Autonomous Car Progress

[rxlawdude]

don't see why that would be an issue with any robo taxi network. As long as you were still within your monthly allowed usage time, or willing to lay whatever extra fees they had if you went over.

Uber/Lift is great for certain situations, but bad for others. You don't have privacy like you would in a robotaxi, you're limited by who is willing to pick you up, etc. The cost of robotaxis will be much less than uber/Lift, and that will be a very compelling argument for most people.

You think there won't be cabin cameras?
And what if you're the hapless customer that gets the robotaxi after a drunk puked two meals up?

 

[daniel]

Once again. You are looking at it from a perspective of what's currently available and not what is coming.

Uber/Lift is great for certain situations, but bad for others. You don't have privacy like you would in a robotaxi, you're limited by who is willing to pick you up, etc. The cost of robotaxis will be much less than uber/Lift, and that will be a very compelling argument for most people.

Nobody is going to sell their car to switch over to using solely robotaxis, but they will not buy a new car and instead use the service.

I'm not assuming that Tesla will get there first. I don't know if they will EVER get there. I'm saying that SOMEONE will get there, and I have a hard time seeing a future where what I've described doesn't come to fruition once they are available to people.

I definitely don't think all Mercedes/BMWs will stop being used, all I'm saying is that for people who have wide access to them, it will be the most affordable option, and for the vast majority of people (>70%) the value proposition will be too high to resist.

Assuming that all of us own Teslas in here, were fortunate enough to be in positions to afford what is considered a luxury car, and we chose to spend our money on that instead of a cheaper car, and the rest on other stuff. I mean hell, I (and a lot of us) spent more money on software that we don't know if we'll ever see a benefit from than some people spend on a car.

I don't think robotaxis will be like current ride hailing. I think it will be a subscription. I believe you will pay something like 200-300 a month for access to the cars whenever you need them. Will it be more inconvenient than having your own car, of course, but for the vast majority of people, paying $200 a month instead of $800 a month for a car payment/insurance/gas is more than worth the difference in convenience. With the algorithms, you'll have a car ready every time you need to go to work, or home from work, etc.

Thanks for your thoughts. But I do not agree with you about what is coming. I think that what is coming is that robotaxis will just compete with current ride-hailing services for a pie that increases no faster than population. And I think that any attempt at a robotaxi subscription service will fail in very short order as people get frustrated that they cannot get a ride when they want it and have to spend even more money to hail a ride from somebody else than the company they subscribe to. It is easy to say "There will be so many robotaxis that you can get one whenever you need it." It will be economically impossible to make that a reality. One thing that will not change in the future: Cars cost money to build and to buy, and a taxi service (robo or not) cannot operate if it cannot generate enough money to pay for the cars.

 

[Microterf]

You think there won't be cabin cameras?
And what if you're the hapless customer that gets the robotaxi after a drunk puked two meals up?

Which is it? There will be cabin cameras, or they'll send you a taxi filled with puke. I agree with the cameras, I think they will play a huge part in minimizing instances of getting a puke filled robotaxi.

 

[ThomasD]

When will Tesla distribute the automatic snake chargers to charge all these Tesla robotaxis that will be on the road in the next few years? What happened to the Model 3s that were turned at end of lease that were supposed to be used as robotaxis

 

[Terminator857]

.... I agree with the cameras, I think they will play a huge part in minimizing instances of getting a puke filled robotaxi.

The middle front camera doesn't have good visibility into second row seats, blocked by front row seats. We need more cabin cameras.

 

[rxlawdude]

Which is it? There will be cabin cameras, or they'll send you a taxi filled with puke. I agree with the cameras, I think they will play a huge part in minimizing instances of getting a puke filled robotaxi.

Someone can puke with finesse, out of the camera's view. Now, if there are microphones, maybe not.

 

[Dan D.]

