6 ms·

I don’t think self-driving cars lead to fewer people owning cars, in fact it’s quite the opposite. With FSD, those who don’t like driving can deal with owning a

I don’t think self-driving cars lead to fewer people owning cars, in fact it’s quite the opposite. With FSD, those who don’t like driving can deal with owning a car to do necessary transportation tasks (e.g. commuting), instead of giving it up for alternative methods because they don’t want to drive consciously/presently.

mewpmewp2 4y ago
Owning a self driving car you can always regulate using taxes etc. If too many people start using self driving cars you would increase taxes on owning those. I don't see that being an actual problem.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  that doesn't make any sense though - self driving is a capability, not a type of car. it would be like taxing cars that have cruise control. fundamentally self driving is a safety feature, why would you tax it?
  - mewpmewp2 4y ago
    You could tax owning a car more or putting the car in traffic in general, not necessarily self driving aspect of it. The main tax being about taking up room in the streets.
  - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
    Tolls in cities for traffic control are common where needed. It works well and is simple.
throw0101c 4y ago
Alternatively, a bunch of friends could buy a car together and split the costs. I could see a scenario where instead of (or in addition to) vehicles being pooled between "x" random people (taxis, Uber/Lyft, ZipCar), you could purchase a fractional share of a car (Cf. NetJets): you get semi-exclusive use of (particular?) vehicles.
- ryukoposting 4y ago
  I considered this in college, but gave up on the idea eventually. Figuring out how to fairly split the cost of gas, tires, and maintenance isn't easy, and when you're a broke college kid, splitting the tab fairly is a big deal.
  - jimkleiber 4y ago
    I wonder if it became more of a thing, companies would help to solve the coordination problem on this.
    - voakbasda 4y ago
      I think companies would need to build the solution before this will become more of a thing.
  - throw0101c 4y ago
    I'm sure there several companies would pop-up for a "X as a Service": you connect your own car to their API, and things like scheduling, mileage, depreciation, etc, would be computing for you. The company could also offer to sell/lease you a vehicle (NetJets-style).
    - qdog 4y ago
      I think Uber/Lyft is that company, they just use human drivers, which has apparently made traffic worse now, and I wouldn't expect it to get better.
      - vkou 4y ago
        The reason Uber/Lyft/Taxis in general make traffic worse is because taxis have to travel X miles between dropping off a passenger to picking up another passenger. It's the form of transportation that makes the least efficient use of limited roadways. They do reduce parking requirements, though.
    - 4y ago
ryukoposting 4y ago
Anecdotal evidence, but as a city-dweller who owns a car, all of my friends who don't own cars have a reason besides "it's inconvenient." They have a disability that makes it unsafe to operate a vehicle and/or they simply can't afford a car. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world, but that seems to be the way it works here in Chicago.
- sdenton4 4y ago
  I don't own a car, save around $5-10k per year, and don't have a disability... Originally, growing up in St Louis, I avoided driving because I saw lots of friends wasting their time in shit jobs to pay for their shit cars; cars were supposed to provide freedom, but were really a gateway to the shackles of work. I suppose that's another reason beyond 'it's inconvenient,' though.
tnel77 4y ago
I think it goes both ways and we won’t know for sure until it comes to fruition. Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around.
- shawnz 4y ago
  If you're just a passenger then why does it matter to you whether the taxi service is self-driving or not? Surely the benefits of self-driving would be significantly more relevant for those who do want to own the vehicle?
  - tnel77 4y ago
    I’m hoping that by excluding the human labor costs I will save some money, but we will see. It would also be nice to not have to have that awkward taxi conversation every time I go to the store.
    - cwalv 4y ago
      > It would also be nice to not have to have that awkward taxi conversation every time I go to the store. This is the real reason ppl will own cars for the foreseeable future. Same reason I prefer a detatched home with a private/fenced yard. I'd probably get used to high-density living, but I doubt if I'd ever really prefer it.
  - tintor 4y ago
    Expectation is that self-driving taxi would be cheaper than manual taxi.
  - fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
    Average earnings (after expenses) of a ride share driver is very roughly $10/hour. If you assume a self-driving car can get 2000 hours of use a year (which seems reasonably conservative), then the self-driving car saves $20k in labor costs per year. Although self-driving tech will be expensive in the beginning, the price will likely at some point decline to be far below $20k/year. Labor is about half of the cost of a hired ride. We know this is true for Uber because there is a lot of public discussion about the budget of a rideshare driver. Not sure about taxis. Given those premises and assumptions, a person who doesn’t want to drive would care about self-driving tech because it could eventually lower the cost of hiring a ride, potentially by 50%.
olalonde 4y ago
A big reason people own cars is that taxi rides are expensive. The idea is that FSD will dramatically reduce taxi ride costs by taking the driver out of the equation.

