3 ms·
I think I've missed an important part of this discussion -- if driverless cars would be revolutionary, what do they provide that an existing taxi service doesn'
by stevecooperorg 15y ago
I think I've missed an important part of this discussion -- if driverless cars would be revolutionary, what do they provide that an existing taxi service doesn't?
A taxi has many of the listed benefits;
- you don't need to buy the car
- you don't need to drive the car
- it's available on demand through your phone
- the utilisation of cars is very high
So what is the functional difference between a shared-ownership, driverless car, and a standard human-driven taxi?
- dr_rezzy 15y agoNothing. You are correct in missing an important part of this discussion.
- jomohke 15y agoYou don't have to pay the driver. Currently it's more expensive for me to take a taxi (in Australia) because the wage of the driver outweighs the extra costs (and inefficiency) associated with running my own car. You see a lot more taxis in cities with lower human labour costs (such as Lima), or where the cost of parking outweighs the cost of the driver (such as Manhattan).
- frankus 15y agoSo what is the functional difference between a shared-ownership, driverless car, and a standard human-driven taxi? Don't underestimate the price difference. It's one of those things where a large enough quantitative difference becomes a qualitative difference. In the US it costs around $15-$20/hour to hire a taxi driver (median wage is $11.20 per hour). Over the course of a month (24/7) that starts to approach the cost of the car. Granted, the taxi isn't used 24/7, but the operator still has to recoup the cost of having it available all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if about 90% of the cost of a taxi is due to employing the driver. Even if all you do is reduce the cost of a trip by a factor of ten, you're going to see big changes.