5 ms·

Self driving electric cars that people pay for on a subscription model (rather than ownership) are the future I'd like to see. I hope it happens during my lifet

by GuiA 13y ago

Self driving electric cars that people pay for on a subscription model (rather than ownership) are the future I'd like to see. I hope it happens during my lifetime.

jowiar 13y ago
Taxis are a reasonable "turking" of this concept.
- samolang 13y ago
  And zipcar.
  - jowiar 13y ago
    Zipcar is great - I love it. But as far as a "self-driving car network" goes, one of the big advantages is that you don't need to worry about parking on either end. A higher percentage of cars are in the process of getting someone from point A to point B rather than taking up space somewhere.
- chriswarren 13y ago
  Taxis in general don't fully turk the concept, at least not in areas without reliable taxi volume. It's reasonable as long as you can rely on the taxi to show up within a decent amount of time of requesting it or expect to see one in passing in a short amount of time. Uber et al. have done a lot to help with this in my experience, but I've had many times where I'm in a location that taxis aren't typically in the immediate vicinity. Calling the cab company has often led to lots of waiting, not knowing when the car will get there, with cars sometimes never showing up at all. Knowing that the car is definitely coming to you (whether it's a self driving car, Uber, or any other service that tracks the vehicle's location) help remove that uncertainty and definitely makes it an acceptable option in more areas. That reliability and knowledge justify the extra cost for taking Uber (or requesting a self driving car some day) to me, more than the comfort or style of a town car compared to a cab.
  - jowiar 13y ago
    Agreed on all parts - for me, I live in DC, in a neighborhood with good cab density, and Uber is in the cab business as well as the swanky car business. I'll launch the app, hail a cab, and by the time I ride down the elevator of my building, there's a cab parked out front waiting for me. It's a reasonable approximation of the future.
- GuiA 13y ago
  True; although one major problem is that for n taxis, you have to pay for n cars and n human salaries, and human salaries end up being the biggest proportion in the final price. How much will the cost be reduced when we don't have to pay for human drivers anymore? Will we see 50$ a month (2013 dollars) plans for 50 hours of "chauffeuring"? (a quick google search shows that the average american spends ~40h driving a year)
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    In some areas, rent to medallion holders might end up being the biggest proportion in the final price...
    - lambda 13y ago
      According to [this resarch](http://www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/taxifb.pdf http://www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/taxifb.pdf), 57% of the fare (including tip) goes to the driver, 24% to vehicle and gas, 15% to the owner, and 4% to other expenses. So, the driver is a pretty substantial portion of that. Taking the driver out of the equation would substantially reduce the costs. If you increased medallion availability as well, and the owners were able to work with lower margins (or they were cooperatively owned), you could get the cost down even further, to maybe 1/3 of what taxis currently cost. That would be a huge difference in affordability for everyday use.
      - dllthomas 13y ago
        Nice! "That would be a huge difference in affordability for everyday use." Very true.
- lambda 13y ago
  Taxis are a lot more expensive than self-driving cars. The driver takes something like 60% of the fare you pay for a taxi; I'm sure insurance eats up another sizeable chunk, and if self-driving cars are ever allowed on the streets, they will have to be safer than human drivers, and thus will have lower insurance costs. Furthermore, eliminating the driver means that you could use even smaller, cheaper cars, or fit more people or belongings per car, making self-driving cars more efficient. Taxis drivers also really frustrating to deal with (the majority in my city, at least); I can't count the number of taxi drivers who haven't been able to find my house, so I've had to play phone tag with dispatch while waiting 45 minutes for a cab that should have been there in 10, then finally hike down the hill, get in, and had them start the meter while they drove up it to pick up my belongings.
  - ghaff 13y ago
    >Taxis are a lot more expensive than self-driving cars. But they have the advantage of actually existing. Whatever relatively near-term possibilities there may be for cars to operate on "autopilot" on certain highways, an urban environment where taxis are most common is probably one of the last places you'll see self-driving cars.
    - lambda 13y ago
      Sure. I'm just pointing out how these hypothetical self driving taxis/car shares would be a substantial improvement over actual taxis, enough so that they would be able to displace more than just the niche that taxis currently occupy but also car sharing programs like Zipcar and probably a substantial portion of car ownership. I think that I'll see them in my lifetime; I don't know if it'll be in 5 years (though I think that would be pushing it), 10 years, or 30 years, but I'm pretty sure they will come about, and will be a huge improvement over our current system of letting distracted, impatient people try to pilot cars through chaotic conditions.
lambda 13y ago
Yep. I've used Zipcar in lieu of a car before (and now own a car that I use maybe once every two weeks), but there was just enough friction due to having to walk to the nearest available car (the closest location to us wasn't always available, so we'd have to walk a few blocks further for the closest available car), having to pay for the time when the car is just parked at your destination before you return it, and not being suitable for the kind of longer range, weekend or week long trips that are a lot of what we need a car for. If the cars were self-driving, however, that would solve the majority of those problems. No need to hike to find the closest car, it would come to you. No need to pay for the time that it's parked while at your destination, it could be used by other people, and another car could come pick you up when you needed to leave. No need to return the car to where you picked it up, it would just go back to the closest available station and they'd rebalance themselves automatically.
nitrogen 13y ago
Subscriptions sure are convenient (and lucrative), but there's also something to be said for the certainty of an owned asset that will always be there, even if you run out of money later.

