# Google Is Developing Its Own Uber Competitor



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Google Is Developing Its Own Uber Competitor*
byBrad Stone
*http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-google-and-uber-are-going-to-war-over-taxis*


----------



## The Kid (Dec 10, 2014)

Google is getting ahead of it's self. Just like it did with Google glass.
Driver-less cars are a long way from widespread acceptance. 10 maybe 15 years.
Most people over 40 will never use them.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

The Kid said:


> Google is getting ahead of it's self. Just like it did with Google glass.
> Driver-less cars are a long way from widespread acceptance. 10 maybe 15 years.
> Most people over 40 will never use them.


I want to say it is Proctor & Gamble....I could be wrong....I would have to look. Butele would say the same thing about them. But everyone in the industry knew....it didn't matter how far away they were on product development because when they arrived it was lights out for the competition. Time to move to a new niche.


----------



## Simon (Jan 4, 2015)

The Kid said:


> Google is getting ahead of it's self. Just like it did with Google glass.
> Driver-less cars are a long way from widespread acceptance. 10 maybe 15 years.
> Most people over 40 will never use them.


I'll buy one tooth sweet.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *Google Is Developing Its Own Uber Competitor*
> byBrad Stone
> *http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-google-and-uber-are-going-to-war-over-taxis*


POST # 1 @chi1cabby : ♤♡♢♧ Yeah, but
what's the over and under on whether
Google will crush #FUBER? Any thoughts
on RasierLLC IPO date, apparently it's as
soon as AprilFools' Day but no later than
Octobrrrrr.


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 1 @chi1cabby : ♤♡♢♧ Yeah, but
> what's the over and under on whether
> Google will crush #FUBER? Any thoughts
> on RasierLLC IPO date, apparently it's as
> ...


IPO could be a dangerous path for Travis. I think he will go for the Golden Parachute and walk away with many $$$$.


----------



## JJcriggins (Dec 28, 2014)

Before the Driver-Less car happens, Uber is quite content with creating the Uber Clone Army.
A Docile, Humble, Quiet Fleet of Drones. 

App on
Go Online
Accept Every
Navigate
Hit arrived
"How is your "Insert Day" Going?"
Begin trip
Navigate
End Trip
Repeat
Go Offline

......

JJ


----------



## Tx rides (Sep 15, 2014)

The Kid said:


> Google is getting ahead of it's self. Just like it did with Google glass.
> Driver-less cars are a long way from widespread acceptance. 10 maybe 15 years.
> Most people over 40 will never use them.


With age comes sensibility and reason (well ideally) I'm 51, I am not going to get on a freeway in a driverless car until all cars around me are driverless, and years of safety testing and adjustments have occurred. When I was 21, I was invincible. Now I know better


----------



## UberBlackDriverLA (Aug 21, 2014)

I'm guessing Google views Travis as a major liability moving forward.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

The Kid said:


> Google is getting ahead of it's self. Just like it did with Google glass.
> Driver-less cars are a long way from widespread acceptance. 10 maybe 15 years.
> Most people over 40 will never use them.


^^^
Yeah, because people who are 40 want to live to be 41.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Yeah, because people who are 40 want to live to be 41.


I used to think the same thing about computers and my 80 year old ex-mother in law. You can't get her off computer now, she's as bad as my kids.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

observer said:


> I used to think the same thing about computers and my 80 year old ex-mother in law. You can't get her off computer now, she's as bad as my kids.


^^^
A few years ago Google bundled something called Navigate with its software. 
I don't know why it was discontinued but it was actually pretty good, and totally GPS operated except all the times that I'd navigate home just for fun, you understand... I've never that three sheets to the wind... I'd get a block from home and it would say "When safe, make a U turn" and yada yada. 
I mean... I could actually see my fricken driveway. 
And this was with receiving anywhere between 8 and 12 satellites.


