In reply to Joe Gearin:
They will be cleaned automatically by cleaning robots back at the charging/service station. Interior sensors will tell the system when the interior is dirty. And thus charge the previous passenger who dirtied it.
In reply to Joe Gearin:
They will be cleaned automatically by cleaning robots back at the charging/service station. Interior sensors will tell the system when the interior is dirty. And thus charge the previous passenger who dirtied it.
TeamEvil wrote: Much easier and safer that how things are today, much cheaper and way more convenient than owning/insuring/maintaining/selling.buying/driving out own cars and trucks and vans.
You do realize that there is no such thing as things getting cheaper. Microsoft will by then control the autonomous cars and you will have to license it for daily use, and when it quits on the way to work, you will have to pay an extra fee to speak to a tech, and after 4 hours of waiting, you will be asked if you want to pay an expedite fee to move further up the list. Then when you finally get to work or where you are going, there will be no way to get your rental back on time for which you will pay another penalty. 
In reply to Joe Gearin:
I don't think it would to wildly difficult to have a UV sanitizer or such thing built into a fully autonomous shared vehicle solution. Maybe even a bleach mist or something with a quick dry. This is tech we already have in use in research facilities, it would just need to be moved to automotive purposes.
While not nearly as bad I used to be, my cars do still collect a bit of trash during regular use. Cigarette packs, empty water bottles, the nuts and bolts that didn't go back in the last time I had something apart, it does add up. But that's just it, it adds up over time. If no one really had the vehicle long enough to gather stuff, I'd imagine it would stay cleanish.
Bare minimum, most cop cars and wrangler jeeps can be hosed out as is from the factory. Sacrifice a little comfort for utility grade materials, and a quick hose down upon return to the station wouldn't be too bad in most anything.
I'd actually be really interested in continuing that "what if we live in a VR already" conversation at another point in time.
RevRico wrote: I'd actually be really interested in continuing that "what if we live in a VR already" conversation at another point in time.
what if I told you...we already have?
^^ I'm sure a solution exists, but if the ride-sharing pods of the future have to head back to the service station after each ride--- that takes a bunch of the efficiency away.
If you've ever been in a big city, you know the kinds of unspeakable behavior that happens in cabs---- and that's with a driver who is likely to protest. Just imagine what kind of things would happen in a driverless vehicle. They'd have to have cameras on board, and signs warning the user that they'd pay for any damage, or nastiness left behind. Cameras may help the problem....until they get smashed. Perhaps they could program the cars to shut down if the interior cameras were damaged? Just random thoughts.
I think most folks are decent, and considerate. I also know that a good portion of the population isn't. Ride-sharing automation will have to take all kinds of people into account, which will pose significant hurdles.
racerdave600 wrote:TeamEvil wrote: Much easier and safer that how things are today, much cheaper and way more convenient than owning/insuring/maintaining/selling.buying/driving out own cars and trucks and vans.You do realize that there is no such thing as things getting cheaper. Microsoft will by then control the autonomous cars and you will have to license it for daily use, and when it quits on the way to work, you will have to pay an extra fee to speak to a tech, and after 4 hours of waiting, you will be asked if you want to pay an expedite fee to move further up the list. Then when you finally get to work or where you are going, there will be no way to get your rental back on time for which you will pay another penalty.
See, I'll just stick with the Apple car. That way I'll just get stuck with a $5K charge every year or two when they change the charging cable in the name of "efficiency". And smugness......it will come with extra smug....and of course an Apple window sticker, so everyone knows how cool I am.
Man Travis Bickle and Monk are gonna hate the future.
Joe Gearin wrote:racerdave600 wrote:See, I'll just stick with the Apple car. That way I'll just get stuck with a $5K charge every year or two when they change the charging cable in the name of "efficiency". And smugness......it will come with extra smug....and of course an Apple window sticker, so everyone knows how cool I am.TeamEvil wrote: Much easier and safer that how things are today, much cheaper and way more convenient than owning/insuring/maintaining/selling.buying/driving out own cars and trucks and vans.You do realize that there is no such thing as things getting cheaper. Microsoft will by then control the autonomous cars and you will have to license it for daily use, and when it quits on the way to work, you will have to pay an extra fee to speak to a tech, and after 4 hours of waiting, you will be asked if you want to pay an expedite fee to move further up the list. Then when you finally get to work or where you are going, there will be no way to get your rental back on time for which you will pay another penalty.
