8 ms·

He's absolutely correct. Automated cars will have a much bigger effect than iPads. So much time is wasted driving.

InclinedPlane 14y ago
This is just blatantly wrong. Yes automated cars will be a huge deal, but discounting the iPad is just prejudice pretending to be insight. The mobile OS experience and the tablet PC are very much the next phase of evolution of the computer. Right now the iPad is trailblazing the way as a very high markup luxury good but even so it's proving to be enormously disruptive. When the second shoe drops on the tablet PC revolution the entire industry and indeed the entire world will be shaken up. In a few decades the market for computing devices and software will be vastly larger than it is today. People in Sudan will have dirt cheap solar powered tablet PCs. The degree of disruption on the horizon due to these devices cannot be overstated. Edit: how are tablet PCs disruptive? In several ways: First, they have fewer components than any other form-factor complete computer and are cheaper to produce. Cheaper computers means more people that can buy computers which exponentially increases the number of people who buy computers when you consider the developing world. This is a feedback loop, technologically it's likely to be possible to make a profit on tablet pcs in the near future in a price range of tens of dollars per device. Second, they are more user friendly for average users and their form factor offers advantages for normal users (portability, etc.) This makes them desirable as replacements for laptops and desktops for many people, as witnessed by the massive number of tablet pcs that have already been bought. Third, they are excellent gaming platforms and will almost certainly compete on equal if not superior footing with other handheld gaming devices (which have sold hundreds of millions of devices already, not including software sales) and even traditional consoles and pcs. That industry is already larger than the film industry and growing rapidly, the growing market share of tablet gaming is nothing to scoff at. Fourth, tablets don't require the same level of infrastructure as other computers. They have long battery life and low power usage, they don't necessarily need a hardline internet connection or a constant source of electricity. Someone in 2030 living in a 3rd world country could pay 1/100th their annual income for a tablet pc which has an e-ink display and can recharge via solar power. They could use it as an ebook reader most of the time and use it for other purposes such as communication and whatnot when they visit a city or someplace with free wifi or they could communicate point to point with folks with similar devices (using them as phones or relays, for example). That technology will change what it means to live in the 3rd world. Fifth, the way that apps work on tablets is a natural match for line of business apps and corporate IT deployment and management. Future generations of tablets will make huge inroads in office computing, which is a huge business. Yes, today they are sometimes toys, but there is a lot of money in toys, and such devices are far less toys than the original PCs were.
- eliasmacpherson 14y ago
  Try and overstate it as an exercise for yourself.
- asto 14y ago
  What will it disrupt exactly? Example? As far as I can tell, it is merely a device that affords convenience.
  - InclinedPlane 14y ago
    How is a device that afford convenience not disruptive? I can walk from Seattle to Portland if I desired, the only advantage a car offers is convenience. Yet through that dramatic increase in convenience the car has proven to be one of the most disruptive inventions in history. Similarly, one can communicate, do graphic design, mix audio, produce movies, write letters and novels without a computer but the convenience afforded by computers and the internet has fundamentally transformed all of those activities.
    - kd0amg 14y ago
      There's a difference between "makes this already-very-feasible thing a bit more convenient" and "makes this thing feasible."
      - InclinedPlane 14y ago
        Right, so cell phones are irrelevant then because when they were introduced it was already already-very-feasible to call people, indeed it happened millions of times a day all across the country, telephone calls were routine. But even though cell phones made a feasible thing even more convenient and easier they were still a very transformative and very lucrative technology.
        saraid216 14y ago
        No, cell phones made it possible to call someone while they weren't at home or at the office. That's extremely important, and the main reason for cellphone adoption. It wasn't for pleasure calls. It was for reliable, anywhere communication.
akg 14y ago
If time is wasted driving, is building more efficient cars really the solution? I would venture that technology that makes the world a lot smaller and puts information at your fingertips, e.g., tablets, phones, social networks, etc. will be a much bigger disrupter in the way we live our current lives. Maybe in the future we won't have to drive as much since we can just get things done without having to waste time in cars.
- ericd 14y ago
  Many people spend 10% of their waking lives in cars, and more of it earning money to afford their cars. Automatic driving with the associated ease of fractional car ownership is potentially huge. Keep in mind that not everyone works at a desk job that can almost as easily be done remotely. Social networks really, really aren't nearly as impactful in the the productive sense. They've mostly made it easier to chat with more people, and browse through more photos - things that are intensely interesting to people, but not really useful.
  - akg 14y ago
    I am not sure how things like this will change our lives to be honest, I think it is too early to say which will have a bigger impact. To your latter point, I can understand that most people use social networks to merely chat and browse drunken photos of friends, but that is like saying that all the invention of the telephone did was make it easier to share mindless banter with your friends. There are fringe benefits that arise from these kinds of technologies that could be really impactful. Twitter's use during the Arab Spring comes to mind as the most recent example of this. I admit that Facebook doesn't provide any great "technological"/scientific achievement, but it does have a strong network effect supporting it; and that is something that can be impactful in a very productive sense.
- btian 14y ago
  Information is one thing, but for many things you just can't do remotely. You can't transport iPhones from the airport to your home remotely, can't send kids to school remotely, can't go to a nice restaurant remotely.
- 14y ago
pyoung 14y ago
The only reason I would buy an automated car is so that I will have more time to play with my iPad :)
nextstep 14y ago
And curing cancer will have an even greater impact. But as of today, cancer still kills millions and I am unable to buy an autonomous vehicle. However, I'm writing a comment on HN on my iPad. I think that autonomous vehicles will be revolutionary, but it's going to be 5-10 years before such claims are anything more than bold prognostications.
Someone 14y ago
I sort-of agree with you, but I wonder whether the effects of automated driving will be positive. Firstly, I doubt most current drivers will be extra productive in the time they gain once they have an automated car. Secondly, I worry whether those who currently drive cars professionally will get any job at all once we have automated cars.
TechNewb 14y ago
How about living in, or building, cities that have good enough public infastructure that cars aren't needed. That would have an even larger effect.
- hgh 14y ago
  I wonder how much is cause and how much is effect. One of the reasons that we have the suburbs is everyone owning cheap cars and getting cheap petrol. Not to discount good urban design and public infrastructure, but if there are autonomous cars, I suspect there will be corresponding influence on urban planning. Likely for the better.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
ippisl 14y ago
I think you should include the iphone and ipad together because they're pretty similar. Cheap smartphones/tablets will totally transform the third world. One good example is education:a billion+ people in the third world have awful or nonexistent education.Just imagine them having access to the best teaching in the world via khan academy, coursera etc. How will this change the world ? What else could cheap smartphones/tablets do for the third world ? help tranform healthcare ? let them organize into big groups to achieve things? let marketers of usefull stuff cheaply reach them ? The thing is that wasting commute time is a small problem relative to the problems the third world suffer from.And smartphones might have a big role to play in solving those.