The county I live in has a population of around 25,000 people. With a population density of 35 people per square mile and a land mass area of 586 square miles. I don't see a robotaxi service wanting to serve such a low population density

If my car right now could be used to perform my errands - call it robogopher - I would probably use it. If would be nice if it could go to Costco and pick up the order, then go get the box of nails from Home Depot from curbside pickup, and all the other tiny things that take time to drive to. I pay for the car anyway to just sit for 99% of the day. I don't want others in the car, nor make money, I would be happy if it could just go and be useful. Insurance would probably go up due to a special clause for "automated car driving around doing errands".

Dunno if it would be a success, partly because if everyone's car was off doing their errands instead of being parked, the streets would be totally clogged most of the time - at least where I live. Sure, you wouldn't know about the traffic jam, your car would eventually come back. Where ThomasD lives, in low-density areas, it would probably work better.

So for me, robotaxi would be less useful than robogopher.

 

[daniel]

Which is it? There will be cabin cameras, or they'll send you a taxi filled with puke. I agree with the cameras, I think they will play a huge part in minimizing instances of getting a puke filled robotaxi.

Cameras will not prevent people from puking in the car. All they will do is provide evidence of who puked in the car so they can be billed for the clean-up. Cameras will not even prevent you from getting a puke-filled car because no company is going to pay people to constantly monitor every car that has a rider in it. The cameras will just prevent you from being blamed for the puke since after you complain they can review the video.

 

[powertoold]

So, more of the same rehashed Intel/Mobileye marketing spiel that we've seen years before. They replaced all references of "BMW" with some noname company that people have already forgotten.

Yea, I don't think it's fair to say Mobileye has developed a L4 car. They say they have a L4 capable car (probably referring to the hardware). Given the kind of deceptive language fsd developers have used over the years (like post videos saying "Watch our AV drive for an hour", which actually doesn't mean fully autonomous but just refers to the vehicle design type), we can't give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Pretty amazing how BMW is conspicuously absent in ALL of Mobileye's marketing material. IAA Munich just wrapped up and BMW was nowhere to be seen when Mobileye was mentioned. Now Mobileye has Moovit or some other brand that nobody has heard of.

Its been a while, but I thought Intel bought Mobileye expressly for their BMW design win. It's 2021 and this BMW+Intel+Mobileye robotaxi didn't happen.

BMW Teams Up With Intel, Mobileye for Autonomous Car by 2021

BMW AG is teaming up with chipmaker Intel Corp. and camera-software company Mobileye NV to bring self-driving cars to the road by 2021, becoming the first major automaker to set a specific date to produce a fully autonomous vehicle.

www.bloomberg.com

July 1, 2016

(edit: Bloomberg article title since inlining is blocked: 2016-07-01/bmw-teams-up-with-intel-mobileye-for-self-driving-car-by-2021)




So, more of the same rehashed Intel/Mobileye marketing spiel that we've seen years before. They replaced all references of "BMW" with some noname company that people have already forgotten.

The iNext is the iX that they unveiled recently. BMW is saying now they never claimed it would be able to autonomously drive in towns. They are aiming to launch L3 instead in 2022, but only on highways (and under 38 mph as per EU's supposed law).
Why the BMW iX isn't ready for level 3 autonomous driving

 

[hgmichna]

It has been mentioned that robotaxis will be cheaper than human-driven taxis. But perhaps it should be mentioned that they will be a lot cheaper, (a) because no driver has to be paid, and (b) the car can be used around the clock.

Taxis can also be used around the clock, in shifts, but not all are used that way. Still the driver could be the biggest expenditure of a contemporary taxi.

Very cheap robotaxi services will change the whole economy of personal transportation.

 

[Bladerskb]

Pretty amazing how BMW is conspicuously absent in ALL of Mobileye's marketing material. IAA Munich just wrapped up and BMW was nowhere to be seen when Mobileye was mentioned. Now Mobileye has Moovit or some other brand that nobody has heard of.

Lol BMW is just another partner of mobileye out of dozens of other partners. Why would mobileye mention them in an event wholly focused on Intel/Mobileye?
Moovit is app company like Google Maps for transportation and transit that was bought by Mobileye.

