XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: gossg@gossg.org   
      
   Doc O'Leary  wrote:   
      
      
   >> No, self-driving cars are, basically, taxis with robot drivers instead of   
   >> human drivers, which makes them cheaper, so people will be better able   
   >> to afford them.   
   >   
   >Afford them?  Why would we even buy them?  My whole point is that I'm   
   >abstracting the problem of moving people from point A to point B.   
   >Currently, that is done with a dedicated vehicle when you want to   
   >reliably have it at your disposal.  Adding a human driver to that is   
   >rather expensive but, as you note, it allows you to re-examine the root   
   >problem and, as a result, you can offer a redundant array of inexpensive   
   >vehicles (RAIV, aka taxi) to achieve the same A to B service.   
      
   I don't take taxis because they're expensive and have long delays for   
   pickup in my sprawled city.  The supply of taxis is artificially held   
   low to make the driver's pay a living wage, and to allow adequate   
   maintenance on the vehicles.   
      
   Taking the driver out of the system would allow more of these robocabs   
   to be around, so that one might be available within two or three hours   
   of bar closing time.   
      
   Tracking user-caused damage (eg bar barf) might require a membership,   
   so the model might be closer to the car-share companies than to taxis.   
   Some of the limited-supply cab drivers avoid bar closing, because the   
   nuisance and clean-up doesn't pay them enough.   
      
   Most cities have micro-rent companies or co-ops that let you call up   
   an app that tells you where the last user left the car.  But you still   
   have to walk to that car, which makes it as inconvenient as a bus, and   
   unworkable for suburbanites.  It also doesn't support daily commutes   
   where the vehicles all start in the suburbs and get left downtown.   
      
   A cross between the taxis and the micro-rent companies is where you're   
   effectively renting the car, rather than hiring a driver.  The costs   
   are mostly capital rather than mostly labour.   
      
   Call up the app and the car comes to you.  And if you take the driver   
   out of the picture, then artificially restricting the supply becomes   
   less of an issue.   
      
   >To make a car self-driving doesn't change that, other than probably   
   >lowering the cost.  Whereas a family now might have 2 or 3 vehicles to   
   >shuttle everyone around, their needs could likely be met by just 1   
   >chauffeured vehicle.  It makes you pause to think about what is going to   
   >be in it for the car makers.   
      
   What was in it for the car makers to stretch lifetimes from 5 years to   
   20?  Detroit ignored that market shift and the Japanese took over.   
   There is more than one car company.   
   --   
   We are geeks.  Resistance is voltage over current.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)