Live data from Hacker News

G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

nytimes.com

261–270 of 402 posts

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#261

It is predicted that autonomous cars will reduce America's fleet of vehicles by something like 10-fold [1]. I think it will unfold something like this: FIRST, instead three cars for mom, dad and kid, the average family has one car that drops mom off to work, then dad, and then the teen off to school. SECOND, aforementioned car makes use of its down time to drive strangers around via Uber, Lyft, et cetera. The car's o…

I can picture all of those things happening to some extent and still would only estimate a 3-5x reduction in fleet size. In order to get 10x, you are implicitly estimating that rush hour vehicle utilization is currently only 10%. I would estimate that rush hour utilization is in the range of 50-70%. For 10x, you would absolutely have to do something to address peak time behavior. For example, if Mom, Dad, and Junior…

> would only estimate a 3-5x reduction in fleet size

10x is admittedly bullish. I expect 4 to 7x within 20 years, i.e. 3 to 4 product cycles. But 10x is more reasonable than it seems at face value.

Let's use Manhattan to illustrate. Another HN user (wadenick) kindly provided [1] some references I'd like to point to. Car ownership across the United States stands at 81% of households [2]. In Manhattan it's 23% [3]. Manhattan has roughly fewer than 1/3 the number of cars as the rest of America. This is partly why there are only 39 gas stations in Manhattan (down from 60 in 2004) [4]. Repair shops, too, are fewer and further in between. Many are owned by taxi operators for their fleets' use only.

Uber pays 75% of its earnings to its drivers. How much cheaper could a driverless be? 50% less? How would that tilt our 23% figure? All it takes is half of Manhattan's car-owning households to switch for Manhattan to hit a 7-fold reduction in car ownership from present-day America.

Everywhere isn't Manhattan. Density matters. Less-dense locales will need to accept some combination of higher wait times, higher prices or lower rates of fleet reduction. That said, the scaling economics are nearly identical. Fleets will be cheaper than individually-owned self-driving cars because they can more efficiently use their down time. This, in turn, makes individually car ownership more expensive (by degrading retail-servicing infrastructure and supply chains). That, in turn, makes fleet usage more desirable and so on.

The degree to which this happens may vary. But at its lower bound, I'd posit 4x and at its higher bound over 10. Given that income and urban dwelling are correlated, and continue to increase in their correlation, that bodes badly for the edge-case rural families demanding high degrees of simultaneity at a price even remotely approaching what it costs to maintain a small garage of cars today.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10837732

[2] http://web.archive.org/web/20140209114811/http://data.worldb...

[3] http://www.nycedc.com/blog-entry/new-yorkers-and-cars

[4] http://www.wnyc.org/story/say-goodbye-manhattans-gas-station...

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You only need the three cars if you insist on owning the vehicle you're riding it. So if Mom, Dad and Kid all need to be somewhere different at the same time, Uber Pool could work for two of the three, or all three while the car is earning more as Uber Black (or the future equivalent). They only need their own vehicle if they want to ride together.

If Mom, Dad, and Kid need to be in different places at the same time during peak travel time, there is still a demand for 3 vehicles regardless of who owns them . The effect on total vehicle fleet is unchanged. The better pooling effects of subscription or on-demand fleets mitigate this problem in most scenarios, but it doesn't mitigate it during peak times. Peak vehicle utilization will be what drives total vehicle…

Even if the members of the family are going different places, each of them can likely share a car with other people heading in the same direction (e.g. to the same school or workplace, to the same city from the suburbs, etc.)

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Mom, Dad, and Junior share rides with other Moms, Dads, and Juniors who are headed in the same direction?

Yeah, but they usually don't originate from the same location. So instead of matching destination, now you have to match destination and departure location.

