I’m a bit confused. If we’re talking about consumer cars, the end goal is not to rent a car that can drive itself, the end goal is to own a car that can drive itself, and so it doesn’t matter if the car is available for purchase but costs $250,000 because few consumers can afford that, even wealthy ones.

▲

BoorishBears 4 days ago | parent [-]

a) I'm not talking about consumer cars, you are. I said very plainly this level of capability won't reach consumers soon and I stand by that. Some Chinese companies are trying to make it happen in the US but there's too many barriers.

b) If there was a $250,000 car that could drive itself around given major cities, even with the geofence, it would sell out as many units as could be produced. That's actually why I tell people to be weary of BOM costs: it doesn't reflect market forces like supply and demand.

You're also underestimating both how wealthy people and corporations are, and the relative value being provided.

A private driver in a major city can easily clear $100k a year on retainer, and there are people are paying it.

	▲	yladiz 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		If you look at the original comment that you replied to, the goalpost was explained clearly: > The goalpost will be when you can buy one and drive it anywhere. So let’s just ignore the non-consumer parts entirely to avoid shifting the goalpost. I still stand by the fact that the average (or median) consumer will not be able to afford such an expensive car, and I don’t think it’s controversial to state this given the readily available income data in the US and various other countries. The point isn’t that it exists, Rolls Royce and Maseratis exist, but they are niche and so if self-driving cars will be so expensive to be niche they won’t actually make a real impact on real people, thus the goalpost of general availability to a consumer.