My take is that Level 2, 3, and 4 will be accepted (as long as they are analogous to a gradually improved “cruise control” that you can escape from by putting your foot on the brake), but that people will be very, VERY, slow to adopt Level 5 (with no no human controls or steering wheel, and the car completely in control of the trip). Would YOU accept to buy a car like that?
Saul
“And it’s there that there will be an enormous conflict between what the technology will offer and what consumers are willing to accept. Anecdotally, I’d argue that the majority of drivers I know, if offered a Level 5 vehicle, would say, “No thanks.” More than a few would say, “You can take my steering wheel out of my cold, dead hands.” It will take years, if not decades, to change those attitudes.”
How pleasant to wake up and read such a common sense observation about driving our vehicles.
Thanks, Saul.
Jim
My take is that Level 2, 3, and 4 will be accepted (as long as they are analogous to a gradually improved “cruise control” that you can escape from by putting your foot on the brake), but that people will be very, VERY, slow to adopt Level 5 (with no no human controls or steering wheel, and the car completely in control of the trip). Would YOU accept to buy a car like that?
Saul,
I look forward to it. Give me comfortable cab with club seating for 4 with no windows, no steering or command center with a full voice control like Alexa and I am good.
Except I would change Alexa to James.
When I got in the car I would say, “Home! James.” With deep aristocratic English accent.
Cheers
Qazulight
My take is that Level 2, 3, and 4 will be accepted (as long as they are analogous to a gradually improved “cruise control” that you can escape from by putting your foot on the brake), but that people will be very, VERY, slow to adopt Level 5 (with no no human controls or steering wheel, and the car completely in control of the trip). Would YOU accept to buy a car like that?
Whether you’re right or wrong, this doesn’t affect nVidia, which is used for levels 2-5. We are nowhere near being sold a driverless car, don’t sweat whether you want one or not. You can’t have one! 
Graham
I flew to Minnesota last week and spent a fortune on rental car.
If I had level 5 I would have drove and got 2 full days of work done en route. It would very much enhance my life.
But this article is addressing the wrong market. Tesla will lead the world into level 4/5. However it is business use from warehouse to trucking to buses that will be the first segments to go level 5.
The market is enormous and is not just consumer automobiles.
But yes, Level 5 would have been superb last week. Delta instead got my business (for now).
Tinker
Whether you’re right or wrong, this doesn’t affect Nvidia, which is used for levels 2-5
I agree completely Graham.
I think of the AI/Autonomous Driving market a bit more broadly. The article focuses on level 5 which is fully autonomous and it compares that to the internet bubble of the late 1990s and early 2000. Specifically, it calls out NVDA when making the comparisons. I agree that autonomous driving will happen in stages, but I disagree that level 5 is required for anyone to make money. I believe that level 2 “autonomous” can come rather quickly, perhaps becoming a standard in most cars within 5 years. That opportunity alone is enormous. In 2017 there were more than 17 million cars sold in the US (more than 75 million globally). If a level 2 AI chip at a price of $100 becomes the standard in cars that’s a $1.7B market in the US and a $7.5B market globally assuming that car sales don’t grow at all. Car sales are still growing and will likely be over 80 million in five years. Just yesterday I learned that Toyota (the largest car maker in the world until recently when VW over took them) will make level 2 autonomous driving standard in all their cars sold in the US and Japan by 2020. That’s more than 8.5M cars which doesn’t seem like a small number to me.
Let’s think about what a car really is. It is a box that carries people around from point A to point B. When I say that I think about AI/Autonomous Driving more broadly, I mean that there are A LOT of other uses for boxes that move around transporting things from point A to point B. Think of a warehouse, a shipping dock/port, a farm, etc. There are millions of items that need to be moved around. Automating the movement of crop harvesting, cargo sorting at ports and in warehouses can lead to massive cost savings, quality improvements, safety advantages, and automatic tracking, quality control, and inventory management benefits. These are a few examples of AI/autonomous movements that can be developed using essentially the same technology that would be used for autonomous driving. Work on these uses cases is already underway. At the GPU Technology Conference in May, there were 245 “automotive” companies(of which only 20 were car makers and 35 were vehicle makers) looking at ways NVDA’s technology can be used to automate motion and the movement of objects from point A to point B. John Deere was there to explore automation is farming. 244 other companies were there to learn how computing and machine learning can be used to make their use case a reality.
