Futurology

1852 readers

87 users here now

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Waymo now has 22% market share of taxi journeys in San Francisco, and now exceeds human-driver taxi company Lyft. (self.futurology)

submitted 5 days ago by Lugh to c/futurology

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Market share data courtesy of yipitdata.com.

There are others, but Waymo in the US and Badiu's Apollo Go in China, now seem ready for take-off with robo-taxis. From now on the only constraints to growth will be how quick they can deploy new vehicles to new markets. When this explosive growth is finished, there will be tens of millions of robo-taxis in every town and city on planet Earth.

The real revolution will be the global displacement of tens, perhaps hundreds, of millions of human driver jobs. We are rushing headlong into this future without anyone preparing for it, yet it's going to happen whether people like it or not, and it's heading straight for us.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (5 children)

Imagining how or if these will ever come to some of the most chaotic cities, such as Bangkok, Mumbai, heck... anywhere in India, Davao, etc where the rules of traffic are based on who believes in reincarnation the most.

[–] Lugh 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

AI is already better than human drivers in China/US. It won't be long before it masters the more challenging environments. I suspect the humans will adapt to its predictability in places with crazier driving.

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

better

Nope. Waymo relies on human operators when its vehicles can't deal with a situation.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

Whose driving is fed into the training data which then eliminates the need for future interventions in similar scenarios. That's the thing with gans, they just get better assuming you vet the data.

load more comments (3 replies)