Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 125 posts

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#101

Post by pyre »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #97
pyre wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes. I regularly fly in planes, which I have no control over, and which spend most of their time on autopilot. Those planes with their auto-pilot system still have a means for the pilots to intervene. That's not quite the same as being in a vehicle for which no human has the possibility of intervening. (It's also a bit disingenuous to imply that it is.)

First, those pilots are heavily trained and certified, far more than car drivers. And second, far more accidents occur due to humans than due to mechanical failure (and of "mechanical failure", only a subset of those involve incorrect autopilot, though I haven't found that broken out). http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm puts total human causes at 67% (53% of which is pilot error), and mechanical failure at 20%.…

Do you have statistics on the number of times that the pilot has to take control because the auto-pilot is unable to cope or is doing the wrong thing? Focusing just human-caused accidents vs. machine-caused accidents ignores this.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#102

Post by mc32 »

paulmd wrote: post #9

The other bubble that driverless cars are going to pop is ticket revenue. There are a lot of police departments and cities who have structured a lot of their budget on heavy-handed enforcement of motorists. That's going to decline significantly once driverless cars are scrupulously following the rules of the road. And any tickets that get written will be going against a giant corporation like Google, with detailed in…

Local authorities will have to recoup costs via registration fees or maybe usage tax (miles driven times some decimal times an income bracket). Unless GM, Ford, Tesla, Google are going to maintain roads and pay for policing --although FB and co. could assess who have more perp risk and assess taxes accordingly...

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#103

Post by beachstartup »

chjohasbrouck wrote: post #100
labster wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily the poors won't be able to afford to the new cars, so we can continue our campaign of oppression via infraction ticketing against them for quite some time.

The cost of owning a car (maintenance, financing, registration, license, insurance, tickets, parking, cleaning) will totally eclipse the cost of Lyft/Ubering a self-driving car, even (especially?) for the poor. We're already to the point where if your commute is less than 8 miles or so, using Uber daily is cheaper than the cost of ownership on a $30k vehicle. Just imagine what self-driving cars will do to that equati…

it's a good point, but just a reminder that for most people the price for comparison would be public transit, bicycle, or scooter, not a $30k car.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#104

Post by safeignorance »

chjohasbrouck wrote: post #100
labster wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luckily the poors won't be able to afford to the new cars, so we can continue our campaign of oppression via infraction ticketing against them for quite some time.

The cost of owning a car (maintenance, financing, registration, license, insurance, tickets, parking, cleaning) will totally eclipse the cost of Lyft/Ubering a self-driving car, even (especially?) for the poor. We're already to the point where if your commute is less than 8 miles or so, using Uber daily is cheaper than the cost of ownership on a $30k vehicle. Just imagine what self-driving cars will do to that equati…

> We're already to the point where if your commute is less than 8 miles or so, using Uber daily is cheaper than the cost of ownership on a $30k vehicle. Just imagine what self-driving cars will do to that equation.

Which brings up the question: why the hell would anyone buy a $30k vehicle for 16 miles of commuting?! You can get a perfectly reliable car that's even reasonably safe and comfortable for regional road trips @ well under $10k, without even looking for sales or deals.

Until true driverless (no driver in vehicle, no insurance policy needed) happens, ownership will always be cheaper than daily taxi rides.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#105

Post by sokoloff »

pyre wrote: post #101
JoshTriplett wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, those pilots are heavily trained and certified, far more than car drivers. And second, far more accidents occur due to humans than due to mechanical failure (and of "mechanical failure", only a subset of those involve incorrect autopilot, though I haven't found that broken out). http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cause.htm puts total human causes at 67% (53% of which is pilot error), and mechanical failure at 20%.…

Do you have statistics on the number of times that the pilot has to take control because the auto-pilot is unable to cope or is doing the wrong thing? Focusing just human-caused accidents vs. machine-caused accidents ignores this.

I don't have the stats, but I have a bit over 1000 hours as a pilot of light aircraft.

"What's it doing now?" is a common question in the industry, and the subject of this excellent American Airlines training seminar video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN41LvuSz10&t=21m41s

(The whole video is good, but that's the specific automation confusion question.)

