# Driverless cars? Read this



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/driverless-cars-bad-roads_us_56fd2101e4b0a06d5804dbc9


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

Now this would make for a great April fools joke.


----------



## backstreets-trans (Aug 16, 2015)

Just another reason why uber needs drivers a lot more than we need them. If Travis thinks he is going to replace us drivers any time soon, he is sadly mistaken. He will piss off everybody with a drivers license long before he gets driverless cars.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Yup.


----------



## Mountainsoloist (Nov 16, 2015)

Good read.

I really liked how they included the viewpoint from three different automakers regarding the central issue of road markings. What Volvo considered a roadblock and Tesla considered a nuisance was considered solved by Mercedes. There are two takeaways from this report:

 Fully autonomous cars are not here yet. This is one hurdle that will need to be solved by the engineers rather than the road maintenance crews. Around the world, there will always be poorly maintained roads. Any successful self-driving car will need the ability to navigate roads at all levels of repair.
 They are on their way. No serious mainstream automaker is sitting out from this research. Billions of dollars in funding are going toward the development of this technology, and there is no stopping it. This isn't like the self-driving cars developed in the fifties which ran along a cable. With the constant and rapid advances in sensors, computing power, information sharing, and software development, there will be some very serious contenders on the market in the near future.
Of course, this is a website comprised primarily of current and former Uber drivers. We watch this technology development closely because Uber has promised its investors that it will soon replace all of us with autonomous cars. Ultimately, we don't know whether that will happen even long after self-driving cars are common. 1. Uber (along with companies like it) may replace or displace car ownership in certain markets. This is the outcome they publicly endorse. 2. Uber may continue to serve as a replacement/supplement to taxis and limos like it does already. As such, they may be autonomous, human driven, or a mix. 3. It is also possible that consumers will simply have their own cars pick them up, thus eliminating the need for taxis, limos, and Uber to a large degree. What they all have in common is uncertainty. There is no "sure thing," other than what we create for ourselves.

Now is a great time to polish up our resumes, print up some business cards, remember how to tie a tie, and start looking at our options. Now is a great time to sign up for school. Many of us need to get out of debt and save money. All of us need to be prepared for big changes no matter what happens. They are literally researching the way to make drivers obsolete!


----------



## SibeRescueBrian (May 10, 2015)

Hmmmm. Automakers want driverless cars and have a good bit of money to create them. The U.S. has crumbling infrastructure that we can't afford to maintain, let alone repair. Seems like there should be some kind of deal to be made there.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

Good luck with driverless cars dealing with the rain, stormy conditions, snow, etc. In California a lot of road signs are covered by trees, including some stop signs because the cities don't trim them. And then throw in the occasional road racers that cut you off and all hell breaks loose. These technological, nerdy companies need to get a grip with reality. Geez, even Google Map has trouble finding locations within the Google campus, haha. On top of that, who is going to load your luggage when its a driverless car? Now if the car is driven by a hot fembot, it's another thing altogether...


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Mountainsoloist said:


> Good read.
> 
> I really liked how they included the viewpoint from three different automakers regarding the central issue of road markings. What Volvo considered a roadblock and Tesla considered a nuisance was considered solved by Mercedes. There are two takeaways from this report:
> 
> ...


Uber is realizing it's goal of " DISPLACING CAR OWNERSHIP"
by having you and I run our cars into the ground without the compensation to replace the vehicles.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

It's a long way off, I would not worry. You know the people that want driverless vehicles the most is the military for obvious reasons. They still have not done it! The best they have are drones, flown by guess who? Humans. In a lot of ways, driving pax around in city traffic is similar to these military missions since there are sooooo many "threats" around. Good luck robots, you'd better be damn good. Travis is blowing smokes up investors' butts. The guy is a crazy moron and unethical in many ways.


----------



## Zebonkey (Feb 2, 2016)

Transportador said:


> They still have not done it!


Actually, they have. A few years back on Top Gear Hamster raced a fully autonomous truck on the military test grounds. It did have a backup remote driver, but it was an autonomous vehicle. It was kinda cool. Big-ass mean looking military truck driving by itself.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Mountainsoloist said:


> Good read.
> 
> I really liked how they included the viewpoint from three different automakers regarding the central issue of road markings. What Volvo considered a roadblock and Tesla considered a nuisance was considered solved by Mercedes. There are two takeaways from this report:
> 
> ...


