Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GM, Lyft Working Toward Creating Autonomous Vehicle Ride-Sharing Network (computerworld.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the autonomous-ride-sharing-network dept.

Lucas123 writes: GM today announced a short-term vehicle rental program exclusive to the Lyft ride-sharing service, but it also made clear a longer-term goal to create a fleet of autonomous vehicles that could be summoned by Lyft's automated ride matching mobile app. The new Express Drive rental program will make cars available to Lyft drivers starting at $99, a price that includes insurance and vehicle maintenance. The new rental program comes just two months after GM struck a strategic partnership with Lyft to develop autonomous vehicles and invested $500 million as part of Lyft's $1 billion Series F funding round. More than 400 million people will rely on robotic car sharing by 2030, according to a new report by ABI Research. "We see the future of personal mobility as connected, seamless and autonomous," GM president Dan Ammann said. "With GM and Lyft working together, we believe we can successfully implement this vision more rapidly."

23 of 38 comments (clear)

  1. More disruptive than UBER by knorthern+knight · · Score: 2

    With UBER, taxi companies are fighting back by lobbying cities against "unlicenced taxis". A self-driving car can...
    * drive from a parking lot to pick you up at location X... JUST LIKE A TAXI
    * drive you over to location Y and drop you off... JUST LIKE A TAXI

    But the corporation will argue that it's actually a car rental business, renting the car to you on an hourly+milage basis, sorta like Zip-Car http://www.zipcar.com/

    --

    I'm not repeating myself
    I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
    1. Re:More disruptive than UBER by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2

      Finally, someone sees the long game. Uber is just in data collection mode right now.

    2. Re:More disruptive than UBER by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Fuck Taxi companies and Taxi drivers. Lazy, cheating scum that rode a monopoly in most areas for years. They can't compete so fuck them sideways with a bandsaw. I'm still dealing with a severe injury to my foot because a cab company made me wait 2 hours at 2 AM for a cab, and then I had to WALK home for 2.5 miles because at that point I could assume that they were never coming. I was in shoes that aren't meant for that kind of walk, and I apparently had a connective tissue issue with my foot. I'll never be able to run, dance or do many other things again. FUCK Cab companies. Especially Yellow Cab of Fort Lauderdale Florida.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    3. Re:More disruptive than UBER by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Uber will not let this go unanswered.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    4. Re:More disruptive than UBER by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      It sounds like a "Subprime Car Leasing" program. When the drivers can't pay back the money they owe, GM will go bankrupt again . . . and guess who gets to pay for it . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:More disruptive than UBER by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      When the autonomous car market really gets going, it will lower the cost of ridesharing to the extent that it will spread into the suburbs and the countryside. Outlying retirement communities would be a diamond mine for such a service. Once established in places where people have been used to owning cars, knocking off medallion cab monopolies in the last few "blue cities" will be a natural conclusion.

  2. Government Motors by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    Autonomous Hertz.

  3. Uber did this first actually. by brunes69 · · Score: 2

    Uber has a standing order for 500,000 autonomous Teslas in 2020.

    http://www.greencarreports.com...

  4. Huh? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Was this really a secret? *GASP* Do you think Uber is doing the same thing too??

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    1. Re:Huh? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Given that they went in and poached Carnegie Mellon's entire robotics department, that's exactly what they're doing.

    2. Re:Huh? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      I guess I just don't see how any of this is news.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  5. Re:End game is autonomous GM Puma by muons · · Score: 1

    The Puma won't catch on for the same reason the Segway didn't. The major needs in transportation are speed, climate avoidance, and cargo carrying capacity. None of those is met by the Puma or Segway. Making it autonomous doesn't improve the utility much beyond not needing a parking spot.

  6. Don't forget the puke detector! by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

    The last thing you want is for a botcab to turn up with something nasty inside that was left by the last passenger.

  7. Lots of changes coming down the pipe by bobo_1968 · · Score: 1

    This is essentially the cloud model for transport, which is pretty interesting. Why buy a server when you can burst as many or as few as you need by spinning up/down VM's in the cloud? Why buy a car when you can hire up/hire down as many as you need? I predict we'll see a massive decrease in the amount of automobiles owned for business purposes. Shippers will own a core fleet and burst up/down around the holiday season as needed.

