Despite accelerating progress towards fully autonomous cars and trucks, many people still do not accept the obvious fact it’s going to happen soon.
For example, in response to Death Spiral for Car Ownership? End of Fuel-Powered Cars by 2024? one reader suggested it will not happen because of capitalism.
Failure to Understand Capitalism
People who believe in this utopia do not understand capitalism. We own cars because consumers chose what they wanted and backed that up with their hard earned cash.
It is already far cheaper to ride the bus or carpool. Few choose that because sharing has its downsides. Fleets of driverless cars are really just a more modular bus service. Some will use this, but most will prefer ownership.
As Backwards
The above line of thinking is ass backwards.
Capitalism is precisely why driverless is coming. Corporations are betting their money and resources. The government is not resisting. The trucking industry will save hundreds of millions of dollars. People who believe driverless is not coming are the ones who do not understand capitalism!
Fully autonomous vehicles are not some pie in the sky prediction by Al Gore. Real companies (hundreds of them) all working on driverless. A bet against them is a foolish bet against capitalism.
Comparing current carpooling with what’s going to happen is like comparing ancient stone huts to modern houses. Carpooling requires a number of people to get together, on the same route, for rides at the same time every day.
On-demand scheduling, point-to-point, is needed, and in the works. I rather doubt that fuel-based cars disappear by 2024, but widespread (not total) disappearance of privately owned vehicles by 2030 seems reasonable.
Lyft and Waymo Reach Deal to Collaborate on Self-Driving Cars
The New York Times reports Lyft and Waymo Reach Deal to Collaborate on Self-Driving Cars.
As the race to bring self-driving vehicles to the public intensifies, two of Silicon Valley’s most prominent players are teaming up.
Waymo, the self-driving car unit that operates under Google’s parent company, has signed a deal with the ride-hailing start-up Lyft, according to two people familiar with the agreement who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly. The deal calls for the companies to work together to bring autonomous vehicle technology into the mainstream through pilot projects and product development efforts, these people said.
The deal was confirmed by Lyft and Waymo.
“Waymo holds today’s best self-driving technology, and collaborating with them will accelerate our shared vision of improving lives with the world’s best transportation,” a Lyft spokeswoman said in a statement.
The partnership highlights the fluid nature of relationships in the self-driving-car sector. From technology companies to automakers to firms that manufacture components, dozens of players are angling for a slice of an autonomous vehicle market that many believe will ultimately be a multibillion-dollar industry. To gain an edge and outmuscle rivals, many of these players are forming alliances — and sometimes shifting them.
The companies have left hints as to what the partnership could entail. Lyft, for instance, has long said it wants to match its network of passengers and drivers with partners in the transportation industry. Last year, it struck a deal with General Motors, a major Lyft investor, to help with that goal. Under that agreement, the companies plan to test autonomous Chevrolet Bolt vehicles using Lyft’s network with the general public in the next few years.
Waymo has pursued its own partnerships. It is working with Fiat Chrysler on a fleet of minivans and is in talks with Honda about a possible deal that would put Waymo technology in Honda test vehicles. Waymo also recently introduced a pilot program in Phoenix in which consumers can apply to hail self-driving Chrysler minivans and Lexuses for free rides around the city.
Capitalism at its Finest
Competition is intense. Corporations are investing hundreds of billions of dollars of their own money on technology. Deals, mergers, alliances, and lawsuits (Google vs Uber) are all in play, on a massive scale.
This is capitalism at its finest.
Some point to how few autonomous cars are on the roads. It all starts somewhere. In 1900, in New York City, there was not a car on the road. By 1920, there was not a horse in sight.
Others say they will never accept the technology. Perhaps they will when their insurance costs go through the roof. Regardless, the technology is perfect for people who live in major urban areas. Busses are not flexible enough, and taxis are neither fast enough or cheap enough.
Waymo, Lyft, Uber (if it survives), and other players will easily solve the on-demand nature. The result will be widespread acceptance.
Long-haul trucks will be first of course. Those drivers will vanish soon. A death spiral for car ownership will follow. The only thing in question is the timeline.
Disruption will be massive. Insurance companies and service stations are in for radical changes. For discussion, please consider Second-Order Consequences of Self-Driving Vehicles.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
” Deals, mergers, alliances, and lawsuits …….., on a massive scale.
This is capitalism at its finest.”
If that was true, no wonder people prefer the socialism of Bernie Sanders…….. Not to mention such comparably rational ideologies as Islamism…
Capitalism is about efficient capital allocation leading to efficient resource use. Not a bunch of privileged banksters and lawyers doing pointless, overhyped makework, like children playing “daddy’s office,” in order to ostensibly justify the ever larger welfare checks that is stolen by the Fed from the rest of the population, for their benefit.
Driverless cars soon? Ok maybe 10 years. My guess is more like 15. Anything sooner risks some huge lawsuits for the people killed.
Get real Mish: You and I have both done software. That sith gets hairy by at least the square of the number of lines of code and you know this code base is HUGE.
Driverless is coming. Far faster than 15 years
Here now actually
The only point of contention is critical mass – much sooner for trucks than cars
Significant number of Self driving cars anytime soon is the delusion
It is the Mishunderstanding of reality
for example : And there are many many issues this is just one :
” Intel’s Winter expects fully autonomous cars to collect, process and analyze four terabytes of data in 1 ½ hours of driving, which is the average amount a person spends in a car each day. That’s equal to storing over 1.2 million photos or 2,000 hours of movies. Such computing power now costs over $100,000 per vehicle, Zeng said. But that cost could fall as more cars are built. ”
You guys all fall for the Venture Capital bologna. The companies are losing Billions.
