Discussion about this post

User's avatar
JakeH's avatar

Re self-driving cars, the car world and commentary about it is unrealistic on two fronts (both personified by purist dreamer Elon Musk): (1) pure electric cars, and (2) self-driving technology. The fundamental problems with both have yet to be solved, and it's not clear that they will be solved in the near- or medium-term. Meanwhile, the goals of both are better served by existing technology that either is already widespread or should become more so.

The fundamental problem with pure electric cars is range and "fill-up" time. A pure electric car is inadequate for a long car trip or for the many people without a garage (i.e., apartment dwellers, all those people whose cars line every city street every night). Pure electric car take-up is slowing, not accelerating, contrary to the car companies' irrationally exuberant predictions, indicating that most people who are interested in them -- a relatively small percentage -- have already bought one.

We already have the solution: hybrids. Plug-ins use no gas on a daily commute and are perfect for those with a garage. Non-plug-ins, regular hybrids like the Prius, roughy double typical mileage, and are perfect for those apartment dwellers. They sacrifice little-to-nothing in terms of performance and come free of range anxiety, using a reliable and mature technology. Policy-makers looking to internal combustion engine bans are making a big mistake. They are incentivizing keeping regular old gas cars on the road much longer -- very doable, insofar as they are super reliable nowadays and it costs ever more to buy a new car. The better policy is to tweak gas mileage mandates to essentially require the mass hybridization of new car fleets. Hybrids don't rely on ultra-large batteries requiring scarce natural resources. They won't massively disrupt an industry that employs many thousands. Companies could standardize battery size, shape, and other aspects to move to more uniform production of smaller hybrid-sized batteries which would bring down the overall cost of hybrids and hasten a world where replacing your hybrid battery after 100K or whatever would cost hundreds, not thousands (a hang-up for cost-conscious shoppers of used hybrids).

The fundamental problem with self-driving technology is that it still makes regular mistakes and is routinely flummoxed. Think about your driving. How often do you encounter odd situations? All the time. As a diver, I, for one, will not tolerate auto-driving technology with anything like the glitchiness of the rest of my tech, which fails to do what I want on a regular basis. These things have to work perfectly nearly 100% of the time in all conditions and all places where you might want to drive. My impression is that that remains a very tall order, which is why you haven't heard a whole lot about self-driving cars in a while, and why their investors are nervous. The idea that self-driving cars will, on average, be safer, is cold comfort. It would be particularly galling to have a loved one, say, who is a very careful driver and has never had an accident, be killed by their robot car's mistake. I can say confidently that a self-driving car for *me* would not represent a safety improvement but a downgrade. I think many millions will probably have the same reasonable view, and not want to hand over the wheel.

Meanwhile, once again, amazing technology is at the ready to come close to solving the problem, but it gets little attention because it's not as flashy or pure. I refer to the suite of guardian angel tech that comes standard now on most new cars -- automatic emergency braking, lane-departure warnings, back-up cameras, adaptive cruise, and the like -- as well as low-grade highway self-driving, like GM's SuperCruise and what I imagine will be the next step -- cars able to avoid accidents by intervening at the last moment to command not just brakes but steering and gas as well. Excessive speed interventions are doable, especially for young drivers, as is ignition/breathalyzer interlock, which, assuming reliability, I'd far sooner accept than cars that take over the whole thing.

Expand full comment
Marc Martinez's avatar

I continue to hope that the members of congress will realize that their public service is best provided by finding centrist compromise. It would be a definite plus if the GOP found a centrist that could win with centrist Dem support. But I found Hakim Jeffries proposal of a coalition to counter right wing extremists pretty rich, since it was the 100% Democratic enablement of the 8 members of the clown caucus that caused the ouster of McCarthy. The GOP needs a mainstream leader that might lose the first traditional vote and then win a vote supported by Dems. But this requires GOP and Dems that actually want to get back to work and believe that they can survive the voter outrage at being reasonable.

Expand full comment
32 more comments...

No posts