Its been a while, but I thought Intel bought Mobileye expressly for their BMW design win. It's 2021 and this BMW+Intel+Mobileye robotaxi didn't happen.

BMW Teams Up With Intel, Mobileye for Autonomous Car by 2021

BMW AG is teaming up with chipmaker Intel Corp. and camera-software company Mobileye NV to bring self-driving cars to the road by 2021, becoming the first major automaker to set a specific date to produce a fully autonomous vehicle.

www.bloomberg.com

July 1, 2016

(edit: Bloomberg article title since inlining is blocked: 2016-07-01/bmw-teams-up-with-intel-mobileye-for-self-driving-car-by-2021)

No Intel bought mobileye for its capabilities and ALL its partners. At that point Mobileye had something like a 70-85% market share on ADAS and Intel also believed that would translate to AV unfortunately that didn't happen because everyone wants to do their own thing for AV.

Secondly if you followed them you would know that the particular project you are referring to fell apart in 2019. Mobileye was no longer doing the driving policy with BMW and Aptiv. Although BMW still uses 2x EyeQ5. BMW then partnered with Mercedes to develop L4, then that partnership fell apart and mercedes went to nvidia, partly because they both don't know what they are doing (management and execs).
Secondly it wasn't a robotaxi, it was a L3 car and always had been although it was supposed to work up to 70mph.

So, more of the same rehashed Intel/Mobileye marketing spiel that we've seen years before. They replaced all references of "BMW" with some noname company that people have already forgotten.

Again Mobileye owns Moovit.

 

[Bladerskb]

Yea, I don't think it's fair to say Mobileye has developed a L4 car. They say they have a L4 capable car (probably referring to the hardware). Given the kind of deceptive language fsd developers have used over the years (like post videos saying "Watch our AV drive for an hour", which actually doesn't mean fully autonomous but just refers to the vehicle design type), we can't give them the benefit of the doubt.

You mean the one where Tesla says "The driver is only there for legal reasons"?

 

[Doggydogworld]

So the cost of manufacturing an L5 car will just automatically fall to whatever level allows an unlimited number of cars to be sold that will sit idle for 23 hours a day so they're available for everybody who wants one at peak demand times???

23 hours? Figure 100% utilization for 3 hours each AM/PM, 50% for another 10-12 hours and 5-10% overnight. So each car does ~12 hours/240 miles per work day. 240 miles * 250 work days plus 105 miles * 115 weekend/holidays is 72k miles per year or 500k miles over a 7 year life. 50k upfront cost over 500k miles is 10 cents per mile. That's similar to operating costs (kWhs, maintenance, cleaning, remote monitors, roving service vans, etc.).

(10 cents/mile depreciation + 10 cents/mile operating) / 50 % deadhead ratio = 40 cents/ revenue mile cost. Add 10 cent margin for 50 cent/mile pricing.

Actual price would be more like $1 rush hour, 25 cents off-peak. Commuters can cut rush hour pricing (and commute time) via carpool, which is vastly more convenient with Robos.

It is ludicrous to imagine that people who keep their private cars in the face of the availability of taxis and ride-shares will suddenly sell them because now robotaxis have been added to the existing ride-hailing mix.

Some got rid of their cars when Uber came in at lower price/higher convenience. A lot more will with 50 cent/mile Robos. They are more convenient than personal cars for those with parking hassles at home/work/shopping, and cheaper for anyone who has to pay for said parking.

25 cents will much cheaper than a lot of 2nd/3rd cars which are mostly used off-peak. And since most shopping is off-peak and weekend, you'll be able to cheaply book a single Robo for an afternoon of errands. This is all completely different than Uber/Taxi.

I don't think robotaxis will be like current ride hailing. I think it will be a subscription. I believe you will pay something like 200-300 a month for access to the cars whenever you need them.