But what these people who are dreaming of these cars seem to forget one idea, and that is people will always want to drive their cars and a lot of people will always want to be driven by a human being just as I want somebody to answer the phone when I call and not a robot. yes there are robots answering phones but whom do we prefer? When there is a choice will usually go with a human. There may be robot cars but they won't totally replace cars driven by humans not now not ever.


----------



## SafeT (Nov 23, 2015)

These car companies can't even make their auto-breaking systems work 100% of the time. The rest is all sci-fi fantasy and wishful thinking.


----------



## backstreets-trans (Aug 16, 2015)

SafeT said:


> These car companies can't even make their auto-breaking systems work 100% of the time. The rest is all sci-fi fantasy and wishful thinking.


You can see the recalls coming already. Will the passengers sue uber, the car manufacturer or both.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

We all know this will never work. Maybe if we lived in a Utopia it might work.


----------



## ninja warrior (Jan 10, 2016)

Instead of *****ing about it ,why don't they invest into the redevelopment of the sub-par infrastructure? I, for one, will not pay more taxes to subsidize these a-holes in order for them to make a bigger profit.


----------



## rtaatl (Jul 3, 2014)

Does Uber or any investor understand that maintaining an autonomous fleet is more costly than paying drivers. Let's not forget repair, fuel, and insurance. Three things Uber doesn't do right now. Who are they going to sucker into giving them driverless cars the company doesn't have to even touch...it's defiantly not coming from the average person who thinks they are an "independent contractor" already..lol


----------



## Mountainsoloist (Nov 16, 2015)

Oscar Levant said:


> But what these people who are dreaming of these cars seem to forget one idea, and that is people will always want to drive their cars and a lot of people will always want to be driven by a human being just as I want somebody to answer the phone when I call and not a robot. yes there are robots answering phones but whom do we prefer? When there is a choice will usually go with a human. There may be robot cars but they won't totally replace cars driven by humans not now not ever.


I strongly agree.

While autonomous cars are definitely coming, we have no idea how people or markets will react. Car companies are still working to figure out where the technology will fit into the design of their products. Many people buy the cars that they want to drive, and the driverless feature will simply make the car more convenient to own. Others legitimately only care about the transportation. Those people are more likely to use on demand car services and they may not care whether there is a person driving them. However, like you pointed out, many people want the experience of service that comes with human interaction. The outcome probably won't be 100% in any case, and it probably won't even be the same across all markets. Eventually, however, the new tech will have a significant impact on car ownership, public transportation, and livery driving.


----------



## Mountainsoloist (Nov 16, 2015)

ninja warrior said:


> Instead of *****ing about it ,why don't they invest into the redevelopment of the sub-par infrastructure? I, for one, will not pay more taxes to subsidize these a-holes in order for them to make a bigger profit.


Ultimately I don't think individual automakers are going to willingly pay for a service that will benefit their competitors' customers as much as their own. Instead, I think they will figure out how to make their vehicles perform well on even the worst roads. This will pay dividends when emerging markets like India and China increase their demand for cars while their own infrastructure lags far behind that of the US.


----------



## Transportador (Sep 15, 2015)

Bruce Willis drives a flying cab in the future versus that stupid robot cabbie that drove Arnold in the other movie. I like Bruce better than the robot


----------



## ninja warrior (Jan 10, 2016)

Mountainsoloist said:


> Ultimately I don't think individual automakers are going to willingly pay for a service that will benefit their competitors' customers as much as their own. Instead, I think they will figure out how to make their vehicles perform well on even the worst roads. This will pay dividends when emerging markets like India and China increase their demand for cars while their own infrastructure lags far behind that of the US.


More sensors with more complex technology would mean higher pricing for these vehicles, correct me if I'm wrong. The price will decrease after a while but we are talking about the cost at the moment of implementation and mass production. It could be years before these vehicles will be at a price point at which regular consumers would be willing to purchase them. That's why, I don't think the govt. should be partial,either way, to the development of self-driving cars when it comes to the matter of public infrastructure and its upkeep. They should be repairing it anyway but not because the big corporations want them to.


----------



## Mountainsoloist (Nov 16, 2015)

ninja warrior said:


> More sensors with more complex technology would mean higher pricing for these vehicles, correct me if I'm wrong. The price will decrease after a while but we are talking about the cost at the moment of implementation and mass production. It could be years before these vehicles will be at a price point at which regular consumers would be willing to purchase them. That's why, I don't think the govt. should be partial,either way, to the development of self-driving cars when it comes to the matter of public infrastructure and its upkeep. They should be repairing it anyway but not because the big corporations want them to.


