An incredible prediction of an entirely believable future!

[jonny jeez]

But that "workplace strategy" (by which you mean "getting people to pay for their own offices") is only ever going to be relevant for office workers. And, coincidentally, according to this survey commissioned by an organisation cheerleading for remote working, very nearly 67% of us don't work from an office all the time.

I don't mean anything of the sort.

Workplace strategy...true strategy has no predetermined outcome. There is no agenda beyond the main business objectives of that particular firm. Which, after distillation generally rotate around profit and talent attrition/attraction.

 

[Electric_Andy]

The desire for autonomous cars isn't about congestion.

I know, but I think they are finding a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. If I sell my car and book an autonomous one for the morning to pick me up, I'd still be occupying a car on the road. I'd still be paying for it. The owner of the autonomous car would still be paying VED and insurance. The owners would still have to charge it up and maintain it. In my view it's a novelty. And if someone says "I'm worth £100/hour so I can work in the car", then why not work at home instead?

All it seems to be doing is putting taxi drivers out of business? Or am I missing something? Is it not just a neat toy for the rich?

 

[jonny jeez]

One bet isn't off. Which is that if someone is paid for doing something, someone else is paying them to do it. I'm using maths, and only maths.

Totally

But the accommodation of that person isn't defined. How they do what they are paid to do, when and where they do it, what contractual commitments they agree are all in a huge state of change.

Many firms, particularly in the IT sector employ and re employ the same staff over and over, allowing them (encouraging) them to work elsewhere in the interim to acquire skills and allow a refresh upon each rehire. This isn't zero hours but very flexible contracting that provides for increase in salary to reflects real and current skill levels.

 

[jonny jeez]

I know, but I think they are finding a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. If I sell my car and book an autonomous one for the morning to pick me up, I'd still be occupying a car on the road. I'd still be paying for it. The owner of the autonomous car would still be paying VED and insurance. The owners would still have to charge it up and maintain it. In my view it's a novelty. And if someone says "I'm worth £100/hour so I can work in the car", then why not work at home instead?

All it seems to be doing is putting taxi drivers out of business? Or am I missing something? Is it not just a neat toy for the rich?

Stats show that on average, for every 24 hours of car ownership, the car is driven for one hour.

I would enjoy only paying for that one hour if it were totally practical and usable. (which it currently isn't...but it is coming.

Its nothing to do with wealth either, I suspect apple are seeking to attract a mass market of average earners who don't want to pay to have a car sat on the drive.

 

[Dan B]

[...] there will be apps that can tell by your facial expressions if you are lying. Imagine a political debate where it's being displayed when they are telling the truth and when not.

I think what we've learned since that exhortation to "imagine" is that nobody[*] cares when a politician is telling the truth.

[*] ok, exaggerating here. but not enough people care to make this in any way a defence against liars and delusionists getting into power.

 

[EltonFrog]

Also founder of some rather 'interesting' organisations...

Another bloody crackpot !

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

Stats show that on average, for every 24 hours of car ownership, the car is driven for one hour.

I would enjoy only paying for that one hour if it were totally practical and usable. (which it currently isn't...but it is coming.

Its nothing to do with wealth either, I suspect apple are seeking to attract a mass market of average earners who don't want to pay to have a car sat on the drive.

I rather suspect that Apple would see things this way:

Car costs Mr Jeez £24 a day, but he only uses it for 1 hour.

Apple supply a car for that one hour for £20, saving Mr Jeez a massive £1460 a year!

However Apple will supply the same car to (say) 10 other people and generate £220 a day, or £80,300 a year for a car which costs (say) £30k to buy and £2k per year to maintain. Over a three year contract, that vehicle generates over £200,000 profit!

Entirely made-up figures of course but it demonstrates the potential revenues for corporations as well as the advantages for the end user. Companies could get very very rich supplying a product that saves the consumer money.

 

[jonny jeez]

I rather suspect that Apple would see things this way:

Car costs Mr Jeez £24 a day, but he only uses it for 1 hour.

Apple supply a car for that one hour for £20, saving Mr Jeez a massive £1460 a year!

