Google Self-driving car

[ChicosBailBonds]

I like the first line of this story ....

Statistically, the least reliable part of the car is ... the driver.

Once you understand how true this is you'll then understand why it is so important to eliminate the concept of a driver.

For those of us that are reliable, never had an accident, passed the NASCAR road school test....don't need it!

[Tugg Speedman]

By the time this happens, most of us here will be drooling on a pillow if we are still kicking

10 years

----------------


Bill Gates says the pace of innovation is as fast as ever
Philantropist says technology is starting to outstrip what was imaginable in his youth
Feb 26, 2015 4:33 AM ET

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-gates-says-the-pace-of-innovation-is-as-fast-as-ever-1.2972866

Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates says the pace of technological innovation is as fast as ever and shows no signs of slowing down.

"We're finally at the point where, in a few areas, it's starting to outstrip what was even imaginable in my youth," Gates told CBC’s chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge in a sit-down interview Wednesday.

Gates predicts a future where people will work seamlessly between devices through cloud-based computing: "Its impact on how we bank, how we communicate, how we entertain ourselves — we are just at the beginning of that," he said in the interview, which airs Saturday on Mansbridge One on One.

Computing will continue to expand to different devices and will use more natural interfaces, Gates said. “Speech is getting really very good, handwriting recognition is very good,” he said. "It will be this personal agent that's very, very powerful."

Improving global health

Gates was in Ottawa on Wednesday for a series of meetings to discuss his foundation’s efforts to improve health in the developing world.

Gates launched the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in the year 2000, and he has laid out an ambitious plan for the organization’s next 15 years.

“There's six million kids a year that are still dying. It was 12 million back in 1990 so we've cut it in half,” he said. “Our goal over the next 15 years is to get it down to three million."

Bill Gates, Stephen Harper look to next steps for maternal health
$500M immunization fund pledged by Canada for developing nations
While in Ottawa, Gates met with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to discuss Canada’s efforts to improve maternal, newborn and child health around the world. Harper and Gates discussed these issues in a roundtable with international aid organizations.

Gates also met with Gov. Gen. David Johnston, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair and Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau at separate events in Ottawa.

Mansbridge One on One airs on CBC News Network Saturdays at 6:30 p.m. ET and on CBC-TV Sundays at 1 p.m.

   
   
   
   
   
   
Report Typo Send Feedback

[ChicosBailBonds]

10 years

----------------


Bill Gates says the pace of innovation is as fast as ever
Philantropist says technology is starting to outstrip what was imaginable in his youth
Feb 26, 2015 4:33 AM ET

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-gates-says-the-pace-of-innovation-is-as-fast-as-ever-1.2972866

Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates says the pace of technological innovation is as fast as ever and shows no signs of slowing down.

"We're finally at the point where, in a few areas, it's starting to outstrip what was even imaginable in my youth," Gates told CBC’s chief correspondent Peter Mansbridge in a sit-down interview Wednesday.

Gates predicts a future where people will work seamlessly between devices through cloud-based computing: "Its impact on how we bank, how we communicate, how we entertain ourselves — we are just at the beginning of that," he said in the interview, which airs Saturday on Mansbridge One on One.

Computing will continue to expand to different devices and will use more natural interfaces, Gates said. “Speech is getting really very good, handwriting recognition is very good,” he said. "It will be this personal agent that's very, very powerful."

Improving global health

Gates was in Ottawa on Wednesday for a series of meetings to discuss his foundation’s efforts to improve health in the developing world.

Gates launched the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in the year 2000, and he has laid out an ambitious plan for the organization’s next 15 years.

“There's six million kids a year that are still dying. It was 12 million back in 1990 so we've cut it in half,” he said. “Our goal over the next 15 years is to get it down to three million."

Bill Gates, Stephen Harper look to next steps for maternal health
$500M immunization fund pledged by Canada for developing nations
While in Ottawa, Gates met with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to discuss Canada’s efforts to improve maternal, newborn and child health around the world. Harper and Gates discussed these issues in a roundtable with international aid organizations.

Gates also met with Gov. Gen. David Johnston, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair and Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau at separate events in Ottawa.

Mansbridge One on One airs on CBC News Network Saturdays at 6:30 p.m. ET and on CBC-TV Sundays at 1 p.m.

