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

Self driving cars and beyond

a16z.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 120 posts

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#51

Post by jaclaz »

JohanByttner wrote: post #49
jaclaz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What did happen to 3D printing? Basically "nothing". Sure 3D printers came out much cheaper (talking of FFF Fused Filament Fabrication or FDM Fused Deposition Modeling ) and much more precise/accurate, but still they are way too slow for any practical "final customer" use, outside the pure fun of it. Other technologies are still too expensive (or again still too slow) to get anywhere soon in "every household". In th…

3D printers aren't material reassemblers. They replace milling and lathing when those methods take a day or more per part. You won't see it in your cupboard but rather a flight engineer might use it.

You mean - I believe - a (mechanical) engineer working in aerospace industry, a flight engineer does other things:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_engineer

And yes, there is some use for such printers, but given their cost (and the cost per piece manufactured) they are limited to other very narrow and "rich" fields like aerospace.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#53

Post by Bizarro »

gervase wrote: post #22
ilovecars2 wrote: post #6

This is kind of a meta comment, but I’ve been lurking on HN for a while on car posts in particular. I have the impression that HN in general doesn’t like cars all that much, and in fact we would be much better of without them. I can’t argue with the facts: congestion and pollution in large cities, such as London, have never been higher where almost all on-road public transport is still run on diesel. However, I think…

Let's assume your worst-case scenario comes to pass, and politicians decide (or are influenced) to outlaw manually-driven vehicles from public roads. First, you would still be able to drive on private tracks; plenty of car enthusiasts already do this today. If your enjoyment is derived from driving fast, or taking curves, this should be able to satisfy your requirements. Second, if your satisfaction is derived from a…

Let's assume your worst-case scenario comes to pass, and politicians decide (or are influenced) to outlaw manually-driven vehicles from public roads.

There seems to be some confusion around HN about politicians signing/voting for laws and the people just magically acquiescing because a hundred guys decided it was for the best.

There's consequences for everything and the people can push back hard if bureacrats aren't thinking clearly.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#54

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

slyall wrote: post #37
ilovecars2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe that cars are not a transportation solution that scales like public transportation, for instance, does. One thing I would like to add is that public transport is too very difficult to scale. For example, the Northern, Central and Piccadilly lines on London Underground are massively overcrowded to the extent where it’s borderline dangerous. I don’t really know what TFL can do about it, because the lines al…

> One thing I would like to add is that public transport is too very difficult to scale A quick check show the Piccadilly line is doing 21 trains per hour and they have a capacity of 684 people. Around 14,000 people per hour. That is roughly a 7 lanes of highway traffic under optimal conditions. Not even thinking about the other direction. I think you find that it is easer to build a new underground line though centr…

London was recently faced with exactly that question: how to transport more people across the city efficiently without paying the astronomical sums required for either another Crossrail or an unthinkably damaging motorway.

The solution is in place now and is working. It’s the North-South and East-West Cycle Superhighways.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#55

Post by mrisoli »

letscavort22 wrote: post #2

It’s great to explore this topic. You can have a lot of fun in picking a random industry and imagining the effect that self driving will have. Health - beyond the obvious effects on the emergency room, what else? Ambulances willl quite clearly be affected. Why would someone wait minutes for one to arrive when they can just hop in an autocar to go the hospital? Or would the entire emergency room itself be on wheels? (…

I remember seeing a concept video ages ago that touch on many the things that self-driving can change(from Audi I think).

I always think in a fully self-driving world there would be huge shifts in the real estate market, living further from your workplace/school won't be such a problem if the commute is easy and the time is consistent, but also in a way that is more convenient than public transportation, similar to how there's higher demand for living close to good transportation links.

Also, if the car can drive itself then you don't have to park it close to you when you don't need it, it can stay at a remote location while you work then "pick you up" when needed.

I also wonder if that could have any effect on car ownership, one of the biggest hassles of living just with uber is that it might just fail you when you need it, either because of surge pricing or lack of drivers, such as late hours or major events, if Uber eliminates the need for drivers it can deploy its fleet at 24 hours a day besides maintenance and therefore could guarantee it's users a minimum supply in a certain area at all times.

Then again, would Uber own those cars? Does it make sense for them to lease unutilized car time from owners similar to what people do with idle CPUs for crypto mining? Thus allowing owners to have some passive revenue.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#56

Post by icebraining »

userbinator wrote: post #29
ilovecars2 wrote: post #6

This is kind of a meta comment, but I’ve been lurking on HN for a while on car posts in particular. I have the impression that HN in general doesn’t like cars all that much, and in fact we would be much better of without them. I can’t argue with the facts: congestion and pollution in large cities, such as London, have never been higher where almost all on-road public transport is still run on diesel. However, I think…

I agree, but it's more than just that --- self-driving cars will take more control away from individuals and put that in the hands of corporations and governments, who will have a much easier time tracking --- and even controlling --- the large-scale movement of the population. When they decide to outlaw non-self-driving cars almost completely, "the frog will have been thoroughly boiled." Of course, it's all done und…

Regular cars are already being tracked. Real-time license plate scanning is a solved problem.