    Platforms like Lyft and Uber will compete to be the market makers. Google and Tesla will offer Self-driving-as-a-Service. GM and other manufacturers will be the IaaS providers of the auto world, handling the insurance, maintenance, provisioning of the fleet. Clients will include the consumer but also FedEx, UPS, DHL, etc. Those logistics companies, along with Lydt, Uber, Didi Kaudi (China) as the ride sharing companies, and HERE, Google Maps, WhatThreeWords, and OpenStreetMap as the mapping companies, will fight for the API layer that both the market-makers (to route closest car to closest consumer) and self-driving software providers need to ping to do their jobs as cheaply as possible.

    Exciting times in transportation, and we haven't even talked about how fueling will have to adapt!

    1. Re:Lots of changes coming down the pipe by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Don't feel sorry for the buggy whip maker.
      Either way mechanics will certainly still be needed, possibly more so. One of the most unexpected hits will be parking lots. You don't need to park an autonomous car in the city, the car will be of use elsewhere. Parking a fleet at night is a much easier to solve problem than parking each city visitor during the day. With an automated fleet you can park them with extreme density.

    2. Re:Lots of changes coming down the pipe by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Any technology change that requires this massive a replacement of existing infrastructure, distribution networks and businesses will take place slowly enough so that no social upheaval need occur. Not only will it will take a generation, like the post-WW II replacement of urban living by suburbs, but the process itself will create a fountain of new jobs.

      One consequence will be that parking lots will disappear. Like the site of the Berlin Wall after German reunification, disused urban parking lots will become the new urban real estate gold rush. Businesses will expand into them, new housing will be built on them, pocket parks will be developed.

  8. This is going to flop by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

    All of this hype over self-driving car sharing... it's going to flop big time.
    Car sharing happens now - it's called a taxi. It only works in very large cities, and with a very small part of the population. This automated business merely hold the potential to bring cost down a bit. There's no other real up side.

    Put another way - if using a taxi & uber is so much cheaper than buying a car yourself, why do the vast majority of people still buy a car? (Hint: There's more to life than cost per mile.)

     

    1. Re:This is going to flop by gnupun · · Score: 1

      why do the vast majority of people still buy a car?

      Because it's cheaper. You don't have to pay for the driver, you don't have to pay the cab company the driver rented the car from and of course there's profit. Taxi companies/drivers make profit well above the costs and you have to pay for that as well. Even if the driver cost is eliminated, the profit the cab companies demand will still make the price higher than owning a car.

      If the above statements are false, people would stop buying cars and get rides from ride-sharing services thereby saving insurance costs, huge liability costs in severe accidents and parking hassles.

    2. Re:This is going to flop by naughtynaughty · · Score: 1

      The vast majority of people in the US haven't purchased a vehicle in the past 3 years.

      When Uber/Lyft not only control the driving experience but also the vehicles, it's going to greatly broaden appeal. Select your vehicle like you would from Avis. SUV, economy, luxury, ... This weekend you take a cruise up the coast in a self-driving convertible, actually getting to spend some time looking at the sights on the way, during the week you pick the economy for trips to work and Friday night you take your special person out to dinner in a special car. At the end of the month you need to bring your kid home from college and an SUV rolls up to their dorm with room for all their stuff.

      Sort of like being wealthy with a garage full of cars and a full-time driver who not only drives but maintains the vehicles.

      Just not having a stranger sitting in the front seat is going to greatly broaden appeal.

      Give it time, it's coming.

    3. Re:This is going to flop by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Right now, it's not really cheaper, since most people have a lot of cases where the taxi ride would be expensive, and commutes which aren't well served by other forms of public transport. And taxis aren't always that quick to arrive. So if the cost dropped significantly, especially for longer trips, and you could count on it showing up, I can see it displacing private ownership. Certainly a lot of families might decide to only have one car rather than two or three.

    4. Re:This is going to flop by MrLogic17 · · Score: 1

      You're missing my point- I really don't think owning a car is cheaper for most people. There are cheaper options everywhere.
      Nuts, many people could walk to work. It might take an hour or two, but it's an option.

      Likewise- when people buy a car, very rarely do they but the cheapest car they can afford.

      Cars are about freedom, convenience, practicality, and in many cases image. Cost is a very very minor factor.

      I want to leave my junk in the back seat, and not have it stolen by the next random person to use the car. I don't want my car to smell like smoke, or sweaty unwashed guy. I want to get my car RIGHT NOW, not in 30 or even 10 minutes.

      I really see no up side to automated side sharing that doesn't exist today with your typical taxi. There is no game changer here.

  9. Please stop calling it "ride sharing" by dave420 · · Score: 2

    If the driver was not already going to the destination, calling it "ride sharing" is like calling a restaurant "meal sharing".

  10. Re:The age of the PC is nigh by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    I think the acronym PC is already in use on slashdot, sorry.

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever