> a company could expand their offerings with a less robust safety record
But would people take it?
I mean, if one service is 25% cheaper but there are a bunch of horror stories of their vehicles crashing into highway barriers (like this past October), I'm not sure people are going to get in.
Driving is 100% cheaper, and there are a bunch of horror stories of people crashing their vehicles into highway barriers. We’re not starting at zero here.
Is driving really 100% cheaper? Owning a car has pretty high fixed costs.
Also, it's different when you crash a car yourself vs a robot doing it. If you are driving, there is clearer accountability than a robot, so the bar must be much higher for the robot.
But would people take it?
I mean, if one service is 25% cheaper but there are a bunch of horror stories of their vehicles crashing into highway barriers (like this past October), I'm not sure people are going to get in.