----------



## Tx rides (Sep 15, 2014)

observer said:


> I used to think the same thing about computers and my 80 year old ex-mother in law. You can't get her off computer now, she's as bad as my kids.


There is a big difference between using a computer and riding in a car on an interstate with no responsible driver.
As one heavily involved in development, support and service of a major operating system, I'm not afraid of technology, but I do fear arrogance, sloppy coding, and narrow verification testing, especially if combined


----------



## UberXtraordinary (Dec 13, 2014)

Interesting that Rideshare drivers are referred to as "the other dude" in the car. The expensive extra passenger. How cheap it will be once "the dude" is gone. What about paying for the car? What about operational expences? The dude pays for all that now. Only Google is developing true driverless cars at this time. If Über wants in on that game it will likely be with the autonomous cars we will be buying in a few years. Unfortunately for Über, those cars, such as Tesla Model III, will not be "driverless" so they are stuck with "the Dude" until they get into building or paying for driverless cars.







Über on!


----------



## DC_Uber_Lyft_Driver (Sep 2, 2014)

Here's the thing. One bad PR incident such as an out-of-control rogue driverless car wiping out 20 innocent bystanders on a crowded city sidewalk could knock back this proposed roll-out by another 10 to 15 years.


----------



## JJcriggins (Dec 28, 2014)

UberXtraordinary said:


> Interesting that Rideshare drivers are referred to as "the other dude" in the car. The expensive extra passenger. How cheap it will be once "the dude" is gone. What about paying for the car? What about operational expences? The dude pays for all that now. Only Google is developing true driverless cars at this time. If Über wants in on that game it will likely be with the autonomous cars we will be buying in a few years. Unfortunately for Über, those cars, such as Tesla Model III, will not be "driverless" so they are stuck with "the Dude" until they get into building or paying for driverless cars.
> View attachment 4642
> 
> Über on!


Spot on man!


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Tx rides said:


> There is a big difference between using a computer and riding in a car on an interstate with no responsible driver.
> As one heavily involved in development, support and service of a major operating system, I'm not afraid of technology, but I do fear arrogance, sloppy coding, and narrow verification testing, especially if combined


Yes, I can see that, I was just wondering if my ex-mominlaw (I don't know why I call her my ex-mominlaw, she's a great lady and we love each other) would use a driverless car. I really believe she would use one if it were available today.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> A few years ago Google bundled something called Navigate with its software.
> I don't know why it was discontinued but it was actually pretty good, and totally GPS operated except all the times that I'd navigate home just for fun, you understand... I've never that three sheets to the wind... I'd get a block from home and it would say "When safe, make a U turn" and yada yada.
> I mean... I could actually see my fricken driveway.
> And this was with receiving anywhere between 8 and 12 satellites.


From what I have read, GPS is just one part of driverless tech. They also incorporate radar, cameras, and other driverless and vehicles with drivers to computer that ties everything together.


----------



## Tx rides (Sep 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Yes, I can see that, I was just wondering if my ex-mominlaw (I don't know why I call her my ex-mominlaw, she's a great lady and we love each other) would use a driverless car. I really believe she would use one if it were available today.


Well 80 year olds can tend to think like 20 year olds , balking at risks ("I've come this far, what's the worst that could happen now?") lol!!!

I think it is not only high-risk on the roads as long as human drivers exist, from a public transportation perspective, I don't see this is very feasible. Cab drivers, Uber drivers, etc. -they all know what the condition of the backseat of a car can be at three in the morning. Someone will have to clean it. So it is hard to believe we will replace drivers with vomit cleaners. Sure, the technology can exist to automate all of that, but the cost will far exceed what can be charged, for at least another 10+ years, and that is assuming adoption in the private sector.


----------



## DC_Uber_Lyft_Driver (Sep 2, 2014)

What's to stop a terrorist from ordering a driverless car with a stolen credit card, tossing a bomb in and setting it on it's way.


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

*The two companies are going to war*.... yeah right 

War can only happen between 2 equal forces.
Google is so much bigger, it might crush Uber even by stepping on Uber's toes by accident.


