3 ms·
Lets take the example of Uber. If Uber ships 10x the code and features, I will still not 2x my rides. Even if Uber makes the cost of travel to 0, I will still
by returnInfinity 6mo ago
Lets take the example of Uber. If Uber ships 10x the code and features, I will still not 2x my rides.
Even if Uber makes the cost of travel to 0, I will still not 2x my rides.
- KellyCriterion 6mo agoHow would they lower the prices to 0 in this scenario, if they have to keep operating their AI-driver-army?
- thaumasiotes 6mo agoLowering the cost of travel to 0 would mean implementing a technology by which anyone can simply desire to be somewhere else, and they will instantly teleport to that new location. returnInfinity is simply lying about not doing double (or more!) the amount of travel in that case.
- theobreuerweil 6mo agoI’m sure that he/she would ride a lot more if it cost nothing, but I think the point is valid: even if Uber could 10x or 100x productivity, they could not do the same with income, because there is a limit to how much people actually need to go places.
- ghaff 6mo agoThat’s true but fully autonomous driving alone might double my car travel. Going into the nearest major city is a pain. So is driving into the mountains. Operating costs and time are still costs. But not having to drive would really change the game for me.
- dmurray 6mo agoWho said anything about instantly teleporting? Uber could cut the cost in money to 0 but still operate cars which are bound by the laws of physics and the rules of the road. Maybe returnInfinity already spends 12 hours a day in Ubers, or otherwise has them satisfy all his transportation needs, and couldn't usefully double his usage of them.
- thaumasiotes 6mo agoUber can cut the price of their service to 0. It's impossible for them to cut the cost to 0 (without using magic), but that doesn't make it impossible for us to talk about what the cost being 0 would involve. Travel time is one of the costs you pay for Uber's service. That you don't pay it to Uber doesn't matter. If Uber reduced that cost to 0, you would use Uber a lot more.
- ghaff 6mo ago0, yes you will. Or at least most would unless piblic transit were a genuinely better way to get around. But it won’t be zero as it’s bounded by the base cost of operating the vehicle.
- ehnto 6mo agoUber needs to prove that they are growing though to validate their stock value, one of the tricks used to be increasing headcount to show growth. But other tricks include new ventures, essentially public companies and VC companies have an almost unlimited appetite for new ventures, as that is how they keep validating their future growth and stock prices. Currently financial realities are forcing layoffs, and the AI story is covering for the "growth" validation to keep stock prices going up. But what's next? After you've fired everyone, what's the next growth story? They'll start hiring again, for new projects, even if AI can handle the coding there is still gobs of work surrounding building a software business or department that needs meat moving it forward.
- creamyhorror 6mo agoThe end of ZIRP (cheap money) is precisely what ended the new-ventures/new-projects drive among big companies and turned them all to cost-cutting and maintenance mode.
- Moto7451 6mo agoThis is precisely my experience. Except our roadmaps didn’t change much.
- idiotsecant 6mo agoThis is a silly easily falsifiable example, though. My Uber usage is approximately zero. If cost was zero my Uber usage would increase.