[fsckboy]

the mfer doesn't assume any liability right now, so even if their self driving technology dramatically lowers your risk, why would they assume any of that risk? I see the point you're making, sure, if they assumed all liability it would make sense for me to accept that deal, but they're not going to and it could still be a very very good idea for me to adopt the technology.

[michaelt]

> if they assumed all liability it would make sense for me to accept that deal, but they're not going to

Why not? Insurance companies will accept liability for my driving fuck-ups in exchange for a monthly payment. And doing so doesn't instantly bankrupt them or anything. Why shouldn't a self-driving car company do the same thing?

[fsckboy]

the insurance company makes money because you are willing to pay more to reduce your personal risk than it costs them to accept it (a dollar you lose is worth more to you than a dollar you gain, declining marginal utility of wealth; an asymmetry they make money on, especially considering a dollar lost to them is much less significant)

G*P didn't mention payments for accepting risk, he just said if they accepted liability.

[MystK]

That's an interesting perspective. Perhaps in the future, we'll have FSD car subscriptions that also include insurance, so if you're in an accident the car manufacturer will cover everything.

[nickthegreek]

I believe Mercedes has a car where they do assume some liability.