   
   
   
   
   
   
Report Typo Send Feedback

Not a chance in the way you described it earlier.  They were off on solar panel predictions by millions, off by electric vehicles by millions, etc, etc.  Not a chance.  You were describing mass adoption....cost alone will prevent mass adoption beyond 10 years.  People have their cars they just bought and those they will buy over the next decade, they aren't going away that quickly.

[Tugg Speedman]

Not a chance in the way you described it earlier.  They were off on solar panel predictions by millions, off by electric vehicles by millions, etc, etc.  Not a chance.  You were describing mass adoption....cost alone will prevent mass adoption beyond 10 years.  People have their cars they just bought and those they will buy over the next decade, they aren't going away that quickly.

You have it backwards, driverless will cars will be far cheaper, not more expensive.  Human driver cars will see insurance skyrocket as human drivers are a menace and get in the way.  It will be unaffordable to most to insure (especially since most states mandate insurance).

Within two years all new cars will have driver assist functions (cruise control on steroids).  The car will drive itself on the highway.  That is just the beginning.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You have it backwards, driverless will cars will be far cheaper, not more expensive.  Human driver cars will see insurance skyrocket as human drivers are a menace and get in the way.  It will be unaffordable to most to insure (especially since most states mandate insurance).

Within two years all new cars will have driver assist functions (cruise control on steroids).  The car will drive itself on the highway.  That is just the beginning.

I hear taxi business is gone.  DVDs aren't sold anymore.  For the record, I took a taxi home last night from the airport.  As I got into the taxi, one of the taxi drivers behind me unloaded on what seemed to be an UBER driver that isn't supposed to legally be there.  THought they were going to come to blows.  Cop intervened. 

Point is, you tend to be off on your predictions on the timing by a lot.  I fundamentally AGREE with you on what is EVENTUALLY going to happen, but your timing is just way way way off.

Say your 2 year prediction happens. First off, ALL new cars will not have this feature.  SOME new cars will.  You can also bet your bottom dollar that gen 1 of anything is buggy, not terrific.  Cars on the road today will be on the road today for the next 15 years to purge them out.  The legal issues on these things is still MASSIVE and unsolved.  Read a few articles on liability and who has that liability.  The car companies are trying like the dickens to figure that out, and guess what....that is going to add cost.

Remember how cheap electric cars were going to be by now?    Ahem.....

Again, many years down the road, I'm on board with your view, but your time horizons are way off.

[Tugg Speedman]

I hear taxi business is gone.  DVDs aren't sold anymore.  For the record, I took a taxi home last night from the airport.  As I got into the taxi, one of the taxi drivers behind me unloaded on what seemed to be an UBER driver that isn't supposed to legally be there.  THought they were going to come to blows.  Cop intervened.  

Point is, you tend to be off on your predictions on the timing by a lot.  I fundamentally AGREE with you on what is EVENTUALLY going to happen, but your timing is just way way way off.

Say your 2 year prediction happens. First off, ALL new cars will not have this feature.  SOME new cars will.  You can also bet your bottom dollar that gen 1 of anything is buggy, not terrific.  Cars on the road today will be on the road today for the next 15 years to purge them out.  The legal issues on these things is still MASSIVE and unsolved.  Read a few articles on liability and who has that liability.  The car companies are trying like the dickens to figure that out, and guess what....that is going to add cost.

Remember how cheap electric cars were going to be by now?    Ahem.....

Again, many years down the road, I'm on board with your view, but your time horizons are way off.

Five years ago Uber did not exist.  Today it is worth more than every taxi company in the U.S. COMBINED.  in fact some think all the taxi companies are worth nothing combined.

Most people that study these things call it one of the fastest and most profound changes in an established industry in business history.

Why do you think your taxi driver almost came to blows with an Uber driver?  Because the value of his taxi License is now nothing.   That license was supposed to be his retirement, that license supposed to be his investment .  it's now worth zero thanks to Uber.

So you paid someone $30 to $40 dollars to drive you home, that is all he has now thanks to Uber.  

[ChicosBailBonds]

Five years ago Uber did not exist.  Today it is worth more than every taxi company in the U.S. COMBINED.  in fact some think all the taxi companies are worth nothing combined.

Most people that study these things call it one of the fastest and most profound changes in an established industry in business history.

