[LINK] itN: Reckless MPs okay Driverless Cars

David Boxall linkdb at boxall.name
Wed Apr 6 11:33:42 AEST 2016


On 6/04/2016 10:35 AM, Brendan wrote:
> ...
> Are you saying they'll all/mostly become taxis? ...
More or less, that's the end game. I've heard it succinctly put:
 From cars to kilometres.
The business model goes from selling vehicles to selling a service: 
kilometres of travel. If the appropriate vehicle can come to you, why 
would you own one?

For example, I live on the land. I often need a vehicle that can go 
off-road and carry a load. I can only afford to own, maintain, register 
and insure one vehicle. Therefore, I go shopping in a 4WD diesel light 
truck.

In the self-driving scenario, I probably wouldn't own a vehicle. I'd 
call for hardware appropriate to each job. The vehicle would arrive 
under it's own control and, once the job is complete, depart for the 
next assignment.

There might still be reasons to own machinery, but private ownership 
will be a tiny fraction of what it is now.

<http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/tesla-rivals-software-may-kill-petrol-car-as-soon-as-2025-2025>

> GM is also investing in the “mobility services” business, snapping up interests in companies investing in lifts and autonomous cars. Google and Apple are investing heavily in similar technologies.
>
> Tesla also has a “master plan”, as we noted on Monday. This does not centre around selling units so much as miles or kilometres travelled. Morgan Stanley says Tesla’s future will rely not on EV deliveries, but the network of service and free charging that is “critical to delivering mobility service-based revenue in the future.”

-- 
David Boxall                    |  The more that wise people learn
                                 |  The more they come to appreciate
http://david.boxall.id.au       |  How much they don't know.
                                                         --Confucius



More information about the Link mailing list