Yep this is how Lyft Line already works

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#264
post #189
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what about trucking? According to this[0] there are approximately 3.5 million professional truck drivers in the United States. I hate to go down the route of "machines are going to replace everything", but doesn't autonomous automobiles and AI based routing mean these people effectively get eliminated? http://www.alltrucking.com/faq/truck-drivers-in-the-usa/

Given that trains require far less cognitive load to operate than a tractor trailer (sorry engineers!), and yet still require humans to operate.. I wonder if ever? I'm actually curious why trains haven't been automated at this point (in the US at least). It seems like an ideal first step (no navigational issues, retrofit some collision avoidance mechanisms, remote control, etc, and you are up and running).

My guess: train operators are probably a much lower percentage of the total cost of running a train than drivers are for trucks or cabs, removing the incentive for automation.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#265

It is predicted that autonomous cars will reduce America's fleet of vehicles by something like 10-fold [1]. I think it will unfold something like this: FIRST, instead three cars for mom, dad and kid, the average family has one car that drops mom off to work, then dad, and then the teen off to school. SECOND, aforementioned car makes use of its down time to drive strangers around via Uber, Lyft, et cetera. The car's o…

It strikes me that while the back-and-forth of autonomous private vehicles (to send parents and kids off on separate trips) might reduce the total number of cars, it would also probably increase the amount of cars on the streets at any given time, since the autonomous vehicles would have to return home without passengers to pick up remaining family members.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Mom, Dad, and Kid need to be in different places at the same time during peak travel time, there is still a demand for 3 vehicles regardless of who owns them . The effect on total vehicle fleet is unchanged. The better pooling effects of subscription or on-demand fleets mitigate this problem in most scenarios, but it doesn't mitigate it during peak times. Peak vehicle utilization will be what drives total vehicle…

Even if the members of the family are going different places, each of them can likely share a car with other people heading in the same direction (e.g. to the same school or workplace, to the same city from the suburbs, etc.)

The same capability currently exists independently of driverless cars. What makes you think the utilization of this tactic will change with driverless cars?

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#267
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the autonomous vehicle I rent for a commute ever be the same one you use to load up with refuse from your home remodel? Wouldn't it make way more sense for you to rent (or own) a pickup truck and for me to rent an autonomous passenger vehicle? Setting autonomous vehicles aside, current short-term car rental companies (i.e Zipcar) have requirements on the condition you return a passenger vehicle in, vs a car…

Imagine if you owned 10 rental properties, were a plumber, an electrician, a basketball coach or had almost any job other than something in the tech industry. You would use your truck/van/large SUV for hauling trash, wire, sports equipment, etc. You would laugh at the idea of selling your primary transport and using an uber/lyft every day to transport all your equipment. Every time one shows up or drops off, remove a…

Most people I know who work in the trades own the vehicle as part of their business, and have separate passenger car(s) for hauling family.

The vehicle subscription would replace the passenger car, not the truck used for heavy work, not at the least because the depreciation of the work vehicle is deductible as a business expense. Also, a vehicle actively used for construction work is already heavily utilized (it is hauling/holding stuff most of the day), so it makes more sense to own it. Passenger cars, however, sit idle most of the day in a parking lot or your driveway, hence their low utilization / wasted value.

Also, many cars today have built-in car-seats (https://www.cars.com/articles/2014/05/which-vehicles-offer-i...). You can bet this sort of feature will be more common in autonomous vehicles.

Furthermore, in certain Uber markets today, you can pay an extra fee to get a vehicle with car seats pre-installed. Right now that fee is high ($10/ride) because they're the only ones doing it, but it's a service so easily replicated that the price will surely come down.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#268
post #240

It is predicted that autonomous cars will reduce America's fleet of vehicles by something like 10-fold [1]. I think it will unfold something like this: FIRST, instead three cars for mom, dad and kid, the average family has one car that drops mom off to work, then dad, and then the teen off to school. SECOND, aforementioned car makes use of its down time to drive strangers around via Uber, Lyft, et cetera. The car's o…

I think it's crazy unrealistic that autonomous cars will be the majority in anything short of 20 to 30 years. The tech doesn't even exist yet. It's taken that long just to see ABS become standard equipment across 90% of vehicles. And this just completely ignores the ~5 to 7 year product cycle. There's no way that in just one or two generations of the Taurus we have a completely self-driving car capable of operating i…

I disagree completely, on two grounds:

1 - I think the tech will be there.

