Self-driving taxis will take half of US driving by 2024

Google’s self-driving car program, Waymo, is allowing cameras inside their autonomous minivans in Arizona as Google prepares to launch the nation’s first self-driving taxi service. Analysts predict self-driving revenue will hit $2.3 trillion by 2030 with Waymo capturing 60 percent of that market.

Waymo’s secretive early rider program, made up of more than 400 households in Chandler, Arizona has been operating for a year.

The last major transportation shift in North America were from 1900 to 1913 from horses and horse carriages to cars. There have been shifts in various Asian countries from mostly bicycles and buses to cars from the 1970s to 2010.

Currently Waymo still has a driver sitting in the drivers seat. However, the person is there as a backup in case of problems. Eventually backup safety drivers would shift to working from remote command centers. Each person in a command center would be monitoring several cars.

There are about 305,000 taxi, limo, and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82,000 vehicles. A full deployment of the Waymo minivans in 2019 in Arizona and California would mean they would be at nearly 25% of the existing fleet of taxis. Avis is working with Waymo to service the cars in its Phoenix, Arizona but Avis itself manages around 400,000 vehicles in its US rental locations.

Uber had $2.8 billion of revenue in the last three months but they lost $890 million. If costs were reduced by not having drivers and robo-ride sharing becomes profitable. Then it would be trivial for Google to spend $20 billion and get 400,000 more minivans and make a profitable Uber. If Google had high levels of self-driving car, vans and buses, then people could be willing to accept one or two ride transfers to lower the overall cost of the ride. If the handoff involved waits of less than 2 minutes. Google will also add wi-fi services, which would make the rides more productive.

Self-driving cars reaching over 50% of all passenger miles in the US could happen as soon as 2024.

This rapid improvement in transportation and supply chain could be a 1-2% per year boost in economic growth throughout the 2020s.

There is also the certainty that lowering the cost of transportation will increase the amount of passenger miles around the world. This is referred to as Jevons Paradox. Technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the rate of consumption of that resource rises due to increasing demand. The Jevons paradox is perhaps the most widely known paradox in environmental economics.

The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.

Electric self-driving cars will eventually be 10 to 20% of the cost of current cars.

Every person could save $5000-10,000 a year on transportation.

This will also reduce the cost of trucks, buses and the supply chain, which will grow the entire economy.

They will not be perfectly safe but if they are initially 4 times safer that will reduce the fatal accident deaths in the US from 36,000 to 9,000. In China it will drop the car deaths from 260,000 to 90,000.

They should eventually get 10 to 20 times safer.

Traffic accidents in the U.S. cost $871 billion a year. Dropping those accidents by 4 to 20 times would be a massive boost in the economy.

195 thoughts on “Self-driving taxis will take half of US driving by 2024”

  1. Will Google’s Wi-Fi service politely forget your passwords and proprietary information. No thanks. Taxi provide more that driving you to a destination. If you need someone to help carry groceries or luggage or whatever a person is needed to make taking a taxi worthwhile. An unmanned car is a open invitation for car jacking for parts if nothing else. This sounds like a losing business model from the get go.

  2. ”Google will also add wi-fi services, which would make the rides more productive.” Yeah! This was the driver for Google to get ito ths self driving business: to get drivers to spend time looking at google ads. Producing cars was incidental.

  3. ”The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.” Only in half? Usually this is estimated rather to a fifth.

  4. ”305,000 taxi, limo, and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82,000 vehicles.” ”drivers” vs ”vehicles” ? Maybe count three drivers per vehicle? That means 82,000 self driving vehicles replace 240 000 drivers

  5. The video wouldn’t play for me, but the vegetation visible in the frame before I clicked on it, suggested that part of Arizona never gets snow. Has anyone tested self driving cars in a snowstorm?

  6. Only if the self-driving cars will be F-450s and Dodge Rams, otherwise Americans won’t feel good about themselves.

  7. Will Google’s Wi-Fi service politely forget your passwords and proprietary information. No thanks. Taxi provide more that driving you to a destination. If you need someone to help carry groceries or luggage or whatever a person is needed to make taking a taxi worthwhile. An unmanned car is a open invitation for car jacking for parts if nothing else. This sounds like a losing business model from the get go.

  8. ”Google will also add wi-fi services which would make the rides more productive.”Yeah! This was the driver for Google to get ito ths self driving business: to get drivers to spend time looking at google ads. Producing cars was incidental.”

  9. ”The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.”Only in half? Usually this is estimated rather to a fifth.

  10. ”305000 taxi limo and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82000 vehicles.””drivers” vs ”vehicles” ?Maybe count three drivers per vehicle? That means 82000 self driving vehicles replace 240 000 drivers”

  11. The video wouldn’t play for me but the vegetation visible in the frame before I clicked on it suggested that part of Arizona never gets snow. Has anyone tested self driving cars in a snowstorm?

  12. Only if the self-driving cars will be F-450s and Dodge Rams otherwise Americans won’t feel good about themselves.

  13. 60% of a $2.3 trillion business @10% margin is like $200 billion in annual profit. At a 30x multiple that would add $6 trillion to Alphabet’s market cap, or 7x their current value. I’d say they are doing it for the profit.

  14. 60{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of a $2.3 trillion business @10{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} margin is like $200 billion in annual profit. At a 30x multiple that would add $6 trillion to Alphabet’s market cap or 7x their current value. I’d say they are doing it for the profit.

  15. ” I’d say they are doing it for the profit.” Probably, but still incidental, in the sense that it was not the original plan. Waymo could get zero revenue on taxis and still win big on getting more eyes watching google ads. I don’t think Waymo/Google was expecting everyone else to fall behind in their schedules for self driving. It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures. I believe Google was expecting to license their self driving tech to car manufacturers, or, at least, induce them to develop self driving.

  16. ” I’d say they are doing it for the profit.”Probably but still incidental in the sense that it was not the original plan. Waymo could get zero revenue on taxis and still win big on getting more eyes watching google ads. I don’t think Waymo/Google was expecting everyone else to fall behind in their schedules for self driving.It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures. I believe Google was expecting to license their self driving tech to car manufacturers or at least induce them to develop self driving.”

  17. So much BS here. 50% of cars self-driving by 2024 (in six years)? EV’s that are 10 to 20% of the cost of current vehicles? When “journalists” make these ridiculous and incompetent claims it eliminates all credibility in anything else they may have to say. Extremely lazy “reporting”, junior high school level.

  18. So much BS here. 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of cars self-driving by 2024 (in six years)? EV’s that are 10 to 20{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the cost of current vehicles?When journalists”” make these ridiculous and incompetent claims it eliminates all credibility in anything else they may have to say. Extremely lazy “”””reporting”””””””” junior high school level.”””

