Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday December 16 2015, @01:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the who's-gonna-drive-miss-daisy? dept.

The race to bring driverless cars to the masses is only just beginning, but already it is a fight for the ages. The competition is fierce, secretive, and elite. It pits Apple against Google against Tesla against Uber: all titans of Silicon Valley, in many ways as enigmatic as they are revered.

As these technology giants zero in on the car industry, global automakers are being forced to dramatically rethink what it means to build a vehicle for the first time in a century. Aspects of this race evoke several pivotal moments in technological history: the construction of railroads, the dawn of electric light, the birth of the automobile, the beginning of aviation. There's no precedent for what engineers are trying to build now, and no single blueprint for how to build it.

Self-driving cars promise to create a new kind of leisure, offering passengers additional time for reading books, writing email, knitting, practicing an instrument, cracking open a beer, taking a catnap, and any number of other diversions. Peope who are unable to drive themselves could experience a new kind of independence. And self-driving cars could re-contextualize land-use on massive scales. In this imagined mobility utopia, drone trucks would haul packages across the country and no human would have to circle a city block in search of a parking spot.

If self-driving vehicles deliver on their promises, they will save millions of lives over the course of a few decades, destroy and create entire industries, and fundamentally change the human relationship with space and time. All of which is why some of the planet's most valuable companies are pouring billions of dollars into the effort to build driverless cars.

After automation puts everyone out of work, will anyone need to drive anywhere anymore?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Wednesday December 16 2015, @04:07PM

    by SanityCheck (5190) on Wednesday December 16 2015, @04:07PM (#277165)

    Some people don't want to deal with hassles of ownership (it's not all peachy). Plus renting gives you flexibility that ownership does not. Due to costs associated with transfer of property, it is really a non-liquid asset, over which value you have very little control over. Pour money into it then the neighborhood goes to shit and your money vanishes overnight.

    Others don't want to deal with hassles of renting things out (being a landlord is probably the worst thing stress-wise. Simply tons of risk for marginal gains).

    You think all the money the landlord collects is pure profit? He pays Taxes on the property (ridiculous in some states), taxes on the income, insurance, covers repairs and upkeep of property, and on top of that he still has to factor in deterioration of the property. There is reason why most real estate companies only go for "luxury" rentals and there is a real shortage of median income housing, it's just not worth the damn hassle. One bad tenant can wipe out the profit from that property, and put you in a hole if you financed it.

    Everything related to real estate only looks easy on a late-night infomercial.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Wednesday December 16 2015, @06:01PM

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Wednesday December 16 2015, @06:01PM (#277225)

    The idea of getting rich with residential real estate renting is a lot like the idea of getting rich by joining Amway.

    Actually, I think Amway is a safer bet. Being a landlord is a complete pain in the ass and has a huge amount of risk: one bad tenant can completely wipe out your profit by wrecking the place, not paying for months on end, and requiring you to take them to court to be evicted. You're also liable for all the repairs, which frequently need to be done on an emergency basis (= $$$): plumbing, HVAC, etc. Tenants don't take care of the property so stuff wears out faster. It just isn't worth the time and effort any more; during the boom it made sense because property values were rising so quickly, but not any more.