# They Were Wrong.



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

https://uberlyftdrivers.com/2019/02...rong-self-driving-cars-have-a-long-way-to-go/
"The great promise of self-driving cars has been that they will eliminate traffic deaths. Now [Andrew Ng] is saying that they will eliminate traffic deaths as long as all humans are trained to change their behavior?"


----------



## ECOMCON (Dec 30, 2018)

everythingsuber said:


> https://uberlyftdrivers.com/2019/02...rong-self-driving-cars-have-a-long-way-to-go/
> "The great promise of self-driving cars has been that they will eliminate traffic deaths. Now [Andrew Ng] is saying that they will eliminate traffic deaths as long as all humans are trained to change their behavior?"


https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> https://uberlyftdrivers.com/2019/02...rong-self-driving-cars-have-a-long-way-to-go/
> "The great promise of self-driving cars has been that they will eliminate traffic deaths. Now [Andrew Ng] is saying that they will eliminate traffic deaths as long as all humans are trained to change their behavior?"


Yes. Very wrong. Here's part of the article that could actually make SDCs functional in limited areas.

_In the interim, they suggested, "We may also see dedicated lanes or zones for self-driving vehicles, both to give them a more structured environment while the technology is refined and to protect other road users from their limitations."_


----------



## ECOMCON (Dec 30, 2018)

https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-aurora-self-driving-roundup/https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/self-driving-cars


----------



## Roadmasta (Aug 4, 2017)

May not happen soon but will happen.


----------



## ECOMCON (Dec 30, 2018)

Roadmasta said:


> May not happen soon but will happen.
> View attachment 296610


Crazy humans.
The automobile will NEVER replace the beloved Horse.
Electric lights will NEVER replace gas, kerosene, whale and wax 
EV will NEVER replace ICE
Automation will NEVER replace the automobile assembly line workers
ATM's Will NEVER replace Bank Tellers
Self Check Out will NEVER replace Cashiers 
Robots will NEVER replace warehouse workers 
SDC will NEVER replace the driver and delivery man


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

ECOMCON said:


> Crazy humans.
> The automobile will NEVER replace the beloved Horse.
> Electric lights will NEVER replace gas, kerosene, whale and wax
> EV will NEVER replace ICE
> ...


I've said what the writer of this article is saying many times.

@ECOMCON you can disagree with me if you want but are you going to disagree with every author of every article that says the same thing? (And these kinds of articles are coming out more and more now). The guy makes some good points that can't be shoo'd away by saying "well, they said we would never replace horses with cars so they're wrong about this now"

For people who don't have time to read the article here's the money quote:

"It's clear now that many of these estimates were overblown; just look at the trouble Uber had in Arizona. Driverless cars will surely make our roads safer, but removing humans from behind the steering wheel is a tough nut to crack. Before we reach the driverless, accident-free utopia we've been dreaming of for decades, we must overcome several hurdles, and they're not all technical."


----------



## ECOMCON (Dec 30, 2018)

https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

ECOMCON said:


> https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


Don't understand but ok


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

If SDC's could actually work you would need to try to change human behavior to make them work. 

It makes no sense that somehow it's the fault of humans that SDC's don't work. 

It makes no sense to think that humans have to change for SDC's to somehow work.


----------



## ECOMCON (Dec 30, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> If SDC's could actually work you would need to try to change human behavior to make them work.
> 
> It makes no sense that somehow it's the fault of humans that SDC's don't work.
> 
> It makes no sense to think that humans have to change for SDC's to somehow work.


https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

uberdriverfornow said:


> If SDC's could actually work you would need to try to change human behavior to make them work.
> 
> It makes no sense that somehow it's the fault of humans that SDC's don't work.
> 
> It makes no sense to think that humans have to change for SDC's to somehow work.


Exactly.

However some people here who shall remain nameless think that the switch from horses to cars is the same as the switch from human to robot drivers.


