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

What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 709 posts

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#311

Post by iso1210 »

owl57 wrote: post #291
qayxc wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iron is cheap nowadays. It's the upkeep that kills you. This "1 server" is equivalent to at least two part-time admins to ensure smooth operations. No biggie if said server just hosts a static website, big deal if runs mission critical processes. That's the part too many "self-hosting" advocates conveniently leave out. A correct TCO calculation must include this cost (and proper risk assessment) and only then can a c…

And, if instead of a dedicated server you rent some combination of AWS services, you suddenly don't need admin or need a cheaper one?

You just need an extra developer who's an expert with various AWS services to make sure you're using them correctly

However as all developers are AWS experts (at least according to their resume), you have to pay that price regardless

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#312

Post by qayxc »

owl57 wrote: post #291
qayxc wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iron is cheap nowadays. It's the upkeep that kills you. This "1 server" is equivalent to at least two part-time admins to ensure smooth operations. No biggie if said server just hosts a static website, big deal if runs mission critical processes. That's the part too many "self-hosting" advocates conveniently leave out. A correct TCO calculation must include this cost (and proper risk assessment) and only then can a c…

And, if instead of a dedicated server you rent some combination of AWS services, you suddenly don't need admin or need a cheaper one?

With services in particular you indeed don't need one.

No need to ensure the software is up-to-date, no worries about hardware outages, no need to monitor the system, etc. etc.

The person working with a rented service infrastructure can focus on what makes them money: the process.

With self-owned hardware you need contingency plans, setup, maintenance, redundant ISPs, UPS, extra electrical setup (many offices automatically turn off power to all outlets after office hours to safe electricity and reduce the risk of fires), and much more depending on the required tasks and their importance.

If you want to know what happens if you cheap out on that because "it just works" anyway once it's been set up and operated by an underqualified and overworked person, look no further than the recent ransomware incidents.

Some of them could've been easily avoided had the IT infrastructure been up to snuff. Way too many businesses and public entities still treat IT as a necessary evil that can be handled casually, not realising their dependence on it.

The specifics differ on a case-to-case basis, but in general it's a terrible idea for a small non-IT business to operate their own IT infrastructure. The solution doesn't have to be "cloud" or SaaS either. Hiring a competent 3rd party to deal with the specific implementation and operation for you is just as good even said party is "Bob's Business IT Services" and not AWS or Microsoft Azure.

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#313

Post by iso1210 »

jjav wrote: post #161
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physical co-lo is only cheaper if your time is worthless (ditto for Linux-on-the-corporate-desktop, or anything else that’s nominatively gratis). My current SaaS gig runs in Azure (App Services and containers - no VMs nor “serverless”) and being completely free of the need to do sysadmin work is just so nice. When I was colocating my own rack about a decade ago there was always something that needed my attention, be…

> Physical co-lo is only cheaper if your time is worthless Physical colocation is nearly always cheaper than AWS for most use cases. Exceptions are when your usage is so tiny that it doesn't need even a single full-time server, and, when your usage is so erratic that provisioning for the spikes doesn't make sense. For everyone else, you're paying a very large premium for AWS over what it'd cost to buy and operate som…

Oh certainly if you want some beefy server with graphics cards, tons of memory etc, running 24/7, it's probably cheaper to co-locate. A g3s.xlarge costs $13k for 3 years with amazon, I suspect kitting your own server out and hiring 1U of space and a 1G internet access port would be much cheaper over the 3 year contract and not run into nasty bandwidth surprises.

The benefit of AWS-style comes in at

1) Flexibile workflows (I need the grunt on mondays, but not the rest of the week)

2) Tiny workflows (I just want a couple of $5/month VMs in different cities and some DNS to host a couple of toys)

Now if you have the $8/hour self drive, that's great if you use it once a year on a 10 hour trip to a holiday destination. It's awful if you use it for 2 hours a day.

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#315

Post by andi999 »

hyperhopper wrote: post #62

> In a swipe at Tesla, he said that by charging hourly fees, VW would make autonomous driving more accessible than “a car with a five-digit surcharge.” This is completely disingenuous at best, and malicious at worst. This is a perfect example of the boots theory of socioeconomic unfairness [1]. This is just taking advantage of the poor-middle class' inability to pay a larger upfront cost, to extort them for more over…

So the hourly fee is only on the surcharge? And one still needs to pay for the car?

Or if the car costs 20k, plus 10k surcharge it is more like 13 years until the rent reaches the price. Also what about insurance and maintainence?

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#317

Post by loup-vaillant »

Great. Now my car does not even belong to me (same as my phone, damn you Steve Jobs).

A subscription fee to update the map I could understand. A subscription fee to be notified of real time event (and have the car automatically chose the fastest route) I can also understand. But for driving itself? No way. That thing has to be done locally for latency reasons, subscription is just dishonest for this one.

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#318

Post by mensetmanusman »

In terms of the heated seat argument, I imagine a future where they take it to the extreme and charge by the Joule for heating.

That would mean those with a lot of thermal mass when they are sitting would have to pay more to get more electrons traveling through the tungsten heating elements. BMW would argue that this is a way to combat obesity.

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#319

Post by ghaff »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #110
hyperhopper wrote: post #62

> In a swipe at Tesla, he said that by charging hourly fees, VW would make autonomous driving more accessible than “a car with a five-digit surcharge.” This is completely disingenuous at best, and malicious at worst. This is a perfect example of the boots theory of socioeconomic unfairness [1]. This is just taking advantage of the poor-middle class' inability to pay a larger upfront cost, to extort them for more over…

> This is 100% a way to extract more money from consumers, especially non financially stable consumers, while lying to all of our faces Isn't this hyperbolic? I split time between at least two cities. Being able to pay as I go represents a real saving in cost, time and attention. Sometimes buying is better than renting. But sometimes there are economies of centralization. AWS isn't a scam on companies too poor to buy…

A lot of people turn subscriptions and pay per use into a tiresome religious argument. I don't want to pay an upfront for-all-time fee for everything I use. Sometimes I want to buy outright. Sometimes I want to rent for a period. And sometimes I want to pay per use. It depends on the thing in question, my usage patterns, and the amount of money involved. (And it can change over time.)

Re: What would you pay for autonomous driving? Volkswagen hopes $8.50 per hour

#320

Post by chiefalchemist »

hyperhopper wrote: post #62

> In a swipe at Tesla, he said that by charging hourly fees, VW would make autonomous driving more accessible than “a car with a five-digit surcharge.” This is completely disingenuous at best, and malicious at worst. This is a perfect example of the boots theory of socioeconomic unfairness [1]. This is just taking advantage of the poor-middle class' inability to pay a larger upfront cost, to extort them for more over…

I see your point but I think you have to factor in:

1) The driver's time. If I can read on my way to work, that's a win. Price effectively reduced.

2) Time saved not getting an oil change, new tires, other maintenance, etc. Price drops a bit more.

3) I don't have to buy a "family sized" car that's only fully utilized a small percentage of the time. That over-pay / under-realized has a cost associated with it. Instead, I simply hail what I need when I need it.

4) Along the same lines as #1, family QT increases when I use a family vehicle.

5) When I'm able to rightly size my vehicle, there are eco savings as well.

6) Or perhaps I'm too old to drive and owning a car doesn't make sense either. If someone else has to shuttle me around, their time is a cost.

Again. I agree. Companies profit from some products and markets more than others. That said, these vehicles and biz models are not the past and can - and will? - change the future.

Post reply on HN