I disagree. the magic transforming interior has been a staple of concept cars forever. Nash sold "transforming" interiors from '36 until their dissolution in '61. It's also worth pointing out that Maybachs (made by Mercedes) have had highly non-automotive back seats since 2009: The difference between the Maybach and the Mercedes concept is that the Maybach has been approved by the NTSB; this is what usually happens when concepts meet regulation.
Yeah, and to make this monstrosity work, the author specifically notes that it's bigger than a Maybach, which is a considerable feat, given that a Maybach 62 is longer than my Silverado by a whole foot. No production passenger car will ever be as big as this F015 for a multitude of reasons. The problem is that if you turn your seat around in an actual functional sedan, you're knocking knees with the person in the back seat. It's not as if car makers have been making the back seat intentionally small for these past 100 years. It's that it doesn't work. Articles like this are what happen when Wired writes about cars, because their transportation reporter seems to not know a lot about cars. (I'm not sure I've yet read a "technology" story about driverless cars that hasn't pissed me off.)The difference between the Maybach and the Mercedes concept is that the Maybach has been approved by the NTSB; this is what usually happens when concepts meet regulation.