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#106

Post by objclxt »

koenigdavidmj wrote: post #32
tw04 wrote: post #3

Why would they lower prices? The government mandates we MUST have insurance, so they know they've got a continued source of business. They'll simply increase profits. The average American has absolutely no way to correlate the amount they pay for insurance to what it costs the insurance company.

> The government mandates we MUST have insurance This becomes absurd with self-driving cars. There are three types of collisions with human-driven cars: 1. Those caused by driver negligence. 2. Those caused by the owner failing to properly maintain their vehicle. 3. Those caused by a manufacturing defect. With self-driving cars, the first one is impossible. A car that follows the law to the letter is by definition ne…

> With self-driving cars, the first one is impossible. A car that follows the law to the letter is by definition never at fault in a collision.

You can still be "at fault" even if you followed the law in a collision. Laws - particularly driving laws - are not always black and white.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#107

Post by sokoloff »

safeignorance wrote: post #104
chjohasbrouck wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of owning a car (maintenance, financing, registration, license, insurance, tickets, parking, cleaning) will totally eclipse the cost of Lyft/Ubering a self-driving car, even (especially?) for the poor. We're already to the point where if your commute is less than 8 miles or so, using Uber daily is cheaper than the cost of ownership on a $30k vehicle. Just imagine what self-driving cars will do to that equati…

> We're already to the point where if your commute is less than 8 miles or so, using Uber daily is cheaper than the cost of ownership on a $30k vehicle. Just imagine what self-driving cars will do to that equation. Which brings up the question: why the hell would anyone buy a $30k vehicle for 16 miles of commuting?! You can get a perfectly reliable car that's even reasonably safe and comfortable for regional road tri…

I did. I bought a LEAF for around $30K (minus $10K in government cheese) for a commute that's about 18 miles RT.

I did it because I wanted an electric car, and specifically a 2014 or later and there were very few 2014s for sale and those that were for sale were overpriced, IMO (in some cases, more than the net price of a new one).

Our other car is indeed a sub-$10K 2005 CR-V with 180+K miles on it.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#108

Post by mc32 »

erobbins wrote: post #94
JoshTriplett wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> do you really want to be in a machine that you have no control over Yes. I regularly fly in planes, which I have no control over, and which spend most of their time on autopilot. I also regularly deal with machines that do their jobs far better than I could, and I feel no desire to take over and do those jobs worse. Why should that answer change when the stakes get higher and the cost of a mistake goes up ? (That d…

I really hate this association of aircraft and car autopilots. Aircraft operate in essentially empty space, and barring major mechanical failure the pilots typically have tens of seconds up to many minutes to act to avoid disaster. In a car you often have less than a second to react, and certainly never more than 4-5. Aircraft hardware and software is tested, retested, tested again, and certified. Auto hardware and s…

People forget planes, the kinds with sophisticated autopilot, don't come out with a new model revision every two to three years. Their cycles are very long, decades long.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#109

Post by kaonashi »

jimjimjim wrote: post #84

Good. just like universal unbreakable glass might hurt glaziers. just like getting people to commit less crimes might hurt for profit prisons. just like people not getting attacked might hurt self-defense courses. I realize this is perfect-world absolutist thinking but industries that exist because of something wrong in the world shouldn't have a right to exist when that wrong is removed.

> just like getting people to commit less crimes might hurt for profit prisons

Naw, they just lobby for new reasons to lock people up.

Re: Driverless Cars Threaten to Crash Insurers’ Earnings

#110

Post by ValleyOfTheMtns »

imglorp wrote: post #92
paulmd wrote: post #9

The other bubble that driverless cars are going to pop is ticket revenue. There are a lot of police departments and cities who have structured a lot of their budget on heavy-handed enforcement of motorists. That's going to decline significantly once driverless cars are scrupulously following the rules of the road. And any tickets that get written will be going against a giant corporation like Google, with detailed in…

And two more bubbles: long haul trucking and taxis. Getting rid of drivers is a high priority for that industry. Human drivers are expensive and they can only drive 70 hours a week. [1] Oh, and Uber is dying to get rid of all its drivers too. [2] 1. https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/new-hours-servi... 2. http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/01/27/how-ubers-autono...

AND public transport, particularly buses, but I'm sure trams/trains will eventually be automated too.
Post reply on HN