199/month might cover 100 peak miles per month plus 500 off-peak. Enough for someone who works from home or usually rides a bike. 399/mo includes enough peak miles for a modest daily commute plus "unlimited" off-peak miles (like "unlimited" cell phone data).

Anti-Robo folk don't realize personal cars will become less convenient over time. It will be harder to get a license, and much easier to lose it. Traffic fines will increase. Free parking lots will shrink and/or disappear as businesses shift that valuable real estate to higher-margin uses. Street parking will shrink as cities realize they can "add lanes" with just a bit of paint.

The major downside Robo-fans ignore is congestion. All that deadheading means fewer cars parked in lots, but a lot more on the road. Rush hour deadheading will tend to be contraflow, which helps, as will techniques like platooning. But it will still be a big problem.

 

[mark95476]

Mobileye has been claiming all sorts of stuff in their marketing spiel for years. Just rehashing all of the same stuff over and over again. A cursory glance people will say that they don't deliver.

Just look at Ford Mach-e BlueCruise and DrivePilot ADAS with Mobileye's garbage in 2021. It can barely be used on straight freeways and disengages on slight turns.

Yea, I don't think it's fair to say Mobileye has developed a L4 car. They say they have a L4 capable car (probably referring to the hardware). Given the kind of deceptive language fsd developers have used over the years (like post videos saying "Watch our AV drive for an hour", which actually doesn't mean fully autonomous but just refers to the vehicle design type), we can't give them the benefit of the doubt.

How timely now that IAA is over.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438098106843910150

BMW's absence was a huge tell. The BMW brand, especially in Germany, is highly regarded and it didn't appear anywhere near Mobileye/Intel. Intel's CEO made an appearance and they couldn't get BMW put their brand on any presentation material, appear together with a high-level exec, or anything.

So, something like 5 years of BMW+Mobileye+Intel development amounted to nothing. It seems more and more likely that BMW walked away from Mobileye/Intel (or perhaps Mobileye/Intel "fired" BMW as a customer, just like Tesla .)

The iNext is the iX that they unveiled recently. BMW is saying now they never claimed it would be able to autonomously drive in towns. They are aiming to launch L3 instead in 2022, but only on highways (and under 38 mph as per EU's supposed law).
Why the BMW iX isn't ready for level 3 autonomous driving

 

[mark95476]

Food and grocery delivery services a big thing now. They've been around for years and the pandemic only made this more widespread and accessible.

We had HelloFresh meal delivery for years. We stopped due to the insane amount of packaging waste unfortunately.

Some people live where ride-hailing services are not economically feasible due to low population density. Far more people simply like the convenience of a private car. You think people are going to abandon their BMWs and Mercedes and Mustangs to take a robotaxi that they have to wait for? You think soccer moms are going to be willing to wait for a robotaxi van to pick them and their four crying kids up from the grocery store while struggling with a shopping cart loaded with food that needs to go into the fridge or the freezer? While the ice cream melts and the butter gets soft and the milk goes bad in the sun?

When I broke my arm and was on pain killers I had to take an Uber to the grocery store. Then when I was ready to leave I had to call for another and wait for it. Let me tell you, I was so glad when I was able to drive again!

 

[Bladerskb]

Mobileye has been claiming all sorts of stuff in their marketing spiel for years. Just rehashing all of the same stuff over and over again. A cursory glance people will say that they don't deliver.

Just look at Ford Mach-e BlueCruise and DrivePilot ADAS with Mobileye's garbage in 2021. It can barely be used on straight freeways and disengages on slight turns.

Does Tesla Autopilot 1, Supercruise 1.0, Supercruise 2.0, Propilot 2.0, BMW Professional, Navigate on Nio pilot also have mobileye's garbage?

How timely now that IAA is over.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1438098106843910150

BMW's absence was a huge tell. The BMW brand, especially in Germany, is highly regarded and it didn't appear anywhere near Mobileye/Intel. Intel's CEO made an appearance and they couldn't get BMW put their brand on any presentation material, appear together with a high-level exec, or anything.