And it will cost billions upon billions for road repair and markings etc….. the entire nation will have to redesign and upgrade their streets. In my area there are a ton of dirt roads, I guess they will have to pave them all.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DRIVING_REVOLUTION_ROBOTS_VS_HUMANS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-05-11-06-36-37
What absolute nonsense. 4 TB of data = 740MB/sec. Modern DDR ram can handle a throughput of 6.4GB/sec. A 1TB Samsung SSD harddrive on Amazon with read/write speeds of over 540MB/sec costs $400.
You could make this work with off the shelf hardware as the majority of data generated is sensor data points which do not necessarily need to be persisted.
We have long since had the technology to handle the amount of data generated.
“Such computing power now costs over $100,000 per vehicle” – I laughed rather loudly at this…
it’s not just the code.
All of this depends on people buying something they don’t currently want.
you are projecting
When you consider the value of your TIME, it is only cheaper to ride the bus or carpool if the implicit value of your time is [if I recall correctly] about $12/hour.
https://www.google.com/search?q=implicit+value+of+bus+rider%27s+time+i&rlz=1C5CHFA_enCA723CA723&oq=implicit+value+of+bus+rider%27s+time+i&aqs=chrome..69i57.14533j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=implicit+value+of+bus+riders+time
The consequences are too complex to predict with much precision.
It will likely be very deflationary overall and impact tax take.
No stopping it.
https://static.googleusercontent.com/media/www.google.com/en//selfdrivingcar/files/reports/report-0816.pdf
In august 2016, googles cars were only autonomous 126,000 out of 170,000 miles driven (74%). And that was the best month ever and at 25mph top speed.
There is a very very long way to go.
if true, 74% is literally AMAZING yet, there is still so far to go???
Really understanding Capitalism you would realise that the American people are to independent for a one size fits all Government run bureaucracy which this WILL morph into. The government (especially one run by Democrats) will make all the rules. All of these vehicles will run at 22 MPH, only in special lanes, to destinations determined by the government. It will be a reincarnation of the railroads. The vehicles will respond ONLY to the inherent S/W. It MUST be that way so as to be “SAFE” for “The Children” of course! If you think otherwise look at what happened so far in that Democrat paradise, San Fransisco. Oh, by the way, if you dare to think a little differently, your ride just won’t show up!
The problem is US central planners desire to mandate all vehicles eventually become self-driving. That would force us all down the same road as the Affordable Health Care Act.
https://whiskeytangotexas.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/sauron_rules_america.jpg?w=938
Change is coming.
I can imagine different quality autonomous for different income groups or areas.
People may have their own car to drive, that can be switched to autonomous on the highway or in traffic. You can be sure that insurance companies will require autonomous over-ride when an accident is imminent. Your car will be in full time communication with other vehicles on the road, even if not autonomous.
When going into a city, a car owner will probably go autonomous to avoid parking fees, which will go through the roof as most parking space disappears for other use.
Mish…Seems to me that you enjoy riding the horse of autonomous vehicles…being force placed by an insurance company to own or drive a particular vehicle has no connection to capitalism…seems more like totalitarian technocracy…I can hear it now…”Mr. Jarhead, you just don’t know what’s good for you and because you don’t, the Mish insurance company is going to make you pay with both arms and legs to be an independent driver.” Then it will be the litany of guilt imposed aphorisms…”you are risking the lives of the global population with injury and death by independently driving…Your infant child will hate you for life when you take that corner too fast and cause a traumatic event such as binky loss…Heck, before we’re done here, somebody will manage to rationalize that anyone NOT driving an autonomous car is a bigot, racist, fascist, communist, Trump loving, anti-social, neocon looking to start a war because of their refusal to be placed under the control of an inanimate object…Just remember, even the USS Enterprise could be run by human/manual control…Thank the good Lord…it will be longer than most realize before this dream becomes a nightmare…
Until we understand that personal freedom is in direct conflict with collective “rights”, we will fail to grasp what is really happening.
They do not us to want personal autonomy and will use “capitalism” as a false representation of freedom, when in reality large corporations in league with the economic rule makers and social engineering monetary gurus, are setting forth an agenda.
Horses disappeared from the roads because they were not compatible with motorized vehicles, and motorized vehicles fit the agenda of government and industry.
We have seen this play out over many decades, the loss of street cars to busses, trains to trucks, all legislated or regulated or taxed out of business.
Capitalism is taken to infer a free market, something which we have seen very little, and you can bet that self driving cars will be given the highest consideration by government and industry as the next big opportunity to be “used”.
Capitalism, right?
Hear, Hear!!!!!
No, horses disappeared because they are extremely expensive to own and difficult to operate.
Try riding your horse on the roads and see how you fare. Until Ford started a production line, autos were very expensive commodities, but horses were still be pushed aside. You could own a horse, raise horses and the only cost was feed. No licenses, no taxes, no cops, no regulations.
Everything about our current version of capitalism is based upon REVENUE, not trade. It is a means of TAXATION, of cutting the government in for a piece of every thing you do.
We have advanced from growing our own food on land that belonged to us with no tax or overhead, to earning a taxable income and using that taxed income to buy everything we need….from others who are doing the same.
The government has advanced from a small organization tasked with protecting our constitutionally guaranteed rights to the owner or partner in EVERYTHING we do, including the air we breath and the water we drink.
Absolutely. It’s all about control and the more that is being controlled the better.
For the controllers.
But that feed was exponentially less dense than gasoline, took away potential food crop land and the horses needed to be fed even when not used. Transportation of grain to cities was enormously expensive, requiring large teams of pack animals. And the waste problem was far worse than dealing with greenhouse gases (although smog was every bit as bad before the catalytic converter was added.
But, but,, we need them?
Jarhead John:
see Star Trek (TOS) “The Ultimate Computer” http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708481/
Firstname Lastname….Thanks.