  19. Which proprietary information and passwords are you talking about ? The same passwords and information Google can now collect when you use it’s search engine if they so desired ? If you need someone to help you carry groceries at the end of your journey then presumably a family member will be able to do this when you arrive home or, you can always remove what you can carry and return for the rest, it is not like the vehicle is going to run off with your merchandise. Your “ideas” for why this is not feasible seem to be rather weak. Most of all, I “like” your fear of an unmanned vehicle being car-jacked, because bank robbers often stick a gun “in the face” of an ATM and demand that it dispense all the money it contains or demand that it follow them home where they can then empty the machine at their leisure.

  20. I tried to google up an ”original plan” but no luck. Ads is how Google makes money. Removing the driver from the cab cuts costs to a fifth, but the price of the trip often will be zero. So you can’t project the future market value to be equal to current value. The money is not in the transport itself – and Google will only own that market for a a few years anyhow. It will make more sense for Google to give its self driving technology away for free – like with Android – on the condition that the car uses a Google Operating system with the Google money making apps preloaded and uninstallable. When Apple realized this, that’s probably when they started working with self driving cars. The trips will often be paid for by advertising. There will be a market for ”geolocal” markering. Companies will pay Google for Google to plot trips with stops at their facilities, et cetera. All Google projects are about getting more eyes to watch their ads. Youtube exists for the commercial interrputs, Google Glass is also about geolocal advertising. The internet distribution projects, obviously. Even the life extension project gets people to live longer productive/consuming lives – upping the total sum of ads seen and acted upon. Of course – all of this could change. Google/Alphabet/Waymo could adapt and create new business plans if they see better opportunities. I checked the X projects to find exceptions and I do actually NOT see how the energy projects fit in with the ”more eyes to ads” strategy. Anyone? It has some other motivation, maybe.

  21. Jan, Do you have a copy of their “original plan” i can see? “It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures.” Google isn’t manufacturing cars, they’re operating in a regime in which they’re most competent and car companies are not, they’re developing AI software systems. I find it amazing that established car manufactures actually have test systems already on the road and not a decade from now.

  22. Which proprietary information and passwords are you talking about ? The same passwords and information Google can now collect when you use it’s search engine if they so desired ? If you need someone to help you carry groceries at the end of your journey then presumably a family member will be able to do this when you arrive home or you can always remove what you can carry and return for the rest it is not like the vehicle is going to run off with your merchandise. Your ideas”” for why this is not feasible seem to be rather weak. Most of all”””” I “”””like”””” your fear of an unmanned vehicle being car-jacked”””” because bank robbers often stick a gun “”””in the face”””” of an ATM and demand that it dispense all the money it contains or demand that it follow them home where they can then empty the machine at their leisure.”””

  23. I tried to google up an ”original plan” but no luck. Ads is how Google makes money. Removing the driver from the cab cuts costs to a fifth but the price of the trip often will be zero. So you can’t project the future market value to be equal to current value. The money is not in the transport itself – and Google will only own that market for a a few years anyhow.It will make more sense for Google to give its self driving technology away for free – like with Android – on the condition that the car uses a Google Operating system with the Google money making apps preloaded and uninstallable.When Apple realized this that’s probably when they started working with self driving cars. The trips will often be paid for by advertising. There will be a market for ”geolocal” markering. Companies will pay Google for Google to plot trips with stops at their facilities et cetera.All Google projects are about getting more eyes to watch their ads. Youtube exists for the commercial interrputs Google Glass is also about geolocal advertising. The internet distribution projects obviously. Even the life extension project gets people to live longer productive/consuming lives – upping the total sum of ads seen and acted upon.Of course – all of this could change. Google/Alphabet/Waymo could adapt and create new business plans if they see better opportunities. I checked the X projects to find exceptions and I do actually NOT see how the energy projects fit in with the ”more eyes to ads” strategy. Anyone? It has some other motivation maybe.”

  24. JanDo you have a copy of their original plan”” i can see?””””It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures.””””Google isn’t manufacturing cars”” they’re operating in a regime in which they’re most competent and car companies are not”” they’re developing AI software systems. I find it amazing that established car manufactures actually have test systems already on the road and not a decade from now.”””

  25. I consider it highly unlikely that we’re going to have automated driving by ’24. In the unlikely event I am wrong, it most certainly will not be Google that develops the technology. One implication that was very clear to me from the James Dalmore fiasco earlier this year is that Google no longer has the corporate culture or human capital necessary to realize any of their “moonshot” projects, including the self-driving car. Also remember that Boston Dynamics, the developer of that robot last week, was sold to a Japanese company over two years ago.

  26. I don’t see the general adoption of self driving cars by 2024. I also don’t see cars selling for 1/5 the cost of today’s car because the price of cars is set by what people can afford and not how cheap you can build them. Most people don’t like cheap cars. They want the most luxurious car they can afford.

  27. I consider it highly unlikely that we’re going to have automated driving by ’24. In the unlikely event I am wrong it most certainly will not be Google that develops the technology. One implication that was very clear to me from the James Dalmore fiasco earlier this year is that Google no longer has the corporate culture or human capital necessary to realize any of their moonshot”” projects”” including the self-driving car. Also remember that Boston Dynamics the developer of that robot last week”” was sold to a Japanese company over two years ago.”””

  28. I don’t see the general adoption of self driving cars by 2024. I also don’t see cars selling for 1/5 the cost of today’s car because the price of cars is set by what people can afford and not how cheap you can build them. Most people don’t like cheap cars. They want the most luxurious car they can afford.

  29. 33,000 automobile deaths a year in the US. Over one and a quarter million a year in the world. All from accidents with human drivers. But, EVERY single fatality involving a vehicle with driverlesss technology is going to get huge press. It’s not an insuperable barrier, but it’s a big speed bump. Even without that, I agree, this schedule may be a bit unrealistic; double it at least.

  30. 33000 automobile deaths a year in the US. Over one and a quarter million a year in the world. All from accidents with human drivers. But EVERY single fatality involving a vehicle with driverlesss technology is going to get huge press. It’s not an insuperable barrier but it’s a big speed bump.Even without that I agree this schedule may be a bit unrealistic; double it at least.

  31. All from accidents with human drivers” does not mean that all those accidents were cause by human drivers. Whereas, ALL accidents in SDCs will not be caused by human drivers as well. That is what you were saying?

  32. It’s tech” it will get better every year.””Guess you have never heard of Moore’s Law and its variants”””” then?”””

  33. All from accidents with human drivers”” does not mean that all those accidents were cause by human drivers. Whereas”””” ALL accidents in SDCs will not be caused by human drivers as well. That is what you were saying?”””

