The interesting part about this is everything mentioned was about saving money on things. It sounds like it could destroy a few trillion in revenue. I don't think it is actually worth trillions to google though. (Obviously it could be worth a lot though)
Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
41–50 of 204 posts
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#42The next several years should prove "interesting" for the car market. Driverless cars and assorted state DOT departments pushing for black boxes in cars on the basis of tracking milage are both going to see pushback from the general public. I've bought two new cars (and 1 used) in the last 15 years. The oldest lasted 11 years and 256000 miles. The used was a truck when I bought my house. The newest is a diesel wagon…
The above is in addition to the "independence" baked into the American culture about the open road and the automobile. Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US? I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future. If this doesn't happen, I doubt Americans will freely giv…
In addition to pushback about our 'right to drive the way we want' (which will inevitably be complicated by government regulations on driverless vehicles), there's the practical fact that cars that require a driver will be here for decades. My family just got rid of a '92 Volvo, and a few years back, a '67 Mustang, still street legal. If 45 year old cars are still on the road, it may be that none of us live to see the promise of a completely computer controlled system.
On the other hand, a "Cash for Clunkers" on a big scale could accelerate the transition.
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#43Fasten Your Seatbelts: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions Amazing! He studied and compared all other driver-less cars to Google's and came to this conclusion. I know a writer getting paid for clicks wouldn't forget that virtually every major car company is working on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driverless_car#History
Or that google isn't an auto manufacturer...
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still, I can't help but feel that maybe Google have the final piece of the puzzle. We've had computers and sensors powerful enough for decades, only Google have all of that maps data, polished again and again by android users using maps (and now Ingress) to make it more reliable. Google almost specialise at crunching massive data into useful products, and building reliable supersystems from millions of unreliable sub…
Can you elaborate on how you think that map data is important? I would expect that mapping data at best gives you a route - something the user could supply. Naively, I would think that the hard problems are responding to obstacles in the road, cross walks, stop lights, etc., where map data won't help much.
My (admittedly limited) knowledge of the cars is that they 'cheat' a lot, in that they don't just look at sensors to make decisions rather they look at a map of data to determine ie approach this corner at maximum 40mph, pot holes on left side of road at this point, always stop at this intersection as it's tricky to see, etc. So the parallel between improving maps data with phones will be improving the car detail map data with cars.
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#45The market is worth trillions... not Google's solution. One thing tech reporters seem to have failed at recognizing is that this research has been taking place at every major car company out there - many many others are legitimately in the race. Ultimately its the manufacturers that get to pull the trigger on how driverless cars will become driverless.
There are other companies, but I think I've mostly seen this kind of tech from small companies and start-ups, rather than big auto-makers. Sure most of them have been working on "automization" of the car, but only for certain specific technologies, not "self-driving car" technologies. The best Audi could show at CES was self-parking, and even that needed infrastructure put in place in the parking lot for it to work,…
Wikipedia says Mercedes has been working on it since 1980[1].
I read a claim[2] a while back that the coming S-Class could drive itself, but they chose to not sell it because of concerns about lawsuits, etc.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car#History
[2]: http://www.businessinsider.com/mercedes-benz-2014-s-class-se...
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
The above is in addition to the "independence" baked into the American culture about the open road and the automobile. Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US? I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future. If this doesn't happen, I doubt Americans will freely giv…
Not the parent, but I do think there is something inherently wrong about it. I grew up around cars, driving cars (heck, my college job was the stereotypical pizza delivery guy). I live in a metropolitan area where I can go just about anywhere I need to with the swipe of a card and waiting a few minutes on a train platform. The feeling of independence that I didn't need to worry about the CV boots on my axles screwing…
You're lucky. It's a luxury to live in an area with effective mass transportation.
A lot of people aren't so lucky.
The freedom a vehicle provides those people is quite real.
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#47I think the implications are huge, but I question the 90% reduction in cars figure. While it's true that most people don't drive their car most of the time, when they do drive, most of them are driving within a relatively small time window. I could imagine a 25-50% reduction in the number of cars, but I just don't see 90% happening unless it's accompanied by a huge increase in people working from home or working non-…
You haven't taken into account car pooling. Driverless cars can do adhoc car pooling. I can even see things like local 4 seater driverless cars picking you up, and taking you to another 10 (or more) seater vehicle for the rest of your journey. (By definition the congestion is because a lot of people have overlapping routes.)
Additionally you are no longer to blame for your commute since the driverless system would be responsible for timing, in much the same way trains are to blame for timing now. I'd also expect the driverless system to have variable pricing - need to get to work by 9am instead 9.15am and it is $5 more out of your pocket. Ultimately your employer is paying that and they have an incentive to only do so if it is valuable.
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you elaborate on how you think that map data is important? I would expect that mapping data at best gives you a route - something the user could supply. Naively, I would think that the hard problems are responding to obstacles in the road, cross walks, stop lights, etc., where map data won't help much.
Even Google's own data isn't perfect. A couple of years ago someone even tried to sue Google for "getting her on a highway" and then having an accident. I think she was walking, and obviously she can't blame Google for not noticing the highway! But with self-driving cars, it's different. A car landing on a highway, when it's not supposed to be there, and then getting into an accident, is not good news. So that's why…
Mapping data will be important, but not to prevent accidents. Maps will not be 100% accurate, so even with perfect maps, cars will end up on roads they think aren't highways while in fact, they are. There also will be newly one-way streets that aren't in the mapping database yet, roads closed due to construction or accidents, etc. Yes, both will be rare, but multiplied by millions of cars (necessary to get the 'worth trillions' part)? Not so.
So, let's say you are driving a vehicle that isn't allowed on the highway but incorrectly takes one. How do you think maps will help with the "and then getting into an accident" part?
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the parent, but I do think there is something inherently wrong about it. I grew up around cars, driving cars (heck, my college job was the stereotypical pizza delivery guy). I live in a metropolitan area where I can go just about anywhere I need to with the swipe of a card and waiting a few minutes on a train platform. The feeling of independence that I didn't need to worry about the CV boots on my axles screwing…
You're lucky. It's a luxury to live in an area with effective mass transportation. A lot of people aren't so lucky. The freedom a vehicle provides those people is quite real.
Counterargument is that people exerting their freedom to own a car has built a society where areas without effective mass transportation are common, thus forcing others to also buy a car.
Suburbs would have been built differently if not for private car ownership. LA would not exist in its current form.
Re: Google's Driverless Car Is Worth Trillions
#50I've been saying this to anyone who will listen for years. I really believe this technology will touch everything. Real estate markets will shift dramatically as the average commute time halves or quarters. Transport costs will plummet, making every single physical object cheaper. Public transit will be dirt cheap, always punctual, and take you absolutely anywhere. Tens of thousands of people each year will escape death; millions will lose their jobs.
Safe to say I'm really, really excited about the future.