Regardless, I don’t think the trend will have a positive impact on society.
https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder899/500x/69627899.jpg
defendant: Your honor, i plead guilty to operating this car without autonomy engaged.
judge: “May God have mercy on your soul.”
Poor kids eat the school lunch. Rich kids bring a brown bag lunch. You can uber it. I’ll drive.
Nice diversion. After all, “things economic” are starting to rumble. Too risky now to venture out of the “Electric Car/Self Driving” Safe Space.
One could argue, self driving cars are already becoming obsolete. Tunnels are the new meme. Subsidized ones that will travel under the dirt, across multiple earthquake faults, at the speed of airliners. Never mind the airliners are way cheaper and the infrastructure is already in place, because Elon is subsidized. Cost is no object,,,,the tax payers are loaded with forced “venture” capital.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/elon-musk-tunnel-digging-investment-infrastructure-transportation-214917
Point-to-point transportation, whether of cargo or humans, is likely to be cheaper and more efficient via driverless vehicles, which is why they will likely become a big part of the roadways. But people own cars for other reasons beyond point-to-point travel. Garages are full of motorcycles, ATVs, trailered boats, and weekend cars. The taste for the freedom to cruise at will, the sense of control, the thirst for independence will not be satisfied by driverless vehicles.
Hey! Don’t diss Al Gore – after all, he invented the Internet and Global Warming
Cruise Control was introduced to extreme pearl
clutching a mere 35 years ago.
level 4/5 cars will be 30% of new market by 2025.
Capitalism the greatest producing machine of all time,by necessity the greatest destructor. Ism’s are not the problem,we are!i
It will be disruptive and deflationary. Ultimately the car sector will shrink, because of efficiencies. So companies need to jump in now not to miss the boat, but eventually large portions of the sector will be wiped out: less moving parts, less employment, less maintenance, less vehicles, less roadways, less time, less money, more transit.
Reversion to the mean.
Once all necessities are unearned….unearnable, we will no longer be necessary.
As our population becomes more and more redundant, useless eaters will abound and ultimately be cast aside. We once again will find ourselves reliant upon only ourselves.
Regarding second order effects, fuel consumption may well go up and total car sales may go down. Many families now have one car per driver because of the convenience of having instant on call transportation. With automatic cars, a household could have only a single car and still have that convenience (unless they all need transportation at exactly the same time). One parent goes to the office. The family automatic car drives itself back home. Other parent goes grocery shopping. Perhaps the automatic car goes to pick up groceries without anyone. Later, the automatic car picks up the kids *without a parent in the car*. Kids go to soccer practice and return *without a parent in the car*. The automatic car drives itself to the office and picks up the parent it dropped off in the morning. The logistics of transport will be tremendously flexible even with fewer vehicles, and even if private ownership remains in the equation. They might sell automatic cars for twice the price and sell half as many. That could work.
Service stations will change completely. The stations will be less conveniently placed and they will be much bigger to handle bigger volumes. There will be a staff of humans (or possibly robots) to service the automatic cars as they come in by the droves. There will be a “Costco” version of stations and they will do much more than just refuel. It is possible the service stations will be open mostly at night when everyone is in bed.
Ah–automotive shangri la…My single autonomous car dropped off the wife for work, only to return home and motor me to my cardiologist…Unfortunately, its was stuck in rush hour traffic and I dropped dead…
..
An automatic car is no substitute for an ambulance.
The autonomous ambulance was stuck in the same rush hour traffic…
.
There won’t be any traffic jams with autonomous. And emergency vehicles will be given precedence when on the roads as all vehicles are in communication with each other.
We are becoming increasingly dependent upon extremely complex systems. Yes, I know, people have been making these claims for years…decades…CENTURIES, but is it always simply a matter of timing. How far can we take this and at what cost. COST IS the issue, as we cannot determine future cost, and there is no indication that this trajectory is reversible once it reaches critical failure. That’s the whole point. Like our miracle of fractional banking and endless infinite debt, it will continue to work until it doesn’t and when it does fail there will be no backup, no going back.
good points
but note SD cars will get much better MPG than humans, driving the speed limit, smoother control, and better platooning. Perhaps 20% better MPG
unknown if that outweighs the extra VMT you predict
Why do we care about mileage? What will we do with the money we save? Buy more Chinese TVs? Or will we need cheaper things because we no longer have jobs to pay for them?
We focus on monetary costs, how many dollars, but there are other costs. What price is our liberty and freedom….how much convenience?
How much sloth unemployment?
How much dependency?
How much poverty?
We see a growing population of unemployed and under employed who do not spend their time enlightening themselves, only seeking more entitlements from government. These are people who have readily accepted dependency in lieu of freedom, of self reliance. There is NO indication that increasing that dependency number is going to yield anything different. What will this capitalistic Utopia look like?
Yes, I forgot add in that low income groups and the generally cost-conscious may prefer SD vehicles.
When does the Indy 500 go driverless? Within 3 years of the first driverless winner!
p.s. Driverless just added to my dictionary
Mish — you keep moving the goal posts.
One minute you are saying its all cars. The next you claim its taxis. Then you say its long haul trucks. Then you say its every vehicle in big cities (we will just ignore the fact that big cities are dying in most of Europe and the US). The next you are saying all cars and all trucks.
Quoting the uninformed opinions of so-called “journalists” isn’t going to convince anyone outside the media industry (and maybe not even those in the industry). Media pundits are morons who can’t even master subjects they cover regularly.
Yeah yeah, the experts told us (in 1970s) that a new ice age was upon us. And Al Gore invented global warming in the 1990s. The experts track record has been a disaster.
Lets go back to talking about flying cars and replacing all local transport with seqways and replacing all ovens with microwaves.
I still think the technical challenges are being underestimated in all of these rosy “by 2024” scenarios, and I am someone that would love to own a car I could put on autonomous mode for long stretches at a time. I still think that 20 years from now, most cars in the US will still be owner-operated, but with limited autonomous capability.
