3 ms·
Maybe, but it might just push many would-be car owners to just use a service and forego buying a car altogether. What's the point of paying the capital expense,
by dv_dt 10mo ago
Maybe, but it might just push many would-be car owners to just use a service and forego buying a car altogether. What's the point of paying the capital expense, and a subscription expense for a car vs just calling up a Waymo. The traditional car makers should really be wary as they've historically been terrible at service offerings.
- wongarsu 10mo agoIn the next step, somebody will notice that many people drive to the same destination (like a large shopping mall or an airport) and try to offer to take them in the same self-driving car for a discount. Over time those vehicles might grow to seat as may as 30-100 people and stop at multiple destinations
- barnas2 10mo agoIncredible startup idea. While we wait for the self driving tech, maybe we could pay specially trained people to drive these vehicles?
- rangestransform 10mo agoLabour is over 50% of the cost for the MTA, we could run more routes and shorter headways with autonomy Who am I kidding, the NYC unions would rather burn down waymos than accept autonomy
- prepend 10mo agoI get your joke. But I like paying more to ride by myself. It’s the driving I don’t like.
- strange_quark 10mo agoPeople said this about Uber 15 years ago, and well, that didn’t happen.
- dv_dt 10mo ago15 years ago we were supposed to have self driving cars in three years
- bluGill 10mo agoIf you rarely drive using a service might be worth it. However if you drive more often it will be worth having your own car because it is ready when you want to go. I have a second car that I rarely use - but if I got rid of it a uber is 15 minutes away when I want to go, and the local rental car place is always sold out if I didn't reserve a week in advance. Even if I'm using a service, someone needs to make the cars the service uses - the car manufactures are not going anywhere, they just get a different customer.