So when that author of the “great article” on autonomous driving says that autonomous driving contains a lot of hype, he’s missing the point. This technology revolution is not just about moving a person from point A to point B with zero human intervention. He makes it seem like that’s what’s required for NVDA to make any money. Well, NVDA already made $140M in revenue last quarter. The number of partners working with them in the automotive sector almost tripled from Q4 2017 to Q1 2018.
So when that author of the “great article” on autonomous driving says that autonomous driving contains a lot of hype, he’s missing the point. This technology revolution is not just about moving a person from point A to point B with zero human intervention. He makes it seem like that’s what’s required for NVDA to make any money.
I didn’t take it like that Chris. In fact I’ve been adding a little to my NVDA position almost every day, including today. I just agreed with him that there are many, many individual people who won’t accept Level 5 autonomous cars. A few weeks ago someone posted a study here saying that by 2025 all cars would be Level 5. No way.
I did like his quote “Technology isn’t adopted when it’s ready. People change slower than technology does - and the faster technology changes, the greater the gap becomes.” I thought there was a lot of wisdom in it.
Saul
I did like his quote “Technology isn’t adopted when it’s ready. People change slower than technology does - and the faster technology changes, the greater the gap becomes.” I thought there was a lot of wisdom in it.
I think the above quote is only partially true. The rate of technology change is accelerating. I think the gap is shrinking. Just look backward in time. People are changing how they do things at an accelerating rate.
What’s most relevant to this board is the rate of adoption of a new technology. The barriers to adopting new technology is dropping. Let’s take communication as an example.
You want to communicate to another person.
In the distant past, you would need to speak with them directly.
Then someone invented paper and writing instruments. There were a lot of barriers to communicating via paper and writing instruments. You needed to acquire these instruments, you needed to be literate, you needed to know where the other person would be and when, you needed a means of delivery. Lots of issues here so adoption was very, very slow. It took centuries to get mass adoption.
The telegram removed some of these barriers but many remained.
The telephone was another innovation but this one took decades to get mass adoption. Decades is a lot less than centuries though.
The mobile phone though took a lot less time for mass adoption than the land line.
Email adoption was a lot faster than snail mail.
Facebook was even faster then the above.
The thing about technology is that innovation builds on all past innovation. You also have a lot of advancements in infrastructure. Email would not be possible if computers were not widely accessible.
Unless you look back in time, it’s not so evident that change is rapidly accelerating. People change quickly when it makes life easier or more convenient. The gap between people’s willingness to change is shrinking not because they are less willing to change than before but because the friction associated with change is decreasing.
My take is that Level 2, 3, and 4 will be accepted (as long as they are analogous to a gradually improved “cruise control” that you can escape from by putting your foot on the brake), but that people will be very, VERY, slow to adopt Level 5 (with no no human controls or steering wheel, and the car completely in control of the trip). Would YOU accept to buy a car like that?
I would buy one. I would like it to have a steering wheel so I could drive it when I want to drive it. I enjoy driving. I used to deliver pizzas when I was in college, and I couldn’t believe that I actually got paid to drive around. But there are times when I really don’t like to drive. I hate drive in traffic, for instance. If I could flip a switch and let the car drive in bumper to bumper traffic then I would be more than happy to let it take over. Or if I was in a city with difficult to find parking I would let the car drop me off and then go find parking or go earn me some money by driving paying customers around until I needed the car again. Driverless capability will only be allowed if it’s proven to be safe. It should be safer than human drivers and it will be eventually. Insurance companies will know this. If the average person drives 12,000 miles per year and pays $1200 per year for insurance the insurance rate is $0.05 per mile. Now, an insurance company would charge less if the car is safer. I could see insurance companies charing $0.01 per mile when autonomous driving is enabled because the chance of an at fault accident would dramatically decrease with autonomous enabled.