That's funny because that was known before IAA even years before.
Also funny because the 2022 BMW iX uses 2x of the latest Mobileye EyeQ5. Looks like they didn't do that good of a job staying away.

So, something like 5 years of BMW+Mobileye+Intel development amounted to nothing. It seems more and more likely that BMW walked away from Mobileye/Intel (or perhaps Mobileye/Intel "fired" BMW as a customer, just like Tesla .)

Mobileye never worked on the iX or BMW's system. 5 years of development amounted to the EyeQ5, Supervision which is a door to door L2 system showing up on the Zeekr 001 next month and Mobileye's robotaxi (Mobileye Drive).

 

[daniel]

23 hours? Figure 100% utilization for 3 hours each AM/PM, 50% for another 10-12 hours and 5-10% overnight. So each car does ~12 hours/240 miles per work day. 240 miles * 250 work days plus 105 miles * 115 weekend/holidays is 72k miles per year or 500k miles over a 7 year life. 50k upfront cost over 500k miles is 10 cents per mile. That's similar to operating costs (kWhs, maintenance, cleaning, remote monitors, roving service vans, etc.).

(10 cents/mile depreciation + 10 cents/mile operating) / 50 % deadhead ratio = 40 cents/ revenue mile cost. Add 10 cent margin for 50 cent/mile pricing.

Actual price would be more like $1 rush hour, 25 cents off-peak. Commuters can cut rush hour pricing (and commute time) via carpool, which is vastly more convenient with Robos.


Some got rid of their cars when Uber came in at lower price/higher convenience. A lot more will with 50 cent/mile Robos. They are more convenient than personal cars for those with parking hassles at home/work/shopping, and cheaper for anyone who has to pay for said parking.

25 cents will much cheaper than a lot of 2nd/3rd cars which are mostly used off-peak. And since most shopping is off-peak and weekend, you'll be able to cheaply book a single Robo for an afternoon of errands. This is all completely different than Uber/Taxi.


199/month might cover 100 peak miles per month plus 500 off-peak. Enough for someone who works from home or usually rides a bike. 399/mo includes enough peak miles for a modest daily commute plus "unlimited" off-peak miles (like "unlimited" cell phone data).

Anti-Robo folk don't realize personal cars will become less convenient over time. It will be harder to get a license, and much easier to lose it. Traffic fines will increase. Free parking lots will shrink and/or disappear as businesses shift that valuable real estate to higher-margin uses. Street parking will shrink as cities realize they can "add lanes" with just a bit of paint.

The major downside Robo-fans ignore is congestion. All that deadheading means fewer cars parked in lots, but a lot more on the road. Rush hour deadheading will tend to be contraflow, which helps, as will techniques like platooning. But it will still be a big problem.

I think you underestimate the cost of robotaxis (once they exist) and the complexity of matching supply with demand.

I am not anti-robotaxi. I think they'll be great. I think they might even be able to compete with Uber. But they're not going to convince massive numbers of people to get rid of their private cars. Everything you will be able to do with robotaxis you can do with Uber & Lyft now. And yet most people keep their cars. A few have gotten rid of their cars, and maybe a few more will do so IF robotaxis end up being significantly cheaper and more reliable than Uber. Right now we have no idea what it will cost to build a Level 4 car. So we can only speculate about the costs. But there will always be convenience issues and people who can afford it will want their own car.

Food and grocery delivery services a big thing now. They've been around for years and the pandemic only made this more widespread and accessible.

We had HelloFresh meal delivery for years. We stopped due to the insane amount of packaging waste unfortunately.

I had never heard of Hello Fresh until they started advertising on podcasts a while back. I do all my own cooking and I like my cooking, but I thought it sounded like something fun to try.

