>
I don't get the constant hype around self driving cars. Sure - they will be revolutionary when they get here - but the reality is they are years and years away at best.There's a mad dash going on to be first to market on driverless cars. The basic driverless car is already being tested. The only things that need to be done are major debugging and lobbying. ETA: within half a decade if lobbying goes through.
> We have autopilots for planes, that can effectively take off, fly, and land a plane. We've had that technology for quite a while.
This is erroneous and irrelevant.
> So why is not common place for planes, at least cargo planes with no passengers? Surely companies like UPS, FedEx etc that have a large fleet of cargo planes that fly around the US and the world would have significant cost savings?
Planes are significantly harder to pilot than cars. If nothing else, look at the differences between a pilot's license and a driver's. Perhaps driverless cars will pave the way for pilotless planes, but not until safety can be guaranteed.
No one wants another 9/11.
> Why do we feel a car is easier to autopilot than a plane?
There are more necessary controls and procedures in a plane than a car.
> As soon as it is available - you'll just have Uber style copy cats with "on demand" vehicles?
If you're talking about one-offs, then probably not. The reason Uber copycats are failing right now is because of app-population and broadness of coverage. Small biz can't populate their own apps with large competitors still in the picture.
Include that with any licensing fees, barrier to entries, etc. it's highly unlikely. Perhaps if a ride-sharing-app sourcer is made that uses Uber and Lyft APIs, while giving one-offs a chance to be mixed in, we might have a nice free market.
> What benefit does Uber have at that point?
A practically free way to get even more cash.