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

DC_Uber_Lyft_Driver said:


> What's to stop a terrorist from ordering a driverless car with a stolen credit card, tossing a bomb in and setting it on it's way.


probably has pressure sensors in the seats to know if people are in the car
same way a car turns the airbags off if it senses a child is in the seat
however vandalism would be a serious problem
and somebody would need to clean behind each trip
otherwise somebody will sit in spilled coffe, or worse yet, puke


----------



## JJcriggins (Dec 28, 2014)

Bart McCoy said:


> probably has pressure sensors in the seats to know if people are in the car
> same way a car turns the airbags off if it senses a child is in the seat
> however vandalism would be a serious problem
> and somebody would need to clean behind each trip
> otherwise somebody will sit in spilled coffe, or worse yet, puke


Bart,
the inside of the car will resemble a Chipotle
Brushed aluminum and dark faux wood formica 
you know, so you cant use markers or spray paint, or use your leatherman to carve "****** Hipster was Here"

Basically have a "Oz"/NYC subway feel!

JJ


----------



## Chicago-uber (Jun 18, 2014)

I have a feeling Google will buy out lyft.


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

Chicago-uber said:


> I have a feeling Google will buy out lyft.


That's an interesting thought. Would we get modified Google Glass to record what goes on in the car? But based on what Uber has gone through, would Google be willing to go deep pockets to shred through the regulatory systems? They have already had some privacy issues in Europe.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> A few years ago Google bundled something called Navigate with its software.
> I don't know why it was discontinued but it was actually pretty good, and totally GPS operated except all the times that I'd navigate home just for fun, you understand... I've never that three sheets to the wind... I'd get a block from home and it would say "When safe, make a U turn" and yada yada.
> I mean... I could actually see my fricken driveway.
> And this was with receiving anywhere between 8 and 12 satellites.


Driverless technology is not solely based on GPS, the cars actually "look ahead", view the streetscape. Time/distance/movement sensors calculate if anything within its operating area is a threat compared to the safe saved image that car is working with in that millisecond.

The parallels with the way human sight and our sensory tools, response and actions work is a lot closer than you think.

Google is sweeping the world with its Streetview vehicles, recording the background landscape for Driverless cars. Uber is stuffed without access to Streetview and Google's driverless technology and Travis knows that.

What Travis needs to find is a company left behind in the Tech race and sellout real quick. Like Newscorp thought they could challenge Facebook by burning up 500million dollars buying Myspace, or AOL buying ICQ.

Travis will be fine, Uber is ****ed once Google comes clean.


----------



## Simon (Jan 4, 2015)

DC_Uber_Lyft_Driver said:


> What's to stop a terrorist from ordering a driverless car with a stolen credit card, tossing a bomb in and setting it on it's way.


I lost IQ points reading this post.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Bart McCoy said:


> probably has pressure sensors in the seats to know if people are in the car
> same way a car turns the airbags off if it senses a child is in the seat
> however vandalism would be a serious problem
> and somebody would need to clean behind each trip
> otherwise somebody will sit in spilled coffe, or worse yet, puke


these Cars will know if you fart. They will have sensors and cctv cameras everywhere. You will not be able to get away with anything for more than 10 seconds.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> these Cars will know if you fart. They will have sensors and cctv cameras everywhere. You will not be able to get away with anything for more than 10 seconds.


They will come equipped with rocket propelled ejection seats for violators.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> these Cars will know if you fart.


What if I just have bad breath and a speech impediment?


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

observer said:


> They will come equipprd with rocket propelled ejection seats for violators.


Images and data such as face recognition would be transmitted to enforcement agencies. Admissible in court, worse than a fine or jail, access to the new mandated public transport system will be curtailed.

In 20-30 years time, NO ONE but the richest and most entitled will be able to drive in City areas. You will be forced to park miles away from the CBD at a nodal point, and take light rail Or driverless cars further.

