4 ms·

Even if it's safe...what's the short term benefit for riders beyond curiosity? Presumably cheaper fares + more throughput but the math is not obvious to me tha

Even if it's safe...what's the short term benefit for riders beyond curiosity? Presumably cheaper fares + more throughput but the math is not obvious to me that owning a fleet of robotaxis will be a lucrative business to be in anytime soon, even if you are the only robotaxi company in town. Seems like they need to license this tech to have it payoff.

adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
cheaper fares is a really big deal. if you can deliver the same service 30% cheaper with 20% higher profit margins, that's massive. driver pay is a significant component of cost so cutting it is pretty massive.
- fullshark 4y ago
  I guess, but if I'm getting a taxi, replacing a human with a computer is not a huge benefit to me, as I'm already not driving. If I'm driving myself to work every day, replacing that repetitive and boring task with a computer is a huge user benefit and thus I'd be more willing to pay and at a higher price for the tech. I just think that's the only real way to make this thing pay off. Also potentially it might work for long haul trucking.
  - adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
    the benefit to the user isn't the computer, it's lower cost. the bushes model makes sense because you can lower user cost while increasing profit
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - spankalee 4y ago
      The benefit absolutely is the safer computer driver. I'd pay more for that.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Maybe? Not that I use Uber/Lyft/taxis much but, when I do, I of course prefer them to be cheaper but +/- 30% pricing pretty much wouldn't affect if I take them or not. It's still a significant premium relative to driving myself at home and, if I'm traveling, I may not have much of a choice.
  - rafaelero 4y ago
    > but +/- 30% pricing pretty much wouldn't affect if I take them or not But it's enough to prefer Waymo over Uber and that's all it takes.
  - notatoad 4y ago
    if +/-30% pricing isn't significant, then the benefit isn't lower fares, it's higher profits for the company operating the cars. either way you slice it, not having to pay drivers would be a significant win for a taxi company.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      Not necessarily if the technology (both development and hardware cost) to replace the drivers costs enough. I don't doubt it will get there someday but Waymo certainly isn't making money off current riders.
lozenge 4y ago
License it to who? If they prove the model then investors will be lining up to give them the capital to expand.
- fullshark 4y ago
  Car manufacturers and trucking companies.
Zigurd 4y ago
> Seems like they need to license this tech to have it payoff. Seems like that's the plan. Volvo and some other car OEMs are using Android on the dashboard. A total package of infotainment, autonation, and the cloud services behind the in-vehicle systems is a likely destination for this and other products than can be sold into cars at the OEM or end-user level.

adgjlsfhk1 4y ago

cheaper fares is a really big deal. if you can deliver the same service 30% cheaper with 20% higher profit margins, that's massive. driver pay is a significant component of cost so cutting it is pretty massive.

fullshark 4y ago
I guess, but if I'm getting a taxi, replacing a human with a computer is not a huge benefit to me, as I'm already not driving. If I'm driving myself to work every day, replacing that repetitive and boring task with a computer is a huge user benefit and thus I'd be more willing to pay and at a higher price for the tech. I just think that's the only real way to make this thing pay off. Also potentially it might work for long haul trucking.
- adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
  the benefit to the user isn't the computer, it's lower cost. the bushes model makes sense because you can lower user cost while increasing profit
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - spankalee 4y ago
    The benefit absolutely is the safer computer driver. I'd pay more for that.
ghaff 4y ago
Maybe? Not that I use Uber/Lyft/taxis much but, when I do, I of course prefer them to be cheaper but +/- 30% pricing pretty much wouldn't affect if I take them or not. It's still a significant premium relative to driving myself at home and, if I'm traveling, I may not have much of a choice.
- rafaelero 4y ago
  > but +/- 30% pricing pretty much wouldn't affect if I take them or not But it's enough to prefer Waymo over Uber and that's all it takes.
- notatoad 4y ago
  if +/-30% pricing isn't significant, then the benefit isn't lower fares, it's higher profits for the company operating the cars. either way you slice it, not having to pay drivers would be a significant win for a taxi company.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    Not necessarily if the technology (both development and hardware cost) to replace the drivers costs enough. I don't doubt it will get there someday but Waymo certainly isn't making money off current riders.

lozenge 4y ago

License it to who? If they prove the model then investors will be lining up to give them the capital to expand.

fullshark 4y ago
Car manufacturers and trucking companies.

Zigurd 4y ago

> Seems like they need to license this tech to have it payoff. Seems like that's the plan. Volvo and some other car OEMs are using Android on the dashboard. A total package of infotainment, autonation, and the cloud services behind the in-vehicle systems is a likely destination for this and other products than can be sold into cars at the OEM or end-user level.