----------



## Launchpad McQuack (Jan 8, 2019)

uberdriverfornow said:


> It makes no sense that somehow it's the fault of humans that SDC's don't work.


The coexistence situation introduces some interesting problems. SDCs are challenging no matter how you slice it, but they would be a lot easier to perfect if they didn't have to deal with human drivers. At least their behavior with respect to one another would be predictable. Human drivers inject a high level of unpredictability into the mix. Unpredictability is one of the hardest things to handle when you're programming.

One thing that I think will be interesting to see is how human drivers adjust their driving practices to exploit the programming of SDCs. For example, you're at an intersection with a protected left-hand turn. There is a long line of cars waiting to turn left and then they get their protected left turn. Five or six cars go through, and then the light turns yellow and eventually red. What generally happens there? A few more cars squeeze their way through the left turn, a couple usually even after the protected left turn has turned red and they are supposed to yield to oncoming traffic. Most drivers coming the opposite direction will tolerate a couple extra cars squeezing through, but if it lasts too long then they will start to force their way through the intersection and make those turning left either yield (like they are supposed to) or risk causing an accident. What if the oncoming car is a self-driving car, though? It's programming probably says to wait until the intersection is clear to go. Will drivers exploit that and just keep turning left in front of it, knowing that it will never actively assert its right of way? I think things like that will start to pop up as drivers and SDCs begin to interact.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

ECOMCON said:


> https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


Autonomous gaining footholds 
and converts


Launchpad McQuack said:


> The coexistence situation introduces some interesting problems. SDCs are challenging no matter how you slice it, but they would be a lot easier to perfect if they didn't have to deal with human drivers. At least their behavior with respect to one another would be predictable. Human drivers inject a high level of unpredictability into the mix. Unpredictability is one of the hardest things to handle when you're programming.
> 
> One thing that I think will be interesting to see is how human drivers adjust their driving practices to exploit the programming of SDCs. For example, you're at an intersection with a protected left-hand turn. There is a long line of cars waiting to turn left and then they get their protected left turn. Five or six cars go through, and then the light turns yellow and eventually red. What generally happens there? A few more cars squeeze their way through the left turn, a couple usually even after the protected left turn has turned red and they are supposed to yield to oncoming traffic. Most drivers coming the opposite direction will tolerate a couple extra cars squeezing through, but if it lasts too long then they will start to force their way through the intersection and make those turning left either yield (like they are supposed to) or risk causing an accident. What if the oncoming car is a self-driving car, though? It's programming probably says to wait until the intersection is clear to go. Will drivers exploit that and just keep turning left in front of it, knowing that it will never actively assert its right of way? I think things like that will start to pop up as drivers and SDCs begin to interact.


Looks like autonomous cars may force humans to obey the posted rules of the road. No more sliding through, no more 10mph over posted speed limit, etc.
Insurance companies love and support these things.

Too many documented driver error deaths daily.

According to Stamford University 90+ *percent* of motor vehicle crashes are caused by human error. 
National Transportation Safety Board puts the number higher.

But the neysayers will claim its a conspiracy to take cars away from the populous in the name of saving lives.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

20’s very advance driver assist
30’s limited SDC in designated areas
40’s level 5 SDC commercial and luxury car
50’s complete replacement of drivers

They are definitely coming but the roll out will be slow. Think about how slow but quick the internet rolled out. Everything seems to be happening fast but generally everything took decades to accomplish. SDC are coming out of their infant stage and are toddlers now. There is still a lot of growing up to do before the technology is fully mature.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> 20's very advance driver assist
> 30's limited SDC in designated areas
> 40's level 5 SDC commercial and luxury car
> 50's complete replacement of drivers
> ...


I have a hard time believing that completely giving up human driving is ever gonna happen but if it's 30 years from now it's a moot point anyway


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

iheartuber said:


> I have a hard time believing that completely giving up human driving is ever gonna happen but if it's 30 years from now it's a moot point anyway


Lol let me correct myself. I don't think human driving will be outlawed but for all intents and purposes obsolete. We all can still mail letters, but emails/phone calls are the norm.


