Rivian Unveils Custom Silicon, R2 Lidar Roadmap, and Universal Hands Free

Post by xmcqdpt2 » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 2:09 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #124

bryanlarsen wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, it seems inevitable that autonomy and insurance are going to be bundled. 1. Courts are finding Tesla partially liable for collisions, so they've already got some of the downsides of insurance (aka the payout) without the upside (the premium). 2. Waymo data shows a significant injury reduction rate. If it's true and not manipulated data, it's natural for the car companies to want to capture some of this upside…

I would pay so much for my own SUV to self-drive as well as Waymo. Keyword: my own SUV. Not a rental. With the possibility for me to take over and drive it myself if service fails or if I want to do so. The significant unlock is that I get to haul gear, packages, family. I don't need to keep it clean. The muddy dogs, the hiking trip, the week-long road trip. If my car could drive me, I'd do way more road trips and sk…

Post by _yb2s » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 2:21 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #18

Autonomy subscriptions are how things are going to go, I called this a long time ago. It makes too much sense in terms of continuous development and operations/support to not have a subscription -- and subscriptions will likely double as insurance at some point in the future (once the car is driving itself 100% of the time, and liability is always with the self driving stack anyway). Of course, people won't like this…

Post by lotsofpulp » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 2:26 PM UTC

manwe150 wrote: post #452

lotsofpulp wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> High-severity accidents might drop, but the industry bleeds money on high-frequency, low-speed incidents (parking lots, neighborhood scrapes). Autonomy has diminishing returns here; it doesn't magically prevent the chaos of mixed-use environments. This seems like it can be solved with a deductible.

I think parent might be implying that a 10 mph collision can total a car just as effectively as a 100 mph collision. There might be more left of the occupants, but the car itself might be still a total loss from a cost-to-repair perspective

Post by _yb2s » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 2:40 PM UTC

HPsquared wrote: post #474

_yb2s wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course, people won't like this I love it because I have exactly zero interest in using this and wouldn’t want to pay for it anyways- and I’d rather more of the drivers around me were actually driving as well.

I'd rather the other cars around me are attentive, polite and robotic. It's better than people looking at their phones.

Post by reportingsjr » Fri, Dec 12, 2025, 2:49 PM UTC

BillinghamJ wrote: post #423

michaelt wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Insurance is a capital management game. We’ll likely see a tech company try this, fail to cover a catastrophic liability due to lack of reserves, and trigger a massive backlash. Google, AFAIK the only company with cars that are actually autonomous, has US$98 Billion in cash. It'd have to be a hell of an accident to put a dent in that.

They'd still at least buy reinsurance etc anyway. All unlimited liability insurance companies (e.g. motor insurers in the UK) have reinsurance to take the hit on claims over a certain level - e.g. 100k, 1m etc. For extreme black swan risks, this is how you prevent the insurance company just going bankrupt. Reinsurers themselves then also have their own reinsurance, and so on. The interesting thing is that you then ha…