Mish,
I agree that automated cars are coming and I am very eager for it.. I don’t understand why self driving cars would facilitate a change of ownership ideology? Busses and taxis predate mas car ownership. When cars became affordable mass ownership happened. As long as costs stay low ownership will persist.
I use Uber, taxi, and planes, etc when needed. It is to exspensive to own a plane or multiple cars for difrent needs and there are times I need a driver. When it comes to my frequent daily transportation though, having my own car is hygenic and reduces the amount of common colds and sick days I have. It is also more convenient. These are economic considerations. Taxis, Uber’s,,planes , etc can be gross .
At least there is plenty of capitalism going on in the comments section.
“…. obvious fact it’s going to happen soon ”
I don’t see anything obvious, and I certainly don’t see any facts – something has to occur to be a fact.
Mish is correct on this issue, as usual.
Stuki stated “capitalism is about efficient capital allocation leading to efficient resource use”. That is correct Stuki. And that is exactly why autonomous vehicles will be so popular.
Businesses and individuals make decisions based on cost/benefit analysis. They will purchase autonomous vehicles because it is in their best interest to do so financially, not because of some imagined government conspiracy.
Rather than own 2 or 3 personal vehicles that are parked 98% of the time, I can own one autonomous vehicle that meets my needs instead. It can drive my spouse to work for 7am, and come back home to take me to work for 9am. After dropping me off it can then go into service for uber, or lyft and earn extra income. It can drive itself to the filling station, and take itself in for service appointments. It can head to the grocery store to pick up my grocery order. My insurance premiums will drop dramatically, and I will never pay for parking again. Should I need a pickup truck or an 11 passenger van, I will simply order one for a few hours rather than own one.
While I am actually being driven by my vehicle, I won’t have to worry about driving. I can read a book, safely use my phone or computer, or have a nap. I won’t be worried about the heavy rain, or snow, or night driving as I get older and lose my vision and reflexes.
Businesses will enjoy such significant savings that they too will adopt these vehicles quickly.
The best part though is that while businesses and individuals benefit financially by adopting this technology, the rest of society will benefit as well, quite by accident. Health care costs will drop as the number of accidents drops dramatically. Insurance costs will drop. More efficient vehicle use will result in fewer vehicles on the roads, which means fewer road repairs, and fewer new roads needed. Traffic jams will become a thing of the past as autonomous vehicles communicate with each other and determine optimal routing. We might not even need as many traffic lights and stop signs. The air will be cleaner with less emissions. We will use less fuel and waste fewer resources in the production of vehicles.
I could write a book about all the benefits.
And it will all happen simply because people will do what’s in their best interest. Capitalism at its finest.
No problems with parking, vehicle maintainance, yes likely some slower speeds, but less wear and tear on the highways. Cars should be lighter, and if so inclined, you can teleconference or focus on work while driving there. Sign me up.
Are you seriously going to contend that American consumers are purchasing based upon cost/benefit analysis?
Look at the vehicles on the road, countless numbers of expensive vehicles that far exceed their utility value in cost. They are purchased not because they need them or can afford them, but because they WANT them. Modern consumption is not based upon ANY cost benefit analysis other than EMOTIONAL NEED, and to pretend that this has anything to do with markets is simply laughable, unless you consider the influence of constant indoctrination for irrational consumption.
If autonomous vehicles are marketed, and if our economic conditions deteriorate to the point that personally owned vehicles are unaffordable, then that is what we will have, but it will ultimately have nothing to do with a free market, capitalism, or cost/benefit concerns. We will buy or use them because we “want” them or because we can afford nothing else.
Absolutely, I believe in cost/benefit analysis when it comes to almost every purchase people make. Or are you the type of person who will spend money on size 12 shoes, when you have size 10 feet?
If someone buys a car as a “status symbol”, one of the benefits to them is the way it makes them feel, and the pride of ownership. Since you consider that an “emotional need”, then you should be supportive of autonomous vehicles as they will become less “sexy” and more utilitarian and practical, and less of a status symbol. Sounds like you should be cheering for autonomous.
And since some people will no longer actually buy a vehicle, and merely use a service, there will be less “irrational consumption” as you complain about. Fewer people buying something they can’t afford that sits in their driveway 98% of the time. Sounds like autonomous is the answer to your concerns.
Not to mention businesses, who are always looking at the bottom line, and how to either increase revenues, or reduce costs. Businesses will adopt autonomous because the cost/benefit will be compelling.
You’ve got it all backwards. You should get on the Mish bandwagon, and talk up autonomous!
I am really looking forward to having a self-driving motorhome when I retire in ten years time.
That sounds pretty good! Just relax and enjoy your trip! Head back to the fridge and grab a beer. Eat lunch. Have a nap. Then arrive at the next campground. Perfect.
Exactly. The number of times I have made an 8-10 hour road trip on my own just to avoid the hassle of airline travel. Instead of dreading the drive, I can enjoy the trip. Get some work done, read a book, enjoy the scenery. Or travel at night and just sleep. Sign me up. It can’t get it fast enough. The dullards who don’t understand the pace of technological change or the freedom it brings to everyone just floor me.
We were supposed to have flying cars and jet-packs by now. I’m looking forrward to my self-flying drone.
Capitalism. Just like pets.com.
And the “capitalists” are also investing in wind, solar, and electric vehicles (heavily subsidized).
I would note that insurance companies TODAY do not give discounts for driver assist features. Somehow magically the now 2x as expensive car with all the extra sensors and electronics will get a discount?
Just as you step out of the vehicle with your security fob in range, I shout “Alexa, drive to Omaha”…
When do you expect self-driving vehicles on Germany’s Autobahn?