----------



## Working4peanuts (Jan 16, 2018)

Launchpad McQuack said:


> The coexistence situation introduces some interesting problems. SDCs are challenging no matter how you slice it, but they would be a lot easier to perfect if they didn't have to deal with human drivers. At least their behavior with respect to one another would be predictable. Human drivers inject a high level of unpredictability into the mix. Unpredictability is one of the hardest things to handle when you're programming.
> 
> One thing that I think will be interesting to see is how human drivers adjust their driving practices to exploit the programming of SDCs. For example, you're at an intersection with a protected left-hand turn. There is a long line of cars waiting to turn left and then they get their protected left turn. Five or six cars go through, and then the light turns yellow and eventually red. What generally happens there? A few more cars squeeze their way through the left turn, a couple usually even after the protected left turn has turned red and they are supposed to yield to oncoming traffic. Most drivers coming the opposite direction will tolerate a couple extra cars squeezing through, but if it lasts too long then they will start to force their way through the intersection and make those turning left either yield (like they are supposed to) or risk causing an accident. What if the oncoming car is a self-driving car, though? It's programming probably says to wait until the intersection is clear to go. Will drivers exploit that and just keep turning left in front of it, knowing that it will never actively assert its right of way? I think things like that will start to pop up as drivers and SDCs begin to interact.


Very insightful!

How about this scenario? An sdc is on a 4 Lane freeway in bumper to bumper traffic. It's in lane 3. It's programmed to get into lane 4 to exit the freeway a half mile before the exit.

Humans who need to do that wait until they see a slower car in lane 4 not tailgating the car in front to make their move, darting into the lane even when there's not enough room to fully get in that lane until traffic moves A little more.

I doubt an sdc would be programmed to do that. It will just stop in lane 3, turn on it's signal light and wait until there's enough room to change Lanes.

In other words, it will just sit there and block traffic in perpetuity, causing even greater gridlock.

AS LONG AS THERE ARE HUMAN DRIVERS ON THE ROAD, SDCS WILL NEVER WORK.


----------



## Launchpad McQuack (Jan 8, 2019)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Lol let me correct myself. I don't think human driving will be outlawed but for all intents and purposes obsolete. We all can still mail letters, but emails/phone calls are the norm.


Yeah, I wouldn't say complete replacement of drivers, but predominant replacement of drivers. When I go fishing, I drive a trail back through a meadow and then I have to drive up and around a ridge that forms one of the banks of the pond where I fish. It's not challenging terrain. I can drive it in my little Ford Escort as long as the ground isn't water logged. It's completely off road, though, and if you veer off too far to the left or right on the ridge you're either going to end up in the lake or rolling the car down the hill. I don't know that I would ever trust that to a robot driver.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Working4peanuts said:


> Very insightful!
> 
> How about this scenario? An sdc is on a 4 Lane freeway in bumper to bumper traffic. It's in lane 3. It's programmed to get into lane 4 to exit the freeway a half mile before the exit.
> 
> ...


40 years of AI development and advances in car to car communications. Think about internet in the 80's now fast forward to 2019. The SDC we are seeing are those fat back computers waiting on the internet to dial up. SDC in decades from now will be the mature iPhone X with 4glte


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Lol let me correct myself. I don't think human driving will be outlawed but for all intents and purposes obsolete. We all can still mail letters, but emails/phone calls are the norm.


Email? Voice phone? What R they?
Texting

Soon telepathy


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Email? Voice phone? What R they?
> Texting
> 
> Soon telepathy


Soon Augmented Reality


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Soon Augmented Reality


After that, The Matrix


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> It makes no sense to think that humans have to change for SDC's to somehow work.


We're not going to.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

You laugh but AR will be much more important than SDC.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> You laugh but AR will be much more important than SDC.


Who's laughing?


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Who's laughing?