2 - Once the tech is there, there will be incredibly fast adoption for a simple reason: price.

First, insurance rates. Right now, you get discounts for eg the sensors in your volvo that warn about vehicles next to you if you turn your blinkers on. Autonomous driving will be like that but on steroids. Insurers will rapidly price in cost falls from autonomous driving.

A second huge cost increase to non-autonomous driving will come from juries. Right now, as a society, we accept car accidents as part of the cost of a modern society because there is no alternative to heavy use of vehicles. Humans driving cars means you will inevitably have accidents. Even if you kill someone in an accident, as long as there isn't negligence on your part, you generally will have nothing happen to you besides increased insurance costs. The second there is an alternative to a human driving, I expect civil juries to start returning large awards and laws to change to include jail sentences. Not to mention coming down hard on things like drunk or impaired driving. eg in WI you can basically get a couple DUIs before the state gets serious about penalties. That will change in a hurry.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#269

It is predicted that autonomous cars will reduce America's fleet of vehicles by something like 10-fold [1]. I think it will unfold something like this: FIRST, instead three cars for mom, dad and kid, the average family has one car that drops mom off to work, then dad, and then the teen off to school. SECOND, aforementioned car makes use of its down time to drive strangers around via Uber, Lyft, et cetera. The car's o…

I think, just like with most predictions that are based on trends, the current set of expectations will be uprooted by an unforeseen technological advancement. I'll even go as far as predicting that this technological advancement will be a personal (or family) aerial vehicle[1] that makes commuting as easy as vehicular travel, but perhaps safer, and definitely faster. In other words, I think the automobile will dimin…

Think of the possibilities even if cars stay on the ground.

No more garages and driveways. Neighbourhoods will look a lot nicer, and maybe this will foster community engagement? House design will change, maybe with more multi-family units.

Much narrower roads, with real estate that's now sacrificed to roadway given over to parkland or housing.

Maybe cars will move partially or fully underground, travelling in large-diameter pipes. Like a sewer. Save the surface for people and bikes.

Maybe I can own my own "car interior", a custom box that I can commute in every day. It won't have wheels or an engine, so when I want to go somewhere I'll summon an auto-auto that picks up my auto-box and ferries it around.

Re: G.M. Invests $500M in Lyft

#270
post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's crazy unrealistic that autonomous cars will be the majority in anything short of 20 to 30 years. The tech doesn't even exist yet. It's taken that long just to see ABS become standard equipment across 90% of vehicles. And this just completely ignores the ~5 to 7 year product cycle. There's no way that in just one or two generations of the Taurus we have a completely self-driving car capable of operating i…

We went from fliphone to total smartphone domination in 5 years. ABS is a sideshow, not a revolution. As soon as self-driven vehicles are market-ready, we'll see a massive car park upgrade within one car-generation, which I guess is 7 years. Droves of people will ditch their old cars just for the purpose of upgrading.

> We went from fliphone to total smartphone domination in 5 years.

That's glossing over the Nokia video phone, the Treo, and all the Windows handsets.

> ABS is a sideshow, not a revolution.

I have no idea what you're trying to say.

> Droves of people will ditch their old cars just for the purpose of upgrading.

That seems like something that would require evidence. Or at least a theory to back it up. My 10 mile round-trip is definitely not so onerous that I'd look to replace my vehicle for something that isn't going to make it any shorter or more pleasant.

Here's some context: Nissan has been working on the Titan XD for longer than that. That's just a pretty basic 3/4-ton truck without a lot of bells and whistles with an outsourced engine.

Tesla's Model 3 will have been in development almost that long by the time it's released, and as far as anyone knows, has no new tech.

You're talking about tech that doesn't even exist yet.

Post reply on HN