  34. Once the increased safety data is seen, there will be law suits if cities don’t let AVs in.” No there won’t. Nice to see that SDC Utopians are not extinct.

  35. It’s tech, it will get better every year.” Guess you have never heard of Moore’s Law and its variants, then?

  36. Once the increased safety data is seen” there will be law suits if cities don’t let AVs in.””No there won’t. Nice to see that SDC Utopians are not extinct.”””

  37. No reason to assume that this technology will initially be safer either. We don’t have anywhere near enough information to determine if it’s more or less safe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the early self driving cars to be less safe but not so much that they won’t be used and then seeing a progression to being more safe over time. Where it will probably win big is with the elderly.

  38. No reason to assume that this technology will initially be safer either. We don’t have anywhere near enough information to determine if it’s more or less safe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the early self driving cars to be less safe but not so much that they won’t be used and then seeing a progression to being more safe over time. Where it will probably win big is with the elderly.

  39. Funny all this happens by executive order and in secret. When we start piling up the bodies on the sidewalks we’ll start asking questions.

  40. Funny, all this happens by executive order and in secret. When we start piling up the bodies on the sidewalks, we’ll start asking questions.

  41. It sounds like you never came in contact with human drivers, and how pathetic they are. Any halfway self-driving vehicle would be better. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if the algorithms that they use in GTA games would be better than real people when connected to a real self driving car.

  42. It sounds like you never came in contact with human drivers and how pathetic they are.Any halfway self-driving vehicle would be better. Hell I wouldn’t be surprised if the algorithms that they use in GTA games would be better than real people when connected to a real self driving car.

  43. Talking about self-driving cars I think I personally wouldn’t risk my family to ride inside one of them now. Not until car manufacturers fix and the flaws and reach at least 99{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} safe for people. I could read quite many accidents with these cars involved in these past few years. I have also read a nice article that talks about this topic at https://www.lemberglaw.com/self-driving-autonomous-car-accident-injury-lawyers-attorneys/.

  44. Yup. Totally agree on that take. I used to bring this up to the SDC Utopians on NBF. The SDC Utopians kept claiming that it would be impossible for an SDC to get into an accident. I know, I know…but that is what they kept repeatedly insisting. Crazy, eh? Total Kool-Aid drinking. Then there was an accident involving a proto-SDC Volvo in the Dominican Republic. Thing ran into a group of reporters. All caught on video. The SDC Utopians shut up and quietly disappeared from the NBF forums starting after that one. Same pattern of wildly outlandish positions followed by total credibility destruction with the Peak Oiltards before that. Notice how we had names for these people? SDC Utopians and Peak Oiltards. Just like cockroaches you can’t kill, so you start giving them names simply because they hang around long enough? Anyway…enough of the NBF Forum History lesson. Just that I think I reacted to your post the way I did because of my experiences with the SDC Utopian crowd, who cited a lot of car passenger death stats in the opening salvos of their Kool-Aid rants…

  45. Yup. Totally agree on that take.I used to bring this up to the SDC Utopians on NBF. The SDC Utopians kept claiming that it would be impossible for an SDC to get into an accident. I know I know…but that is what they kept repeatedly insisting. Crazy eh? Total Kool-Aid drinking.Then there was an accident involving a proto-SDC Volvo in the Dominican Republic. Thing ran into a group of reporters. All caught on video. The SDC Utopians shut up and quietly disappeared from the NBF forums starting after that one. Same pattern of wildly outlandish positions followed by total credibility destruction with the Peak Oiltards before that.Notice how we had names for these people? SDC Utopians and Peak Oiltards. Just like cockroaches you can’t kill so you start giving them names simply because they hang around long enough? Anyway…enough of the NBF Forum History lesson. Just that I think I reacted to your post the way I did because of my experiences with the SDC Utopian crowd who cited a lot of car passenger death stats in the opening salvos of their Kool-Aid rants…

  46. Did you think we would have human like assistants answering the phone, this year on the Pixel 3 phones? You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.

  47. Did you think we would have human like assistants answering the phone this year on the Pixel 3 phones?You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.

  48. Yes. “You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.” No I am not. Nothing you just mentioned bares any relation to what I wrote, either.

  49. Yes.You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.””No I am not.Nothing you just mentioned bares any relation to what I wrote”””” either.”””

  50. You were the only one ever using insulting smear terms like this to everyone you disagreed with, so only you had them, not “we”. I guess you just want to be perceived more obnoxious than anyone else.

  51. About half of the 12 reported Waymo accidents in CA were with the Waymo car “stopped in traffic”, hit by another (presumably human driven) car. So at least half of the accidents were due to a human not correctly predicting what the Waymo car would do (e.g. expecting it to start moving when it did not, and so rear-ending the Waymo car). And since half of Waymo accidents were of that type, it doesn’ seem unreasonable to assume that about half of the ‘Waymo in motion’ accidents were from the same cause. The point being, that Waymo ‘made an error’ accidents were maybe 1/4th of total, and if it were dealing only with other SD cars the accident rate might be substantially lower.

  52. Sorry – corrections: Waymo drove ~352500 miles in CA in 2017 (ending Nov), and had 4 accidents recorded over same period, so one accident per ~88K miles – comparable to human drivers. However, they had 63 total “disengagements” – which I take to mean the human safety driver took over. The drivers might have been overcautious, but this puts a lower bound on Waymo quality of around 1 potential accident per 6000 miles driven. They’ve had 12 reported to CA in 2018 so far and probably will have a few more by end of the reporting year. Don’t know how many miles driven in CA this year. But unless they’ve tripled their driven miles in CA, they are lagging human-quality driving this year.

  53. From this site: “www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+” it looks like Waymo has had about 50 accidents this year, driving around 1M miles. So somewhere around 1 per 20K miles – human driven cars (in US) rate is more like 1 per 256K miles. No fatalities yet, but total miles driven is only around 10M, while human drivers only have one fatality per 80M miles (40K in 2017, 3.2T miles driven). So they have a ways to go to prove themselves better than human drivers.

  54. I doubt Google / Waymo will make cars, nor operate a taxi service. More likely they’ll contract with automakers to provide the tech (adapted and tested for each car), whatever digital operation services (e.g. updated maps), and most critically they’ll insure the cars against all losses due to software or data issues. (Thus answering the question of who pays when an SD car has an accident, and getting paid handsomely for it by the auto makers.)

  55. You were the only one ever using insulting smear terms like this to everyone you disagreed with so only you had them not we””.I guess you just want to be perceived more obnoxious than anyone else.”””