Why do you think your taxi driver almost came to blows with an Uber driver?  Because the value of his taxi License is now nothing.   That license was supposed to be his retirement, that license supposed to be his investment .  it's now worth zero thanks to Uber.

So you paid someone $30 to $40 dollars to drive you home, that is all he has now thanks to Uber.  

With all due respect, the Uber comparison makes no sense.  5 years ago Uber didn't exist, but the cars they drove, the maps, the infrastructure already did.  It was just a matter of someone linking them together.  This is far, far, far different than mass automation of driverless cars that don't exist today.

I don't know if you read what I stated about Uber last week here in California.  Major ruling came down that Uber cannot classify drivers as contract workers anymore, they must be employees.  Huge costs coming from that.  Secondly, on July 1st here in California Uber drivers must carry a separate new policy rider for insurance.  A few weeks ago on the radio they had Uber drivers calling in and how many of them were bailing because the cost of this new insurance is so high that it basically isn't worth it to them to drive anymore.  Not sure if you saw some of the riots in Paris this week with cabbies attacking Uber drivers, trying to flip over their cars.

I love Uber, I use it all of the time.  Have for probably 2 years since the west coast was one of the first markets to have it (not the first).  At LAX, you can't get Uber so I had no choice to take the cab to my office and then get my pickup truck from there.  Is what it is.  I believe their business will do very well, but I also believe the gov't will take many pounds of flesh as they always do, and that means more cost, more regulation, and some of the things we love about Uber today will be going away as a result.

[mu_hilltopper]

Agree with CBB here.   Everything will change, but over a much longer arc.

Driverless cars being possibly "cheaper" is a thin proposition.   The "driverless" tech will be priced at a premium for years, just like GPS was (and still is.)    Leaders like Audi, BMW, Lexus, etc, they're gonna sell you your A4 or 5-series for $40-50k and tack on $10k for the driverless option.  That'll be how it starts.  After 5+ years, the tech will trickle down to the economy cars, but it'll still be an option that increases the price.

And that's just for people who want to buy new cars.  The average age of the US auto fleet is 11.2 years.   Figuring rocket-like adoption rates, like 5% of new cars are driverless, then 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 75, 100% .. just did the math with those rates.. it takes 18 years to replace half the 253m US fleet.  And frankly, my suggested adoption rates are preposterous.  They won't be a third that in the beginning years, making getting to 50, 75, 100 .. way way further out.

None of that factors in the inevitable car accident that kills a family of 6 and a bus full of nuns that give rise to the Luddite party making society rethink the whole robot driver thing.

[Spotcheck Billy]

You have it backwards, driverless will cars will be far cheaper, not more expensive.  Human driver cars will see insurance skyrocket as human drivers are a menace and get in the way.  It will be unaffordable to most to insure (especially since most states mandate insurance).

Within two years all new cars will have driver assist functions (cruise control on steroids).  The car will drive itself on the highway.  That is just the beginning.

Why would insurance rates go up if there are some driverless cars? We have none now - all hands-on drivers, so you think there will be more accidents by driven cars when there are driverless cars on the road as well? What's your reason for expecting sky high liability then?

[MUWarrior2007]

Why would insurance rates go up if there are some driverless cars? We have none now - all hands-on drivers, so you think there will be more accidents by driven cars when there are driverless cars on the road as well? What's your reason for expecting sky high liability then?

I'm guessing his theory is that insurers will artificially inflate rates due to the assumption that driverless cars will be safer and there will be less accidents (despite the fact that they would need several years of underwriting/actuarial proof to do this...). 

[martyconlonontherun]

Not a chance in the way you described it earlier.  They were off on solar panel predictions by millions, off by electric vehicles by millions, etc, etc.  Not a chance.  You were describing mass adoption....cost alone will prevent mass adoption beyond 10 years.  People have their cars they just bought and those they will buy over the next decade, they aren't going away that quickly.

Not saying 10 years is accurate but the reason solar panel and electric vehicles predictions were way off is because it relied on human's desire to push social issues. The technology was too expensive and only had an environmentalist appeal for early adopters. Being able to have a self driving car has huge economic and personal benefits. I have long drives multiple times a week for my job, so I would pay a premium for it. You could work, relax, etc. The electric vehicles cost 10k plus to save you 1k in gas every year.

