The historical evolution of the automobile is the most common path to derive a new vehicle from. New technologies and insights have altered the shape and performance of the personal car over time. In this line of thoughts, it is logical that driverless technology found its way to the common car. The vehicles Google uses for the development of its technology are standard production vehicles. But there is a huge downside to this evolutionary approach. The weak spots of the automobile are inherited through generations due to designing in a fashion much resembling a copy-paste action, focussing on the object and not on its system.
What happens if you radically break with the past of automotive design and focus on movement rather than vehicle? Whether it is a driverless shopping cart that follows you home while cycling or a gently moving sofa that presents the city to some cheerful chatting oldsters, the focus is laid on the meaning of the motion. Therefore, it tackles the system rather than the object. The resulting mobjects are not each others successors or predecessors, but they exist simultaneously and each of them fulfils a specific role in the mobile landscape. A potential pod-vehicle should be approached as an adaptation of a wicked mobject rather than be derived from a city-car.
MOBJECT [n. mob jekt]
1. mobile object for the mob
Ex: Did you see granstudio's latest mobject? I can't wait to ride it!
MOBESE [adj. mo bi:s]
1. to be heavy or bulky due to mobility problems like traffic jams
Ex: Istanbul's traffic is gridlocked again. That city is really mobese.
MOBESITY [n. mo bi: se ti:]
1. the condition of being mobese
2. traffic that has become victim of its own multitude
Ex: Daily commuters are suffering from all the mobesity on the streets.