  56. About half of the 12 reported Waymo accidents in CA were with the Waymo car stopped in traffic””” hit by another (presumably human driven) car. So at least half of the accidents were due to a human not correctly predicting what the Waymo car would do (e.g. expecting it to start moving when it did not and so rear-ending the Waymo car). And since half of Waymo accidents were of that type it doesn’ seem unreasonable to assume that about half of the ‘Waymo in motion’ accidents were from the same cause. The point being that Waymo ‘made an error’ accidents were maybe 1/4th of total”” and if it were dealing only with other SD cars the accident rate might be substantially lower.”””

  57. Sorry – corrections: Waymo drove ~352500 miles in CA in 2017 (ending Nov) and had 4 accidents recorded over same period so one accident per ~88K miles – comparable to human drivers. However they had 63 total disengagements”” – which I take to mean the human safety driver took over. The drivers might have been overcautious”” but this puts a lower bound on Waymo quality of around 1 potential accident per 6000 miles driven.They’ve had 12 reported to CA in 2018 so far and probably will have a few more by end of the reporting year. Don’t know how many miles driven in CA this year. But unless they’ve tripled their driven miles in CA”” they are lagging human-quality driving this year.”””

  58. From this site: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+“”it looks like Waymo has had about 50 accidents this year”” driving around 1M miles. So somewhere around 1 per 20K miles – human driven cars (in US) rate is more like 1 per 256K miles. No fatalities yet but total miles driven is only around 10M while human drivers only have one fatality per 80M miles (40K in 2017″” 3.2T miles driven). So they have a ways to go to prove themselves better than human drivers.”””

  59. I doubt Google / Waymo will make cars nor operate a taxi service. More likely they’ll contract with automakers to provide the tech (adapted and tested for each car) whatever digital operation services (e.g. updated maps) and most critically they’ll insure the cars against all losses due to software or data issues. (Thus answering the question of who pays when an SD car has an accident and getting paid handsomely for it by the auto makers.)

  60. What insulting terms? Only one? Guess you have some magic filters that prevent you from seeing the terms Matteo Martini/Luca uses all the time, eh? Peak Oiltards and SDC Utopians are not insulting because I use them. They are insulting because they are totally applicable, memetically. And that isn’t my fault but that of those who earned those monikers. I am sorry if you feel left now because you didn’t use those terms. But there’s always tomorrow. Never too late to get with the program.

  61. What insulting terms? Only one? Guess you have some magic filters that prevent you from seeing the terms Matteo Martini/Luca uses all the time eh? Peak Oiltards and SDC Utopians are not insulting because I use them. They are insulting because they are totally applicable memetically. And that isn’t my fault but that of those who earned those monikers. I am sorry if you feel left now because you didn’t use those terms. But there’s always tomorrow. Never too late to get with the program.

  62. No I am not. I don’t see anything in the market except voice recognition toys like Alexa. You may not have noticed that there are no self driving cars for sale.

  63. No I am not. I don’t see anything in the market except voice recognition toys like Alexa. You may not have noticed that there are no self driving cars for sale.

  64. Why bother making excuses? You fully well that 90% of what you comment is trolling and insults, particularly towards your pet peeves.

  65. Why bother making excuses? You fully well that 90{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of what you comment is trolling and insults particularly towards your pet peeves.

  66. Why bother making excuses? You fully well that 90% of what you comment is trolling and insults, particularly towards your pet peeves.

  67. Why bother making excuses? You fully well that 90{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of what you comment is trolling and insults particularly towards your pet peeves.

  68. No I am not. I don’t see anything in the market except voice recognition toys like Alexa. You may not have noticed that there are no self driving cars for sale.

  69. No I am not. I don’t see anything in the market except voice recognition toys like Alexa. You may not have noticed that there are no self driving cars for sale.

  70. Why bother making excuses? You fully well that 90% of what you comment is trolling and insults, particularly towards your pet peeves.

  71. No I am not. I don’t see anything in the market except voice recognition toys like Alexa. You may not have noticed that there are no self driving cars for sale.

  72. What insulting terms? Only one? Guess you have some magic filters that prevent you from seeing the terms Matteo Martini/Luca uses all the time, eh? Peak Oiltards and SDC Utopians are not insulting because I use them. They are insulting because they are totally applicable, memetically. And that isn’t my fault but that of those who earned those monikers. I am sorry if you feel left now because you didn’t use those terms. But there’s always tomorrow. Never too late to get with the program.

  73. What insulting terms? Only one? Guess you have some magic filters that prevent you from seeing the terms Matteo Martini/Luca uses all the time eh? Peak Oiltards and SDC Utopians are not insulting because I use them. They are insulting because they are totally applicable memetically. And that isn’t my fault but that of those who earned those monikers. I am sorry if you feel left now because you didn’t use those terms. But there’s always tomorrow. Never too late to get with the program.

  74. You were the only one ever using insulting smear terms like this to everyone you disagreed with, so only you had them, not “we”. I guess you just want to be perceived more obnoxious than anyone else.

  75. You were the only one ever using insulting smear terms like this to everyone you disagreed with so only you had them not we””.I guess you just want to be perceived more obnoxious than anyone else.”””

  76. About half of the 12 reported Waymo accidents in CA were with the Waymo car “stopped in traffic”, hit by another (presumably human driven) car. So at least half of the accidents were due to a human not correctly predicting what the Waymo car would do (e.g. expecting it to start moving when it did not, and so rear-ending the Waymo car). And since half of Waymo accidents were of that type, it doesn’ seem unreasonable to assume that about half of the ‘Waymo in motion’ accidents were from the same cause. The point being, that Waymo ‘made an error’ accidents were maybe 1/4th of total, and if it were dealing only with other SD cars the accident rate might be substantially lower.

  77. About half of the 12 reported Waymo accidents in CA were with the Waymo car stopped in traffic””” hit by another (presumably human driven) car. So at least half of the accidents were due to a human not correctly predicting what the Waymo car would do (e.g. expecting it to start moving when it did not and so rear-ending the Waymo car). And since half of Waymo accidents were of that type it doesn’ seem unreasonable to assume that about half of the ‘Waymo in motion’ accidents were from the same cause. The point being that Waymo ‘made an error’ accidents were maybe 1/4th of total”” and if it were dealing only with other SD cars the accident rate might be substantially lower.”””

  78. Sorry – corrections: Waymo drove ~352500 miles in CA in 2017 (ending Nov), and had 4 accidents recorded over same period, so one accident per ~88K miles – comparable to human drivers. However, they had 63 total “disengagements” – which I take to mean the human safety driver took over. The drivers might have been overcautious, but this puts a lower bound on Waymo quality of around 1 potential accident per 6000 miles driven. They’ve had 12 reported to CA in 2018 so far and probably will have a few more by end of the reporting year. Don’t know how many miles driven in CA this year. But unless they’ve tripled their driven miles in CA, they are lagging human-quality driving this year.