Well sorry I assumed "the matrix" was a playful joke.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Lol let me correct myself. I don't think human driving will be outlawed but for all intents and purposes obsolete. We all can still mail letters, but emails/phone calls are the norm.


Couple things:

1. Compare two people: one owns a car, one literally Uber's everywhere. After a certain point it's cheaper to own a car if you go a lot of miles

2. The freedom, man.. the freedom.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

iheartuber said:


> Couple things:
> 
> 1. Compare two people: one owns a car, one literally Uber's everywhere. After a certain point it's cheaper to own a car if you go a lot of miles
> 
> 2. The freedom, man.. the freedom.


Uber thinking no one will own a car anymore is propaganda. When driverless tech is there people will buy it as a add on such as navigation or leather seats. All companies know this, Uber is starting the greatest pump and dump in history.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Uber thinking no one will own a car anymore is propaganda. When driverless tech is there people will buy it as a add on such as navigation or leather seats. All companies know this, Uber is starting the greatest pump and dump in history.


Uber I understand. But Waymo?


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Uber thinking no one will own a car anymore is propaganda. When driverless tech is there people will buy it as a add on such as navigation or leather seats. All companies know this, Uber is starting the greatest pump and dump in history.


Not just uber but several hundred global companies 
Uber's got the customer lists, other companies seem more advanced
In hard & softwares

https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Not just uber but several hundred global companies
> Uber's got the customer lists, other companies seem more advanced
> In hard & softwares
> 
> https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


That's cool

That's real cool

Let me know when it's happening for real though.

I'll wait

Thanks


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

iheartuber said:


> Uber I understand. But Waymo?


Waymo(google) also see driverless tech being a add on to personal car ownership. Not the death of personal car ownership. Same for all the car manufacturers. Uber is the only company saying rideshare with SDC will end personal car ownership. That sir is pure propaganda to increase Uber valuations


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Waymo(google) also see driverless tech being a add on to personal car ownership. Not the death of personal car ownership. Same for all the car manufacturers. Uber is the only company saying rideshare with SDC will end personal car ownership. That sir is pure propaganda to increase Uber valuations


But what about waymo's Robo taxi service?


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Waymo(google) also see driverless tech being a add on to personal car ownership. Not the death of personal car ownership. Same for all the car manufacturers. Uber is the only company saying rideshare with SDC will end personal car ownership. That sir is pure propaganda to increase Uber valuations


Ma'am, u may not be objective enough for clear thought nor valid rational opinion on anything uber.
Can u offer a link to this uber "propaganda" statement of "the end of car ownership"?

I chose long ago not to jump-on & join the Hate Evil Uber Bandwagon. I found it pedestrian and common working class propaganda from the crowd that refuse to take responsibility for their own life decisions.

In their minds it's always Uber & the passenger's fault.

Sorry, no Sale

The Evil Uber​


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

Example of end of car ownership propaganda:
https://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-will-own-a-car-in-the-future-2017-5
Example of Google's vision of SDC tech:
https://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-will-own-a-car-in-the-future-2017-5


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

Was not initiated by uber.
But: Tony Seba, a RethinkX think tank cofounder and Stanford instructor. Sounds like the guy has got credentials.

Frankly, a good percent of 75 million millennials
and the following generation "Z"
really aren't into automobiles.
Once the older generations die out
millennials & Z will not be rushing to car dealerships.

As a matter of fact 50% of retail car dealership will be gone within the next 10-20 years.

SDC will fill many gaps

Times change, generations have different priorities while technology is marchs into the future.

I welcome the future and change while others will be dragged kicking & screaming. Outcome will be the same

That's not propaganda, it's fact.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Example of end of car ownership propaganda:
> https://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-will-own-a-car-in-the-future-2017-5
> Example of Google's vision of SDC tech:
> https://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-will-own-a-car-in-the-future-2017-5


What those are failing to take into account is that "rush hour" traffic accounts for a very large portion of miles driven every year.

What vehicle for hire business is going to have a large portion (even just 20% of them) of their cars active for only 4 hours a day?

