5 ms·

Lots of people jump to the notion that if driverless cars are available, we will go to a dominantly short-term-hire model of car ownership. By why? Yes, taxis

Lots of people jump to the notion that if driverless cars are available, we will go to a dominantly short-term-hire model of car ownership. By why? Yes, taxis would be cheaper in a world of driverless cars. But they would still be dubiously clean (perhaps even dirtier without a human there to make the passengers clean up). You would still not be able to leave your crap in them. And they would still be only intermittently available at times of high demand (or else they'll be quite expensive). In contrast, if you privately owned a car, it would have all its present advantages and also it would be usable even if you intended to get drunk; you could use the time that you were driving to read or use the computer or watch TV or whatever; you wouldn't need to circle around and try to park; you could still potentially utilize the car more than the present situation (for example: your car could drop the kids off at school while you get an hour of work in, and then come back and take you to the office), giving a cost savings. By the way: does anyone who has kids young enough to require car-seats think that they could get away with a taxi-approach to cars, even if taxis were arbitrarily cheap? Don't underestimate the value of a personally owned car as a mobile receptacle of your stuff. I don't know which of those models would be more dominant in a driverless car world. They both have advantages over the present state of the art. But I'm pretty sure that the people who jump immediately to believe that the taxi model would become massively dominant are basing this more on their wishes than the facts.

LockeWatts 13y ago
I think there will be a hybrid model. Owning a driverless car will still be a very commonplace thing, car ownership is too ingrained in the American mindset to just let it go. However, I believe owning a car will also come to be seen as an investment option, like owning property. What if your car was loaned out to a taxi service while you're at work every day? The taxi service has no drivers, no cars, no real capital. It's just a website with a server coordinating cars to people and to destinations. As a vehicle owner, you are given a share of the profits for the utilization of your capital. Sure there are a lot of kinks to work out, but I could see this being a very common thing.
- karamazov 13y ago
  Renting out your car while you're not using it negates the advantages of owning one that GP points out. In addition, you're now taking on the risk of damage and the onus of maintenance for a car that's used as a taxi. I don't think this will be a popular option.
  - Avshalom 13y ago
    Also if you want to go home now, or go to the store now and it's rented out by some one: you're basically fucked. You can program a range limit and certain hours (be no farther than 30 miles away by 4pm and not in use) sure but when anything unexpected comes up (on either end) you don't have a car for X period of time. Even just sharing the car has this problem, oh it can drive back home empty, but the logistics of making sure it can drop Bob off drive home get Alice drive her some were pick Bob back up up drop him at home in time to go get Alice are only barely more convenient than "sorry I need the car today" for twice the mileage cost natch.
    - aetherson 13y ago
      I don't think within-family-car-sharing would be a HUGE deal, certainly. But there are a lot of situations in which I end up chauffeuring my fiancée or vice versa because one of us needs to get to point A, but the other needs the car for the day. And there's lots of little friction points in terms of lining up our schedules there. It's not a huge pain point, but my car would be noticeably more valuable to me if it handled these situations for itself. It might not be wildly convenient, but it's even less convenient for me to drive my fiancée to where she needs to go and then drive back.
  - pyoung 13y ago
    uhhh, essentially we already have this service. It's called Lyft, and it is wildly popular. The only difference, is that the owner has to drive the car.
- warfangle 13y ago
  For taxis? Hybrid and gas? .... Y'all don't think Elon would eat this up?
nemoniac 13y ago
> Lots of people jump to the notion that if driverless cars are available, we will go to a dominantly short-term-hire model of car ownership. By why? I'm already part of a short-term-hire model of car ownership for cars that I drive myself. I don't own a car and have no desire to own one but I use small electric cars from a company called car2go whenever I need them. If the cars were driverless I'd be even happier to use them. I have no affiliation with the company, just as a very satisfied customer.

LockeWatts 13y ago

I think there will be a hybrid model. Owning a driverless car will still be a very commonplace thing, car ownership is too ingrained in the American mindset to just let it go. However, I believe owning a car will also come to be seen as an investment option, like owning property. What if your car was loaned out to a taxi service while you're at work every day? The taxi service has no drivers, no cars, no real capital. It's just a website with a server coordinating cars to people and to destinations. As a vehicle owner, you are given a share of the profits for the utilization of your capital. Sure there are a lot of kinks to work out, but I could see this being a very common thing.

karamazov 13y ago
Renting out your car while you're not using it negates the advantages of owning one that GP points out. In addition, you're now taking on the risk of damage and the onus of maintenance for a car that's used as a taxi. I don't think this will be a popular option.
- Avshalom 13y ago
  Also if you want to go home now, or go to the store now and it's rented out by some one: you're basically fucked. You can program a range limit and certain hours (be no farther than 30 miles away by 4pm and not in use) sure but when anything unexpected comes up (on either end) you don't have a car for X period of time. Even just sharing the car has this problem, oh it can drive back home empty, but the logistics of making sure it can drop Bob off drive home get Alice drive her some were pick Bob back up up drop him at home in time to go get Alice are only barely more convenient than "sorry I need the car today" for twice the mileage cost natch.
  - aetherson 13y ago
    I don't think within-family-car-sharing would be a HUGE deal, certainly. But there are a lot of situations in which I end up chauffeuring my fiancée or vice versa because one of us needs to get to point A, but the other needs the car for the day. And there's lots of little friction points in terms of lining up our schedules there. It's not a huge pain point, but my car would be noticeably more valuable to me if it handled these situations for itself. It might not be wildly convenient, but it's even less convenient for me to drive my fiancée to where she needs to go and then drive back.
- pyoung 13y ago
  uhhh, essentially we already have this service. It's called Lyft, and it is wildly popular. The only difference, is that the owner has to drive the car.
warfangle 13y ago
For taxis? Hybrid and gas? .... Y'all don't think Elon would eat this up?

nemoniac 13y ago

> Lots of people jump to the notion that if driverless cars are available, we will go to a dominantly short-term-hire model of car ownership. By why? I'm already part of a short-term-hire model of car ownership for cars that I drive myself. I don't own a car and have no desire to own one but I use small electric cars from a company called car2go whenever I need them. If the cars were driverless I'd be even happier to use them. I have no affiliation with the company, just as a very satisfied customer.