  79. Sorry – corrections: Waymo drove ~352500 miles in CA in 2017 (ending Nov) and had 4 accidents recorded over same period so one accident per ~88K miles – comparable to human drivers. However they had 63 total disengagements”” – which I take to mean the human safety driver took over. The drivers might have been overcautious”” but this puts a lower bound on Waymo quality of around 1 potential accident per 6000 miles driven.They’ve had 12 reported to CA in 2018 so far and probably will have a few more by end of the reporting year. Don’t know how many miles driven in CA this year. But unless they’ve tripled their driven miles in CA”” they are lagging human-quality driving this year.”””

  80. From this site: “www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+” it looks like Waymo has had about 50 accidents this year, driving around 1M miles. So somewhere around 1 per 20K miles – human driven cars (in US) rate is more like 1 per 256K miles. No fatalities yet, but total miles driven is only around 10M, while human drivers only have one fatality per 80M miles (40K in 2017, 3.2T miles driven). So they have a ways to go to prove themselves better than human drivers.

  81. From this site: http://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+“”it looks like Waymo has had about 50 accidents this year”” driving around 1M miles. So somewhere around 1 per 20K miles – human driven cars (in US) rate is more like 1 per 256K miles. No fatalities yet but total miles driven is only around 10M while human drivers only have one fatality per 80M miles (40K in 2017″” 3.2T miles driven). So they have a ways to go to prove themselves better than human drivers.”””

  82. I doubt Google / Waymo will make cars, nor operate a taxi service. More likely they’ll contract with automakers to provide the tech (adapted and tested for each car), whatever digital operation services (e.g. updated maps), and most critically they’ll insure the cars against all losses due to software or data issues. (Thus answering the question of who pays when an SD car has an accident, and getting paid handsomely for it by the auto makers.)

  83. I doubt Google / Waymo will make cars nor operate a taxi service. More likely they’ll contract with automakers to provide the tech (adapted and tested for each car) whatever digital operation services (e.g. updated maps) and most critically they’ll insure the cars against all losses due to software or data issues. (Thus answering the question of who pays when an SD car has an accident and getting paid handsomely for it by the auto makers.)

  84. What insulting terms? Only one? Guess you have some magic filters that prevent you from seeing the terms Matteo Martini/Luca uses all the time, eh?

    Peak Oiltards and SDC Utopians are not insulting because I use them. They are insulting because they are totally applicable, memetically. And that isn’t my fault but that of those who earned those monikers.

    I am sorry if you feel left now because you didn’t use those terms. But there’s always tomorrow. Never too late to get with the program.

  85. You were the only one ever using insulting smear terms like this to everyone you disagreed with, so only you had them, not “we”.
    I guess you just want to be perceived more obnoxious than anyone else.

  86. Yes. “You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.” No I am not. Nothing you just mentioned bares any relation to what I wrote, either.

  87. Yes.You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.””No I am not.Nothing you just mentioned bares any relation to what I wrote”””” either.”””

  88. Did you think we would have human like assistants answering the phone, this year on the Pixel 3 phones? You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.

  89. Did you think we would have human like assistants answering the phone this year on the Pixel 3 phones?You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.

  90. About half of the 12 reported Waymo accidents in CA were with the Waymo car “stopped in traffic”, hit by another (presumably human driven) car. So at least half of the accidents were due to a human not correctly predicting what the Waymo car would do (e.g. expecting it to start moving when it did not, and so rear-ending the Waymo car).

    And since half of Waymo accidents were of that type, it doesn’ seem unreasonable to assume that about half of the ‘Waymo in motion’ accidents were from the same cause.
    The point being, that Waymo ‘made an error’ accidents were maybe 1/4th of total, and if it were dealing only with other SD cars the accident rate might be substantially lower.

  91. Sorry – corrections: Waymo drove ~352500 miles in CA in 2017 (ending Nov), and had 4 accidents recorded over same period, so one accident per ~88K miles – comparable to human drivers. However, they had 63 total “disengagements” – which I take to mean the human safety driver took over. The drivers might have been overcautious, but this puts a lower bound on Waymo quality of around 1 potential accident per 6000 miles driven.

    They’ve had 12 reported to CA in 2018 so far and probably will have a few more by end of the reporting year. Don’t know how many miles driven in CA this year. But unless they’ve tripled their driven miles in CA, they are lagging human-quality driving this year.

  92. From this site: “www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/vr/autonomous/autonomousveh_ol316+”
    it looks like Waymo has had about 50 accidents this year, driving around 1M miles. So somewhere around 1 per 20K miles – human driven cars (in US) rate is more like 1 per 256K miles. No fatalities yet, but total miles driven is only around 10M, while human drivers only have one fatality per 80M miles (40K in 2017, 3.2T miles driven).

    So they have a ways to go to prove themselves better than human drivers.

  93. I doubt Google / Waymo will make cars, nor operate a taxi service.
    More likely they’ll contract with automakers to provide the tech (adapted and tested for each car), whatever digital operation services (e.g. updated maps), and most critically they’ll insure the cars against all losses due to software or data issues. (Thus answering the question of who pays when an SD car has an accident, and getting paid handsomely for it by the auto makers.)

  94. Yes.

    “You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.”

    No I am not.

    Nothing you just mentioned bares any relation to what I wrote, either.

  95. Did you think we would have human like assistants answering the phone, this year on the Pixel 3 phones?
    You seem to be underestimating the speed of AI contribution to technology.

  96. Yup. Totally agree on that take. I used to bring this up to the SDC Utopians on NBF. The SDC Utopians kept claiming that it would be impossible for an SDC to get into an accident. I know, I know…but that is what they kept repeatedly insisting. Crazy, eh? Total Kool-Aid drinking. Then there was an accident involving a proto-SDC Volvo in the Dominican Republic. Thing ran into a group of reporters. All caught on video. The SDC Utopians shut up and quietly disappeared from the NBF forums starting after that one. Same pattern of wildly outlandish positions followed by total credibility destruction with the Peak Oiltards before that. Notice how we had names for these people? SDC Utopians and Peak Oiltards. Just like cockroaches you can’t kill, so you start giving them names simply because they hang around long enough? Anyway…enough of the NBF Forum History lesson. Just that I think I reacted to your post the way I did because of my experiences with the SDC Utopian crowd, who cited a lot of car passenger death stats in the opening salvos of their Kool-Aid rants…

  97. Yup. Totally agree on that take.I used to bring this up to the SDC Utopians on NBF. The SDC Utopians kept claiming that it would be impossible for an SDC to get into an accident. I know I know…but that is what they kept repeatedly insisting. Crazy eh? Total Kool-Aid drinking.Then there was an accident involving a proto-SDC Volvo in the Dominican Republic. Thing ran into a group of reporters. All caught on video. The SDC Utopians shut up and quietly disappeared from the NBF forums starting after that one. Same pattern of wildly outlandish positions followed by total credibility destruction with the Peak Oiltards before that.Notice how we had names for these people? SDC Utopians and Peak Oiltards. Just like cockroaches you can’t kill so you start giving them names simply because they hang around long enough? Anyway…enough of the NBF Forum History lesson. Just that I think I reacted to your post the way I did because of my experiences with the SDC Utopian crowd who cited a lot of car passenger death stats in the opening salvos of their Kool-Aid rants…

  98. It sounds like you never came in contact with human drivers, and how pathetic they are. Any halfway self-driving vehicle would be better. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if the algorithms that they use in GTA games would be better than real people when connected to a real self driving car.