by GuiA 13y ago

Self driving electric cars that people pay for on a subscription model (rather than ownership) are the future I'd like to see. I hope it happens during my lifetime.

jowiar 13y ago

Taxis are a reasonable "turking" of this concept.

samolang 13y ago
And zipcar.
- jowiar 13y ago
  Zipcar is great - I love it. But as far as a "self-driving car network" goes, one of the big advantages is that you don't need to worry about parking on either end. A higher percentage of cars are in the process of getting someone from point A to point B rather than taking up space somewhere.
chriswarren 13y ago
Taxis in general don't fully turk the concept, at least not in areas without reliable taxi volume. It's reasonable as long as you can rely on the taxi to show up within a decent amount of time of requesting it or expect to see one in passing in a short amount of time. Uber et al. have done a lot to help with this in my experience, but I've had many times where I'm in a location that taxis aren't typically in the immediate vicinity. Calling the cab company has often led to lots of waiting, not knowing when the car will get there, with cars sometimes never showing up at all. Knowing that the car is definitely coming to you (whether it's a self driving car, Uber, or any other service that tracks the vehicle's location) help remove that uncertainty and definitely makes it an acceptable option in more areas. That reliability and knowledge justify the extra cost for taking Uber (or requesting a self driving car some day) to me, more than the comfort or style of a town car compared to a cab.
- jowiar 13y ago
  Agreed on all parts - for me, I live in DC, in a neighborhood with good cab density, and Uber is in the cab business as well as the swanky car business. I'll launch the app, hail a cab, and by the time I ride down the elevator of my building, there's a cab parked out front waiting for me. It's a reasonable approximation of the future.
GuiA 13y ago
True; although one major problem is that for n taxis, you have to pay for n cars and n human salaries, and human salaries end up being the biggest proportion in the final price. How much will the cost be reduced when we don't have to pay for human drivers anymore? Will we see 50$ a month (2013 dollars) plans for 50 hours of "chauffeuring"? (a quick google search shows that the average american spends ~40h driving a year)
- dllthomas 13y ago
  In some areas, rent to medallion holders might end up being the biggest proportion in the final price...
  - lambda 13y ago
    According to [this resarch](http://www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/taxifb.pdf http://www.schallerconsult.com/taxi/taxifb.pdf), 57% of the fare (including tip) goes to the driver, 24% to vehicle and gas, 15% to the owner, and 4% to other expenses. So, the driver is a pretty substantial portion of that. Taking the driver out of the equation would substantially reduce the costs. If you increased medallion availability as well, and the owners were able to work with lower margins (or they were cooperatively owned), you could get the cost down even further, to maybe 1/3 of what taxis currently cost. That would be a huge difference in affordability for everyday use.
    - dllthomas 13y ago
      Nice! "That would be a huge difference in affordability for everyday use." Very true.
lambda 13y ago
Taxis are a lot more expensive than self-driving cars. The driver takes something like 60% of the fare you pay for a taxi; I'm sure insurance eats up another sizeable chunk, and if self-driving cars are ever allowed on the streets, they will have to be safer than human drivers, and thus will have lower insurance costs. Furthermore, eliminating the driver means that you could use even smaller, cheaper cars, or fit more people or belongings per car, making self-driving cars more efficient. Taxis drivers also really frustrating to deal with (the majority in my city, at least); I can't count the number of taxi drivers who haven't been able to find my house, so I've had to play phone tag with dispatch while waiting 45 minutes for a cab that should have been there in 10, then finally hike down the hill, get in, and had them start the meter while they drove up it to pick up my belongings.
- ghaff 13y ago
  >Taxis are a lot more expensive than self-driving cars. But they have the advantage of actually existing. Whatever relatively near-term possibilities there may be for cars to operate on "autopilot" on certain highways, an urban environment where taxis are most common is probably one of the last places you'll see self-driving cars.
  - lambda 13y ago
    Sure. I'm just pointing out how these hypothetical self driving taxis/car shares would be a substantial improvement over actual taxis, enough so that they would be able to displace more than just the niche that taxis currently occupy but also car sharing programs like Zipcar and probably a substantial portion of car ownership. I think that I'll see them in my lifetime; I don't know if it'll be in 5 years (though I think that would be pushing it), 10 years, or 30 years, but I'm pretty sure they will come about, and will be a huge improvement over our current system of letting distracted, impatient people try to pilot cars through chaotic conditions.

lambda 13y ago

Yep. I've used Zipcar in lieu of a car before (and now own a car that I use maybe once every two weeks), but there was just enough friction due to having to walk to the nearest available car (the closest location to us wasn't always available, so we'd have to walk a few blocks further for the closest available car), having to pay for the time when the car is just parked at your destination before you return it, and not being suitable for the kind of longer range, weekend or week long trips that are a lot of what we need a car for. If the cars were self-driving, however, that would solve the majority of those problems. No need to hike to find the closest car, it would come to you. No need to pay for the time that it's parked while at your destination, it could be used by other people, and another car could come pick you up when you needed to leave. No need to return the car to where you picked it up, it would just go back to the closest available station and they'd rebalance themselves automatically.

nitrogen 13y ago

Subscriptions sure are convenient (and lucrative), but there's also something to be said for the certainty of an owned asset that will always be there, even if you run out of money later.