Keep in mind that AARP is excited about driverless cars because for millions of seniors, losing their ability to drive means losing their independence. Also, by age 50, everyone knows somebody killed by a human-driven car. AARP's members vote at very high rates even in non-presidential elections, so they are a very powerful lobby.
Not clear to me how a driverless car has any advantage for a senior vs. Uber or Lyft with a driver. In fact it seems less desirable, as the human driver could help the elderly passenger in and out of the vehicle, help with walkers or wheelchairs, etc.
The hope is that autonomous cars will be much cheaper once you take out the human element; when a taxi costs $30 for a routine trip, and Uber/Lyft still have to pay their drivers >minimum-wage, you cannot cater to the elder niche of doing groceries and making regular doctor trips, not to mention the useful aspect of 24/7 coverage.
There's also the psychological issues: elderly people don't want to be a 'burden' or rely on strangers, and autonomous cars neatly solve both issues.
It feels strange to see so many traditional backers for this tech. I've been hesitant to let myself get too excited for the possibility that driverless cars will reach the market when the technology is ready - instead of when it is deemed ready by regulators, lobbyists, and the gatekeepers who are backed up by legacy protectionist policies.
There seems to be so much positive traction among political and industry players that this might turn out to be one of those rare technologies who's progress doesn't get crippled by vested incumbents. But experience has taught me to be cautiously optimistic at best.
It does make sense though. The majority of people have driven a car and can relate to the hassles. Especially with drunk driving. Eliminating drunk driving is in everyone's best interest and hard to argue. Plus who would fight against self-driving cars? The only self-interest groups here would be the drivers themselves and even then I don't think it'll be a big enough lobby group.
Maybe a subscription model, now you can't pay once and maintain your car with your local mechanic for 20 years, it has to be done by the manufacturer and contains expensive software updates?
Keep in mind that AARP is excited about driverless cars because for millions of seniors, losing their ability to drive means losing their independence. Also, by age 50, everyone knows somebody killed by a human-driven car. AARP's members vote at very high rates even in non-presidential elections, so they are a very powerful lobby.
http://www.aarp.org/home-family/personal-technology/info-201...