Even if these services do grow, things like rush hour unavailability will keep a lot of people owning cars. And most people aren't chronic alcoholics who depend on for-hire services to get around cause they are blitzed all the time.

If you can't get a ride to work your not going to stop owning a car.

Tourism and drinking related activities are already mostly critical mass in terms of for-hire ride usage. as is Airport transportation.

Most cities won't be able to support large percentage of cars that exist primarily for 10-15 hours a week of peek usage. (Assuming 1.5 hours of peek business per morning and evening commute times.

People killing car ownership isn't the core ridership of the for-hire industry. It's always been tourism and alcoholism being key to their existence, not commuters.

Alcoholism keeping cars active at night and tourism keeping them active during the day (whether that's just taking people to the airport or not)

My proof?

Most cars (Collectivly as in all the cars in the country as one collective group) are parked between 8:00 PM and 4:00 AM and most cars are parked between 10:00 AM and 4:00 PM, just at different places.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Was not initiated by uber.
> But: Tony Seba, a RethinkX think tank cofounder and Stanford instructor. Sounds like the guy has got credentials.
> 
> Frankly, a good percent of 75 million millennials
> ...


It is propaganda because no known data supports the claim. I am a millennial, all millennials are already grown and has taken up car ownership with zest. Us millennials already make the largest portion of the population so current trend will be the same for the foreseeable future.

Facts and statistics for millennials:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/23/millennial-money-myths-the-truth-about-homes-cars-and-ownership.html


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Frankly, a good percent of 75 million millennials
> and the following generation "Z"
> really aren't into automobiles.


Incorrect sir

Millennials just want to use whatever option is cheapest.

If you travel less than 10,000 miles a year, it's def cheaper to Uber everywhere than to spend $800+ a month on new car, insurance, parking, gas, and maintenance.

Once you start traveling more than that it's cheaper to own a car.

If a millennial finds herself in the situation where they need to travel more than 10,000 miles a year they will simply go wherever is cheaper which is to own a car


----------



## Uberfunitis (Oct 21, 2016)

iheartuber said:


> Incorrect sir
> 
> Millennials just want to use whatever option is cheapest.
> 
> ...


Where I live it is $150/month just to park my car at night. An Unlimited pass to ride the metro in and around town for the month is only $154. It gets hard to justify having a vehicle at all at times.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

Uberfunitis said:


> Where I live it is $150/month just to park my car at night. An Unlimited pass to ride the metro in and around town for the month is only $154. It gets hard to justify having a vehicle at all at times.


Unless you get a promotion, you start making more money and you want to actually drive places and go on road trips.

It's all about the money. You got some? You buy a car. You don't? It's Uber and public transport.


----------



## Uberfunitis (Oct 21, 2016)

iheartuber said:


> Unless you get a promotion, you start making more money and you want to actually drive places and go on road trips.
> 
> It's all about the money. You got some? You buy a car. You don't? It's Uber and public transport.


I have two cars for a total of 300 / month in parking. Even having the cars available insurance paid etc I still find it more convenient to Uber and take the metro. It is nice having the cars available but really not worth it even if money is not the issue.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

Uberfunitis said:


> I have two cars for a total of 300 / month in parking. Even having the cars available insurance paid etc I still find it more convenient to Uber and take the metro. It is nice having the cars available but really not worth it even if money is not the issue.


Also it depends where you live


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

iheartuber said:


> Also it depends where you live


This is key. Majority of America is spread out suburbs and county side. Also don't confuse millennials struggling to get a start on life with preferences. The oldest millennials are late 30's they have home and car. So do most millennials in my age bracket late 20's. Click on that link I posted the rate of millennials car ownership is comparable with prior generations.


----------



## Who is John Galt? (Sep 28, 2016)

ECOMCON said:


> https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa


Just cutting to the chase in the article:
https://www.popsci.com/self-driving-cars-cities-usa

Would you mind pointing out which of these outfits has NO human guidance/driver/pilot/chaperone on board? Thanks.

