101–110 of 140 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This makes me want to visit Las Vegas for this reason alone. I would love to go to Vegas and for the first time in my life ride in a driverless car, convertable, top down, and enjoy the view, take pictures, and relax no matter what the traffic is like. I can see this being a MASSIVE boost to tourist cities.
I think there's only one street in the whole state that gets bad traffic.
Will insurance companies stop charging you based on your driving history and instead determine your insurance rate based on the safety rating of the AI powering your vehicle? Or perhaps some combination of both? Insurance pricing based on AI safety could become a powerful motivator for developers of the software to continue to innovate and ensure driving safety.
There is certainly a lot of marketing potential in a company being able to say, "Not only is our car the safest autonomous vehicle on the road, but you'll also pay the lowest insurance rate as a result!"
[1] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46419453/ns/business-autos/#.Tz2...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's incorrect to say "less need for labor" because labor in general is the most scarce resource (it's easy to prove: we have unused natural resources and capital always requires labor to make them work and maintain them). This is exactly why everybody tries to build capital which makes labor more efficient. It is clearly more efficient for a man to control 10 cars with a computer instead of the one with his bare han…
True, but those unsolved, more urgent problems often require more educated labor. Many taxi drivers who find themselves out of a job likely don't have the skills necessary to quickly reintegrate into the labor market solving the tougher problems you're talking about. As machines continue to replace humans in tasks that can be automated, fewer unskilled jobs will be left for less-educated segments of the labor force.…
The good thing is that the higher end jobs tend to be creative(Research), and in near infinite supply if you can get money flowing into them. You can never have enough inventions or new technologies.
I'm interested to find out how this will affect car insurance in the future. Although the human operator of the vehicle is held liable for any accidents, even if he/she is not physically present in the car [1], the likelihood of an autonomous vehicle accident will obviously be largely dependent on the car's software rather than the human responsible. Will insurance companies stop charging you based on your driving hi…
Also insurance is hardly an innovative industry... I'd bet they don't change anything about how they insure people for a LONG time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a YC company in the making! In all seriousness, there will be some great business opportunities here. It will open up an entirely new market.
I always thougt companies like Uber were really positioning themselves and building the tech necessary for when this inevitably happens. Right now they need humans to drive their cars around but as soon as they can they will surely shift to automated cars. If they've already built the scheduling systems necessary they'll be able to combine that with the mindshare they've been building and be in a great position.
Uber is Netflix in 1997, sending DVDs through the mail to people's mailboxes, carefully awaiting the day when the technological infrastructure will support their true purpose.
This is a beautiful example of a state, in desperate need of revenue, supporting legislation that encourages businesses to start up without increasing/decreasing taxes. Now if only the US could do the same thing with stem cells.
Is the Nevads government subsidizing research into self driving cars with tax money? If not, than I see no parallel to stem cells. For the last 10 years or more, you're welcome to do anything you want with stem cells. Go crazy. You just haven't been able to get tax money to fund it, if the stem cells happened to be embryonic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That won't help. Everyone in the area will likely be travelling to work around the same time.
I think we should get rid of the 9-5 and have staggered times. Different companies start different times of the day... I'm fairly sure theres a group of who like to start at 10, and go home 6, or maybe start at 11.
It's worth remembering that companies are free to do this already. Most don't, however, because they want to maximise the amount of overlap with other businesses they need to interact with. It also conveniently fits in with other things in family life, such as the kids going to school, or sports, etc.
America, if there's anything that's going to send bolts of lightning through your economy, it's this.
Does that mean pedestrians can confidently stride out to cross the road and the traffic will effortlessly stream around them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a YC company in the making! In all seriousness, there will be some great business opportunities here. It will open up an entirely new market.
I always thougt companies like Uber were really positioning themselves and building the tech necessary for when this inevitably happens. Right now they need humans to drive their cars around but as soon as they can they will surely shift to automated cars. If they've already built the scheduling systems necessary they'll be able to combine that with the mindshare they've been building and be in a great position.