I know you think this is just cutting off a man's balls, but I'm ok with that if my 2 hour commute this morning would've included me preparing for my meeting or reading the paper.

[GooooMarquette]

Agree with CBB here.   Everything will change, but over a much longer arc.

+1

[GOO]

You have it backwards, driverless will cars will be far cheaper, not more expensive.  Human driver cars will see insurance skyrocket as human drivers are a menace and get in the way.  It will be unaffordable to most to insure (especially since most states mandate insurance).

Within two years all new cars will have driver assist functions (cruise control on steroids).  The car will drive itself on the highway.  That is just the beginning.

I am all for driverless cars, driver assisted cars, etc.  Humans are not very good at driving and need some help.  It shouldn't be the most dangerous activity most of us partake in.   For the next 5 to 7 years, we will more of less have to settle for Driver LESS cars (as in the human driver will do less, but still a long way from a driverless car that is completely automated).  More of the autopilot car is what we'll get in the next 5 to 7 years.  I'm looking forward to see what Tesla does in this area since they are out in front, especially with the Gen III vehicle. 

Will there be a google fully automatic car approved in certain cities or something to that effect in 5 years... I would expect so, in CA, but it will be far from something that is common in the USA. 

It will happen, but you won't see a sea change in 10 years.  Those with higher disposable incomes will have driver LESS cars (auto pilot, etc). These cars  won't make up 25% of cars on the road in 10 years... I bet more like 10%. I'll be in the market for one in about 5 years (I tend to buy a new car every 10 years, and I sure expect my next one to have a lot of autopilot features).

But the insurance argument won't fly for most people on the road.  I'm sure you like I have great insurance policies to protect what we have and to pay up if we were to make a mistake and hurt someone while driving.  It is the responsible thing to do.  However, a certain guy in Chicago has made billions selling 25K liability policies that rarely pay up.  Did you notice one of the first things Walker did when he got into office was to approve lowering the minimum insurance requirements to 25K?  I guess money talks.  A lot of bad driving won't make a 25K liability policy go up much, especially when it is sold by a company that basically doesn't pay up anyway even when their insured is at fault.  So, with major lobbying pushes to get mandatory insurance limits way down from anything reasonable, I don't think the insurance cost argument will make a difference.  Wish I was wrong, but that insurance argument is off base and won't be a reason for driverless cars to take off. 

[martyconlonontherun]

For those of us that are reliable, never had an accident, passed the NASCAR road school test....don't need it!

Those are coming far and few between with new technologies subsidizing the drivers bad habits. It will get to the point where it will be self-driving even if we are driving.

Another major benefit to this is speed limits will definitely go up with driverless cars. Between fewer cars on the road and better sensors, I bet the speed limit will be 100+ when the majority of the cars are driverless. Factoring in less traffic, it will cut driving time in half between cities like Milwaukee and Madison.

I think it will be a more interesting battle when laws are made against driving your own car rather then when these driverless cars will become legal.

[Tugg Speedman]

Agree with CBB here.   Everything will change, but over a much longer arc.

Driverless cars being possibly "cheaper" is a thin proposition.   The "driverless" tech will be priced at a premium for years, just like GPS was (and still is.)    Leaders like Audi, BMW, Lexus, etc, they're gonna sell you your A4 or 5-series for $40-50k and tack on $10k for the driverless option.  That'll be how it starts.  After 5+ years, the tech will trickle down to the economy cars, but it'll still be an option that increases the price.

And that's just for people who want to buy new cars.  The average age of the US auto fleet is 11.2 years.   Figuring rocket-like adoption rates, like 5% of new cars are driverless, then 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 75, 100% .. just did the math with those rates.. it takes 18 years to replace half the 253m US fleet.  And frankly, my suggested adoption rates are preposterous.  They won't be a third that in the beginning years, making getting to 50, 75, 100 .. way way further out.

None of that factors in the inevitable car accident that kills a family of 6 and a bus full of nuns that give rise to the Luddite party making society rethink the whole robot driver thing.

This is not how it is going to work.  New entrants are going to come in an bankrupt the existing car manufactures.  This is how new technology works.  See the story below.  Google and/or Uber (or Apple) will make the cars and bankrupt the legacy (read slow, beueaucratic and uncreative) auto manufactures.

And you will not buy a driverless car.  You will push a button on your phone to hirer one.  They are trying to make owning a car a thing of the past.