Because if they have ANY human driver or guidance on board they are not SDCs. End of story.

.


----------



## BobMarley (Feb 12, 2019)

iheartuber said:


> I have a hard time believing that completely giving up human driving is ever gonna happen but if it's 30 years from now it's a moot point anyway


I have an easy time believing it. By 2050 seems unlikely, at least in the USA. First, we like to drive, at least much of "middle America". The more urban states might want to ban drivered cars, but as far as federal legislation they're going to run into a brick wall when it comes to the Senate, the more rural states will continue to be a majority for a long long time. Secondly, its going to take some time to change our liability laws. A driver less car kills someone and... who is liable. The owner? Why, he didn't design the software. There is no driver. So now a huge corporation that has potentially billions in assets can be sued for.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> It is propaganda because no known data supports the claim. I am a millennial, all millennials are already grown and has taken up car ownership with zest. Us millennials already make the largest portion of the population so current trend will be the same for the foreseeable future.
> 
> Facts and statistics for millennials:
> https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/23/millennial-money-myths-the-truth-about-homes-cars-and-ownership.html


https://www.mcall.com/business/mc-biz-cars-millennials-20181112-story.html
https://www.popsci.com/car-subscription-services
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...wer-cars-than-older-generations/#582049417726
https://www.nbc26.com/news/local-news/survey-millennials-want-alternatives-to-driving-cars
https://www.hotcars.com/jeep-launching-car-sharing-service/
FYI I'm Post-Millennial, aka: iGeneration, generation Z


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

BobMarley said:


> I have an easy time believing it. By 2050 seems unlikely, at least in the USA. First, we like to drive, at least much of "middle America". The more urban states might want to ban drivered cars, but as far as federal legislation they're going to run into a brick wall when it comes to the Senate, the more rural states will continue to be a majority for a long long time. Secondly, its going to take some time to change our liability laws. A driver less car kills someone and... who is liable. The owner? Why, he didn't design the software. There is no driver. So now a huge corporation that has potentially billions in assets can be sued for.





UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> https://www.mcall.com/business/mc-biz-cars-millennials-20181112-story.html
> https://www.popsci.com/car-subscription-services
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...wer-cars-than-older-generations/#582049417726
> https://www.nbc26.com/news/local-news/survey-millennials-want-alternatives-to-driving-cars


Your articles prove my point none of them point to factual figures on millennials car ownership which is widely available. Which in turn my them propaganda pieces. That's right reread all 3. One is a survey the other to are opinion pieces. None used the actual data on the books. Heck the 4th one you added title even says "since millennials can't afford them". Your confusing young people just starting life with an entire generation of millennials.


----------



## BobMarley (Feb 12, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> https://www.mcall.com/business/mc-biz-cars-millennials-20181112-story.html
> https://www.popsci.com/car-subscription-services
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...wer-cars-than-older-generations/#582049417726
> https://www.nbc26.com/news/local-news/survey-millennials-want-alternatives-to-driving-cars


First off, millennial's weren't buying homes in the 2000's and early 2010's because of the very high home prices that went into a crisis that led to higher unemployment. Homes were unaffordable, then lots of millennials either couldn't find work, or only "gig" jobs.

I've only read that last linked article, but you can tell what BS most of these articles are from just that. They surveyed college students. Ever tried driving and parking on a large university campus? Obviously people in college want alternatives. Also, college freshman and sophomore's are, now, not millennials. That generation ended with babies born in 1999. And, even looking at the very last couple of years of millennial's is hardly representative. I'm a millennial... I'm also 37. Oh, and every single person I know between 20 and 40 owns or leases a car. I'm sure on the coasts its different, here in middle america, nearly every adult owns a car, including millenials.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Your articles prove my point none of them point to factual figures on millennials car ownership which is widely available. Which in turn my them propaganda pieces. That's right reread all 3. One is a survey the other to are opinion pieces. None used the actual data on the books.


