[cliveowen]

Agreed, and that enormous thing on the roof just shouldn't be there. "Google plans to build 100 to 200 of these prototypes, and work towards safety approval by the end of the year. The future’s coming a lot faster than we thought."

If this is the future I hope there will be time travel, so I can go back.

[swalsh]

Seriously, your big problem with self driving cars is you think a giant laser on top is ugly?

[iagooar]

I can kind of understand that. Cars are not only a motor on 4 wheels. Design is one of the most important aspects when man building and selling cars, so it is not strange that people think of the camera as something that doesn't fit.

Until Tesla came and showed an electrical car that actually DID attract car / driving fans, the majority of people wouldn't consider an electrical car because most of them were plain ugly, even if the technology underneath was plain neat.

Same thing with self driving cars. I know it's not top priority for now, but I think the real breakthrough will be achieved by a completely redesigned and appealing car.

[zanny]

> I think the real breakthrough will be achieved by a completely redesigned and appealing car.

Hopefully, on a Tesla. Tesla range and safety design + self driving. I'd pay six figures for that.

[afarrell]

But part of the point of Tesla is that lots of hobbyists and researchers and failed companies already did the work for proving that electric cars are feasible on a basic level. They could take that work and on top of it build cars that are beautiful and have refined engineering.

Aside from the DARPA challenge in the desert, Google has had to start from square 1, so it needs to accept that it will build ugly cars first.

[prawn]

Does the signalling and branding on top of current taxis have you turn to your time travel device rather than just get inside and give the driver your destination?