We were supposed to have flying cars and jet-packs by now. I’m looking forward to my self-flying drone.
By whom? Some random think tank or hundreds of companies spending hundreds of billions of dollars?
The driverless car may be technologically feasible but consumers must accept the product for it to be successful.
The last poll I saw on the topic showed that something like 75% of drivers don’t trust driverless cars and don’t want to ride in them.
http://www.motortrend.com/news/75-percent-u-s-drivers-continue-fear-autonomous-vehicles/
I suspect it is all about how humans assess risk. OTOH it could be a generational thing and perhaps in 13 years, opinions will have changed dramatically.
In 1910 most people preferred horses
Exactly I fully agree with Mish brilliant
Driving is a pleasure it enables human beings a sense of responsibility and freedom to act
Do not confuse transportation or going from point a to point b with driving a car or riding a bicycle a car is not a train or a bus
I am not a robot Sir and I don t need a shuttle to move I am eager to remain active not passive
Would you prefer for example to eat pills or to fill a plate with fish and vegetables / a steack ?
Self driving cars are pure nonsense and useless to consumers thats pure californians geeks
stuff widgets from silicon valley
As american are not able maybe to produce competitive cars they will disapear but not in Europe as Germany will produce more efficient cars and sell them to China or India.
We don t want self driving cars that will produce more unemployment
What about self driving surf boards for californians geeks math nerds ? lol
As a taxpayer I refuse to pay for insurance employees truck drivers and taxis drivers being
unemployed
Special taxes as a result shall be created and paid by silicon valley billionaires and
computer scientist creating self driving cars
The gafa uber etc … should pay higher tax rates not the average taxman
Once unemployed pro drivers will stay at home or drink in the bars watch tv then become couch potatoes and then it will result in higher health social security expenses
with higher diseases
I suspect that you may be overly optimistic about India and especially China, buying or even allowing foreign-built cars in China. They may allow them in while they reverse engineer the products and technology, and clone them, for their own domestic manufacturing, but mid- to long-term they will protect their domestic markets. They’re very good at playing the “heads we win, tails you lose” game with the idealistic folks who still believe in free markets, including overly optimistic CxOs from Western countries. At the very high-end, M-B and BMW will always have a niche worldwide, but for the huge mass market in China, not so much.
It may or may not happen, but it won’t have anything to do with Capitalism, that disappeared a very, very, very long time ago, coinciding with government interference and regulation.
When was the last time the benefits of any major productivity improvement ever went to the masses?
The owners of this planet cannot afford the masses being wealthier or to be able to remove themselves from the wheel.
So what if parking charges disappear, insurance becomes lower,there will be other costs loaded on to everybody, the overall benefits will not be greater or the costs lower, all gains go to the owners.
When was the last time the benefits of any major productivity improvement ever went to the masses?
Continually
Not overall Mish, in terms of debt, stress, loss of freedom, work hours, job security, health, disappearing pensions, life continually becomes worse for the masses.
The producitivity improvements made possible by technology just makes it more convenient and less back breaking for the workers, but overall their lives don’t improve, for many it gets worse.
Happiness and fulfilment is the true measure of wealth, we have never been poorer.
I was an IT salesman back in the day, FTSE 100 clients.
Mobile phones!
Wow, we’ll get such an advantage on everybody else.
Business won’t benefit if everyone adopts.
I’m not a negative person, I have a successful business, but talk of greater benefits, freedom, capitalism is 180 degrees to reality.
Paul Weller of The Jam said it well, the public wants what the public gets.
There’s one thing that many of you over look, Greed…. There’s alot of money that’s going to be up for grabs and you can bet Uncle Sugar, and the Insurance Industry are going to get the lion’s share of it, at the taxpayer’s expense. I can envision the Gov’t, the Insurance Industry, and the Automotive Industry all getting into a big huddle, and pointing their fingers at us, the regular joes of this country.
Like the ACA, I can envision where all three will conspire to make ownership of your own, manually driven car a thing of the past. You’ll be forced into one of these things whether you want one or not. I can hear it now…” if you like your car, you can keep your car” “nobody is going to take your manually driven vehicle away from you” where have we heard this before? This is just another way to control the movement of people, and little more of your freedom has just been taken away. Myself, I like to drive, you can shove those driverless cars up your ass.
People need to wake up…any idea that claims that it’s for the “common good” as this does, is generally a lie, and only designed for the advancement of a small group at the expense of a larger one.
At a million bucks a vehicle or more, self-driving vehicles will not be replacing conventional driver-driven vehicles anytime soon. And let’s not even get into the trillions required to upgrade the roads to actually support them.
I remember when computers cost more than a million dollars. Today, a $200 computer is way more powerful than one of those machines from the sixties. One of the benefits of advancing technology, is how it drops prices so quickly.
Besides, an autonomous car is already under a 100 grand and in just a few years will be 40 grand. In 10 years, probably 20 grand. Plus, you don’t have to actually buy one. Just use a service.
Trillions? for what?
Trillions to actually equip the roads for self-driving cars. With the necessary in-road guidance systems, communications networks, and various other compliance with technical standards matters. Even DMV’s will have to entirely re-staff themselves with people with the required skills to maintain self-driving capable roadways. DMV’s that are generally ill-equipped to deal with current infrastructure, nevermind all the extra infrastructure associated with autonomous vehicles.
Autonomous cars currently cost millions of dollars, and they are nowhere near adequate for the task in their current implementations. Many of the required items just don’t scale down like the prices of microelectronics. Plus there’s extreme costs in ongoing engineering support, maintenance, etc., for self-driving vehicles.
There you go again. Exaggerating the costs. The cars don’t cost millions, and the infrastructure improvements will not cost trillions. And like all technology, prices continue to drop every year.
No, not exaggerating the cost at all. If anything, I’m understating the costs, especially of maintenance. Also, I think you’re a bit confused about technology dropping in price.
