undefined

points

[-]

A product/service that can drastically reduce the top cause of injury and death, as well as give safe mobility to so many who do not currently have it is not a "cute tech project".

>I would rather pay substantially less on anything I buy, and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

Alphabet's entire revenue divided by the total amount of goods and services sold is miniscule, so I don't see how it could be mathematically possible to pay substantially less on anything you buy.

>and have the free market sort out self-driving cars.

This is the free market sorting out self-driving cars.

by fsh1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Google is one of many monopolies that are collectively bleeding society dry. Of course, the others should be broken up as well.

Waymo is currently financed by a monopolist and has negligible revenue itself, so it is not part of the free market.

by franga20001 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Self-driving cars are an absurdly inefficient way to reduce traffic deaths that exists only because it makes substantially more money for shareholders than the alternatives. You are being witheld a good and cheap solution now for the promise of a worse and expensive solution some time in the future. All the while people keep dying.

Oh, and what's this "those who don't have it" bullshit? If anything, turning driving into a subscription service will mean mobility becomes harder for many people, as dirt-cheap used cars slowly stop being available. As for people who can't drive for whatever reason, they already have taxi apps. And don't think for a second that self-driving taxis will be cheaper in the long term than regular ones, only the margins will go up.

by idndnfjfj1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

thing i dont like: extraction

thing i like: free market

i would rather people like you please stay silent instead of polluting the world with lazy thinking fit not even for dog