However Apple will supply the same car to (say) 10 other people and generate £220 a day, or £80,300 a year for a car which costs (say) £30k to buy and £2k per year to maintain. Over a three year contract, that vehicle generates over £200,000 profit!

Entirely made-up figures of course but it demonstrates the potential revenues for corporations as well as the advantages for the end user. Companies could get very very rich supplying a product that saves the consumer money.

Add to that the attraction of contracted earnings. Car manufacturers are only as good as their last years of unit sales. This creates huge pressure for constant product development and more sales.

Charging a "user" £150 a month to provide a set amount of car hours allows the company to show significant contracted worth, share value and recurring revenues. Not providing cars for the hours charges (a little like the fitness club membership) will deliver massive profits...literally money for nothing.

Now plug that rationale into a firm like Tesla or apple...or better still google who are way ahead of the curve already

Soon these new players will offer a solution like this, if the BMW/Peugot/Citroen partnership doesn't beat them to it

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

Where it falls down a little is most people want their cars between 8-10 am and 4-6am, so my theoretical 11 users won't all be able to use the same car.

 

[jonny jeez]

I rather suspect that Apple would see things this way:

Car costs Mr Jeez £24 a day, but he only uses it for 1 hour.

Apple supply a car for that one hour for £20, saving Mr Jeez a massive £1460 a year!

However Apple will supply the same car to (say) 10 other people and generate £220 a day, or £80,300 a year for a car which costs (say) £30k to buy and £2k per year to maintain. Over a three year contract, that vehicle generates over £200,000 profit!

Entirely made-up figures of course but it demonstrates the potential revenues for corporations as well as the advantages for the end user. Companies could get very very rich supplying a product that saves the consumer money.

Also, ( apologies for the double reply but its a separate point.)

Teslas plan is to plug in car storage facilities, so that they become one large source of clean stored energy, that is pushed across their own grid and distributed to users on demand. This allows storage of solar and wind generated power as well as the development of their own power grid. The potential here is far beyond the need for you and I to get to the pub.

Its a genuinely exciting age.

I must admit to having more than a slight career crush on Tesla, they are a very inspirational firm.

 

[Slick]

Where it falls down a little is most people want their cars between 8-10 am and 4-6am, so my theoretical 11 users won't all be able to use the same car.

Still a lot of business miles take place outwith the commuters hours.

 

[Blue Hills]

Some of those predictions seem eerily familiar. I remember 40 Years ago on Tomorrow's World when they said robots would be doing a lot of jobs and that as a result people would have far more time in their hands.

ah yes - I remember those days - humanities lessons we were all invited to brainstorm how folk would meet the challenge of all this free time as they would all be working about ten hours a week and robots and computers would be producing all the money. Incredible. What they missed of course is that folk can be selfish manipulative hypocritical posey me me me nobbers - including no shortage of them on the left, men and women, gay and straight. I could tell a few tales but better not.

Reality of course is we are heading for a new Victorian age - at least in the West.

 

[srw]

Teslas plan is to plug in car storage facilities, so that they become one large source of clean stored energy, that is pushed across their own grid and distributed to users on demand. This allows storage of solar and wind generated power as well as the development of their own power grid.

So when Elon Musk owns the power grid that charges the cars, Page and Bryn own the maps that steer the cars, Donald Trump controls the satellites that tells the cars where they are, Bill Gates owns the computer networks that enables the cars to talk to each other and Mark Zuckerberg owns the advertising screens in the cars, what's left for democratic control?

There's a lot of potentially exciting stuff, and I'm really quite impressed by Tesla for its vision, but there's more than a hint of corporate dystopia in this sort of vision of the future.


(Despite appearances, this isn't a series of personal digs - but whenever anyone is quite excited about technology I'm programmed to look for the issues.)

 

[Drago]

While Putin is in charge there will always be democracy in the World.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Technology changes. People don't. Give us utopia, or even the opportunity of utopia, and we will screw it up. We will want more utopia for ourselves and less utopia for them over there who are different. I blame Darwin.