This is just blatantly wrong. Yes automated cars will be a huge deal, but discounting the iPad is just prejudice pretending to be insight. The mobile OS experience and the tablet PC are very much the next phase of evolution of the computer. Right now the iPad is trailblazing the way as a very high markup luxury good but even so it's proving to be enormously disruptive. When the second shoe drops on the tablet PC revolution the entire industry and indeed the entire world will be shaken up. In a few decades the market for computing devices and software will be vastly larger than it is today. People in Sudan will have dirt cheap solar powered tablet PCs. The degree of disruption on the horizon due to these devices cannot be overstated. Edit: how are tablet PCs disruptive? In several ways: First, they have fewer components than any other form-factor complete computer and are cheaper to produce. Cheaper computers means more people that can buy computers which exponentially increases the number of people who buy computers when you consider the developing world. This is a feedback loop, technologically it's likely to be possible to make a profit on tablet pcs in the near future in a price range of tens of dollars per device. Second, they are more user friendly for average users and their form factor offers advantages for normal users (portability, etc.) This makes them desirable as replacements for laptops and desktops for many people, as witnessed by the massive number of tablet pcs that have already been bought. Third, they are excellent gaming platforms and will almost certainly compete on equal if not superior footing with other handheld gaming devices (which have sold hundreds of millions of devices already, not including software sales) and even traditional consoles and pcs. That industry is already larger than the film industry and growing rapidly, the growing market share of tablet gaming is nothing to scoff at. Fourth, tablets don't require the same level of infrastructure as other computers. They have long battery life and low power usage, they don't necessarily need a hardline internet connection or a constant source of electricity. Someone in 2030 living in a 3rd world country could pay 1/100th their annual income for a tablet pc which has an e-ink display and can recharge via solar power. They could use it as an ebook reader most of the time and use it for other purposes such as communication and whatnot when they visit a city or someplace with free wifi or they could communicate point to point with folks with similar devices (using them as phones or relays, for example). That technology will change what it means to live in the 3rd world. Fifth, the way that apps work on tablets is a natural match for line of business apps and corporate IT deployment and management. Future generations of tablets will make huge inroads in office computing, which is a huge business. Yes, today they are sometimes toys, but there is a lot of money in toys, and such devices are far less toys than the original PCs were.

