# Google reportedly plans to take on Uber with ride-hailing service



## uberxbayarea (May 14, 2014)

Will you leave Uber for this if it happens?

http://www.cnet.com/news/google-reportedly-plans-to-take-on-uber-with-ride-hailing-service/


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

uberxbayarea said:


> Will you leave Uber for this if it happens?
> 
> http://www.cnet.com/news/google-reportedly-plans-to-take-on-uber-with-ride-hailing-service/


When Google starts up taxi service, it won't need drivers. It will use driverless cars.


----------



## uberxbayarea (May 14, 2014)

Driverless cars won't hit the road for over a decade, it's not something that's going to happen before 2025-2030


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

observer said:


> When Google starts up taxi service, it won't need drivers. It will use driverless cars.


Here is the big question about driverless cars....

How are they going to design them? Or Are they just going to modify existing cars? Safety requirements are federal territory. Talk about liability issues.


----------



## Montgomery (Jan 7, 2015)

I find this interesting. My question then becomes why has Google invested close to 300 million into Uber? I did notice last week I used google maps app and on the route guidance options before you hit navigate it suggested an Uber ride, saying that a car was 5 minutes away.

I imagined the long term vision was for Uber and Google sort of partner up with the driverless car project but if this article is true so much for that theory. 
Who knows.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> I find this interesting. My question then becomes why has Google invested close to 300 million into Uber? I did notice last week I used google maps app and on the route guidance options before you hit navigate it suggested an Uber ride, saying that a car was 5 minutes away.
> 
> I imagined the long term vision was for Uber and Google sort of partner up with the driverless car project but if this article is true so much for that theory.
> Who knows.


Why not? They are sourcing information from Uber as we speak. All that info Uner doesn't want to release? Google is getting it. Travel times to riders. Route efficiency. Addresses of customers of both Lyft and Uber.

But like you said...who knows?


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> Here is the big question about driverless cars....
> 
> How are they going to design them? Or Are they just going to modify existing cars? Safety requirements are federal territory. Talk about liability issues.


Think about a city such as San Francisco. So many things that could go wrong with GPS and the like. If it's working off a map algorithm that hasn't been recently updated, there is certainly a strong potential for error in that regards. We know that GPS coordinates are depending on precise satellite reception, but that's not always the case. I agree, liability is a huge issue. I wouldn't use one. No control. And Google getting more of your personal information. Probably would put TV screens showing advertising based on what they know about you.


----------



## Montgomery (Jan 7, 2015)

UL Driver SF said:


> Here is the big question about driverless cars....
> How are they going to design them? Or Are they just going to modify existing cars? Safety requirements are federal territory. Talk about liability issues.


Like any new technology, especially one in which safety is concerned a responsible way to do it is that it will start with a small scale "test" and then grow from there. You will prolly see them within a private property like the Google Campus for example and then perhaps a Golf Club, then test it at a large university campus, then a small town, county and go incrementally bigger all the while working and smoothing out the kinks.

All these technologies you see on the high end packages of luxury cars ( collision avoidance/brake assist, blind spot warning systems etc) are just technologies that will be transferred to the driver less cars. The new Tesla vehicle has an "auto pilot" mode that by all accounts its pretty good.

Will they go mainstream in our lifetime to the point that they become as normal as regular car today? perhaps not until we are at a very old age, but we will definitely see them on a small scale in the very near future. That's just my opinion anyways


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> Like any new technology, especially one in which safety is concerned a responsible way to do it is that it will start with a small scale "test" and then grow from there. You will prolly see them within a private property like the Google Campus for example and then perhaps a Golf Club, then test it at a large university campus, then a small town, county and go incrementally bigger all the while working and smoothing out the kinks.
> 
> All these technologies you see on the high end packages of luxury cars ( collision avoidance/brake assist, blind spot warning systems etc) are just technologies that will be transferred to the driver less cars. The new Tesla vehicle has an "auto pilot" mode that by all accounts its pretty good.
> 
> Will they go mainstream in our lifetime to the point that they become as normal as regular car today? perhaps not until we are ata very old age, but we will definitely see them on a small scale in the very near future. That's just my opinion anyways


This brings up another point. When, where and how do you recharge. Tesla's one caveat has been the amount of charging stations available. Google hasn't succeed in making even wi-fi widely available. What if on a longer trip the car dies. 40 miles per hour? I may be wrong, but I don't see this happening for a long time and then, in a very limited sense.


----------



## Montgomery (Jan 7, 2015)

PT Go said:


> This brings up another point. When, where and how do you recharge. Tesla's one caveat has been the amount of charging stations available. Google hasn't succeed in making even wi-fi widely available. What if on a longer trip the car dies. 40 miles per hour? I may be wrong, but I don't see this happening for a long time and then, in a very limited sense.


