Full Self Driving FSD - Game Changer or Gimmick?

[ChrissyOne]

I hope this thread still exists in 10 years.

It wasn't that long ago that EVs themselves were 'gimmicks'. How many other 'gimmicks' have we seen take over the world in even the lifetime of those on this forum? Cell phones. Internet. Cryptocurrencies.

Some of the first cars were electric, so I’m not sure how far you want to go back for that claim. I’ve only heard the most ignorant luddites describe cell phones and the internet as gimmicks, but we could argue that. And as far a cryptocurrency… you can play with that cobra yourself, my friend. I’m not getting anywhere near that nonsense.

The problem with FSD is that it only half-solves the transportation problem.
On one side you have private cars - which offer total freedom, but with a cost of ownership, storage, and maintenance. On the other you have public transit, with less freedom, but massively better efficiency. FSD lies somewhere im the middle, and in a sense has all the drawbacks of both. Even if robotaxis take us all to and from work, and don’t require a parking spot, they still need to GO somewhere in the middle of the day and night. And as a consumer, if I’m giving up the freedom of owning my own car, then it’s much more efficient to take public transit. FSD provides the illusion of freedom, but the logistical costs will make it far less attractive than ownership, and only maybe slightly more attractive than taking a train. It’s a half solution that doesn’t make as much sense as just building public transit.

Sponsored

 

[ChrissyOne]

You know what we were all supposed to be using ubiquitously by now? Voice control.
Are any of you using voice control or speech-to-text to write to this thread?

 

[ChrissyOne]

And one more thing - as far as what the OP meant (hi!)

I specifically asked if FSD is something that people are going to pay more for. When the technology evolves and it's standard on every car for no upcharge, of course people will use it. But will they use it all the time? (Alexa? Hello?) We are probably a long way from that.

 

[Inkedsphynx]

Some of the first cars were electric, so I’m not sure how far you want to go back for that claim. I’ve only heard the most ignorant luddites describe cell phones and the internet as gimmicks, but we could argue that. And as far a cryptocurrency… you can play with that cobra yourself, my friend. I’m not getting anywhere near that nonsense.

The problem with FSD is that it only half-solves the transportation problem.
On one side you have private cars - which offer total freedom, but with a cost of ownership, storage, and maintenance. On the other you have public transit, with less freedom, but massively better efficiency. FSD lies somewhere im the middle, and in a sense has all the drawbacks of both. Even if robotaxis take us all to and from work, and don’t require a parking spot, they still need to GO somewhere in the middle of the day and night. And as a consumer, if I’m giving up the freedom of owning my own car, then it’s much more efficient to take public transit. FSD provides the illusion of freedom, but the logistical costs will make it far less attractive than ownership, and only maybe slightly more attractive than taking a train. It’s a half solution that doesn’t make as much sense as just building public transit.

Sure, nobody described cell phones or the internet as a gimmick now, but I'm old enough (and I'm not that old) to remember when people did. It wasn't just a few people either. Cryptos... your loss I've made more money off cryptos in the last few years than all the salary I've ever earned combined. Cryptos are here to stay, and will only grow in use and influence, yet still plenty of people think it's a gimmick - it sounds like you fall into that camp.

America is a big place. You can't build public transit everywhere. When I want to head out to my house in the sticks, I have to have a way to get there. There's no world where me sitting in the back reading a book isn't better than me being forced to be behind the wheel.

The arc of technology always moves towards efficiency. Self-driving cars offer massive benefits in efficiency both at the personal and societal level. It will happen, it's just a matter of time.

Since Alexa has been brought up a few times now - how many cars come with Alexa standard? How many of you own a device in your home that offers Alexa that you obtained free of charge? It's important to remember that Alexa isn't that old yet - it's still new technology. Do you honestly think it won't be better in 10 years than it is now? Do you honestly think the marketshare won't increase over that time for voice assistants? History tells us both of these things will be true.

 

[ChrissyOne]

Sure, nobody described cell phones or the internet as a gimmick now, but I'm old enough (and I'm not that old) to remember when people did. It wasn't just a few people either. Cryptos... your loss I've made more money off cryptos in the last few years than all the salary I've ever earned combined. Cryptos are here to stay, and will only grow in use and influence, yet still plenty of people think it's a gimmick - it sounds like you fall into that camp.