Governments will easily be convinced by Google of the advantages of handing over personal transport monopolies to them. Freeing up city budgets of providing public transport. In return Google will be obliged to share data on who, when where people travelled to with Government.

This is not about mass transport, its about data mining and control. Uber loses that race to Google and Government.


----------



## Simon (Jan 4, 2015)

Sydney Uber said:


> Images and data such as face recognition would be transmitted to enforcement agencies. Admissible in court, worse than a fine or jail, access to the new mandated public transport system will be curtailed.
> 
> In 20-30 years time, NO ONE but the richest and most entitled will be able to drive in City areas. You will be forced to park miles away from the CBD at a nodal point, and take light rail Or driverless cars further.
> 
> ...


Sooooooooooooooo bleak. You make me sad


----------



## AintWorthIt (Sep 30, 2014)

I still think driverless cars are 15 years away. Even then, I'm not so sure people will be sold on them. I'd like to see one of them in heavy rain or some ice for a few laughs.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

If I'm in a car by myself, I'd want to drive it.

I really don't understand where the demand is for this.... other than from the ******** who doesn't want to pay "the other dude in the car".


----------



## Simon (Jan 4, 2015)

UberHammer said:


> If I'm in a car by myself, I'd want to drive it.
> 
> I really don't understand where the demand is for this.... other than from the ******** who doesn't want to pay "the other dude in the car".


My wife said she wanted one as soon as she can.. I asked why she said she would sleep on the rife into work or read a book. It also would be great for handicap people who cannot drive. Long drives would be great with these.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Simon said:


> Sooooooooooooooo bleak. You make me sad


Unfortunately so called progress over the centuries have meant the individual's loss of personal freedoms, rights and choices in many areas of modern life - the price of progress i guess


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Images and data such as face recognition would be transmitted to enforcement agencies. Admissible in court, worse than a fine or jail, access to the new mandated public transport system will be curtailed.
> 
> In 20-30 years time, NO ONE but the richest and most entitled will be able to drive in City areas. You will be forced to park miles away from the CBD at a nodal point, and take light rail Or driverless cars further.
> 
> ...




I think there may be less need for mass transit in the future, birth rates have been dropping steadily and some countries are not replenishing their populations. As time goes on we will need less and less cars


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

observer said:


> I think there may be less need for mass transit in the future, birth rates have been dropping steadily and some countries are not replenishing their populations. As time goes on we will need less and less cars


I recently read an article that Japan could cause a major recession because they aren't having enough kids. A large amount are not marrying and somewhere around 40% of women and 25% of men aren't even INTERESTED in sex.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

observer said:


> I think there may be less need for mass transit in the future, birth rates have been dropping steadily and some countries are not replenishing their populations. As time goes on we will need less and less cars


1st world stagnating populations are being replaced by 3rd World breeders, legal and illegal immigration. 1st world menial tasks, services and jobs will grow as wealth is concentrated and rich households hire help for every domestic task.

As upwardly mobile races start purchasing on a discretionary rather than a needs based basis, mobile human services such Uber, food and grocery delivery will come under higher demand.

Google with a tonne of data on individual behaviour will be able to see patterns in collective demand, mobilise resources to meet demand or motivate consumption.

Yes @observer, there may be less need for mass transit due to tele-commuting and virtual offices. But Google have thrown their net a lot wider than Uber in the hunt to corner and cater to consumers and whilst mining heaps of personal data


----------



## Drive777 (Jan 23, 2015)

AintWorthIt said:


> I still think driverless cars are 15 years away. Even then, I'm not so sure people will be sold on them. I'd like to see one of them in heavy rain or some ice for a few laughs.


Good point. Even light to moderate rain can distort the senses and turn streets into ponds and rivers. Several times I've had to make split second reactions based on two opposing threats. Example... you're driving along and someone coming the opposite direction suddenly swerves over the line. You counter to avoid hitting them, but then hit that deep pot hole that suddenly came up on your right side instead.... because there's no time to slam on your brakes and risk being rear-ended by the car following too close behind. The pot hole put quite a jolt to your shocks/struts, but it was determined to be the LEAST of threats at that moment.