Cruise control has been available in cars for at least 20 years. I think many/most cars have this feature. I never use it. I don’t like it because I feel it is unsafe and because you still need to pay full attention. I pay less attention when the cruise control is on. I also tend to get more sleepy when it’s on. And I get bored. Now, if the car could drive and I could read or do something else productive while I’m commuting somewhere that would be a benefit.
When we look at adoption of a new technology we need to look at the benefits and where people would want those benefits. As I’ve pointed out above, there are many benefits. The objections that Saul raised (full AI with no human control possible) can easily be addressed by making the car fully autonomous by flipping a switch. I don’t see why that wouldn’t be done and why that would be incredibly easy to implement.
While I do agree that full autonomy will take a while to become mainstream, however who would not want the massively increased safety that autonomous systems provide?
Look at these situations where Tesla Autopilot gives you advanced warning of impending crashes https://youtu.be/DuIrjRAzNPQ
This is huge! With nearly 40 000 deaths on US roads in 2016, even without level 5 this technology is game changing.
Justin
Full benefit of “no steering wheel needed” will not come until nearly all cars are so equipped and can communicate with each other real time …“There is a bad pothole 0.82 miles ahead” So maybe 15 or 20 years away . That’s beyond my investment horizon.
We don’t need L5 autopilot to make money in stocks, L3 or L4 should be enough So that is what I am interested in now.
There was no huge demand for ABS or cruise control when first introduced but now everybody wants them These are a form of autonomous driving. Polls are worthless when it comes to technology benefits people have no experience with. Before iPhone were people demanding apps?
The projections of deployment for AI and autopilot are based on more definite evidence than was the spread of PC in the early 1980s. Or the spread of Amazon beyond books (unless you knew the genius of Bezos)
I have listened to scenarios difficult to handle by machines and realize that some of them will indeed be tough for AI. Today or over the next 3 or 4 years, Example,it happened to me, stuck on X way due to ice, saw another car cross median successfully, followed it. Ones who did not cross were stuck for over 8 hours. AI probably could not figure this out , it was driving on a forbidden area.
On a recent trip Google maps directed me incorrectly several times ,dangerously so a couple of times.
The objections that Saul raised (full AI with no human control possible) can easily be addressed by making the car fully autonomous by flipping a switch. I don’t see why that wouldn’t be done and why that would be incredibly easy to implement.
I agree that that would have to be the solution (or people would never accept it). It would probably add some extra cost as you’d have to have two redundant sets of controls, but that’s probably the way it’s going.
Before iPhone were people demanding apps?
There may be a big difference in how people see it. No one felt that having an iPhone, or any of the apps on it, was taking something away from them.
A lot of people would feel that no longer ever having the option to drive their own car was taking something away from them! Even if sometimes they’d be happy to have the car drive so they could do something else. As long as you have a switch you can flip so you can drive yourself, it will be okay. It’s not the car’s autonomy people will worry about, it’s their own autonomy.
Delivery vans in an industrial park will do fine without a steering wheel and human controls, but I don’t believe the majority of humans will accept personal automobiles without a steering wheel and human controls in my lifetime.
Saul
I think there is an age/generational factor in play here as well. I don’t think Millennials and the wave after will have any qualms whatsoever about driverless, and urban dwelling older people won’t have many either, I don’t think.
I did like his quote “Technology isn’t adopted when it’s ready. People change slower than technology does - and the faster technology changes, the greater the gap becomes.” I thought there was a lot of wisdom in it.
Saul:
I assume you are very familiar with the TALC:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_adoption_life_cyc…
It has been a generally accepted process for adoption of new technology…I rather doubt that we will see any difference with autonomous driving…realizing there are MANY issues that need to be worked out (viruses, what makes decisions about life/death if one or another are inevitable, big brother tracking your every whereabouts, error rates, etc.).
