• Sizzler@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    And this is how they will push everyone into driverless. Through insurance costs. Who would insure 1 human driver vs 100 bots, (once the systems have a few billion miles on them)

    • nucleative@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You’re probably right. Another decade or two and human driver controlled cars might be prohibitively expensive to insure for some or even not allowed in certain areas.

      I can imagine an awesome world where that’s a great thing but also imagine a dystopian world like wall-e as well. I guess we’ll know then which one we chose.

      • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I feel you’re misapplying the advantage. Right now people hit other people in cars and insurance is what it is. It would be more appropriate to say that humans will pay normal rates, while autonomous car companies will charge you an insurance subscription, and work out much lower rates with the insurer.

        • Sizzler@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          You would think that’s how it should be right? Not a chance. They’ll find another reason to stiff you.

          • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            As long as there is free competition, the cost will be around 10% over the operating cost. After that point it becomes worthwhile for another competitor to step in.