Live data from Hacker News

A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

jalopnik.com

61–70 of 205 posts

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#61
post #3

Here's what this research tells me: demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation. Current use is limited by cost and convenience. Self-driving car is likely to fix both so it'll lead to more use of transportation. This is a good thing. We're currently deprived and if things go well, we'll get more of what we want. The congestion problem is mostly overblown. First, maybe with rare ex…

How would robotaxis fix the ~80% of cars being single person? It seems like it would make it even worse, replacing some of those with zero people in the car.

Today we buy cars for presentations of status, personal expression, enjoyment and “the worst case” I.e. family and kids all need to go somewhere at the same time.

“I’m a truck person”, “I’m a hybrid person”, “I’m outdoors-y”

Then we use it 95% of the time for single person use, to commute (not enjoy) with zero recognition of personal expression.

Even if people don’t share the robotaxis, they will be optimized for pragmatic use. Taxi sizes will scale with number of people (think enclosed, self driving motorcycles, etc).

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#62
I feel like it's clown world.

As driving becomes easier we will drive more. Yes.

Yes. I see no reason why people won't spend 3 hours each way commuting and live in rural utopias. Like the suburbs but won't suck.

When everything which has to be delivered, which is everything, becomes cheaper perhaps we can spend that on traffic taxes. This is not an issue for now.

PHDs are now let's assume a lie and prove its not true?

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The congestion problem is mostly overblown. It's really not. Congestion is a huge problem already, and increasing the current road utilization by 83% will bring entire cities to a standstill for the entirety of waking hours. > I just eyeballed but ~80% cars were single person. Yes, and in the AV future the majority of cars on the road will have zero occupants, so things will get much, much worse as far as how many…

We're going to have to slowly shift to more usage-based pricing if we want autonomous cars to work. Start off charging tolls per mile for zero occupancy vehicles when they drive in congested areas, then expend it to single occupancy vehicles in congested areas, etc. A bit more controversial, but I personally love the idea of a congestion-free fast lane (say, 100+ mph) exclusively for autonomous vehicles, with prices…

Gas taxes are already effectively toll-per-mile, with a bonus incentive to get fuel efficient cars.

If we start seeing enough EV adoption to dent gas tax revenues, that's a win.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're going to have to slowly shift to more usage-based pricing if we want autonomous cars to work. Start off charging tolls per mile for zero occupancy vehicles when they drive in congested areas, then expend it to single occupancy vehicles in congested areas, etc. A bit more controversial, but I personally love the idea of a congestion-free fast lane (say, 100+ mph) exclusively for autonomous vehicles, with prices…

Gas taxes are already effectively toll-per-mile, with a bonus incentive to get fuel efficient cars. If we start seeing enough EV adoption to dent gas tax revenues, that's a win.

The linked article addresses how gas taxes are nowhere near good enough to solve the congestion problem, and especially not when more cars go EV.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would robotaxis fix the ~80% of cars being single person? It seems like it would make it even worse, replacing some of those with zero people in the car.

Today we buy cars for presentations of status, personal expression, enjoyment and “the worst case” I.e. family and kids all need to go somewhere at the same time. “I’m a truck person”, “I’m a hybrid person”, “I’m outdoors-y” Then we use it 95% of the time for single person use, to commute (not enjoy) with zero recognition of personal expression. Even if people don’t share the robotaxis, they will be optimized for pra…

In practice, I don't expect to see it. Economically, there's value in having whatever cars are closest to you be ones that fit your group. I expect that value will exceed the savings of a smaller car. I bet we'll see something like uber vs uber-xl, rather than something as granular as you're suggesting.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#66
post #41

There's a solution to the congestion problem that works even without AVs: private ownership of roads and automated pricing. Right now, you don't really pay to use roads, you only pay a gas tax to drive on any road. If specific roads were all tolled, and your navigation app (or AV) can tell you the cheapest route and time to drive, people can make better decisions. And people living nearby should be able to collect nu…

Gas taxes are already an effective road use tax, with infrastructure for collection already in place

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#67
post #3

Here's what this research tells me: demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation. Current use is limited by cost and convenience. Self-driving car is likely to fix both so it'll lead to more use of transportation. This is a good thing. We're currently deprived and if things go well, we'll get more of what we want. The congestion problem is mostly overblown. First, maybe with rare ex…

How would robotaxis fix the ~80% of cars being single person? It seems like it would make it even worse, replacing some of those with zero people in the car.

Network of robotaxis has a wonderful quality of increasing utilization with density.

It's a self-healing system: the more people use it, the more efficiently we can use it. Efficiency, it this context, is number of people we can transport per hour on a given stretch of the road.

It's important, so i'll emphasize it: high utilization of roads is a good thing. Roads are a fixed resource that have already been paid for. High utilization means we're providing more transportation value for the same, fixed price.