-----------------------

Bill Gates thinks Uber has the best shot at self-driving cars
by  Jonathan Chew
June 25, 2015, 11:28 AM EDT

https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/bill-gates-self-driving-cars/

Driverless cars have become a moonshot project for tech companies around the world, and Microsoft’s MSFT -1.55% Co-founder and world-leading philanthropist Bill Gates believes there’s one company that will rule the space.

In a conversation with Financial Times Editor Lionel Barber at an event in London Wednesday, Gates shared his thoughts on issues ranging from the global economy to robots to Silicon Valley. Gates said a real tipping point for change in driving will come from self-driving cars, calling it “the real rubicon.” And Uber is primed to take the lead, he added.

FT Alphaville writer Izabella Kaminska live-tweeted Gates’ thoughts:

If Gates is correct, it will validate recent moves by Uber to invest in self-driving technology. Earlier this year, Uber announced a partnership with Carnegie Mellon University to create the Uber Advanced Technologies Center in Pittsburgh “to do research and development, primarily in the areas of mapping and vehicle safety and autonomy technology.”

CEO Travis Kalanick has made it no secret that his company sees a future where we drive without our hands on a steering wheel. “The reason Uber could be expensive is because you’re not just paying for the car, you’re paying for the other dude in the car,” Kalanick said in a conference last year. “So the magic there is you basically bring the cost below the cost of ownership for everybody, and then car ownership goes away.”

The move has set Uber up for a battle with Google GOOG -1.54% . Last year, at the Code Conference, the tech giant made public a two-seater, self-driving car after years of research. Both companies, however, will have to battle the public’s perception on giving up control of a car. A survey conducted by NerdWallet found that only 37% of women and around half of men expressed any interest in owning a self-driving vehicle.

[GOO]

For those of us that are reliable, never had an accident, passed the NASCAR road school test....don't need it!

True, if you were the only one on the road. 

But by your reasoning, you don't need other safety enhancements that have come about such as seat belts, air bags, traction control, crumple zones, etc. And we can't all drive Trucks and large SUV's to make us safer, of course, or it negates each other. 

If I were in charge, the mandatory use of some of the autopilot tech would start with semi-trucks (collision avoidance and lane departure, would go a long way since we apparently have given up on actually enforcing rules).

[mu_hilltopper]

This is not how it is going to work.  New entrants are going to come in an bankrupt the existing car manufactures.  This is how new technology works.  See the story below.  Google and/or Uber (or Apple) will make the cars and bankrupt the legacy (read slow, beueaucratic and uncreative) auto manufactures.

And you will not buy a driverless car.  You will push a button on your phone to hirer one.  They are trying to make owning a car a thing of the past.

And that's a fine theory, and may be what happens.  Except the math I just went through is the same.

You still have 253m cars on the road, with 100m owners, and (guess) 500m "trips" per day that need to happen.  They aren't going to just abandon their automobile investment at a junk yard and start using Uber, driverless or not.

Ford, GM, Audi, BMW .. they aren't going out of business.   They all have driverless research programs.  Not to mention, they have tons of devoted customers.  

You can make a better mousetrap all you want, some people are still gonna buy those wire spring thingies.

[GOO]

I think you need to just accept that you are going to have to disagree with most of us on the time frame.  Most of us see this happening, but at a slower pace (the tech will be there, but the adoption rate will be slower). This has been hashed to death here, so just accept that we will disagree on the timing/speed of this taking over and selfdriving vehicles being the norm. I look at how slow true smart phone adoption rates were from 2007 on at a sub $200 out of pocket expense as a guide for how slow people are to adopt new tech even at very little cost.  It still amazes me when people pull out a flip phone, but in any crowd there will be someone using one.   Look at EV.  Makes so much sense, but it is very, very slow to catch on.. look at hybrids, why would anyone buy a traditional engine, makes no sense.. but...

Smart phone adoption rates.  Cell phones have been replaced every few years by many since the 1990's, at a very low cost.. yet the adoption rate is slow, cars will be a lot slower unfortunately:

http://www.statista.com/statistics/201183/forecast-of-smartphone-penetration-in-the-us/

This is not how it is going to work.  New entrants are going to come in an bankrupt the existing car manufactures.  This is how new technology works.  See the story below.  Google and/or Uber (or Apple) will make the cars and bankrupt the legacy (read slow, beueaucratic and uncreative) auto manufactures.