But then you will need a Pugeot or Volvo name on it to truly appreciate it's Appleness. And somewhere in the car a control that goes on the right will be missing! 
In reply to TeamEvil:
So I see you've already given up on life.
If I ever utter the same words you just did, please, somebody shoot me.
Seriously.
Shoot me.
TeamEvil wrote: Current road conditions, other driver's age (attitude, lack of skills, and experience) congestion, and Winter weather here in New England has pretty much ruined the driving "experience" already. I'm looking forward to just getting to where I need to go without the pain-in-the-ass of driving there myself !
My first autonomous trip would be one-way out of New England on the Megabus, if that is the alternative.
Meh, I see it like rental cars. If the car comes to pick you up and is too dirty, you protest and get a different car. And the previous renter gets charged up the a for cleaning fees.
Once I rented a car and found as I was driving away a real glass of half gone vodka soda with a slice of lemon in the armrest console. Like literally ordered a drink at a bar, walked out with it, and stashed it half drank in the rental car. It hadn't even spilled or anything.
It was no longer cold or I would've considered finishing it 
Not gonna bother defending or explaining my post, except to say that if you lived here or near here, you would completely understand.
Honestly, as sad or pathetic as my post might seem, you would under stand and agree with me . . .
In reply to TeamEvil:
I can imagine. That's part of the reason I could never live in or near a major metropolitan area. I'm about halfway between Dallas and Austin and honestly that's way too close for comfort.
Down in his barn My uncle preserved for me an old machine – For fifty-odd years To keep it as new has been his dearest dream I strip away the old debris, that hides a shining car A brilliant red Barchetta, from a better, vanished time Fire up the willing engine, responding with a roar! Tires spitting gravel, I commit my weekly crime…
Wind in my hair – Shifting and drifting – Mechanical music Adrenalin surge –
Well-weathered leather Hot metal and oil The scented country air Sunlight on chrome The blur of the landscape Every nerve aware
Joe Gearin wrote: The main issue I see with "ride-sharing" autonomous cars in the future is this-------- who is going to clean them? I like a clean car......many many folks do not. I find food debris, wrappers, stains, spills, and misplaced bodily fluids unacceptable in a "transportation" pod. Obviously, many do not. I find litter in my yard everyday, because people are ignorant, filthy pigs--- although that's really not fair to pigs. These will be the same humans I'm sharing a car with. Unless they have a complete interior flush / sterilization, I don't want any part in ride-sharing. The rear seat of a taxi is bad enough.......and those get cleaned out at least once a shift by the cabby. Who's gonna clean the robot-car? Maybe the eggheads can design a transportation pod that can be hosed out, or taken through an interior power-wash after each use. Something I hadn't thought of, but seeing how many (most) people treat their cars like rolling garbage cans, something will have to be done. I'm not even going to get into the sort of use these cars will see after hours.....with no cabby (or Uber driver) to control back-seat behavior. So......you really want to be the next one in the car? Better get caught up on your shots! Don't worry, if you aren't, there will be handy needles on the floor for you to use!
Next time you are in Europe (France mostly), go try the paying toilets.
Self-cleaning waste pits is old tech. So clean self-driving cars shoudn't be a problem.
racerdave600 wrote:TeamEvil wrote: Much easier and safer that how things are today, much cheaper and way more convenient than owning/insuring/maintaining/selling.buying/driving out own cars and trucks and vans.You do realize that there is no such thing as things getting cheaper. Microsoft will by then control the autonomous cars and you will have to license it for daily use, and when it quits on the way to work, you will have to pay an extra fee to speak to a tech, and after 4 hours of waiting, you will be asked if you want to pay an expedite fee to move further up the list. Then when you finally get to work or where you are going, there will be no way to get your rental back on time for which you will pay another penalty.
