I'd be down with an autonomous vehicle doing long highway drives for me so I can work, watch a movie or whatever else. I wouldn't consider it a more enjoyable experience in most of my current life though; I quite enjoy driving (might have something to do with the lack of significant traffic where I live).
Elon Musk | Owner of X and right wing man-child
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
I'd be down with an autonomous vehicle doing long highway drives for me so I can work, watch a movie or whatever else. I wouldn't consider it a more enjoyable experience in most of my current life though; I quite enjoy driving (might have something to do with the lack of significant traffic where I live).
I think my dream version of autonomous driving is basically a train to be honest.
Oh, no!
Anyway...
Anyway...
It's almost as if his fortune wasn't real, in the sense of being actualisable or utilisable, and thus, evaporates just easily.
Measuring wealth based on stock value is cloud castle measurements.
So if less cars are sold, which is the incentive of carmakers to develope this technology?
Higher margins, crushing competition. Plus, the main player (Google) is not a car company.
Plus, it is not necessary that there will be less cars, more like fewer privately owned cars. Essentially replace some privately owned cars with cars owned by robotaxi companies.
The only thing i hear is "less cars". And if automakers dont allow the technology,google will neex to create its new car, that it could happen, but in 10-15 years after the technology is good enough, so 20-25 years
I never understood this "cars are inefficient because most of the times they are parked" reasoning.
Surely the same can be said about:
-Houses
-Beds
-Chairs
-Conscience
Never mind something like a couch or tv.
People want their own cars because its an extension of their private space that they can take around with them. Transportation is only one function they fulfill.
Anyone remember when Elon promised Model 3 owners gonna earn more money through it than paying for it by renting it out as a robotaxi? Surely that's over 5 years ago now!?
Surely the same can be said about:
-Houses
-Beds
-Chairs
-Conscience
Never mind something like a couch or tv.
People want their own cars because its an extension of their private space that they can take around with them. Transportation is only one function they fulfill.
Anyone remember when Elon promised Model 3 owners gonna earn more money through it than paying for it by renting it out as a robotaxi? Surely that's over 5 years ago now!?
Go fash, no cash
To be fair, sharing houses or beds would not be nice. Sharing cars is much better, with cars staying most of the time doing nothing.
I don't know about other countries but nobody in the UK owns their own car. The DVLA own the car, you're just the registered keeper of the vehicle.
I'm not so sure. You trust your life to the car and it being well maintained can save your life eventually. Do you really trust a corporation or a random stranger to take care of it as well as you do? We'll need airline/train levels of regulations for those companies and they're basically all run by regulation dodgers.
So somebody owns it then : (
No, that's incorrect. The only thing the DVLA owns is the registration.
That's a stranger I selected myself, partly based on imperfect information (reputation) . With car sharing you have to trust whoever the random stranger was that used it before you. For robotaxis companies could build up reputations I guess.
I don't know where you live, but in the city, parking is a major issue for car owners. Beds are not.
I live in a city and rooms for beds are definitely a hot commodity here.
Solutions should be welcomed for that too then, just like cars and parking.
I have my doubts that can ever happen. Even if you magically made enough space to fill all demand that in itself would make it less attractive because it would then be unlimited and people would crave something else they can't have, making the magical solution obsolete.
To me robotaxis, car sharing, uber etc. are all just businesses. The imagined "benefits to society" are largely marketing.
So basically, all the advances of modern society over the past 100 years are not in fact real benefits to society?
"people wanted electricity, and once they all got it, they found something else they can't have."
Shouldn't have bothered. Ingrates.
Well without electricity I wouldn't need to bother responding to this post, so there's that. People want to live in city centers now but as little as 20-30 years ago everyone wanted a back garden and to live in the green belt version of their city.
Replacing parked cars with empty cars driving around to pick people up doesn't sound like the boon to urban life that some people make it out to be.
Space is the limiting factor in all those situations and if you're buying any one of those things above you also have to 'provide' space for it. With cars this inefficiency wouldn't matter, if people only parked it in the spaces they owned or in the middle of nowhere. But in a lot of cities there is a conviction that car owners are owed a parking space in walking distance of anything that has to be ready for them at anytime and is absurdly cheap.
A bit like parks. It would make the city a nicer place.
