[woojoo666]

I presume the human is still the most expensive cost. So you might be looking at cost reduction of over 50%. If that were true, then I would definitely take the robotaxi, assuming it's reached human safety levels of course. On the off chance that they leave me stranded, I'll file a complaint for full refund, and then just take another one

[37ef_ced3]

In other words, you believe the cost of the human is subtracted but there is no additional hardware/maintenance/remote-operation/R&D-investment cost to add?

Anyway, I think we can all agree that the only benefit of a robotaxi is that it's cheaper. And we don't know how much cheaper. So it's not surprising that most people aren't excited about them.

I don't know a single person who cares about robotaxis. In my experience, if you talk to people about robotaxis they just don't see it as big step forward. "What's the point?"

[mindvirus]

I think people under estimate just how much cheaper it is.

Conservatively, suppose the car lasts 100k miles, and costs $50k including maintenance. Suppose it gets 10mpg, and each trip is 5 miles. Gas is $6/gallon.

100k miles = 20k trips. 20k trips for $50k cost = $2.50 per ride + $3 gas = $5.50 fixed cost per ride, which is significantly cheaper than pretty much anything.

[woojoo666]

Cost is a big deal.

If my city had better public transport, I would use it more often. I don't like driving around everywhere. It's labor. While I am also pushing for better public transport, robotaxis can also fill that gap, provided it is cheap enough