  99. It sounds like you never came in contact with human drivers and how pathetic they are.Any halfway self-driving vehicle would be better. Hell I wouldn’t be surprised if the algorithms that they use in GTA games would be better than real people when connected to a real self driving car.

  100. Talking about self-driving cars I think I personally wouldn’t risk my family to ride inside one of them now. Not until car manufacturers fix and the flaws and reach at least 99{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} safe for people. I could read quite many accidents with these cars involved in these past few years. I have also read a nice article that talks about this topic at https://www.lemberglaw.com/self-driving-autonomous-car-accident-injury-lawyers-attorneys/.

  101. Yup. Totally agree on that take.

    I used to bring this up to the SDC Utopians on NBF. The SDC Utopians kept claiming that it would be impossible for an SDC to get into an accident. I know, I know…but that is what they kept repeatedly insisting. Crazy, eh? Total Kool-Aid drinking.

    Then there was an accident involving a proto-SDC Volvo in the Dominican Republic. Thing ran into a group of reporters. All caught on video. The SDC Utopians shut up and quietly disappeared from the NBF forums starting after that one. Same pattern of wildly outlandish positions followed by total credibility destruction with the Peak Oiltards before that.

    Notice how we had names for these people? SDC Utopians and Peak Oiltards. Just like cockroaches you can’t kill, so you start giving them names simply because they hang around long enough?

    Anyway…enough of the NBF Forum History lesson. Just that I think I reacted to your post the way I did because of my experiences with the SDC Utopian crowd, who cited a lot of car passenger death stats in the opening salvos of their Kool-Aid rants…

  102. It sounds like you never came in contact with human drivers, and how pathetic they are.
    Any halfway self-driving vehicle would be better. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if the algorithms that they use in GTA games would be better than real people when connected to a real self driving car.

  103. Funny, all this happens by executive order and in secret. When we start piling up the bodies on the sidewalks, we’ll start asking questions.

  104. Funny all this happens by executive order and in secret. When we start piling up the bodies on the sidewalks we’ll start asking questions.

  105. No reason to assume that this technology will initially be safer either. We don’t have anywhere near enough information to determine if it’s more or less safe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the early self driving cars to be less safe but not so much that they won’t be used and then seeing a progression to being more safe over time. Where it will probably win big is with the elderly.

  106. No reason to assume that this technology will initially be safer either. We don’t have anywhere near enough information to determine if it’s more or less safe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the early self driving cars to be less safe but not so much that they won’t be used and then seeing a progression to being more safe over time. Where it will probably win big is with the elderly.

  107. No reason to assume that this technology will initially be safer either. We don’t have anywhere near enough information to determine if it’s more or less safe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the early self driving cars to be less safe but not so much that they won’t be used and then seeing a progression to being more safe over time. Where it will probably win big is with the elderly.

  108. Once the increased safety data is seen, there will be law suits if cities don’t let AVs in.” No there won’t. Nice to see that SDC Utopians are not extinct.

  109. Once the increased safety data is seen” there will be law suits if cities don’t let AVs in.””No there won’t. Nice to see that SDC Utopians are not extinct.”””

  110. It’s tech, it will get better every year.” Guess you have never heard of Moore’s Law and its variants, then?

  111. It’s tech” it will get better every year.””Guess you have never heard of Moore’s Law and its variants”””” then?”””

  112. All from accidents with human drivers” does not mean that all those accidents were cause by human drivers. Whereas, ALL accidents in SDCs will not be caused by human drivers as well. That is what you were saying?

  113. All from accidents with human drivers”” does not mean that all those accidents were cause by human drivers. Whereas”””” ALL accidents in SDCs will not be caused by human drivers as well. That is what you were saying?”””

  114. 33,000 automobile deaths a year in the US. Over one and a quarter million a year in the world. All from accidents with human drivers. But, EVERY single fatality involving a vehicle with driverlesss technology is going to get huge press. It’s not an insuperable barrier, but it’s a big speed bump. Even without that, I agree, this schedule may be a bit unrealistic; double it at least.

  115. 33000 automobile deaths a year in the US. Over one and a quarter million a year in the world. All from accidents with human drivers. But EVERY single fatality involving a vehicle with driverlesss technology is going to get huge press. It’s not an insuperable barrier but it’s a big speed bump.Even without that I agree this schedule may be a bit unrealistic; double it at least.

  116. “Once the increased safety data is seen, there will be law suits if cities don’t let AVs in.”

    No there won’t.

    Nice to see that SDC Utopians are not extinct.

  117. “All from accidents with human drivers” does not mean that all those accidents were cause by human drivers. Whereas, ALL accidents in SDCs will not be caused by human drivers as well.

    That is what you were saying?

  118. 33,000 automobile deaths a year in the US. Over one and a quarter million a year in the world. All from accidents with human drivers. But, EVERY single fatality involving a vehicle with driverlesss technology is going to get huge press. It’s not an insuperable barrier, but it’s a big speed bump.

    Even without that, I agree, this schedule may be a bit unrealistic; double it at least.

  119. I consider it highly unlikely that we’re going to have automated driving by ’24. In the unlikely event I am wrong, it most certainly will not be Google that develops the technology. One implication that was very clear to me from the James Dalmore fiasco earlier this year is that Google no longer has the corporate culture or human capital necessary to realize any of their “moonshot” projects, including the self-driving car. Also remember that Boston Dynamics, the developer of that robot last week, was sold to a Japanese company over two years ago.

  120. I consider it highly unlikely that we’re going to have automated driving by ’24. In the unlikely event I am wrong it most certainly will not be Google that develops the technology. One implication that was very clear to me from the James Dalmore fiasco earlier this year is that Google no longer has the corporate culture or human capital necessary to realize any of their moonshot”” projects”” including the self-driving car. Also remember that Boston Dynamics the developer of that robot last week”” was sold to a Japanese company over two years ago.”””

  121. I don’t see the general adoption of self driving cars by 2024. I also don’t see cars selling for 1/5 the cost of today’s car because the price of cars is set by what people can afford and not how cheap you can build them. Most people don’t like cheap cars. They want the most luxurious car they can afford.