“Despite accelerating progress towards fully autonomous cars and trucks, many people still do not accept the obvious fact it’s going to happen soon.”
Let’s be clear about something. That is only an opinion based upon guesswork. Not fact.
I contend that once the obvious unintended consequences of self-driving vehicles are understood it will put the kibosh on any massive game-changing autonomous vehicle roll-out for at least the next 20-30 years.
Oh, you will see little experiments here and there. But no massive roll-out. If I were a betting man I’d wager the house on it.
Think UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES!
Never bet your house. I’d hate to see you living in your autonomous car!
I would be the last person on the planet to own an autonomous car.
You’d have to pry my cold dead hands off the steering wheel of my owner operated car first.
I bet you enjoyed science fiction as a child, didn’t you?
I still enjoy science fiction. That’s why I like reading posts from all the conspiracy theorists here who think autonomous cars are a global conspiracy by all governments in the world, not to mention thousands of companies, to control your thoughts and actions. I’m sure it’s the first thing Trump discusses when he meets every other world leader. In fact I’m sure that he and President Xi of China discussed how best to warp the minds of all Americans.
And I bet he discussed this with the Saudis in order to reduce oil consumption so they force you to spend your money on Marijuana instead of oil, and really mess up your head.
And don’t worry about dying at the wheel of your autonomous car. Remember, deaths by auto will be reduced by 98%. Live long and prosper fellow Trekkie!
What weapons systems will these driverless trucks have? Because they are going to need them all – defense against snipers taking shots at their tires from overpasses, IED detection etc. etc. Without t\hose measures, a good number of these trucks will get immobilized or blown up.
The people who have been driven into poverty and destitution aren’t going to go quietly into the night. curl up and die. As someone said – if people are pushed and pushed and pushed to the point where they have nothing left to lose, they lose it!
Apparently, you have already lost it. That’s perhaps the most ridiculous post in a long time.
It won’t look as ridiculous when reality unfolds!
Oh. I sometimes forget that you Americans love your guns.
With autonomous vehicles, road deaths will drop from over 30,000 per year to almost 0.
While gun deaths will remain over 30,000 per year.
Whoever said anything about guns here?! My comment was about the consequences of putting people where they have lost their jobs.
And the best way to reduce road deaths is to reduce the number of individual vehicles. That would point you to mass transit.
Just the amount of real estate freed up by not needing much parking will be an enormous gain.
I’m basically in favor of self-drivers. I like the idea of subscribing to a car service, as long as it is an order of magnitude cheaper than owning. Couple that with working at home (except at IBM) and automatic/robotic delivery and I’ll hardly need to drive at all.
I think most here are in agreement with my thinking. Where the problem comes in is when the self-driving car meets the government-owned road. Thanks to the unfortunate coincidence of the car being developed during the progressive era, it is already crippled by far more regulations than necessary and more are piled on all the time. If roads were private I’m certain there would be standards and rules, but there would also be someone more than happy to help accommodate advancing technology, and possibly invest in tech for the road itself to speed along the process. There would still be kill switches and other potential “lockout” scenarios, but I would think it would be more for not paying the toll, not because you didn’t pay your child support.
Last time I looked the free market was all about delivering products and services that people actually wanted. So yes, commercial uses: trucking, taxis and courier services (maybe – you still need someone to walk the parcel to the door or to the 20th floor)). Automation in these areas cut out significant costs so it makes complete sense.
But self-driving cars for personal ownership? Lol
Yes, fleets of driverless vehicles available cheaply will negate car ownership needs for people who only own a car for occasional short journeys (mainly old folks) but people who use their cars regularly will not want anything to do with this. Having a car at your disposal immediately has massive benefits over taxi-hailing, which is time-consuming and inflexible. Most people who are cheerleading for automation to completely take-over are naive singletons living in cities. Once you have family, pets and loads of goods to haul round on a regular basis you’ll realise how much shit you were talking.
And maybe I’m unique here but until I’m declared unfit to drive, there is no way I would choose to not be in full control of my own car. FFS!
Added to which the BS being spewed about ‘ride-sharing’ is beyond contempt. You mean ride-sharing with complete strangers who have bad personal hygiene, flatulence, nose-pickers, homicidal maniacs, thieves, rapists, paedophiles …. you get the drift. It ain’t happening. Only the terminally deluded believe this complete tosh.
Yo can believe what you want. The same thing was said about horses
Mish, you don’t have kids obviously. No responsible parent is going to put their child (or children) in a ride-share Uber with complete strangers. If my wife said she was going for drinks with friends in town and was taking a ride-share Uber, how happy would I be? Not very. A ride-sharing taxi service is nothing more than a scaled-down bus service, only far less safe.
Comparison with horses is ridiculous. The point of a self-owned vehicle is the privacy, safety and independence it affords over the cheaper alternatives. Ride-sharing will only ever threaten public bus services, not private ownership.
The comparison to horses is not ridiculous. Many have commented along the lines “Where are they?” the same could be said with cars, with cell phones, with the internet, washing machines etc.
as for “No responsible parent is going to put their child (or children) in a ride-share Uber with complete strangers”
What about kids taking busses every day in cities around the country? If you mean young kids, perhaps. But what about going from 2 cars to one? What about pooling services just for school kids? Think small, personalized school buses, perhaps with one parent going along for the ride.
You really are not thinking about obvious ways around the non-problem you pose.
Uber already has tiered services where you can choose a discount fair with a pool of others, a private car that is in a regular car, and a private luxury car. Who says the kids will have to choose a pool car?
Also, do you realize that children in large cities routinely travel on subways and buses alone at younger ages than you expect?
I have precisely zero issue with fact that SD cars are in our future. What I have an issue with, apart from insistence that everyone will dump their gas-burning vehicles in favour of SD, is that the number of journeys made will plummet as a result.
