3 ms·

Self-driving cars seem like an existential threat to GM, I'm surprised they're seriously working on them instead of desperately trying to tank the concept. They

Self-driving cars seem like an existential threat to GM, I'm surprised they're seriously working on them instead of desperately trying to tank the concept. They seem like they have a huge conflict of interest as it's a massive threat to their business model. If we had truly capable self-driving cars, we could probably get rid of >50% of all cars on the road. Most cars spend upwards of 90% of their existence parked and doing nothing, waiting for their owners to need them. If cars could be operating full-time 24/7, ready to be dispatched anywhere as needed, it would mean the destruction of vast amounts of transportation demand.

webdood90 3y ago
> we could probably get rid of >50% of all cars on the road I've seen this argument before but it doesn't make sense to me. In some subset of situations, yes, this would be the case. But 8-9a or 5-6p there is a surge of demand in every major metro in America. Developing self driving cars is not a fruitful endeavor IMO. We need to push alternative modes of transportation (transit, e-bikes, etc) which are way, way more efficient and cost effective.
- dventimi 3y ago
  What do you mean "we"? Push for alternative modes of transportation to the complete exclusion of autonomous vehicles if you like. Personally, I like autonomous vehicle and will continue to advocate for them.
- mullingitover 3y ago
  > Developing self driving cars is not a fruitful endeavor IMO. We need to push alternative modes of transportation (transit, e-bikes, etc) which are way, way more efficient and cost effective. The US is incapable of building cost-effective heavy transit though. Just building a few miles of subway in the LA metro area, for example, costs on the order of double digit billions and takes a decade plus. In huge areas of the country where it's snowy in the winter, e-bikes are a non-starter. I'm not saying every self-driving vehicle needs to be a single occupancy car. We could have fleets of self-driving minivans that are somewhere between buses and cars that can move the dramatically more people than solo drivers. Even self-driving buses would be a win, a very big chunk of the operating expenses of public bus fleets is the payroll for drivers.
  - webdood90 3y ago
    > a few miles of subway in the LA metro area, for example, costs on the order of double digit billions and takes a decade plus Then don't build trains - busses work fine. > In huge areas of the country where it's snowy in the winter, e-bikes are a non-starter I live in Denver - it's fine. I don't hear feasibility concerns in your arguments - I hear convenience concerns. How I interpret this is that you, and many other people in the world, prioritize convenience above all else. I understand why, but we must come to the realization that we're taking the side of convenience over everything else: decrease in safety, increased electrical consumption, increased congestion, increased pollution, increased noise, etc.
gwbas1c 3y ago
Stop letting your imagination run away. > we could probably get rid of >50% of all cars on the road. ... If cars could be operating full-time 24/7, ready to be dispatched anywhere as needed Wow, you really don't get it, do you? No one wants to get in their car to find it a mess from an inconsiderate customer. No want wants to deal with the extra wear and tear. Most people drive during rush hour, so assuming you need your car to get you to and from work, your car won't be doing chores for you when you don't need it. Really, robotaxis may cut down on lower-use cars. IE, if you live in the city, and don't use your car everyday, you might prefer to use a robotaxi. It might even be "worth it" if you live where parking is sparse. (Or not, because your self-driving car could park itself 15 minutes away.) Robotaxis might make it so that multi-car households can cut down on the cars in their household. But turning every car owner into an entrepreneur who rents out their car when they don't need it? You're letting your imagination run away! And here's the problem: So many people are letting their imaginations run away regarding self-driving cars and robotaxis that it's actively hurting development. The pie-in-the-sky promises like yours never come true; so the people who need to believe in self-driving-cars to keep investing loose faith and cut funding.
- mullingitover 3y ago
  > But turning every car owner into an entrepreneur who rents out their car when they don't need it? You're letting your imagination run away! I'm glad we agree on this, individuals renting out their own car is a wacky idea. I picture it more as a subscription service. Pay x dollars per month for an on-demand vehicle, or just pay per use.
  - gwbas1c 3y ago
    That might work for people in the city, or people who have light automobile needs. But the (uhm) unpredictability of what you get may make this less desirable for everyday use: If you have a family, you may find it easier (and cheaper) to own your own vehicle that your stuff can be left in. If you live in a rural area, the customer density may make it uneconomic to rely on a robotaxi. If you're of the wide middle class you just might like the fact that the space that you spend 1-2 hours a day in is yours, and won't be defiled by someone else. You live near the beach and get tired of cars randomly showing up filled with beach sand or wet seats. --- But I want to stress a very important mindset: The interior of a car is your space. People leave stuff in their cars for all sorts of reasons. You could be doing a certain activity and leave some backup equipment in your car. You could be of a certain profession and always carry certain equipment in case you get a call from a customer... You could be running errands and need to carry different things with you for different stops. This becomes significantly harder with robotaxis when your car is no longer your private space. Don't assume that robotaxis will suddenly make people change this behavior. Instead, assume that you can't fully predict how markets will adjust to robotaxis and self-driving cars. --- Honestly, I think the early markets for self-driving cars will (obviously) be robotaxis that are cheaper than current taxis / ubers / lyfts. But, I don't think that will be the first market. I think the first market will be people who really need self-driving vehicles and have the money to pay for it. They will be able to jump in and smooth over situations when the car can't drive itself. I suspect these are people who have access to money and have some form of impairment that makes paying for self-driving "worth it."