They will not ship to my location. I looked at several of their competitors, and none of them will ship to my location. Not surprising. I could get groceries delivered, but I eat a lot of veggies and it's really important to me to get the freshest veggies I can. Often, what I buy depends on what's the freshest that day. A grocery delivery service will just pick at random, and I cannot see what it looks like before I order. Driving to the store is not a matter of life or death, but as long as I can afford to do it I will. In my own car. (Which will be self-driving as soon as I can get one that is.)

 

[ThomasD]

How many spare cars will be needed to replace to cars that are down for maintenance and or cleaning. Some cars my need cleaning multiple times a day. Some may need cleaning once a day but all the cars will need cleaning at least once a day. Then there is insurance and don't forget charging. If you have 30000 cars operating in the LA metro area the cost of operation will be around a dollar per mile. There is no way a company will only charge you 25 cents a mile to ride in one. Most likely there will be a minimum fee to just pick you up then a charge per mile. Insurance will be required since people can't be trusted not to harm other passengers, Imagine someone drops a used drug needle on the seat and a kid getting in the car accidently gets stabbed with it. That company will get sued .

 

[dgatwood]

I suppose in a case like that, you could have excess cars from outside of the area drive into the evacuation zone to alleviate the shortage. Imagine a swarm of a million robotaxies driving in.

That would be a bad idea. In evacuation situations, they normally make the roads be one-way out of the problem zone. You can't do that if you have cars coming in, which means you have now halved the rate of the evacuation to accommodate the swarm of robotaxis.

That said, what will it be like if you want to go camping and don't want to unload the car completely, because say you're doing several camp sites.

Long-term (multi-day) rental or owning is often the only practical choice.

People think they are special and they have legitimate needs that can't be met with robotaxis etc. I'd be willing to bet there are a million carless people in NYC who moved there thinking they would always own a car but figured out otherwise when they factored all the costs in.

Only about 81% of the U.S. population are in urban areas. Only 71% are in urban areas with a population over 50,000 people.

So somewhere between 19% and 29% of the U.S. population are special, and have legitimate needs that can't plausibly be met with robotaxis, because they live in areas that aren't dense enough or populous enough to have taxi or ride share services, much less robotaxi services.

Remember that for every New York City, there are a hundred Bucksnort, TNs.

Also, you're ignoring commuters entirely. The longer the commute, the less likely it is that a robotaxi will be able to do something useful while waiting for you to return, and the more your trip will cost. In dense urban areas with people commuting single-digit miles, that probably isn't an issue, but even in semi-suburban areas like most of the Bay Area, it can be a problem.

Uber/Lift is great for certain situations, but bad for others. You don't have privacy like you would in a robotaxi, you're limited by who is willing to pick you up, etc. The cost of robotaxis will be much less than uber/Lift, and that will be a very compelling argument for most people.

Why? The vehicles will cost a lot more, and most of the cost of service is depreciation on the vehicle and maintenance thereof. Yes, the maintenance will be cheaper, but that doesn't help if the car costs twice as much. The driver is only a small part of the cost. Fuel/electricity, insurance, depreciation, maintenance, and profit for the ride sharing network can easily add up to 75% of what you're paying for Uber or Lyft, and that's before you factor in the car costing twice as much.

I doubt you'll shave off more than about 5% when all is said and done.

Nobody is going to sell their car to switch over to using solely robotaxis, but they will not buy a new car and instead use the service.

If they have a car, why will they bother paying more money for the service that's less convenient than having their own car there? Just to not have to drive? I mean for some people, maybe, but I think a lot of people will say, "Yeah, or I could spend $45k on a Model 3 and have the best of both worlds."

I don't think robotaxis will be like current ride hailing. I think it will be a subscription. I believe you will pay something like 200-300 a month for access to the cars whenever you need them. Will it be more inconvenient than having your own car, of course, but for the vast majority of people, paying $200 a month instead of $800 a month for a car payment/insurance/gas is more than worth the difference in convenience. With the algorithms, you'll have a car ready every time you need to go to work, or home from work, etc.

If you can actually make it that cheap, it might be the majority of people who live in areas that can practically be served by such a service. That still leaves out almost a third of the country, though.