For sure on both counts. The automakers will need to recoup their R&D costs early on when the first models hit the market. I'm sure they will come with price tags on the higher end of mainstream production vehicles, but with a slightly lower price than the actual cost because of government subsidies (at least I expect that in the US). I think it will take some time before it filters down to most cars on the road.

The governments probably separate the dilemma into two distinct issues: 

They favor the development of autonomous vehicles primarily for safety reasons. The researchers in this field generally agree that there will be far fewer deaths from car accidents when the technology matures and removes many human drivers. Instead of remaining neutral, the US government is in favor of this development. They are contributing to the funding of this research in hopes of safer roads in the future.
The infrastructure is a completely different question, which will probably be approached differently depending on the government. 
In the US, we view infrastructure as something that must be maintained properly. Unfortunately, there are many roadways that are not properly maintained across the country. Most of the struggles from this are funding related (just like many of our issues). The recommendations floating around the transportation circles in the US right now are leaning slightly toward taxing transportation by the mile. The problem with this approach is privacy. Generally speaking, Americans do not want their movements tracked, whether by GPS or camera systems. 
In the UK, this is a non-issue. Everyone is already tracked there, openly and officially, and their citizens don't seem to care. Also their gas prices are significantly higher than in the states.
China, on the other hand, is more likely to implement ownership and use restrictions. That appears to be one of the methods they use for most of the issues which concern them, and they already have a lottery system in place for private citizens to even be allowed to buy a car. With their smog already too dense and their population steadily increasing, I wouldn't be surprised if they purposefully allowed their roadways to crumble. They would be much more likely to invest heavily in public trains or something similar.

The big corporations view these issues globally, and they recognize that each market will come with its own roadway problems. Any vehicle they create will need solid performance on the roads available in every market they enter. Any payments they make to better the roads in any country will probably be made in the form of a tariff.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

Mountainsoloist said:


> I strongly agree.
> 
> While autonomous cars are definitely coming, we have no idea how people or markets will react. Car companies are still working to figure out where the technology will fit into the design of their products. Many people buy the cars that they want to drive, and the driverless feature will simply make the car more convenient to own. Others legitimately only care about the transportation. Those people are more likely to use on demand car services and they may not care whether there is a person driving them. However, like you pointed out, many people want the experience of service that comes with human interaction. The outcome probably won't be 100% in any case, and it probably won't even be the same across all markets. Eventually, however, the new tech will have a significant impact on car ownership, public transportation, and livery driving.


I think I have a good idea of how they will react. I have asked my riders how they would react to a driverless car if one appeared , just everyone I have asked this question they have always said they would not climb into one. I asked a lot of people would they like to own one and they say no. Maybe you will find some people who will like them but the point is they are not going to replace normal cars and normal Uber and Taxi


----------



## Mountainsoloist (Nov 16, 2015)

Oscar Levant said:


> I think I have a good idea of how they will react. I have asked my riders how they would react to a driverless car if one appeared , just everyone I have asked this question they have always said they would not climb into one. I asked a lot of people would they like to own one and they say no. Maybe you will find some people who will like them but the point is they are not going to replace normal cars and normal Uber and Taxi


Very true. The driverless car technology will not be accepted immediately with open arms. There are bound to be problems when they first begin to integrate on normal roads in large numbers. Like every new technology, I think that the general public will wait cautiously in the wings while the early adopters work the kinks out. Also, there are many motorists who fear that normal cars will be outlawed with the onset of driverless cars. Over time though, I think driverless cars will become common. Eventually, I think they will become the norm for most cars.

I am also skeptical as to how Uber and Taxi companies will handle the change. Uber has always maintained that they are going to replace all drivers with driverless cars, but owning a fleet of cars doesn't seem like the kind of move Uber would make, when they already use our cars for free. They must have data somewhere that suggests it could be profitable. Otherwise, I don't see people letting their car go out unsupervised on the platform. That would be begging for trouble. That leaves plenty of room for the continuation of Uber and Taxis as part of the service economy with real people driving.

My guess is that Uber and other companies will actually purchase and maintain fleets of self driving cars. I completely agree that many customers will hold out and insist on a real person, and I believe there will be a time period where both self driving corporate owned Uber cars and normal drivers like us are on the road together. Uber will continue to collect data and make trips until they come to a conclusion of which is the better business model in each market. After that, they will probably make incremental changes to their platform which push riders and drivers into taking the rides most profitable to the company.


----------