How would an auto driving car react to multiple perceived hazards at the same time? How would an auto driving car quickly get you from the city to the suburbs in heavy traffic with construction detours and school zones along alternate routes? I've had to make course corrections on-the-fly based on variables that change from minute to minute (GPS and Waze is useless without first hand knowledge of the streets, back roads and route/time/distance tradeoffs).

I don't see these cars being able to operate except within more controlled grids / environments. Maybe having their own lanes would be a more realistic goal, but that's going to require major infrastructure changes - and limited car availability due to limited road options.


----------



## AintWorthIt (Sep 30, 2014)

Let a SUV or semi plow into one of those and see what's left.


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

yeah, a whole lot of variables that a driverless car must handle
i know they eve already tested them to drive coast to coast on a freeway,but when you're picking up strangers in dense cities, just so many different things can happen,that would require human judgement

Even on the highway if say a criminal got in the car in new york, punched in an address to Dallas texas. Cop gets behind it,will it pull over and stop and unlock the doors so they can get him out? Even better, how do they know I didnt just put a flashing light on my dash and pull it over just so i can rob the passenger and/or try to carjack the car, and punch in a new address to take the car to a chop shop? lol. I mean a wild notion yes, but no matter the situation, a driverless car HAS to be able to handle it properly


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Driverless technology is not solely based on GPS, the cars actually "look ahead", view the streetscape. Time/distance/movement sensors calculate if anything within its operating area is a threat compared to the safe saved image that car is working with in that millisecond.
> 
> The parallels with the way human sight and our sensory tools, response and actions work is a lot closer than you think.
> 
> ...


^^^
Oh, yeah... I remember ICQ. I used to love it back in the day when I had dialup.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

observer said:


> I recently read an article that Japan could cause a major recession because they aren't having enough kids. A large amount are not marrying and somewhere around 40% of women and 25% of men aren't even INTERESTED in sex.


^^^
Blame it on aluminum cookware... Teflon too.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> What if I just have bad breath and a speech impediment?


^^^
Then just do what I do. 
Communicate with Post-It notes.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Drive777 said:


> Good point. Even light to moderate rain can distort the senses and turn streets into ponds and rivers. Several times I've had to make split second reactions based on two opposing threats. Example... you're driving along and someone coming the opposite direction suddenly swerves over the line. You counter to avoid hitting them, but then hit that deep pot hole that suddenly came up on your right side instead.... because there's no time to slam on your brakes and risk being rear-ended by the car following too close behind. The pot hole put quite a jolt to your shocks/struts, but it was determined to be the LEAST of threats at that moment.
> 
> How would an auto driving car react to multiple perceived hazards at the same time? How would an auto driving car quickly get you from the city to the suburbs in heavy traffic with construction detours and school zones along alternate routes? I've had to make course corrections on-the-fly based on variables that change from minute to minute (GPS and Waze is useless without first hand knowledge of the streets, back roads and route/time/distance tradeoffs).
> 
> I don't see these cars being able to operate except within more controlled grids / environments. Maybe having their own lanes would be a more realistic goal, but that's going to require major infrastructure changes - and limited car availability due to limited road options.


^^^
As far as finding my house address is concerned...
Tom Tom is pretty good. 
Garmin tells me that I'm in North Las Vegas instead of Las Vegas.
Magellan tells me that my address doesn't exist. 
Waze says I live in Las Vegas, New Mexico. 
And Google location services on the weather map says that I live in Winchester.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Then just do what I do.
> Communicate with Post-It notes.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> Oh, yeah... I remember ICQ. I used to love it back in the day when I had dialup.


Yep, it was the only messaging program on the Internet that was any good - for a little while.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> What if I just have bad breath and a speech impediment?


