RE:Google's Trillion-Dollar Driverless Car -- Part 2: The Ripple Effects
In part 2 of Chunka Mui's series on how the driverless car will shape society he expounds on how many business models will be disrupted in the near future by the technology. While he also predicts some opportunities that will emerge, reading the first 2/3 of the article left me deeply concerned.
While i have considered many of the implications of an economy of driverless cars in the past, Mui's assembly is a much bigger and more far reaching set. I agree with most all of the claims but what has me concerned is not "what" will happen but how arduous the transition will be. If the past 100 years and even the next 5-10 years of disruption in the information system economy is any barometer, the industries that stand to loose in Mui's predicted disruptions will look to block the transition in every way they can. Instead of looking to capitalize on the opportunities this new and revolutionary technology presents, they will lobby heavily against laws that will allow driverless cars to do more.
There have been laws past so far allowing driverless cars in some states. I believe that this will become a harder battle in other states as the implications that Mui has outlined become more and more real. There will likely become a huge argument over who is to blame when a car that is driving its self is responsible for an accident. Just because i hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't. This responsibilty question is almost trivial in that the frequency of this happening will be in the six sigma range, but the fact that it can happen will be fuel for the opposing argument, especially from insurance companies.
To build on the that thought, the implications of having a vehicle drive it's self has significant implications when you apply it to shipping. If large trucks could be automated, why have a driver in the truck at all? This adds one more group that stands to loose, truck drivers. The labor unions will lobby heavily to make it illegal to operate a vehicle without a capable driver in the vehicle. If states go different ways on this matter i can image trucks going stopping at state borders just to pick up a driver so as to operate legally in the next state. How do you enforce this? What happens when a vehicle get's pulled over and there is no person in it? I can see the trucking company getting fined and having to send out a driver to move it. All to satisfy a law that was put in place to keep a dying profession alive. Small indications of this are already starting to crop up in the case of NYC banning Uber to keep the taxi's in business.
Another thought I've had relates to the transition and the interaction between automated and non-automated vehicles. How long will they be allowed to co-exist on the same road. The benefits Mui highlights about lighting and road construction are great but only apply if "ALL" the traffic is automated. The answer is certain roads will have to become "driverless only" roads. The opposition will argue against tax dollars being put toward infrastructure that can't be used by all. This is a ridiculousness argument but it will be made by a subset of the population that will refuse to use driverless cars. There is still a subset of the population that even refuses to use cars.
To be clear I want driverless cars right now. I don't ever want to drive a car ever again. The benefits Mui has presented so far are real and can change so much. I am just very concerned about how we are going to get there. The linear thinking that has been so pervasive in industry as of recent does not lend it's self to such step changes in technology. The industries that will be threatened by the commercialization of driverless cars have a lot of money and a lot of friends in government. I don't think they have really seen the writing on the wall but they will and when they do, things will come to a screeching halt.