webdood90 3y ago

> we could probably get rid of >50% of all cars on the road I've seen this argument before but it doesn't make sense to me. In some subset of situations, yes, this would be the case. But 8-9a or 5-6p there is a surge of demand in every major metro in America. Developing self driving cars is not a fruitful endeavor IMO. We need to push alternative modes of transportation (transit, e-bikes, etc) which are way, way more efficient and cost effective.

dventimi 3y ago
What do you mean "we"? Push for alternative modes of transportation to the complete exclusion of autonomous vehicles if you like. Personally, I like autonomous vehicle and will continue to advocate for them.
mullingitover 3y ago
> Developing self driving cars is not a fruitful endeavor IMO. We need to push alternative modes of transportation (transit, e-bikes, etc) which are way, way more efficient and cost effective. The US is incapable of building cost-effective heavy transit though. Just building a few miles of subway in the LA metro area, for example, costs on the order of double digit billions and takes a decade plus. In huge areas of the country where it's snowy in the winter, e-bikes are a non-starter. I'm not saying every self-driving vehicle needs to be a single occupancy car. We could have fleets of self-driving minivans that are somewhere between buses and cars that can move the dramatically more people than solo drivers. Even self-driving buses would be a win, a very big chunk of the operating expenses of public bus fleets is the payroll for drivers.
- webdood90 3y ago
  > a few miles of subway in the LA metro area, for example, costs on the order of double digit billions and takes a decade plus Then don't build trains - busses work fine. > In huge areas of the country where it's snowy in the winter, e-bikes are a non-starter I live in Denver - it's fine. I don't hear feasibility concerns in your arguments - I hear convenience concerns. How I interpret this is that you, and many other people in the world, prioritize convenience above all else. I understand why, but we must come to the realization that we're taking the side of convenience over everything else: decrease in safety, increased electrical consumption, increased congestion, increased pollution, increased noise, etc.

gwbas1c 3y ago

Stop letting your imagination run away. > we could probably get rid of >50% of all cars on the road. ... If cars could be operating full-time 24/7, ready to be dispatched anywhere as needed Wow, you really don't get it, do you? No one wants to get in their car to find it a mess from an inconsiderate customer. No want wants to deal with the extra wear and tear. Most people drive during rush hour, so assuming you need your car to get you to and from work, your car won't be doing chores for you when you don't need it. Really, robotaxis may cut down on lower-use cars. IE, if you live in the city, and don't use your car everyday, you might prefer to use a robotaxi. It might even be "worth it" if you live where parking is sparse. (Or not, because your self-driving car could park itself 15 minutes away.) Robotaxis might make it so that multi-car households can cut down on the cars in their household. But turning every car owner into an entrepreneur who rents out their car when they don't need it? You're letting your imagination run away! And here's the problem: So many people are letting their imaginations run away regarding self-driving cars and robotaxis that it's actively hurting development. The pie-in-the-sky promises like yours never come true; so the people who need to believe in self-driving-cars to keep investing loose faith and cut funding.

mullingitover 3y ago
> But turning every car owner into an entrepreneur who rents out their car when they don't need it? You're letting your imagination run away! I'm glad we agree on this, individuals renting out their own car is a wacky idea. I picture it more as a subscription service. Pay x dollars per month for an on-demand vehicle, or just pay per use.
- gwbas1c 3y ago
  That might work for people in the city, or people who have light automobile needs. But the (uhm) unpredictability of what you get may make this less desirable for everyday use: If you have a family, you may find it easier (and cheaper) to own your own vehicle that your stuff can be left in. If you live in a rural area, the customer density may make it uneconomic to rely on a robotaxi. If you're of the wide middle class you just might like the fact that the space that you spend 1-2 hours a day in is yours, and won't be defiled by someone else. You live near the beach and get tired of cars randomly showing up filled with beach sand or wet seats. --- But I want to stress a very important mindset: The interior of a car is your space. People leave stuff in their cars for all sorts of reasons. You could be doing a certain activity and leave some backup equipment in your car. You could be of a certain profession and always carry certain equipment in case you get a call from a customer... You could be running errands and need to carry different things with you for different stops. This becomes significantly harder with robotaxis when your car is no longer your private space. Don't assume that robotaxis will suddenly make people change this behavior. Instead, assume that you can't fully predict how markets will adjust to robotaxis and self-driving cars. --- Honestly, I think the early markets for self-driving cars will (obviously) be robotaxis that are cheaper than current taxis / ubers / lyfts. But, I don't think that will be the first market. I think the first market will be people who really need self-driving vehicles and have the money to pay for it. They will be able to jump in and smooth over situations when the car can't drive itself. I suspect these are people who have access to money and have some form of impairment that makes paying for self-driving "worth it."