The car will diagnose your problem and suggest UBER partners it could take you to to have your problem looked at.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Drive777 said:


> Good point. Even light to moderate rain can distort the senses and turn streets into ponds and rivers. Several times I've had to make split second reactions based on two opposing threats. Example... you're driving along and someone coming the opposite direction suddenly swerves over the line. You counter to avoid hitting them, but then hit that deep pot hole that suddenly came up on your right side instead.... because there's no time to slam on your brakes and risk being rear-ended by the car following too close behind. The pot hole put quite a jolt to your shocks/struts, but it was determined to be the LEAST of threats at that moment.
> 
> How would an auto driving car react to multiple perceived hazards at the same time? How would an auto driving car quickly get you from the city to the suburbs in heavy traffic with construction detours and school zones along alternate routes? I've had to make course corrections on-the-fly based on variables that change from minute to minute (GPS and Waze is useless without first hand knowledge of the streets, back roads and route/time/distance tradeoffs).
> 
> I don't see these cars being able to operate except within more controlled grids / environments. Maybe having their own lanes would be a more realistic goal, but that's going to require major infrastructure changes - and limited car availability due to limited road options.


Most emergency driving decisions we are forced to make "in split seconds" are such because no accommodation for conditions or variables are made.

Driverless cars WILL slow down and provide higher safety levels. They will not rush, take risks or drift in front of other oncoming cars. This is why regulators WILL change road usage laws in their favour. Politicians will sell it that they are reducing the road death toll, slashing road trauma, saving millions of dollars in injury and lost productivity.

The more I think about it the more certain it looks. Only a small percentage of humans with the money and entitlement will be allowed to drive. Even so, the moment they break any rules or make a human error their car will take over. The event is recorded, logged with a central review authority and if bad enough the car wont release back into the Driver's control.

REAL bad events will have your driving rights totally removed, and your bank account debited.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

AintWorthIt said:


> Let a SUV or semi plow into one of those and see what's left.


The event will be recorded, corroborated with vision from other Driverless cars and the Human driver will have his or her driving rights reviewed.

If the human is at fault, they lose their driving rights. But thats OK - UberX is cheaper than owning a car. Hitting that Driverless car just provided Uber/ Google with a customer for life.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> As far as finding my house address is concerned...
> Tom Tom is pretty good.
> Garmin tells me that I'm in North Las Vegas instead of Las Vegas.
> ...


You are right @Uber-Doober in pointing out the limitations of GPS. It's a system that will have a 5-15 yard variation when it is right! We all know how wrong it can get.

But with the visual mapping of the world's streetscapes by Google, this is what will provide the pin point accruacy that driverless cars need. They will be "seeing" and matching up what it sees with the memory of the image it has been programmed to go to, just like we "remember" how to get to places


----------



## Drive777 (Jan 23, 2015)

Sydney Uber said:


> Most emergency driving decisions we are forced to make "in split seconds" are such because no accommodation for conditions or variables are made.
> 
> Driverless cars WILL slow down and provide higher safety levels.


If driverless cars must slow down and be safer under the same assumption that the majority will lose rights to private car ownership (and therefore most people's current means of self-controlled transportation will be restricted)... I expect the driverless car system of getting around a large city to be worse than waiting in line at the DMV. The issues I mentioned have nothing to do with rather variables can be programmed or predicted, but rather with the sheer volume of hazard avoidance and logistics necessary to transport a city population of a million people across intersecting paths in real time. A bus or commuter rail is much more efficient at moving a population block of 50 people than trying to squeeze that same population into 15 automated cars.

On a small scale with dedicated infrastructure, the concept may work. But in a large metropolitan area where public street space is limited, trading traffic jams of drivers with new traffic jams of diverless cars won't solve the problem. The same number of people still need to move from point A to point B over and over and over, day or night, rain or shine, while constantly avoiding collision with other objects and people.



