Millions of cars spend their entire existence confined to US highways, cities, and suburbs. In what way is a car not self-driving if it can successfully drive you on you everywhere you go in your daily life?
You don't "obviously" need a human driver if the car is used entirely in that "special place" (ie. where most cars spend their entire existence).
Your argument makes about as much sense as claiming cell phones aren't truly mobile because you can't use them in Antarctica.
Well, simply because I don't know everywhere "I would have to go in my daily life" when I am buying the damn car.
>Your argument makes about as much sense as claiming cell phones aren't truly mobile because you can't use them in Antarctica.
By that logic, your argument also makes only as much as sense as calling a walkie talkie with 100m range a mobile phone.
You can rent or take a cab or an uber. I don't own a car. I get around just fine at home or when traveling.
If your time for commute is that much valuable, just hire a driver or call a taxi. Like most people who's time is actually valuable, have been doing for years...
Quite honestly, it is quite a joke when people on HN brag about how "valuable" their time is....
* Safety - they'll be safer. Period.
* It's a natural extension for cos like uber - how else can they bring costs down enough?
* It meshes well with other aspects of tech reducing friction - deliveries will be cheaper (think dinner, groceries, taskrabbit)
* They damn near already exist.
No. I don't think so. Not in the foreseeable future at least..
>* It's a natural extension for cos like uber - how else can they bring costs down enough?
I don't know or care.
>It meshes well with other aspects of tech reducing friction - deliveries will be cheaper (think dinner, groceries, taskrabbit)
Well, why do you think the providers will reduce the cost? They can always add to their profit, instead of making the service cheaper.
>* They damn near already exist.
So does cold fusion.
> No. I don't think so. Not in the foreseeable future at least..
According to the NHTSA[1], they already are.
>>* It's a natural extension for cos like uber - how else can they bring costs down enough?
> I don't know or care.
The point is that they're dumping money into the tech for their own purposes, regardless of effectiveness as a consumer product
>> It meshes well with other aspects of tech reducing friction - deliveries will be cheaper (think dinner, groceries, taskrabbit)
> Well, why do you think the providers will reduce the cost? They can always add to their profit, instead of making the service cheaper.
I sure hope they do; I'd doubt any of those comapanies make any profit as is. And again, they'll be willing to spend lots of money on the cars, making them a viable product without the consumer market.
[1]: https://techcrunch.com/2017/01/19/nhtsas-full-final-investig...
You would think a level 5 autonomous car would not try this; unlike some human drivers.
Self-driving cars "confined" to anywhere are not self-driving cars, because you obviously need a human driver to get to and from that special place.