I don't think Crypto is a gimmick, I think it's a con, and it's an awful use of electricity. I'm glad that you're on the right side of it, and I wish you success in that.

As far as the internet, like I said, we could argue that. My first use of the proto-internet was in the late 80s on a 300 baud modem playing Trade Wars, and back then it was difficult to explain to most people what that even meant. Of course every invention was considered by someone as a gimmick, but in many cases they were right. They said Quibi was a gimmick. They said the Microsoft Zune was a gimmick.

Getting back to my original point - will people pay more for FSD? My feeling is no.

 

[Inkedsphynx]

People already do. Your point is instantly invalidated.

If you want to ask how many people will, that's a different discussion. It will be years before we see uptake rates greater than even 20%.

 

[Inkedsphynx]

I don't think Crypto is a gimmick, I think it's a con, and it's an awful use of electricity. I'm glad that you're on the right side of it, and I wish you success in that.

Just shows your lack of knowledge in the area. Not every crypto burns electricity like crazy, and most that do now are mid-flight on blockchain upgrades to move to PoS rather than PoW.

I won't bother diving into whether it's a con. Time will illuminate all.

 

[ChrissyOne]

People already do. Your point is instantly invalidated.

If you want to ask how many people will, that's a different discussion. It will be years before we see uptake rates greater than even 20%.

Forgive me for not restating my point yet again in agonizing detail. And thank you for agreeing with me.

 

[jtshaw]

And one more thing - as far as what the OP meant (hi!)

I specifically asked if FSD is something that people are going to pay more for. When the technology evolves and it's standard on every car for no upcharge, of course people will use it. But will they use it all the time? (Alexa? Hello?) We are probably a long way from that.

FWIW, I use voice to do a LOT of things these days... though probably fewer things that Amazon would hope, and yes, many of them are pretty minor optimizations....

I have a lot of opinion as to what the world would look like if self-driving worked and how fast the shift may or may not happen. That'd take too long to explain though so I'll cut it short by saying I would likely pay more for FSD on my personally owned vehicle if it worked. For regional transportation, it could be game changing. I'm leaving to head from Seattle to northern California in my Tesla tomorrow morning. If it could drive itself, you can be damn sure we'd leave tonight at the kids bedtime instead and let it drive us while we relax and read a booksleep. That sounds amazing, in fact

 

[ChrissyOne]

I'm leaving to head from Seattle to northern California in my Tesla tomorrow morning. If it could drive itself, you can be damn sure we'd leave tonight at the kids bedtime instead and let it drive us while we relax and read a booksleep. That sounds amazing, in fact

Indeed! There will certainly be a market for this, and you offer a perfect use case. For places like our beautiful home state with limited regional transit, this is a good solution. But in Europe, you'd take a train.

 

[RideAlong]

Still at least 10 years out , at least in the US -- and then there is that Insurance Company thing ?

 

[manitou202]

Doing a quick search I found that the fare for a Taxi/Uber is about 50% labor cost. So even if you eliminate the labor from the equation, Taxi/Uber fares might drop by half.

How many of you would give up your car if you could simply use an Uber for all of the travel around town at half the cost of today? This wouldn't change my habits. I would still own the cars we have. I respect that people in densely populated cities where the cost of owning a car is much higher, would be more likely to get rid of the car. But I don't think this would have a dramatic impact on auto sales.

The number one selling vehicles are trucks. Those individuals aren't going to give them up.

It would be nice to have a true self driving car on a long road trip so I could do other things while driving. Unless Tesla is the only company to ever solve this problem, then it will become a common feature and will dramatically drop in price.

 

[LeoH]

Try reading the rest of the thread. What I said was entirely relevant. (Hell, read the first sentence of the OP's post - "In the coming years").

I think we'll be farther along in 10 years than level 2. We're there now. Is your stance that we won't make any meaningful improvements in the technology in the next 10 years?

I meant irrelevant to what I said, I thought you were directly replying to me, so I apologize for that.


10 years? I think we will have a very good grasp of the technology and we will see handful of small geographical areas implementing it, I have no doubt about that. But Cameras alone are not the answer, and we know that because the concept of autonomy and automation depends on signals ( radar or otherwise ) because you can't visually decode or predict nature. Given that the biggest adopters of EV driven technologies reside in the top half of the northern hemisphere, snow, rain and sleet render camera only driven autonomy useless.

