Comment by blurker | Hacker News Reader

Comment by blurker | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> as evidenced by the literally free taxi service that is just being given out to many people in SF right now.

You realize that it's only free while they test and it's not going to be free forever, right? In fact, the protests are in response to a decision which allowed the companies to start charging for driver-less rides, so that is already changing.

Hard to say which way people will go overall. I personally am no longer a fan of driver-less cars. I used to be but now I see it as a doubling down of car-dependence. I could see a nasty rebound effect [1] through increased convenience and a lot of other negative consequences if cities adapt their infrastructure to cater to those vehicles. History repeating itself for "automobile progress." A possible second coming of demolishing our cities and neighborhoods to make way for cars. Yeah I know most if not all of the arguments for how the technology will just fix all the problems and make everything about cars better, I used to make those arguments myself. I don't believe them anymore.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebound_effect_(conservation)

> You realize that it's only free while they test and it's not going to be free forever, right

You realize that the whole point of self driving taxis is that they are cheaper to run than regular taxis, and that's how they will compete right?

> I used to be but now I see it as a doubling down of car-dependence

Ok, so you just don't like taxis in general then.

That's fine, but it changes nothing about the idea that self driving taxis are strictly better than regular taxis.

> I could see a nasty rebound effect [1] through increased convenience

Oh the irony of this statement.

At the very beginning of you post, you talk about how the benefits of self driving cars are temporary, and yet now you admit that the problem is that they are too good.

I am glad that I have convinced you that self driving cars are such a benefit, such a popular consumer product that everyone will love, so much so that it will cause problems because of just how useful they are!

You're putting a lot of words in the parents mouth.

>> I used to be but now I see it as a doubling down of car-dependence

> Ok, so you just don't like taxis in general then.

That was not the point. One of the general arguments for AVs is that it will reduce car-dependence, that we're all going to be able to live car-free and AVs will shuttle us around in hyper efficient transport systems.

If the way we get there is by having a taxi service that is 70% cheaper, I don't see how that follows. I agree with the parent, the claim that AVs are a ticket out of car dependence seems like a bill of goods.

My claim was that self driving taxis are better than regular taxis because they are cheaper.

The person responded by using arguments that they don't like a car driven society.

That does not contradict my point that self driving taxis are better than regular taxis.

Furthermore they admitted that self driving taxis are more convenient, which further supports my point.

> they are cheaper

Time will tell, but I suspect it'll be economically unviable once the lawsuits start flowing

> You realize that the whole point of self driving taxis is that they are cheaper to run than regular taxis, and that's how they will compete right?

Longterm that will be true if there is substantial competition between driverless car providers (since it requires very significant that won’t necessarily be the case).

Otherwise these companies will just keep their margins high and charge only slightly below what a car driven by a person costs.

> keep their margins high and charge only slightly below what a car driven by a person costs

So you mean like, "the whole point of self-driving taxis is that they are cheaper to run, ... and that's how they will compete?"

You're trying to convince yourself too hard that you disagree with the previous comment.

There will probably be a bit of both: using the margin to seriously undercut the taxis and ubers in order to drive them out, and then raise prices.

> too hard

Why would you say that? I wasn’t trying that hard at all.

It just seemed that you were implying that they will be significantly cheaper for consumers which is not at all obvious at this point.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com