5 ms·

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 info

by 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.
recursive 14y ago
Many people actually have to do things in certain physical places. I do most of my driving getting to and from bike races. Better access to information will not help with that.
Daniel_Newby 14y ago
> If time is wasted driving, is building more efficient cars really the solution? To first approximation, humans have a fixed amount of daily attention span.[1] Automated driving will effectively increase the workforce by ~5%. The base rate of "maintenance attention" is already supplied, so much of the 5% will go to the margins, increasing the rate of progress. Since progress compounds exponentially over time, this is huge. [1]Research I have read on the optimal length of work week, and other research on performance after sustained vigilence.
saraid216 14y ago
It's not just efficiency. The parent is slightly wrong on that point. Remember that Steve Blank's original point is driverless cars, not efficient cars. Driverlessness changes the game in ways that mere efficiency does not. That disruption has been analyzed and commented on in many other places, so I'm not going to rehash it (and I don't really feel qualified to).

by akg 14y ago

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.

recursive 14y ago

Many people actually have to do things in certain physical places. I do most of my driving getting to and from bike races. Better access to information will not help with that.

Daniel_Newby 14y ago

> If time is wasted driving, is building more efficient cars really the solution? To first approximation, humans have a fixed amount of daily attention span.[1] Automated driving will effectively increase the workforce by ~5%. The base rate of "maintenance attention" is already supplied, so much of the 5% will go to the margins, increasing the rate of progress. Since progress compounds exponentially over time, this is huge. [1]Research I have read on the optimal length of work week, and other research on performance after sustained vigilence.

saraid216 14y ago

It's not just efficiency. The parent is slightly wrong on that point. Remember that Steve Blank's original point is driverless cars, not efficient cars. Driverlessness changes the game in ways that mere efficiency does not. That disruption has been analyzed and commented on in many other places, so I'm not going to rehash it (and I don't really feel qualified to).