Originally Posted by
Mobile 155
Originally Posted by
tandempower 
Ride-sharing cost - driver cost = self driving ride-sharing cost
That isn't how investment works. Someone has to buy the vehicle. They will cost more than an average car today. That someone will want a return on investment. They only get 4 years to that they can write off the cost before it has to be claimed as an asset and pay taxes on them. You will need to provide enough units to replace millions of cars.
By the time self-driving cars are legal, most of the technology will probably already have been installed on vehicles. I noticed a pedestrian sensor in a car ad recently. Some models already have advanced cruise-control that basically drives for you, except you're supposed to keep your hands on the wheel. By the time the systems are permitted for autonomous operation, they will already be in the cars.
You are the one that claims to be looking at being LCF, what does the C stand for?
It means different things in different contexts. To me the main thing it means is for societal-cultural to be such where getting around without driving is as practical as driving, or more so. Last time I was in Amsterdam, people were driving and there were taxis but getting around by tram, train, bike, walking, etc. were more common than driving. So the question is what does it take to get to that point in cities where driving has become the predominant form of transportation. It's not so much about whether individuals every use cars for any reason as it is about liberating people from the pressures that lead them to feel like driving is the only practical option. Ride-sharing does that to the extent someone can get a ride (albeit in a car) and then walk around wherever they want without moving their car from parking spot to parking spot throughout the day. That's LCF more so than driving a personal vehicle.
Because a multi-million dollar self driving bus will be able to match the flexibility of a self driving car on call? Will they not have to replace them as well? Someone will have to pay for that and that will requite votes from people. are you predicting self driving buses in five years as well? And when was the last time you saw the government lower the prices for a more expensive price of equipment? I am guessing never.
I've seen videos of self-driving bus tests, but you are right that government is slow at adoption, especially where people see jobs getting lost, because government is used to create jobs with only secondary concern for cost/efficiency. In fact, current bus fare is set independently of the costs of running the system, which are kept high by subsidies.
The bus trips that will go down in price with self-driving buses are intercity buses. Granted, the cost of a driver is not that high a percentage of the revenue from ticket sales, and there will probably be some kind of attendant paid to be on the self-driving bus anyway, but fares will go down if ridership goes up, and that will happen if the anti-competitive forces in the industry subside, which may occur for various reasons.
I hope you are part of such an elite few that they give you special right-of-way as a human driver.
I expect to be taking a dirt nap long before I am required to give up my car, bicycle, e-bike or motorcycle. I also doubt if you will see that in your lifetime.
Idk, modern medicine is getting pretty good at extending longevity.
Do you have any idea of the control servos and computer interfaces that would be necessary to upgrade 253 million standard cars even if they could in five years? Do you seriously believe we are anywhere near the stage where that is going to take place? And just how do you "know" that people will be able to lease or sell their cars in the new world you envision in five years? If we were playing poker I would go all in and call on that bet.
Retrofit technology is possible, but I actually doubt they'll market it because the automakers make more money selling new cars. Cash4Clunkers junked the cars they bought, I believe, and prevented them from being parted out even (that's what I read, at least). Auto manufacturing is so efficient these days, it's basically like printing money. I read that it only takes a few hundred KWH of electricity to melt a ton of steel, so for the amount of energy an average household uses in a month, you can form every part of a car. Idk how much energy it takes for the robots to put the parts together, but it is probably quite efficient. I think the most inefficient part of the auto industry is the human employees, unionized and otherwise.