1. If i need to go to the store to get some milk, a journey will need to be made irrespective of which type of vehicle is used. SD does = tele-transportation, last time I looked.
2. If my child needs to get to his soccer match (and back), two journeys will need to be made whether by gas-guzzler or by SD electric vehicle.
3. Car-pooling? We already do it — I pick up 4 other soccer team-mates on the way to the match anyway. What does SD vehicles change? Nothing.
4. Ride-sharing: isn’t that what a bus service is? Don’t people (who already know one another) do this in private vehicles anyway?
What would save journeys is if I could order up a liter of milk online and a drone delivered to my house. Other than that, will SD vehicles reduce the number of journeys? Maybe, but dramatically? I don’t see how.
I am all in favor of driverless vehicles at one’s beck and call with max wait time of 5 minutes. Economically speaking, automobiles are the biggest disaster ever perpetrated on the human race. Take a typical car, costs $35k, we actually operate it for 3 to 6 months and throw it away! 30 mph x 4000 hours = 120,000 miles on the odometer, 60 mph = 2000 hours to reach 120k miles. Three to six months actual operating time and then junk. What a waste of capital.
And so you think their next big iteration will be a savior? Do you really think this will get better….more corporate control, more government control, more dependency and fewer choices as our employment, our justification for existence fades?
But it will be easier, more convenient, right?
Okay. Earlier you complained about mindless spending by consumers on cars they can’t afford. With autonomous services, no more mindless spending by consumers on cars; hooray! You should be happy.
Now, you’re complaining that this is all about government/corporate control of your life and fewer choices. With autonomous services, you should have more choices and control. Just order the type of vehicle you need; truck, van, suv, sporty car etc. as needed.
As for employment, we have always created more jobs than we eliminate through technology. One hundred years ago, 80% of people worked on farms; today it is less than 2%, yet we grow 10x more food than a 100 years ago at lower costs. And last time I looked almost every worker with even minimal skills is employed. The only people unemployed either don’t have any skills, or don’t want to work.
Where do I put my gun on the communal bus? My riffle? I feel like going hunting.
Where do I put my gun on the communal bus? My riffle? I feel like going hunting.
perhaps you don’t.
Then again, where the hell is a communal bus going? Anywhere near hunting grounds?
Garages are obsolete. Billions of square feet occupied by machines are freed to house people.
For now, don’t start a career as an airplane pilot. Don’t build a three car garage in your new home.
Traffic collisions are almost over. Death on the highway — the end is in sight.
Bob, you do know that the technology for pilot-less flights has existed for yonks — it’s just that no sensible person would set foot on a plane without someone in charge, so they canned the idea. Maybe SD vehicles will provide the necessary psychological break-through but we have years, decades even before we’re at the point where the teething problems are all sorted out (no doubt involving many tragic deaths along the way)
“No sensible person would set foot on a plane without someone in charge.” Well, no sensible person would set foot on an aircraft that is being shot at, and, now, very few do. Pilot error is the greatest cause of aviation mishaps — by far. And but for government regulation – not consumer fear – we would have drone pax flights now as an option for consumers who wish them. The pilot-not-on-board option would tempt all but the most timid pax because the cost would be low relative to the obsolete human-flown option. At a minimum, but for government regulation, we’d have drone freight flights now. I write this as a certificated commercial pilot, with great melancholy.
CEOs and Fund Managers with a self-interest in automated cars will find that the market will be soft due to increased expense and the fact that buyers don’t wish to sell their freedom for $4,000 (or the additional cost of automation).
The self-interested CEO/Fund Manager class will then use campaign donations to push their agenda in a top down, mandatory manner through legislatures in the interest of “public safety”. When that happens, mark my words, those people doing the pushing will find their own “public safety” to be at risk.
“Some point to how few autonomous cars are on the roads. It all starts somewhere. In 1900, in New York City, there was not a car on the road. By 1920, there was not a horse in sight.”
But the cars didn’t venture far from the cities for many more years. I think shared driverless cars may go the same route.
Cars *added* freedom as they were higher performing and more sanitary than horses. The only thing you get in car automation is the loss of driver freedom. Perhaps Millenials will take to it. Gen Xers and older will not, hence the mandatory nature of this change through legislators that can be bought.
I see increased freedom! People with poor eyesight, physical disabilities, etc., who can no longer safely drive, having a new ability to own a personal auto, if they choose.
People who can’t drive because they can’t afford insurance, now being able to afford it.
People who have lost their license for medical reasons (seizures, epilepsy, etc.), being able to drive again.
People who have lost their license for other reasons (dui, speeding tickets, too many accidents, etc.) being able to drive again.
Households that can only afford one vehicle while having multiple drivers, being able to all use one autonomous vehicle, plus the occasional service.
Freedom to do more with your time because the autonomous vehicle can drive itself to re-fuel, maintenance appointments, pick up the kids, the groceries, etc.
This is going to happen because people will love the increased freedom, not because anyone is trying to force anything on you.
Every point you made is correct. Nice to see one other person on here that sees autonomous tech for what it really is.
It won’t be cheaper if you are looking at cost per mile. Even though I have a 20 year old honda, my cost per mile is still 30-40 cents per mile.
A self driver still has a 200k life span on average. Fuel costs and maintenance are the same. Let’s say insurance is eliminated. But it will be replaced by the profit of the ride sharing company. And the car itself will not be cheaper. Every new feature increases the price.
If you think the car is going to drive around all day to avoid parking, calc the cost of that at 40 cents per mile. You may find out the parking was a better deal.
Is uber really going to drive me around for 40 cents per mile? Doubt it. Already their software figures decides how badly you need a ride and sticks it to ya. Stuck in the boonies, or a bar at closing time? Pay up, sucker.