I don't need to care all that much. I live in the countryside and don't foresee participating in such carpooling, even if it happens in my lifetime. Think it will improve urban society when it happens though.
i think self driving cars will inevitably become common-place because it will be cheaper for companies
i think the idea it won't catch on is quite absurd really, it will take time but it's obviously a better solution and more efficient solution
i think the idea it won't catch on is quite absurd really, it will take time but it's obviously a better solution and more efficient solution
That's only a problem to the people not owning cars though, everybody else needs exactly the same. I'm not sure where you live but in my city if I park in a public garage that's about 2€ /hour which comes out at ~1440 € / month for at most 24 m² of unheated, unprotected dirty space.
Hardly absurdly cheap.
Eventually I agree but can't see it happen this decade, maybe next.
We were promised to have it for at least 5-6 years now though. So a bit of ridicule for those that keep claiming it's right around the corner is to be expected, no?
(I think a large % of current car owners will still want to own their own self driving car though)
yeah i expect it to take at least a decade from here, but honestly who knows
i'd definitely rather just share a self-driving car, or one of a pool of cars, rather than own one.. so I'm on board once the tech is ready
the amount of jobs that will be lost will be crazy though, so not entirely sure its a good thing
Irrespective of how clean or clever private cars are, they'll always be awful for urban environments. The sheer amount of land roads take up, the cost of maintaining them and the impact they have on the walkability of a city far outweigh how efficient they are as a means of transport.
This esentially. For us to take our private space with us in a trip, a gigantic and mainly public effort is needed in infrastructure, maintenance, signaling, workforce, parking space, law enforcement, etc. And that's not considering things like the consumption of non renewable resources, the carbon print, or the fact that we have to look at the million-a-year casualties from car accidents and just shrug it off.
I appreciate the technology behind self driving cars and kind of understand the hype, but there's a leap between that and to consider it a long term efficient solution.
Pooled cars as a concept is already up and running. I have two kids which occasionally means owning just one car is a hassle but I really didn’t want a second one for environmental/financial reasons. So I signed up with these guys and have access to a car round the corner from my house which I can rent on an hourly basis. The hourly rates are very expensive but still work out miles cheaper (and better for the environment) than a second car. I think more and more people living in big cities will do the same. A lot of them will be able to avoid owning any car at all. Which is great. I’ve heard of even more sophisticated versions in other European capitals. In Berlin there are BMWs you can rent and pick up/drop off wherever you want (GoCar version involved dropping back to same spot you picked it up)
That's what I did as well when I lived in Copenhagen and didn't own a car. Far easier and cheaper for the times I actually needed a car. I used ShareNow where you can rent by the minutes, or pre-purchase for some hours or even a week. At one point I even bought a monthly subscription on minutes for the discount. Much cheaper than a taxi and faster the public transport (at one point, sometimes even cheaper than buying a bus ticket to get across town. Definitely been a positive in the city.
It's a product where you pay mostly for flexibility and availability, if you wanted to find anything close to a direct equivalent you would probably have to compare it to hotels charging hourly and I think it's a fairly safe guess that controlling for the differences in costs they run on astronomically higher margins. Public garages are also usually both funded and heavily subsidized, not sure how much of it applies to your particular one.
Ignoring the 'not my problem, therefore not a problem' sentiment, the car-centric cities are horrible to live in for car users too, they're just basically unlivable for anybody else.
The future is fully integrated public transport, not driverless cars.
Well to my mind motorways are car-centric. Hardly any city in Europe that I'm aware of can be called car centric (Maybe Basel? Hardly a horrible place), some have banned cars from huge stretches like Amsterdam or Barcelona but most have a healthy mix cultivated over decades, and I don't see that changing anytime soon other than for tourist places. And I'll gladly visit Amsterdam but you couldn't pay me to live in the car free parts of it.
I love trams and trains but they only take you where they drive, and that is largely between different populated places (hence why mass transit makes sense). Even in places that have truly great networks like Switzerland or Japan that makes huge parts of the country inaccessible without some access to a car. Good enough if you only want to move from one urban environment to another but hardly perfect. Just look at London, with trains, tube, crossrail, buses, trams etc. and huge price penalties on privately driven cars. Yet there's still plenty of cars around because people still value them enough compared to the alternatives to pay up and go through the pain of driving (maybe not the majority anymore but still more than enough).
It's not like we won't need roads once private cars are replaced anyway, no matter how much not just bikes says so
.