Sydney Uber said:


> They will not rush, take risks or drift in front of other oncoming cars. This is why regulators WILL change road usage laws in their favour. Politicians will sell it that they are reducing the road death toll, slashing road trauma, saving millions of dollars in injury and lost productivity.
> 
> The more I think about it the more certain it looks. Only a small percentage of humans with the money and entitlement will be allowed to drive.


So the majority's unwillingness to give up their travel freedom because it involves some level of risk necessitates the government to mandate a driverless utopia? That's about as easy to fathom as Texans giving up their guns and pickup trucks in the name of public safety. Some communities may adapt to the idea, but many will not.

I for one will not trade my car for a safety mandate that I have to share rides with strangers just to go out on a date to the movies, or that I must share trunk space in some headless bot car while shopping or running personal errands at the same time someone else is running their errands.

Bottom line: the margin of safety needed to operate tens or hundreds of thousands of driverless cars in a sprawling 3,000 sq. mile urban area -- while at the same time reducing current risks -- comes at a cost of more time spent in those driverless cars, or less flexibilty to get in and out of one exactly when you want to.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Now Apple joins the driverless car bandwagon.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...ry-in-effort-to-develop-self-driving-vehicle/


----------



## pacmo_lala (Jan 31, 2015)

Allegedly autonomous vehicles are far more safer than behind the wheel driven vehicles. I was viewing videos of Googles rides being tested and I can see why they would come with that summation. It's an all seeing machine that processes all angles of the trip far more efficient than any of us could.

I find this quite fascinating yet strangely sad at the same time. That human element just vamoose. They'll probably hire geeky security guards instead to manage the trips.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

Driverless cars will slow down when physics decide that it is necessary. Variables being road and traffic conditions. They will operate FASTER AND CLOSER than human drivers are capable when conditions allow

Here is a "road train" test of cars, still a long way to go but with development they will go faster, run closer and cheaper






"On a small scale with dedicated infrastructure,"

_No infrastructure is necessary, this technology sees and reads whatever landscape is around, _


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

pacmo_lala said:


> Allegedly autonomous vehicles are far more safer than behind the wheel driven vehicles. I was viewing videos of Googles rides being tested and I can see why they would come with that summation. It's an all seeing machine that processes all angles of the trip far more efficient than any of us could.
> 
> I find this quite fascinating yet strangely sad at the same time. That human element just vamoose. They'll probably hire geeky security guards instead to manage the trips.


Crazy thing pacmo_lala is that Audi actually had a driverless car race around a track. WTF!? They've just spent millions to develop a new motorsport with not much human interest at all. Who would buy tickets to watch robot cars take perfect lines around a track, accelerate at the very exact same time lap after lap?


----------



## UberXtraordinary (Dec 13, 2014)

AintWorthIt said:


> I still think driverless cars are 15 years away. Even then, I'm not so sure people will be sold on them. I'd like to see one of them in heavy rain or some ice for a few laughs.


Some autonomous cars will indeed come online in 15 years, some are already coming online today. You have probably already been passed on a freeway by an autonomous car and didn't even know it. My next car will have autopilot. My brain is already rewiring itself for the transition. Can't wait!


----------



## UberXtraordinary (Dec 13, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Unfortunately so called progress over the centuries have meant the individual's loss of personal freedoms, rights and choices in many areas of modern life - the price of progress i guess


Personal liberty is limited by governments, lawmakers, and authority figures with and without costumes, and our willingness to go along with their programs, not technology.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

UberHammer said:


>


^^^
And by the time they get out the ball point pen to reply, the fart has fossilized the ink.


----------



## amp man (Sep 26, 2014)

Gave a ride to a google sales rep yesterday. He told me google just dropped uber. "Watch the news this weeked."
I mentioned that can't be good for Ubers intentions of an IPO, eh? He said, "you got it."
Mayby it's bullshit. Just sayin' what I heard.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

amp man said:


> Gave a ride to a google sales rep yesterday. He told me google just dropped uber. "Watch the news this weeked."
> I mentioned that can't be good for Ubers intentions of an IPO, eh? He said, "you got it."
> Mayby it's bullshit. Just sayin' what I heard.