Just because u type it and think it, doesn't make it true
I offered proof, u offer emotion & noise.
Best I End it here
Good bye


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Just because u type it and think it, doesn't make it true
> I offered proof, u offer emotion & noise.
> Best I End it here
> Good bye


My links had car ownership data for millennials on them, yours didn't. Like I said you selling snake oil.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

Born between the mid-1990s and early 2000s, Generation Z includes more than 2 billion people worldwide and holds more than $44 billion in annual purchasing power, according to a study from IBM and the National Retail Federation.


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Born between the mid-1990s and early 2000s, Generation Z includes more than 2 billion people worldwide and holds more than $44 billion in annual purchasing power, according to a study from IBM and the National Retail Federation.


Once again stop confusing broke people that can't afford a car with people with money that don't want a car. Most of gen z are minors with the oldest being 20


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Once again stop confusing broke people that can't afford a car with people with money that don't want a car. Most of gen z are minors with the oldest being 20


@TheDevilisaParttimer You're under many continuous misconception
Oldest of my gen is 25
Reading is fundamental

Nothing personal
U bring little to the table other than the fake news of ur generation.
Subsequently, I must ignore u


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> @TheDevilisaParttimer You're under many continuous misconception
> Oldest of my gen is 25
> Reading is fundamental
> 
> ...


I'm 27 and my gf is 22. Obviously you trolling at this point.


----------



## BobMarley (Feb 12, 2019)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> I'm 27 and my gf is 22. Obviously you trolling at this point.
> View attachment 297719


To be fair, I've seen other years used for who is in what generation. For example Gen X: '64 to '81, Millennial '82 to '99 and Gen Z 2000 to present. With Xenialls being an ill-defined border between X and Millenial. Sometimes its called the "Oregon Trail Gen". If you remember playing that game in a computer at school, you're a Xeniall. I am.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

BobMarley said:


> I have an easy time believing it. By 2050 seems unlikely, at least in the USA. First, we like to drive, at least much of "middle America". The more urban states might want to ban drivered cars, but as far as federal legislation they're going to run into a brick wall when it comes to the Senate, the more rural states will continue to be a majority for a long long time. Secondly, its going to take some time to change our liability laws. A driver less car kills someone and... who is liable. The owner? Why, he didn't design the software. There is no driver. So now a huge corporation that has potentially billions in assets can be sued for.


Not only that but the "urban areas" you speak of are basically Manhattan, NYC, SF, parts of Chicago and a handful of other cities. That's really it. Everywhere else is basically rural as far as public transport goes


----------



## TheDevilisaParttimer (Jan 2, 2019)

BobMarley said:


> To be fair, I've seen other years used for who is in what generation. For example Gen X: '64 to '81, Millennial '82 to '99 and Gen Z 2000 to present. With Xenialls being an ill-defined border between X and Millenial. Sometimes its called the "Oregon Trail Gen". If you remember playing that game in a computer at school, you're a Xeniall. I am.


Once the dust is settled in the "when gen z started", debate is over I think it's going to be 2001-2016 for gen z, 1980-2000 for millennials but that's just my opinion so I didn't take it up with the other guy. Xeniall's never really stuck they were assimilated into gen x unofficially.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

TheDevilisaParttimer said:


> Obviously you trolling at this point.
> 
> View attachment 297719


Yes he is.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> It's all about the money. You got some? You buy a car. You don't? It's Uber and public transport.


My riders say Uber is better than public transportation but I don't drive Pool anymore so my riders are probably happier than Pool riders.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

goneubering said:


> My riders say Uber is better than public transportation but I don't drive Pool anymore so my riders are probably happier than Pool riders.


Well yeah it's better! But $4 pool is more than $1.75 bus. Depending on how broke you are that extra $2.25 is either a little or a lot


----------



## The Entomologist (Sep 23, 2018)

The predictions were not made out of true engineer opinions, they were people defending their projects or those with enough capital to exploit the future.

Any sane software engineer knew it was impossible, I knew it the day they announced it.


----------