Most of the time roads are empty. Case in point: it's 1 PM in a busy part of San Diego. I just looked out of the window and the road is empty.

Even if there were 10 more, single occupancy cars on that road it would not degrade transportation service for anyone. Plenty of capacity.

The bad part is congestion caused by going over capacity. That's the friday night scenario in my neighborhood or commute to/from work traffic during weekdays.

Robotaxis give us obvious tools to combat that.

When the need for transportation at a given time is so hight that it would cause bumper-to-bumper traffic, it implies that a lot of people are sharing their route with other people.

It is the case today but we have no practical way of arranging for those people to share the car.

With robotaxis, the fleet can see that 4 people on the same block want to go to roughly the same place so it can direct them to the same car, so that they can more efficiently utilize fixed resource of cars and roads.

What if they don't want to share a car with other people?

Make them with congestion pricing.

Make them pay $10 for a single person ride vs $3 for shared. If $10 doesn't work, then jack it up to $20, $50 or $100. There is a price that will make 90% choose shared ride during congestion.

Or if things are really that bad and the trip is non-essential, they'll choose to shift their trip. Maybe 5:30 PM is not the best time for trip to walmart.

We can certainly do better than what we do today during congestion: mostly empty, overly big cars.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#68
post #7
post #3

Here's what this research tells me: demand for transportation is much higher than the current use of transportation. Current use is limited by cost and convenience. Self-driving car is likely to fix both so it'll lead to more use of transportation. This is a good thing. We're currently deprived and if things go well, we'll get more of what we want. The congestion problem is mostly overblown. First, maybe with rare ex…

The problem is those numbers are off. With margin, the services are always more expensive. I drive a fancyish SUV, and my average per-trip cost is around $3. I can Uber for $8-10 minimum or ride a bus for $1.5. Robot cars are going to be more like Uber, as you won’t have the driver losing money on depreciation.

Robotaxis should roughly drop the cost of “Uber’s” to 1/3.

Currently Uber only collects 25% of the fair for itself. The rest is for the human driving.

Robotaxis can also be used 24/7 so better capital utilization on the initial investment for the car.

Maintenance costs reduce with scale (+in house mechanics to improve margins). Maintenance costs reduce with electric drive trains. Maintenance costs reduce with better initial manufacturing (to optimize overall car costs rather than optimizing for initial sale costs to sell to individuals).

Increased scale can mean reduced margins i.e. Amazon.

And this is all before the tech is democratized. Once there is competition, Uber’s 25% cut of current fairs (for software engineering and support) starts to drop too.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#69
post #6
post #4

It has been obvious to me for a long time that AVs will not reduce traffic. Reducing the cost of driving will cause more driving to happen. While AVs will use the road slightly more efficiently, the increase in driving will more than make up for it. AVs will make traffic a whole lot more tolerable, though. And they will dramatically reduce parking needs, freeing up space for other uses.

It's a complete nobrainer. Right now the bulk of the cars are single occupant. That's because it is the occupants going places, not the cars. As soon as self-driving cars are a reality it will be the cars going places that get added to all the other traffic already there.

Spotify's central office in Stockholm has ~1000 employees.

So, at 6pm a thousand people call up the efficient fast driverless cars to go home....

And that's just one office out of a dozen on that street.

Re: A Week with Chauffeurs Showed the Major Flaw in a Self-Driving Car Future

#70
post #57
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”The cars would no longer be an expression of personality and a status symbol” You’re not the only one claiming that, but I don’t think it automatically follows. People can currently afford to buy cars for themselves, so unless self-driving cars will be (much) more expensive, people still would be able to afford them. So, in this case, the question is what else, if anything, people would want to use their money on in…

When you use X and then a substitute Y arrives that is 10x cheaper and more convenient, you'll switch to it. Using robotaxi network will be much cheaper than total cost of owning a car, mostly because cars are dramatically underutilized. On average a car is used 1-2 hrs a day out of 12-16 hrs it could be used as a robotaxi. To start off we have 5-7x price difference. Then most use is not shared. Assuming robotaxis wi…

”On average a car is used 1-2 hrs a day out of 12-16 hrs it could be used as a robotaxi.”

…assuming demand for cars is flat 12-16 hours per day, and that you could somehow, make all their operating hours useful operating hours. For example, society would have to change for commuter cars to end up in places where they immediately can be used productively.

”Why would Tesla sell a car to you for $10k profit if they can make $70k profit?”

Because, if they don’t, somebody else (e.g, a Chinese car manufacturer) will sell me a car for that $10k profit, and Tesla will make zilch.

If cars become that much cheaper, and wouldn’t need a driver’s license to use them, I don’t see why, by necessity, fewer people would own cars.

Your scenario assumes some manufacturer will gain a near-perfect monopoly. That might happen, but it’s not a given.

Also, I don’t think it is a given that the government wouldn’t break up such a monopoly.

Post reply on HN