And you will not buy a driverless car.  You will push a button on your phone to hirer one.  They are trying to make owning a car a thing of the past.



-----------------------

[GOO]

And that's a fine theory, and may be what happens.  Except the math I just went through is the same.

You still have 253m cars on the road, with 100m owners, and (guess) 500m "trips" per day that need to happen.  They aren't going to just abandon their automobile investment at a junk yard and start using Uber, driverless or not.

Ford, GM, Audi, BMW .. they aren't going out of business.   They all have driverless research programs.  Not to mention, they have tons of devoted customers.  

You can make a better mousetrap all you want, some people are still gonna buy those wire spring thingies.

Well said.  Some traditional car manufacturers may go under, but this is not RIM versus Apple/Google.  The current traditional car companies are on board, as are dozens of other competing tech players/developers who will license the tech.  Ford has already said they see a day when they sell fewer cars (at least on a percentage of population basis, due to tech and car share, etc). 

[Tugg Speedman]

Here is the timeline ....

5 years tens of thousands of driverless cars are on the road.

7 years approaching a million driverless cars.  

At this point we have years and hundreds of million of miles of real data.  The car shows it is more efficient, cheaper and far more safer.  Dense Urban areas like central London, downtown Manhattan , San Fran and the loop river north area of Chicago see a movement to ban drivers.  They are seen as slow inefficient, expensive and dangerous.

Once this happens, the driver car takes on a different view.  It is a giant waste of money.  Other than the collector cars, the 3,000 pound hunk of metal in your garage is viewed as ultimately having a value of zero.  New car sales plummet because no one wants to buy a car that is going to have no value in a few years.  Human drivers are started to be looked upon like smokers.

So yes in 10 years their will still be hundreds of millions of driver cars on the road.  But like the Taxi company today, they will be seen as a dead industry with no long-term value and we are all demanding the new technology.

Maybe I should explain myself regarding taxis ... the game is over, car-sharing companies like Uber have won.  Sure traditional taxis will be around many more years (like horse drawn wagons existed on city streets until the 1940s) but we are watching the final convulsions of an industry that is about to expire.  We are not going back the other way to traditional taxis.  CA ruling they are employees is going to accelerate this process.  Uber is moving as fast as humanly possible to fire every driver and get driverless on the road.  CA ruling is going to make this happen faster.

Regarding the major auto makers.  They all go bankrupt every generation or so now.  GM and Chrysler being the last.  The rest are owned by the government and are bloated an inefficient.  The Telsa electric car and non-dealer selling model is case in point that they "don't really get it" and are structured to sell something that will no longer be demanded.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

[ChicosBailBonds]

This is not how it is going to work.  New entrants are going to come in an bankrupt the existing car manufactures.  This is how new technology works.  See the story below.  Google and/or Uber (or Apple) will make the cars and bankrupt the legacy (read slow, beueaucratic and uncreative) auto manufactures.

And you will not buy a driverless car.  You will push a button on your phone to hirer one.  They are trying to make owning a car a thing of the past.



-----------------------

Bill Gates thinks Uber has the best shot at self-driving cars
by  Jonathan Chew
June 25, 2015, 11:28 AM EDT

https://fortune.com/2015/06/25/bill-gates-self-driving-cars/

Driverless cars have become a moonshot project for tech companies around the world, and Microsoft’s MSFT -1.55% Co-founder and world-leading philanthropist Bill Gates believes there’s one company that will rule the space.

In a conversation with Financial Times Editor Lionel Barber at an event in London Wednesday, Gates shared his thoughts on issues ranging from the global economy to robots to Silicon Valley. Gates said a real tipping point for change in driving will come from self-driving cars, calling it “the real rubicon.” And Uber is primed to take the lead, he added.

FT Alphaville writer Izabella Kaminska live-tweeted Gates’ thoughts:

If Gates is correct, it will validate recent moves by Uber to invest in self-driving technology. Earlier this year, Uber announced a partnership with Carnegie Mellon University to create the Uber Advanced Technologies Center in Pittsburgh “to do research and development, primarily in the areas of mapping and vehicle safety and autonomy technology.”