We will all be completely convinced that autonomous cars are a dream come true when an entire manufacturer’s fleet of cars are hacked and forced to accelerate at maximum speed while driving straight forward. All the convincing will need will come while we are sitting in those vehicles as we accelerate to our death.
Mish,
Interesting write-up. My only sticking point is you calling our current system Capitalism. I’m not sure what we have exactly now days, but I’m not sure I would call it Capitalism. I’m thinking it would be more in line to call our current system Neo-Feudalism.
Wouldn’t it be better to hack the military and have all your nuclear weapons fire at your own country? Why bother with cars? Think big! Plus, I think all the codes are still on 8 inch floppy disks.
I agree that capitalism or rather natural progress will push the adoption of driverless cars; however there are some issues:
There will be more efficiency through ride scheduling and therefore fewer cars will be needed, resulting in a potential reduction in production and consequences for manufacturers.
People like me will want to own a car for the sheer pleasure of driving and this will be a car which makes a noise when I accelerate.
Will hydrocarbon fuelled cars be banned by the idiots who believe the Al Gore fairy tales. If so will people who enjoy their noisy cars live in more sensible place in the World?
Will people get depression and other lifestyle problems, because of boredom in an ever increasingly organised World.
I like the concept and it will reduce costs (increasing deflation – oh dear!) and reduce hassle/traffic congestion etc.
It is not however for me!
David Wood, ultimately the choice is not yours, you will get what you are given. If today’s cars are not wanted by the authorities they will be forced off the road, either through regulation, insurance or any of the dozen other ways. Just as has happened in many other areas.
Some call it freedom, capitalism and beneficial. Ha!
Karl, while I share your cynicism about government and their motives, forcing hydrocarbon vehicles off the road is unlikely happen overnight as this will necessarily impose (in many cases) substantial financial losses on the citizenry. Outside of a police state situation this would be political suicide and probably be enough to set off a civil war. I think, therefore, they’ll therefore disappear slowly and gently into the night.
In addition the hysteria over climate change is dying a death, as we speak, so the pressure to decrease emissions will abate with it. And once the globe falls into a severe economic recession the will to pursue climate goals will disappear for good.
Lege, I try to stay optimistic, but government idealogues will use whatever means they need to, do do “what’s best for you”.
Ralph Nader, NHTSA (and the church lady lookalike whose name I’v forgotten), and other advocates and agitators will “fix” things for you to make your life safer, the planet’s life safer, etc.
Autonomous vehicles will initially provide options to current habits. As things develop, within the autonomous option there will be additional options. Having additional options is always good.
Government will need to be involved, so the communication between various options and key roadway features like traffic lights can be standardized. [Can you imagine traffic lights that anticipate your arrival, when no cars are coming on the intersecting street, or that adjust waiting times when one road is more heavily traveled?]
As long as government does not attempt to limit options, or does not attempt to apply outdated regulations to autonomous, it’s all good.
Regarding the assumption that insurance rates will go sky-high for non-autonomous, it is actually the reverse.
Those driving non-autonomous will not become worse drivers, and the danger from other vehicles will diminish. Even if the non-autonomous driver does make a mistake, autonomous will take evasive action to avoid or reduce damage.
While the market for new vehicles in unquestionable, a golden opportunity awaits for the genius team that perfects a retrofit package for existing vehicles.
Even given all the tech challenges, I believe it’s inevitable.
Having commuted in to Seattle for the last 20 years, I would welcome a personal point-to-point transpo mechanism where I didn’t have to worry about traffic, parking (including the ridiculous high rates), parking tickets, or stops for multiple buses, or multi-modal drive+train+bus+walk, etc., etc.
A few folks locally are asking why government is spending gigabucks on trains (1910s tech) when this is supposedly a tech hub and driverless is inevitable. Smart cars? Smart roads?
Local government are making owning and using a car as painful as possible, to herd people to public transit.
Which is my main question — how will government screw things up? They will find a way, either directly or through “regulation”.
And how will they use the technology change to herd the masses where they want us and how they want us to behave.
More questions…
How will this effect the urban vs. non-urban divide. Widen it? Since it’s market-driven, for now, the biggest markets are in high-density urban areas. Wider split between the government-dependent herd and independents?
And how will the current very-profitable auto dealers change and adapt, though they’re really in the finance biz, not the car selling biz (try to walk in to a dealership and tell them you want to pay cash to buy a car today). And much (most?) of their revenue comes from service, not sales or leasing. They still have a lot of political clout, but change is inevitable. Musk fired the first shot for direct sales in NJ; he lost, but it’s only the first shot.
I love to drive when I’m not commuting, so I’ll probably always own a car that’s fun to drive, but the current private “fleet” of 4 will get smaller. And large bureaucratic systems often break when most needed, so I’ll likely always own a car that I can drive w/o external intervention.
” A death spiral for car ownership will follow. The only thing in question is the timeline.”
I will be laughing all the way to the bank when I load up on car company stocks after MISH and others frighten everyone into selling theirs by parroting this falsehood.
Autonomous technology will allow people who now use taxis, buses and subways to own a personal car. Cities will be scrambling to raise taxes when bus and subway networks hemorrhage money because ridership plummets. All forms of shared transportation will suffer. I could see stockholders demanding Uber sell the ride-share division and focus on autonomous tech once autonomous technology prices drop to a level where the masses can afford it.
Some people prefer vinyl records over mp3 files. Vinyl still sells. But, 97% of music is still sold digitally. A few people will want those old cars you have to drive, too. Just like the “vinyl only” crowd.
So you call up a driverless car to take you down to the protest march to protest the public execution of (u-name-it), and the car says ” I’m sorry that address has been blocked by the transportation authority, would you like to go to another address? The government is not fighting this because they WANT this.