You're probably more anonymous buying a bus ticket with cash than driving your car.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#57

Post by ctdonath »

letscavort22 wrote: post #2

It’s great to explore this topic. You can have a lot of fun in picking a random industry and imagining the effect that self driving will have. Health - beyond the obvious effects on the emergency room, what else? Ambulances willl quite clearly be affected. Why would someone wait minutes for one to arrive when they can just hop in an autocar to go the hospital? Or would the entire emergency room itself be on wheels? (…

Assuming "hard" self-driving...

Education: more kids "driving" themselves to school. There's an age where a kid could be trusted to walk alone, but not ready to "drive" there. Get in car, car takes kid to school & back. The one thing stopping my kids from going to a preferred school is we can't drive 'em there at that time; give me a trustworthy car and I'll let it take them there.

Play: like above, parents will be more likely to let the kid travel a non-trivial, non-walkable distance to play with friends. No longer bound by parental availability, parents can just authorize the kid to get in and be taken somewhere.

Parking: there will be a "Napster"-type stage of anarchy where self-driving cars won't park, they'll just slowly roam around until the owner calls it back. I've spent a whole day in NYC driving in circles (while the family enjoyed scenic stops) in lieu of finding & paying for expensive parking; would be nice to just get out and let the car wander, using roads as "parking in motion". This will lead to legislation & new solutions requiring aimless vehicles to actually get off the roads, albeit into more compact storage.

Tourism: lots of people dislike dealing with taxis. I'd certainly be more comfortable with an automated "pick your destination on a map" UI, evolution of getting rid of elevator operators.

Travel: huge hit on travel industry. My family rarely flies anywhere, opting instead for painful overnight 1000+ mile drives. Many people will be far more likely to do such trips when they can get on a major long-haul freeway and completely ignore the driving process. No more trying to stay awake on a boring overnight drive, just doze off completely, waking up only for refueling or nearing destination. I'll happily drive the complex parts at start/end, but it's that 700 mile stretch that's agonizing as driver.

Housing: longer commutes will be more tolerable. I will live in an acre+ site, and let the car deal with traffic while reading/working/napping. So long as I can ignore the commute, I'll put up with a much longer one.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#58

Post by madeofpalk »

slyall wrote: post #37
ilovecars2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe that cars are not a transportation solution that scales like public transportation, for instance, does. One thing I would like to add is that public transport is too very difficult to scale. For example, the Northern, Central and Piccadilly lines on London Underground are massively overcrowded to the extent where it’s borderline dangerous. I don’t really know what TFL can do about it, because the lines al…

> One thing I would like to add is that public transport is too very difficult to scale A quick check show the Piccadilly line is doing 21 trains per hour and they have a capacity of 684 people. Around 14,000 people per hour. That is roughly a 7 lanes of highway traffic under optimal conditions. Not even thinking about the other direction. I think you find that it is easer to build a new underground line though centr…

So I think the insight here is that, as with everything, it can only scale so far.

Here's a question though: is it easier to build a new underground tunnel now compared to 100(?) years ago? While previously there was a lot less existing infrastructure to have to worry about disturbing, these days we have a lot more advanced technology to make the process easier.

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#59

Post by saltcured »

clfougner wrote: post #39
ilovecars2 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your opinion on flying for pleasure (i.e vacation)? We know that flying too is very damaging for the environment and creates terrible noise pollution. Would love to hear your thoughts on this!

That isn’t the same thing at all. When you fly for a vacation, the flying is a means to an end (transportation), not the goal in itself. This discussion is about driving for fun, in which the driving is the goal in itself, not transporting yourself to a “fun” destination.

So, I understand you'd be OK with driving to get somewhere (anywhere?) as the ends justify the means. And driving around a race track just for the purpose of driving sounds really bad? Or is the purpose of racing somehow different than someone taking a Sunday drive to nowhere? The race car also produces a lot more particulate emissions than a highway cruiser, both from fuel combustion and from the friction wear of tires and brakes.

What about taking the "scenic route" to get somewhere instead of the most direct route available? You still have a destination and purpose, rather than driving just for the sake of operating the vehicle, but you might drive a little further and take the car's emissions into a nicer area. What about driving a big, gas-hungry SUV or luxury vehicle to be comfortable instead of the most economical compact car that is feasible? What about people operating off-highway vehicles instead of hiking and using mule trains to get deep into the woods?

Starting with the same initial argument that it is wrong to operate a vehicle for pleasure because of its impact on others' health, why do we allow people to create filthy camp fires in the very locations where the most people will be exposed in national parks? Compared to a modern car, the fire is pumping out horrendous unregulated emissions...

Re: Self driving cars and beyond

#60

Post by watchdogtimer »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #54
slyall wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One thing I would like to add is that public transport is too very difficult to scale A quick check show the Piccadilly line is doing 21 trains per hour and they have a capacity of 684 people. Around 14,000 people per hour. That is roughly a 7 lanes of highway traffic under optimal conditions. Not even thinking about the other direction. I think you find that it is easer to build a new underground line though centr…

London was recently faced with exactly that question: how to transport more people across the city efficiently without paying the astronomical sums required for either another Crossrail or an unthinkably damaging motorway. The solution is in place now and is working. It’s the North-South and East-West Cycle Superhighways.

Any estimate of how many people these can move at peak volume? I'm curious how it compares to the Underground.
Post reply on HN