  122. I don’t see the general adoption of self driving cars by 2024. I also don’t see cars selling for 1/5 the cost of today’s car because the price of cars is set by what people can afford and not how cheap you can build them. Most people don’t like cheap cars. They want the most luxurious car they can afford.

  123. Which proprietary information and passwords are you talking about ? The same passwords and information Google can now collect when you use it’s search engine if they so desired ? If you need someone to help you carry groceries at the end of your journey then presumably a family member will be able to do this when you arrive home or, you can always remove what you can carry and return for the rest, it is not like the vehicle is going to run off with your merchandise. Your “ideas” for why this is not feasible seem to be rather weak. Most of all, I “like” your fear of an unmanned vehicle being car-jacked, because bank robbers often stick a gun “in the face” of an ATM and demand that it dispense all the money it contains or demand that it follow them home where they can then empty the machine at their leisure.

  124. Which proprietary information and passwords are you talking about ? The same passwords and information Google can now collect when you use it’s search engine if they so desired ? If you need someone to help you carry groceries at the end of your journey then presumably a family member will be able to do this when you arrive home or you can always remove what you can carry and return for the rest it is not like the vehicle is going to run off with your merchandise. Your ideas”” for why this is not feasible seem to be rather weak. Most of all”””” I “”””like”””” your fear of an unmanned vehicle being car-jacked”””” because bank robbers often stick a gun “”””in the face”””” of an ATM and demand that it dispense all the money it contains or demand that it follow them home where they can then empty the machine at their leisure.”””

  125. I tried to google up an ”original plan” but no luck. Ads is how Google makes money. Removing the driver from the cab cuts costs to a fifth, but the price of the trip often will be zero. So you can’t project the future market value to be equal to current value. The money is not in the transport itself – and Google will only own that market for a a few years anyhow. It will make more sense for Google to give its self driving technology away for free – like with Android – on the condition that the car uses a Google Operating system with the Google money making apps preloaded and uninstallable. When Apple realized this, that’s probably when they started working with self driving cars. The trips will often be paid for by advertising. There will be a market for ”geolocal” markering. Companies will pay Google for Google to plot trips with stops at their facilities, et cetera. All Google projects are about getting more eyes to watch their ads. Youtube exists for the commercial interrputs, Google Glass is also about geolocal advertising. The internet distribution projects, obviously. Even the life extension project gets people to live longer productive/consuming lives – upping the total sum of ads seen and acted upon. Of course – all of this could change. Google/Alphabet/Waymo could adapt and create new business plans if they see better opportunities. I checked the X projects to find exceptions and I do actually NOT see how the energy projects fit in with the ”more eyes to ads” strategy. Anyone? It has some other motivation, maybe.

  126. I tried to google up an ”original plan” but no luck. Ads is how Google makes money. Removing the driver from the cab cuts costs to a fifth but the price of the trip often will be zero. So you can’t project the future market value to be equal to current value. The money is not in the transport itself – and Google will only own that market for a a few years anyhow.It will make more sense for Google to give its self driving technology away for free – like with Android – on the condition that the car uses a Google Operating system with the Google money making apps preloaded and uninstallable.When Apple realized this that’s probably when they started working with self driving cars. The trips will often be paid for by advertising. There will be a market for ”geolocal” markering. Companies will pay Google for Google to plot trips with stops at their facilities et cetera.All Google projects are about getting more eyes to watch their ads. Youtube exists for the commercial interrputs Google Glass is also about geolocal advertising. The internet distribution projects obviously. Even the life extension project gets people to live longer productive/consuming lives – upping the total sum of ads seen and acted upon.Of course – all of this could change. Google/Alphabet/Waymo could adapt and create new business plans if they see better opportunities. I checked the X projects to find exceptions and I do actually NOT see how the energy projects fit in with the ”more eyes to ads” strategy. Anyone? It has some other motivation maybe.”

  127. Jan, Do you have a copy of their “original plan” i can see? “It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures.” Google isn’t manufacturing cars, they’re operating in a regime in which they’re most competent and car companies are not, they’re developing AI software systems. I find it amazing that established car manufactures actually have test systems already on the road and not a decade from now.

  128. JanDo you have a copy of their original plan”” i can see?””””It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures.””””Google isn’t manufacturing cars”” they’re operating in a regime in which they’re most competent and car companies are not”” they’re developing AI software systems. I find it amazing that established car manufactures actually have test systems already on the road and not a decade from now.”””

  129. I consider it highly unlikely that we’re going to have automated driving by ’24. In the unlikely event I am wrong, it most certainly will not be Google that develops the technology. One implication that was very clear to me from the James Dalmore fiasco earlier this year is that Google no longer has the corporate culture or human capital necessary to realize any of their “moonshot” projects, including the self-driving car. Also remember that Boston Dynamics, the developer of that robot last week, was sold to a Japanese company over two years ago.

  130. So much BS here. 50% of cars self-driving by 2024 (in six years)? EV’s that are 10 to 20% of the cost of current vehicles? When “journalists” make these ridiculous and incompetent claims it eliminates all credibility in anything else they may have to say. Extremely lazy “reporting”, junior high school level.

  131. So much BS here. 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of cars self-driving by 2024 (in six years)? EV’s that are 10 to 20{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the cost of current vehicles?When journalists”” make these ridiculous and incompetent claims it eliminates all credibility in anything else they may have to say. Extremely lazy “”””reporting”””””””” junior high school level.”””

  132. ” I’d say they are doing it for the profit.” Probably, but still incidental, in the sense that it was not the original plan. Waymo could get zero revenue on taxis and still win big on getting more eyes watching google ads. I don’t think Waymo/Google was expecting everyone else to fall behind in their schedules for self driving. It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures. I believe Google was expecting to license their self driving tech to car manufacturers, or, at least, induce them to develop self driving.

  133. ” I’d say they are doing it for the profit.”Probably but still incidental in the sense that it was not the original plan. Waymo could get zero revenue on taxis and still win big on getting more eyes watching google ads. I don’t think Waymo/Google was expecting everyone else to fall behind in their schedules for self driving.It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures. I believe Google was expecting to license their self driving tech to car manufacturers or at least induce them to develop self driving.”

  134. I don’t see the general adoption of self driving cars by 2024. I also don’t see cars selling for 1/5 the cost of today’s car because the price of cars is set by what people can afford and not how cheap you can build them. Most people don’t like cheap cars. They want the most luxurious car they can afford.

  135. 60% of a $2.3 trillion business @10% margin is like $200 billion in annual profit. At a 30x multiple that would add $6 trillion to Alphabet’s market cap, or 7x their current value. I’d say they are doing it for the profit.