But keep in mind that there are 77 MILLION new cars sold worldwide EACH year. That is a whole lot of room to sell autonomus technology even if the “late majority and laggards” delay a bit longer…say now nearly 40 million annually adopting pretty quickly.
What may be more difficult to calculate from an estimation perspective is what impact this will have on need for car ownership to begin with. Some are predicting by 2030, none of us will need to own a car…they will be just circulating around picking and dropping off passengers…the cost being less than ownership. That could certainly reduce the above revenue generation expectations for NVDA, etc.
But in the near term (10 years) the sales expectations for autonomous are likely to be pretty robust.
SaulR80683: Delivery vans in an industrial park will do fine without a steering wheel and human controls, but I don’t believe the majority of humans will accept personal automobiles without a steering wheel and human controls in my lifetime.
I tend to think the same, especially as I am someone who places an extreme value on my own self reliance and personal freedom. Except lately I wonder … is this just fear of the unknown? Fear of a radically different way of life I filled with benefits and drawbacks which will be far different from the fantasy floating around my head? Once I experience autonomous driving will find a different perspective?
Think of this use for an autonomous car, for those who can work anywhere as long as you get a decent wifi or LTE signal.
I could get a beach home 8 or 9 hours a way, and spend every weekend there at the cost of gas and wear and tear. Which on the right car is not that much.
Why I could do this is if the car was driving itself I could easily have a work station in the car and get as much work done remotely, while the car drove, as I could in the office. So it would be like I got in the office, hit the go button. And then I step out of the office 8 or 9 hours later (of course with a few breaks en route) and got work done I would have to get done anyways, and I’d be at the beach home.
I’d have no wear (as I would have had to work anyways), no time wasted (as I’d have to have worked anyways), and I get to enjoy my time at the beach home without the burden of travel that is a major bummer for having vacation homes or just taking vacations.
Even if I took an airline (e.g. Atlanta to Minneapolis is one about a 2 hour flight, but it is a 1 hour drive, 1.5 hour in the airport and waiting to board and waiting for the plane to taxi and take off, taxi at the destination airport, get bags and rental car and drive to location (heck that is another 1.5 to 2 hours at least, and by this time the 2 hour flight is a 7 or 8 hour affair itself, and your exhausted).
Yeah, an autonomous car opens up real possibilities. I could equal these possibilities by either having someone else drive me (and then they are wasting their time), or to pay a chauffeur to do it and then we are talking real big money.
So yes, autonomous driving will mean a lot of things to a lot of people. Things we may not even have thought about.
Tinker
I wonder if the author has taken a plane trip lately. People get on a plane with no reservation that the majority of time it is in autopilot or driving itself. Now the concept of open air space versus being on the road, weather, remote locations, security, etc. are all still issues.
One of my son’s just turned 16 and is taking driving classes and one of the first things he said was; if we had self-driving cars I wouldn’t have to be dealing with this. I think that is applicable to today’s youth - they would embrace it.
On people accepting technology slower - completely agree. I’ve been in Enterprise high tech sales for many, many years. One of my first “sales” jobs was selling something called Bank at Work in the late 80’s.
It was one of the hardest sells I have ever dealt with in my career. I was trying to “sell” them the concept of having their hard cold pay check directly deposited into a bank account. They wouldn’t have to wait in the teller line on Friday afternoon, mgmt. wouldn’t have to give extended lunches, you would get this ATM card and it would allow you to get money out any time you wanted it, etc.
No way, I want to see that cash in my pocket and I like saying hello to everyone at the bank.
Sox Nation
So yes, autonomous driving will mean a lot of things to a lot of people. Things we may not even have thought about.
Tinker,
How about a micro distillery and bud bar. You drink and toke here, we auto drive you home.
Sweet, but the potato chips are 5 dollars a bag in the car.
Cheers
Qazulight