Well, there's Google Maps, Google Music, Google Books, Search, etc. 
But I guess no Google Tipping.


----------



## UberXtraordinary (Dec 13, 2014)

amp man said:


> Gave a ride to a google sales rep yesterday. He told me google just dropped uber. "Watch the news this weeked."
> I mentioned that can't be good for Ubers intentions of an IPO, eh? He said, "you got it."
> Mayby it's bullshit. Just sayin' what I heard.


Wow. They are really going to do it. They are going to unlesh the robots soon. That will be sweet. I think it will be a while before Google will have anywhere near the coverage that Rideshare currently offers. We will be fine for a couple years at least, but yeah, that would steal thunder from Übers IPO.


----------



## UberXtraordinary (Dec 13, 2014)

http://www.wsj.com/articles/BL-DGB-40298


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

UberXtraordinary said:


> Wow. They are really going to do it. They are going to unlesh the robots soon. That will be sweet. I think it will be a while before Google will have anywhere near the coverage that Rideshare currently offers. We will be fine for a couple years at least, but yeah, that would steal thunder from Übers IPO.


They may hire drivers until they are up and running with their driverless cars.

Hear that giant sucking noise??
No, it's not jobs going to Mexico, it's Google hiring away Uber drivers.

Umm excuse me, not Uber drivers, independent contractors.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

observer said:


> They may hire drivers until they are up and running with their driverless cars.
> 
> Hear that giant sucking noise??
> No, it's not jobs going to Mexico, it's Google hiring away Uber drivers.
> ...


Now wouldn't THAT be something...


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

I remember as a kid, my parents going to an auto show in San Francisco. I saw there a video that showed a family driving in a car that was controlled by programming the destination. There were wires imbedded in the roadway that detected the signals and interacted with the vehicle. This was many, many years even before the Internet. If it hasn't happened by now, it's going to take many more years to occur. If the Google car can only manage 24 MPH, not much use on the freeway at all and minimal use in town to cover any distance. Car makers are producing cars that might be capable of more, but still are in need of possible human intervention.
I don't know if I see Google getting into the ridesharing fiasco, as to me, that's really spreading their business model in a whole new direction. But then again, it's Google. Still don't trust them as they will use the data for marketing.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

PT Go said:


> I remember as a kid, my parents going to an auto show in San Francisco. I saw there a video that showed a family driving in a car that was controlled by programming the destination. There were wires imbedded in the roadway that detected the signals and interacted with the vehicle. This was many, many years even before the Internet. If it hasn't happened by now, it's going to take many more years to occur. If the Google car can only manage 24 MPH, not much use on the freeway at all and minimal use in town to cover any distance. Car makers are producing cars that might be capable of more, but still are in need of possible human intervention.
> I don't know if I see Google getting into the ridesharing fiasco, as to me, that's really spreading their business model in a whole new direction. But then again, it's Google. Still don't trust them as they will use the data for marketing. Scroll over to about 3 minugtes to go to the best part.


^^^
Yeh, that was the G.M. Firebird concept / future car.
That was like... 1955 or something like that.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

observer said:


> They may hire drivers until they are up and running with their driverless cars.
> 
> Hear that giant sucking noise??
> No, it's not jobs going to Mexico, it's Google hiring away Uber drivers.
> ...


Google would be one of the few credible competitors to UBER, if they wished to take them down.

Google keeps winning awards as to it workplace standards and employee satisfaction rates. Flys in the face of UBER's strategy of burning and churning its drivers, dropping rates and simply lying to us when it suits them.

Perhaps Google saw this as a real long term intergration problem. You just can't consolidate two differant management cultures and wanted out....after all, Uber has been the Parasite in the relationship so far, and Google have bigger and better things in the wings waiting for the right now.


----------

