Why would I want this? Why is this better than a normal taxi?
Presumably, labor cost is a large part of the cost of a ride.
We're going commercial
21–30 of 37 posts
Re: We're going commercial
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, I am not convinced by your arguments. Technology has improved our lives and relieves us from drugery of life. But there are people out there that want Humans to suffer (Mother Teresa, et. al.) and it is a fundamentalist view that cannot be challenged through logic, reason and objectivity. The only way to defeat neo-luddism is to double down on technological progress. It is fundamentally anti-Human in every way. T…
Maybe they got their cancer from technology…
Life expectancy has improved with technological progress.
Re: We're going commercial
#23For whatever reason, Cruise continues to advance and get very little buzz. I’m curious what it will take to get them discussed even half as much as Tesla (which is much farther behind) when it comes to automation.
From a customer's perspective, it isn't clear that a software taxi driver is in any way better than a human taxi driver, particularly with human driver assist preventing collisions and all the other warnings provided by a modern car. In both cases someone else is driving for the customer. With a human driver (plus driver assist breaking and collision warnings) you have the most flexible, sophisticated intelligence on…
[deleted]
Re: We're going commercial
#24Re: We're going commercial
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not even lower prices, but even to continue the current prices of Uber and Lyft (without burning VC cash), automation is needed. Even with the low pay for human drivers today, that's still too much for the prices charged by ride sharing to be sustainable.
Nah current prices are sustainable. Self driving cars should get us 1/5th of the prices going forward imo.
Based on what? Ride share companies don't absorb any of the cost of vehicle maintenance, insurance, or fuel. Drivers are subsidizing a significant amount of the capital costs of running a taxi business that isn't exactly reflected in prices.
Additionally there's the problem of the market tolerating current prices. Like gasoline, even if the cost comes down it doesn't mean price goes down. Profit margins will increase if the market can sustain current prices.
Re: We're going commercial
#26For whatever reason, Cruise continues to advance and get very little buzz. I’m curious what it will take to get them discussed even half as much as Tesla (which is much farther behind) when it comes to automation.
From a customer's perspective, it isn't clear that a software taxi driver is in any way better than a human taxi driver, particularly with human driver assist preventing collisions and all the other warnings provided by a modern car. In both cases someone else is driving for the customer. With a human driver (plus driver assist breaking and collision warnings) you have the most flexible, sophisticated intelligence on…
Software can't rape you.
I'm serious.
I think that automated taxis will be a boon to women who want to go somewhere at night but don't want to go there by means of an unscrupulous stranger.
Re: We're going commercial
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
From a customer's perspective, it isn't clear that a software taxi driver is in any way better than a human taxi driver, particularly with human driver assist preventing collisions and all the other warnings provided by a modern car. In both cases someone else is driving for the customer. With a human driver (plus driver assist breaking and collision warnings) you have the most flexible, sophisticated intelligence on…
I think another draw would be its safety which at least as planned is supposed to be greater and consistent while with human driver you never know what you’re getting For non-us markets it’s also integrity. No more shenanigans like calling rider and asking to cancel the ride bc the driver didn’t like it
There should also be a huge tipping point in safety and efficiency when all (or almost all) cars go fully autonomous.
With cars all communicating p2p in a local mesh to avoid collisions and improve throughput, apart from reducing accidents even further, you could safely turn all highways into autobahns with much higher speed limits.
Even if it’s a long way off, I welcome any progress in this direction.
We’re all very used to it, so it seems normal, but the status quo of high stress traffic and casually risking death and disfigurement on a daily basis is completely insane.
Re: We're going commercial
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
The robotaxi’s draw will be its lower prices. They are removing the cost of a driver from the equation. Assuming the car felt as safe as a normal taxi, I’d take the cheaper one.
Not even lower prices, but even to continue the current prices of Uber and Lyft (without burning VC cash), automation is needed. Even with the low pay for human drivers today, that's still too much for the prices charged by ride sharing to be sustainable.
The “burning VC cash” objection to Uber and Lyft is hardly relevant when they’ve both been public companies for three years or so.
Re: We're going commercial
#29For whatever reason, Cruise continues to advance and get very little buzz. I’m curious what it will take to get them discussed even half as much as Tesla (which is much farther behind) when it comes to automation.
From a customer's perspective, it isn't clear that a software taxi driver is in any way better than a human taxi driver, particularly with human driver assist preventing collisions and all the other warnings provided by a modern car. In both cases someone else is driving for the customer. With a human driver (plus driver assist breaking and collision warnings) you have the most flexible, sophisticated intelligence on…
> ...it isn't clear that a software taxi driver is in any way better than a human taxi driver...
If there is sufficient surge coverage that I can get an autonomous vehicle within 10 minutes of hailing one 90% of the time and 15 minutes 100% of the time for example, and the fares are reasonably based off of amortizing across 24x7 operational hours. Then the financials flip for a lot of people who either do not want or cannot afford the capex much less opex of owning and operating their own private vehicle.
Furthermore, if the AV companies work with municipalities to share ride data in the form of urban public transit planning data in exchange for a small passive income slice of the parts of the data turned into actual implemented public transit routes, it is a win for everyone. The AV company gets to expand territory with a more efficient capital stream to replace old territory mostly ceded to public transit without burdensome capex, and everyone else gets empirically-tested public transit routes with little of the usual route planning risks.
With software-driven coordination, I really hope to see vehicles as just the leading edge of a trend to amortize the capex of expensive items across more people, leading to more Buy It For Life/Generations quality of those items, and less environmental impact of a throwaway items per individual orientation in the current market.
Re: We're going commercial
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me ask you back: Why not? What would be worse than a regular cab?
Not being able to get a taxi? I don't really see how your question relates.
Well, this is a substitute for a person driven taxi. "Not being able to get a taxi" is a confusing reply, since this assumption is wrong. My question begore relates to what you think are the disadvantages, since you asked "Why is this better than a normal taxi?". I beliebe its the same, just no driver from the consumers point of view, is it not?