My point is that innovations are not car related only, you will need engineers in other industries to pitch in and they have not moved an inch yet.

 

[ChrissyOne]

Doing a quick search I found that the fare for a Taxi/Uber is about 50% labor cost. So even if you eliminate the labor from the equation, Taxi/Uber fares might drop by half.

And the price of a driver base might 100% go away, but you're still going to need a labor force to keep the cars going, if nothing more than to clean them. Because a driverless taxi is going to see some shit, and they're probably going to need a little more than usual TLC, so you'll have an increased cost there. Cleaning would have to take place at the charging station to be efficient, so you're going to have to go pick them up, and that means you have to have onsite facilities for them. Unless your Tesla Bots are ready, of course.
Theoretically you could save ALL the driver costs, and still have plenty of new costs to deal with. But let's say it does save 50% on costs - would those savings pass entirely on to the customer?
Maybe at first, to grow their customer base, but they're going to end up charging what people are willing to pay, so for the end user, there may be little if any cost savings over a humanned fleet.

I'm sure there's enough margin there for Tesla to make money at it, and they'll make a crapload. But it won't be a cure for the "we have too many cars" problem, it just kicks it into big parking lots on the edge of town. It's probably going to take some massive infrastructure to build out, and it will create problems of its own.

 

[Scott]

I think people are underestimating the impact of a fleet of self driving, fully autonomous vehicles.

1. These vehicles don't HAVE to have only one passenger at a time, although that is what people often envision. They could be small vans that seat ~10 people. The big annoyance with public transportation is that it doesn't take you to your destination. You often have to drive / walk to a station, park, take the transit and then walk to your final destination. On the fly, efficient routing of large demand in vehicles without human labor cost that takes you door to door could REPLACE public bus systems. Uber already offers ride sharing, this is like that on steroids. This could drastically reduce the number of vehicles on the road at a given time and drastically reduce the cost of getting from point A to point B. You already remove ~50% of the cost by removing the driver. Then electric cars use less energy than ICE ones and have less maintenance. And then you split the cost of every mile driven across 5 to 10 people. You could easily replace a $20 uber ride with a 1 to 2 dollar ride.
2. We could use land way more efficiently in dense urban areas. The need for parking on every street would vanish. These fleets could drive themselves to a place ~10 minutes away to charge when not in use. And those garages could pack in way more cars, because there is no need for any specific car to leave at any time. Automated Ubers don't complain about being double parked, the one on the outside just goes
3. People will change where they decide to live. If your commute is spent reading / working instead of driving, and it takes you door to door people might choose to live in lower cost areas, or those with less money will have a more reasonable access to jobs available in dense urban areas
4. Transportation costs for shipping will drop, and those trucks can drive 24/7 increasing the speed at which good are moved and allowing the movement to happen more in off-peak hours. Trucks could be loaded / unloaded during the day, and drive all night.
5. Many people will choose to not own a car at all, but many more than that will choose to own fewer cars. You might still have 1 family car for longer trips and such, but the need to have 2 or 3 cars for your family will mostly vanish (and even in reality it would be more economical to rent cars for trips than to own it)
6. Accident rates will likely plummet, which is good for health and safety, bad for insurance companies.
7. Sending kids who can't yet drive to activities and such can be done without parental involvement for significantly less money. For anyone shuttling 3 or 4 kids to soccer, gymnastics, dance, acting, music lessons, school, etc this would be magical.
8. It reduces the cost for those with mobility concerns to get around. The elderly who no longer can drive safely could get from door to door at a much lower cost than.


As for FSD in personal cars, I think the price will drop a lot. As it stands now, what I have in my ID.4 is helpful. Adaptive cruise control and auto lane centering is nice. I am way more rested when I get to my destination than I was without it. But, I wouldn't pay a dime for anything between that and true FSD. Every minor improvement doesn't stop me from having to pay attention. BUT as soon as I don't have to pay attention at all, I would pay for that in a heartbeat.


EDIT: One thing to add. Automobiles are one of the most expensive good produced,yet they have a terribly low utilization rate. Most sit unused for 20-23 hours a day. If we can increase utilization rates up to even 25% we could reduce the number of cars we produce annually by a massive amount. The impact on the environment of producing that many fewer cars per year is astounding.

Sponsored