  136. 60{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of a $2.3 trillion business @10{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} margin is like $200 billion in annual profit. At a 30x multiple that would add $6 trillion to Alphabet’s market cap or 7x their current value. I’d say they are doing it for the profit.

  137. Which proprietary information and passwords are you talking about ? The same passwords and information Google can now collect when you use it’s search engine if they so desired ? If you need someone to help you carry groceries at the end of your journey then presumably a family member will be able to do this when you arrive home or, you can always remove what you can carry and return for the rest, it is not like the vehicle is going to run off with your merchandise. Your “ideas” for why this is not feasible seem to be rather weak. Most of all, I “like” your fear of an unmanned vehicle being car-jacked, because bank robbers often stick a gun “in the face” of an ATM and demand that it dispense all the money it contains or demand that it follow them home where they can then empty the machine at their leisure.

  138. I tried to google up an ”original plan” but no luck.

    Ads is how Google makes money. Removing the driver from the cab cuts costs to a fifth, but the price of the trip often will be zero. So you can’t project the future market value to be equal to current value. The money is not in the transport itself – and Google will only own that market for a a few years anyhow.

    It will make more sense for Google to give its self driving technology away for free – like with Android – on the condition that the car uses a Google Operating system with the Google money making apps preloaded and uninstallable.

    When Apple realized this, that’s probably when they started working with self driving cars.

    The trips will often be paid for by advertising. There will be a market for ”geolocal” markering. Companies will pay Google for Google to plot trips with stops at their facilities, et cetera.

    All Google projects are about getting more eyes to watch their ads. Youtube exists for the commercial interrputs, Google Glass is also about geolocal advertising. The internet distribution projects, obviously. Even the life extension project gets people to live longer productive/consuming lives – upping the total sum of ads seen and acted upon.

    Of course – all of this could change. Google/Alphabet/Waymo could adapt and create new business plans if they see better opportunities.

    I checked the X projects to find exceptions and I do actually NOT see how the energy projects fit in with the ”more eyes to ads” strategy. Anyone? It has some other motivation, maybe.

  139. Jan,

    Do you have a copy of their “original plan” i can see?

    “It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures.”

    Google isn’t manufacturing cars, they’re operating in a regime in which they’re most competent and car companies are not, they’re developing AI software systems. I find it amazing that established car manufactures actually have test systems already on the road and not a decade from now.

  140. So much BS here. 50% of cars self-driving by 2024 (in six years)? EV’s that are 10 to 20% of the cost of current vehicles?

    When “journalists” make these ridiculous and incompetent claims it eliminates all credibility in anything else they may have to say. Extremely lazy “reporting”, junior high school level.

  141. ” I’d say they are doing it for the profit.”

    Probably, but still incidental, in the sense that it was not the original plan. Waymo could get zero revenue on taxis and still win big on getting more eyes watching google ads. I don’t think Waymo/Google was expecting everyone else to fall behind in their schedules for self driving.
    It is totally amazing that they as an outsider took the lead over all the established car manufactures. I believe Google was expecting to license their self driving tech to car manufacturers, or, at least, induce them to develop self driving.

  142. Will Google’s Wi-Fi service politely forget your passwords and proprietary information. No thanks. Taxi provide more that driving you to a destination. If you need someone to help carry groceries or luggage or whatever a person is needed to make taking a taxi worthwhile. An unmanned car is a open invitation for car jacking for parts if nothing else. This sounds like a losing business model from the get go.

  143. Will Google’s Wi-Fi service politely forget your passwords and proprietary information. No thanks. Taxi provide more that driving you to a destination. If you need someone to help carry groceries or luggage or whatever a person is needed to make taking a taxi worthwhile. An unmanned car is a open invitation for car jacking for parts if nothing else. This sounds like a losing business model from the get go.

  144. ”Google will also add wi-fi services, which would make the rides more productive.” Yeah! This was the driver for Google to get ito ths self driving business: to get drivers to spend time looking at google ads. Producing cars was incidental.

  145. ”Google will also add wi-fi services which would make the rides more productive.”Yeah! This was the driver for Google to get ito ths self driving business: to get drivers to spend time looking at google ads. Producing cars was incidental.”

  146. ”The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.” Only in half? Usually this is estimated rather to a fifth.

  147. ”The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.”Only in half? Usually this is estimated rather to a fifth.

  148. ”305,000 taxi, limo, and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82,000 vehicles.” ”drivers” vs ”vehicles” ? Maybe count three drivers per vehicle? That means 82,000 self driving vehicles replace 240 000 drivers

  149. ”305000 taxi limo and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82000 vehicles.””drivers” vs ”vehicles” ?Maybe count three drivers per vehicle? That means 82000 self driving vehicles replace 240 000 drivers”

  150. The video wouldn’t play for me, but the vegetation visible in the frame before I clicked on it, suggested that part of Arizona never gets snow. Has anyone tested self driving cars in a snowstorm?

  151. The video wouldn’t play for me but the vegetation visible in the frame before I clicked on it suggested that part of Arizona never gets snow. Has anyone tested self driving cars in a snowstorm?

  152. Only if the self-driving cars will be F-450s and Dodge Rams, otherwise Americans won’t feel good about themselves.

  153. Only if the self-driving cars will be F-450s and Dodge Rams otherwise Americans won’t feel good about themselves.

  154. 60% of a $2.3 trillion business @10% margin is like $200 billion in annual profit. At a 30x multiple that would add $6 trillion to Alphabet’s market cap, or 7x their current value. I’d say they are doing it for the profit.

  155. Will Google’s Wi-Fi service politely forget your passwords and proprietary information. No thanks. Taxi provide more that driving you to a destination. If you need someone to help carry groceries or luggage or whatever a person is needed to make taking a taxi worthwhile. An unmanned car is a open invitation for car jacking for parts if nothing else. This sounds like a losing business model from the get go.

  156. ”Google will also add wi-fi services, which would make the rides more productive.”

    Yeah! This was the driver for Google to get ito ths self driving business: to get drivers to spend time looking at google ads. Producing cars was incidental.

  157. ”The cost of taxis and ride-sharing with self-driving will drop in half when the amount of drivers is reduced.”

    Only in half? Usually this is estimated rather to a fifth.

  158. ”305,000 taxi, limo, and ride-hail drivers in the US. Waymo has ordered 82,000 vehicles.”

    ”drivers” vs ”vehicles” ?

    Maybe count three drivers per vehicle? That means 82,000 self driving vehicles replace 240 000 drivers

  159. The video wouldn’t play for me, but the vegetation visible in the frame before I clicked on it, suggested that part of Arizona never gets snow. Has anyone tested self driving cars in a snowstorm?

Comments are closed.