This. Paying for things on an as-needed or subscription basis is rarely cheaper. In addition to ride costs, passengers in a driverless pod will be captive audiences that advertisers will be stumbling over themselves to pander to their desired demographics. As passengers, we'll be able to pay an additional fee for an ad-free experience, or to let jr play his favorite game, etc.
The car manufacturers win on both sides by selling the rides or vehicles up front, and then selling the data collected from users and ad space to advertisers. There's huge money to be made, and it's going to be poured into the coffers of wealthy investors and huge corporations from the users of the service (aka general society).
TeamEvil wrote: Not gonna bother defending or explaining my post, except to say that if you lived here or near here, you would completely understand. Honestly, as sad or pathetic as my post might seem, you would under stand and agree with me . . .
I hear you...hang in there. I was pressured to move three times by my company to CT. They offered to double my pay, and after I did the math I figured it was about a 20% decrease in effective earnings. That was just one factor.
For us, in this area, there is also a proven (much needed) income that comes from traffic citations. This fact has been mentioned in several newspaper and on-line articles, the areas are listed on all of the "Speed Trap Allert" sites as well. Like it or not, the money brought in from folks speeding and such is crucial to operating budgets. I imagine that there are a LOT of locals that also rely on this sort of income to make things work.
Autonomous or self-driving cars would certainly completely eliminate this added yearly income for these towns and cities in need. It's a hard pill to swallow that such areas rely so heavily on the foibles of the drivers within and without, but it's a genuine fact, not just an urban legend. These towns and cities would suffer enormously and have to sacrifice service jobs of all sorts if the additional income flow were to stop.
https://www.google.com/?client=safari&channel=mac_bm#channel=mac_bm&q=speed+traps+in+massachusetts
Anyone driving in or through Connecticut has experienced how excessive the speeding stops can be, a quick look-up or search will easily show how much the state relies on this income. Doubt that this behavior is exclusive to New England. Self driving cars would have a massive detrimental impact on this . . .
In reply to TeamEvil:
I don't want to get political, but the New England area seems to be about the most highly taxed region in the nation.. Vermont, Maine, Connecticut and Rhode Island are all in the top 10 and Massachusetts is 18th. Why is a region that is taxing the populace so heavily also so dependent on income from traffic citations?
All I want to know is why the AI controlled transport pods are all sitting in the berking left lane.
No, I didn't read page 2.
The tax dollars are distributed in such a way that population is one of the deciding factors. A while lot of the smaller towns just don't have enough folks living in them to get a large enough share of the State revenue to keep budgets balanced. There a fixed costs, for police, firemen, teachers,and such that are set at a State level and abide with State union requirements. If the town doesn't have enough property tax revenue to fund the budget they look else where. The moneys from traffic fines and such is split with the State in the town's favor, the more tickets written, the money comes back to them. Hard to accept that my foolishness behind the wheel is what's helping to keep the kids in one town or the next in books and crayons, sports equipment and prom decorations, but it's sadly true around here to one degree or another.
Were all cars to be "driven" within the speed limits, it could prove chaotic. I'm hoping that were this to actually come to pass, that there would be some sort of additional fees or taxes at the purchase point that would be directly dispersed to the small towns who would ordinarily rely of traffic fines to supplement their budgets.
Any potentially dramatic shift in the status quo ALWAYS has ripples on all sides that effect this as they are/were. It's a variation on Consequentialism that often needs to be addressed but often isn't but very often isn't when special interest, money, or politics is involved.
Not to be political at all here, just "talking" about the potential real consequences to real people were something like self driving cars come to pass. I'm obviously very much for them but the ramifications need to be seriously considered, beyond the immediate ones of convenience, coolness, investor profits, and providing the CEO's in the tech sector with big fat bonus packages.
Can someone please show this ad to BWM? They used to do this "Driving Machine" thing.
All I thought watching the first 90% of the ad is how boring it looked to drive a Lexus IS, just cruising through beautiful roads at like 10 below the speed limit. The autonomous car didn't look much less boring than actually driving the IS in the ad, frankly.
I'm not too impressed at the reaction to a company trying to identify as a driver's car manufacturer when so many have complained tirelessly about them not being enough of one. Let me guess all are devout bmw apologists despite the continued shift that company is making away from anything that resembles a "driving machine".
You'll need to log in to post.