mewpmewp2 4y ago

Owning a self driving car you can always regulate using taxes etc. If too many people start using self driving cars you would increase taxes on owning those. I don't see that being an actual problem.

endisneigh 4y ago
that doesn't make any sense though - self driving is a capability, not a type of car. it would be like taxing cars that have cruise control. fundamentally self driving is a safety feature, why would you tax it?
- mewpmewp2 4y ago
  You could tax owning a car more or putting the car in traffic in general, not necessarily self driving aspect of it. The main tax being about taking up room in the streets.
- yazaddaruvala 4y ago
  Tolls in cities for traffic control are common where needed. It works well and is simple.

throw0101c 4y ago

Alternatively, a bunch of friends could buy a car together and split the costs. I could see a scenario where instead of (or in addition to) vehicles being pooled between "x" random people (taxis, Uber/Lyft, ZipCar), you could purchase a fractional share of a car (Cf. NetJets): you get semi-exclusive use of (particular?) vehicles.

ryukoposting 4y ago
I considered this in college, but gave up on the idea eventually. Figuring out how to fairly split the cost of gas, tires, and maintenance isn't easy, and when you're a broke college kid, splitting the tab fairly is a big deal.
- jimkleiber 4y ago
  I wonder if it became more of a thing, companies would help to solve the coordination problem on this.
  - voakbasda 4y ago
    I think companies would need to build the solution before this will become more of a thing.
- throw0101c 4y ago
  I'm sure there several companies would pop-up for a "X as a Service": you connect your own car to their API, and things like scheduling, mileage, depreciation, etc, would be computing for you. The company could also offer to sell/lease you a vehicle (NetJets-style).
  - qdog 4y ago
    I think Uber/Lyft is that company, they just use human drivers, which has apparently made traffic worse now, and I wouldn't expect it to get better.
    - vkou 4y ago
      The reason Uber/Lyft/Taxis in general make traffic worse is because taxis have to travel X miles between dropping off a passenger to picking up another passenger. It's the form of transportation that makes the least efficient use of limited roadways. They do reduce parking requirements, though.
  - 4y ago

ryukoposting 4y ago

Anecdotal evidence, but as a city-dweller who owns a car, all of my friends who don't own cars have a reason besides "it's inconvenient." They have a disability that makes it unsafe to operate a vehicle and/or they simply can't afford a car. Maybe it's different in other parts of the world, but that seems to be the way it works here in Chicago.

sdenton4 4y ago
I don't own a car, save around $5-10k per year, and don't have a disability... Originally, growing up in St Louis, I avoided driving because I saw lots of friends wasting their time in shit jobs to pay for their shit cars; cars were supposed to provide freedom, but were really a gateway to the shackles of work. I suppose that's another reason beyond 'it's inconvenient,' though.

tnel77 4y ago

I think it goes both ways and we won’t know for sure until it comes to fruition. Personally, I hate owning vehicles and desperately want a self-driving taxi service that I can order via an app to get me and my family around.

shawnz 4y ago
If you're just a passenger then why does it matter to you whether the taxi service is self-driving or not? Surely the benefits of self-driving would be significantly more relevant for those who do want to own the vehicle?
- tnel77 4y ago
  I’m hoping that by excluding the human labor costs I will save some money, but we will see. It would also be nice to not have to have that awkward taxi conversation every time I go to the store.
  - cwalv 4y ago
    > It would also be nice to not have to have that awkward taxi conversation every time I go to the store. This is the real reason ppl will own cars for the foreseeable future. Same reason I prefer a detatched home with a private/fenced yard. I'd probably get used to high-density living, but I doubt if I'd ever really prefer it.
- tintor 4y ago
  Expectation is that self-driving taxi would be cheaper than manual taxi.
- fshbbdssbbgdd 4y ago
  Average earnings (after expenses) of a ride share driver is very roughly $10/hour. If you assume a self-driving car can get 2000 hours of use a year (which seems reasonably conservative), then the self-driving car saves $20k in labor costs per year. Although self-driving tech will be expensive in the beginning, the price will likely at some point decline to be far below $20k/year. Labor is about half of the cost of a hired ride. We know this is true for Uber because there is a lot of public discussion about the budget of a rideshare driver. Not sure about taxis. Given those premises and assumptions, a person who doesn’t want to drive would care about self-driving tech because it could eventually lower the cost of hiring a ride, potentially by 50%.

olalonde 4y ago

A big reason people own cars is that taxi rides are expensive. The idea is that FSD will dramatically reduce taxi ride costs by taking the driver out of the equation.