CEO Travis Kalanick has made it no secret that his company sees a future where we drive without our hands on a steering wheel. “The reason Uber could be expensive is because you’re not just paying for the car, you’re paying for the other dude in the car,” Kalanick said in a conference last year. “So the magic there is you basically bring the cost below the cost of ownership for everybody, and then car ownership goes away.”

The move has set Uber up for a battle with Google GOOG -1.54% . Last year, at the Code Conference, the tech giant made public a two-seater, self-driving car after years of research. Both companies, however, will have to battle the public’s perception on giving up control of a car. A survey conducted by NerdWallet found that only 37% of women and around half of men expressed any interest in owning a self-driving vehicle.

Fine, but not in the timeframes you are talking about.  Not going to happen.

[ChicosBailBonds]

True, if you were the only one on the road. 

But by your reasoning, you don't need other safety enhancements that have come about such as seat belts, air bags, traction control, crumple zones, etc. And we can't all drive Trucks and large SUV's to make us safer, of course, or it negates each other. 

If I were in charge, the mandatory use of some of the autopilot tech would start with semi-trucks (collision avoidance and lane departure, would go a long way since we apparently have given up on actually enforcing rules).

I don't think that is a proper extrapolation of my reasoning.  You see, I'm a very good driver, but there are a lot of people on the road that are not.  Thus I still need the enhancements because I don't know what the other clown is going to do.

This whole thing has a long long way to go.  Hilltopper is right that it will be in the high end cars at first.  Thing is, a lot of people LIKE TO DRIVE.  Sure, it will be nice to have in the commute, but a completely driverless car would just suck for a lot of people.  I would love to run the marketing campaign against this and promote the freedom of getting behind the wheel, feel the power, the control, the excitement. 

At any rate, I'm not too worried about this.  Its nice, it will be a nice feature for some, but the adoption rate is so far away.  Bill Gates, well we'll see.  If he hadn't been convinced more than a few times about computers and operating systems, he would have gone down the road in his own field, but smart people told him he was wrong and he was smart enough to listen.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You have it backwards, driverless will cars will be far cheaper, not more expensive.  Human driver cars will see insurance skyrocket as human drivers are a menace and get in the way.  It will be unaffordable to most to insure (especially since most states mandate insurance).

Within two years all new cars will have driver assist functions (cruise control on steroids).  The car will drive itself on the highway.  That is just the beginning.

So in two years ALL new cars will have this driver assist.....ALL NEW CARS.   

Do you want to fill out the charity donation now or later on this one?  Wager for charitable donation?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Here is the timeline ....

5 years tens of thousands of driverless cars are on the road.

7 years approaching a million driverless cars.  

At this point we have years and hundreds of million of miles of real data.  The car shows it is more efficient, cheaper and far more safer.  Dense Urban areas like central London, downtown Manhattan , San Fran and the loop river north area of Chicago see a movement to ban drivers.  They are seen as slow inefficient, expensive and dangerous.

Once this happens, the driver car takes on a different view.  It is a giant waste of money.  Other than the collector cars, the 3,000 pound hunk of metal in your garage is viewed as ultimately having a value of zero.  New car sales plummet because no one wants to buy a car that is going to have no value in a few years.  Human drivers are started to be looked upon like smokers.

So yes in 10 years their will still be hundreds of millions of driver cars on the road.  But like the Taxi company today, they will be seen as a dead industry with no long-term value and we are all demanding the new technology.

Maybe I should explain myself regarding taxis ... the game is over, car-sharing companies like Uber have won.  Sure traditional taxis will be around many more years (like horse drawn wagons existed on city streets until the 1940s) but we are watching the final convulsions of an industry that is about to expire.  We are not going back the other way to traditional taxis.  CA ruling they are employees is going to accelerate this process.  Uber is moving as fast as humanly possible to fire every driver and get driverless on the road.  CA ruling is going to make this happen faster.

Regarding the major auto makers.  They all go bankrupt every generation or so now.  GM and Chrysler being the last.  The rest are owned by the government and are bloated an inefficient.  The Telsa electric car and non-dealer selling model is case in point that they "don't really get it" and are structured to sell something that will no longer be demanded.

Feels like you have changed your tune with this post.

You realize that Tesla isn't even profitable with their cars...yes?  Not until AT LEAST 2020

http://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-china-sales-declined-significantly-ceo-says-1421186754