eliasmacpherson 14y ago
Try and overstate it as an exercise for yourself.
asto 14y ago
What will it disrupt exactly? Example? As far as I can tell, it is merely a device that affords convenience.
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  How is a device that afford convenience not disruptive? I can walk from Seattle to Portland if I desired, the only advantage a car offers is convenience. Yet through that dramatic increase in convenience the car has proven to be one of the most disruptive inventions in history. Similarly, one can communicate, do graphic design, mix audio, produce movies, write letters and novels without a computer but the convenience afforded by computers and the internet has fundamentally transformed all of those activities.
  - kd0amg 14y ago
    There's a difference between "makes this already-very-feasible thing a bit more convenient" and "makes this thing feasible."
    - InclinedPlane 14y ago
      Right, so cell phones are irrelevant then because when they were introduced it was already already-very-feasible to call people, indeed it happened millions of times a day all across the country, telephone calls were routine. But even though cell phones made a feasible thing even more convenient and easier they were still a very transformative and very lucrative technology.
      - saraid216 14y ago
        No, cell phones made it possible to call someone while they weren't at home or at the office. That's extremely important, and the main reason for cellphone adoption. It wasn't for pleasure calls. It was for reliable, anywhere communication.

akg 14y ago

If time is wasted driving, is building more efficient cars really the solution? I would venture that technology that makes the world a lot smaller and puts information at your fingertips, e.g., tablets, phones, social networks, etc. will be a much bigger disrupter in the way we live our current lives. Maybe in the future we won't have to drive as much since we can just get things done without having to waste time in cars.

ericd 14y ago
Many people spend 10% of their waking lives in cars, and more of it earning money to afford their cars. Automatic driving with the associated ease of fractional car ownership is potentially huge. Keep in mind that not everyone works at a desk job that can almost as easily be done remotely. Social networks really, really aren't nearly as impactful in the the productive sense. They've mostly made it easier to chat with more people, and browse through more photos - things that are intensely interesting to people, but not really useful.
- akg 14y ago
  I am not sure how things like this will change our lives to be honest, I think it is too early to say which will have a bigger impact. To your latter point, I can understand that most people use social networks to merely chat and browse drunken photos of friends, but that is like saying that all the invention of the telephone did was make it easier to share mindless banter with your friends. There are fringe benefits that arise from these kinds of technologies that could be really impactful. Twitter's use during the Arab Spring comes to mind as the most recent example of this. I admit that Facebook doesn't provide any great "technological"/scientific achievement, but it does have a strong network effect supporting it; and that is something that can be impactful in a very productive sense.
btian 14y ago
Information is one thing, but for many things you just can't do remotely. You can't transport iPhones from the airport to your home remotely, can't send kids to school remotely, can't go to a nice restaurant remotely.
14y ago

pyoung 14y ago

The only reason I would buy an automated car is so that I will have more time to play with my iPad :)

nextstep 14y ago

And curing cancer will have an even greater impact. But as of today, cancer still kills millions and I am unable to buy an autonomous vehicle. However, I'm writing a comment on HN on my iPad. I think that autonomous vehicles will be revolutionary, but it's going to be 5-10 years before such claims are anything more than bold prognostications.

Someone 14y ago

I sort-of agree with you, but I wonder whether the effects of automated driving will be positive. Firstly, I doubt most current drivers will be extra productive in the time they gain once they have an automated car. Secondly, I worry whether those who currently drive cars professionally will get any job at all once we have automated cars.

TechNewb 14y ago

How about living in, or building, cities that have good enough public infastructure that cars aren't needed. That would have an even larger effect.

hgh 14y ago
I wonder how much is cause and how much is effect. One of the reasons that we have the suburbs is everyone owning cheap cars and getting cheap petrol. Not to discount good urban design and public infrastructure, but if there are autonomous cars, I suspect there will be corresponding influence on urban planning. Likely for the better.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

ippisl 14y ago

I think you should include the iphone and ipad together because they're pretty similar. Cheap smartphones/tablets will totally transform the third world. One good example is education:a billion+ people in the third world have awful or nonexistent education.Just imagine them having access to the best teaching in the world via khan academy, coursera etc. How will this change the world ? What else could cheap smartphones/tablets do for the third world ? help tranform healthcare ? let them organize into big groups to achieve things? let marketers of usefull stuff cheaply reach them ? The thing is that wasting commute time is a small problem relative to the problems the third world suffer from.And smartphones might have a big role to play in solving those.