I'm sure in that regard it won't be that different than a Roomba vacuum cleaner robot. When the power is low it will automatically go back to their charging stations (wherever they may be). When you request the car I'm sure you will need to input your destination so the app will send you a car with enough juice to complete the trip.

The one question I have right off the bat is how will the vehicles stay clean? You know there will be people puking, defecating, masturbating and having sex in them. Perhaps cameras inside the vehicle? But that will still not deter many people from doing anything they wanna do.


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> I'm sure in that regard it won't be that different than a Roomba vacuum cleaner robot. When the power is low it will automatically go back to their charging stations (wherever they may be). When you request the car I'm sure you will need to input your destination so the app will send you a car with enough juice to complete the trip.
> 
> The one question I have right off the bat is how will the vehicles stay clean? You know there will be people puking, defecating, masturbating and having sex in them. Perhaps cameras inside the vehicle? But that will still not deter many people from doing anything they wanna do.


Once again, depends on the distance between and where the stations are. Would take a lot of infrastructure. So if the power is low and there is a pax inside, then what? Clean..Good point...then they become like some taxis. Or cheaper than a motel...(Ha!)


----------



## BlkGeep (Dec 7, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> I find this interesting. My question then becomes why has Google invested close to 300 million into Uber? I did notice last week I used google maps app and on the route guidance options before you hit navigate it suggested an Uber ride, saying that a car was 5 minutes away.
> 
> I imagined the long term vision was for Uber and Google sort of partner up with the driverless car project but if this article is true so much for that theory.
> Who knows.


Because Google has an interest in demonstrating that there are apps that can be used for real business commercial purposes .


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

BlkGeep said:


> Because Google has an interest in demonstrating that there are apps that can be used for real business commercial purposes .


Because Google doesn't mind spending big bucks to obtain other companies deep information. I'm not so worried about Big Brother anymore as I am about Google.


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> I find this interesting. My question then becomes why has Google invested close to 300 million into Uber? I did notice last week I used google maps app and on the route guidance options before you hit navigate it suggested an Uber ride, saying that a car was 5 minutes away.
> 
> I imagined the long term vision was for Uber and Google sort of partner up with the driverless car project but if this article is true so much for that theory.
> Who knows.


300 million for Google is like $5 for us.
They saw something interesting so they threw a $5 bill in the tipping hat.
They did that because they wanted to further explore this idea.
They want to encourage Uber to prove the concept and to clear all the legal hurdles with legislators.
Google (and all the other whales) do not like to take risks, they only invest in "sure things".
So they let these small frys wannabes, like Uber, to take all the risk, if it works out then they launch their own.
And if the launch fails..... they just buy them out.
Either way it's a "sure thing"


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> Here is the big question about driverless cars....
> 
> How are they going to design them? Or Are they just going to modify existing cars? Safety requirements are federal territory. Talk about liability issues.


They are being tested NOW. A driverless car went from Palo Alto to the Las Vegas CES last month.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> Here is the big question about driverless cars....
> 
> How are they going to design them? Or Are they just going to modify existing cars? Safety requirements are federal territory. Talk about liability issues.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

observer said:


> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car


Yea I've seen that before. Pretty interesting and a little misleading but still pretty good.

Right now they are testing on existing platforms. But rumors has it they want to design specific vehicles. That's the part I'm wondering about.

BTW..,they have been testing them for years in CA under very controlled circumstances.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> Like any new technology, especially one in which safety is concerned a responsible way to do it is that it will start with a small scale "test" and then grow from there. You will prolly see them within a private property like the Google Campus for example and then perhaps a Golf Club, then test it at a large university campus, then a small town, county and go incrementally bigger all the while working and smoothing out the kinks.
> 
> All these technologies you see on the high end packages of luxury cars ( collision avoidance/brake assist, blind spot warning systems etc) are just technologies that will be transferred to the driver less cars. The new Tesla vehicle has an "auto pilot" mode that by all accounts its pretty good.
> 
> Will they go mainstream in our lifetime to the point that they become as normal as regular car today? perhaps not until we are at a very old age, but we will definitely see them on a small scale in the very near future. That's just my opinion anyways


Yup...that's how it started. Now...what's the next step? Existing platform? The car in the picture above may or may not meet federal safety standards. Are we going to relax those standards? What's the liability?

I know what's out there....I'm wondering what the end product goal is.

As for auto pilot? Eh..not much different than what's out there so far...a little better...not really a game changer. But out of all the car manufacturers...he probably has the best shot at advancing faster.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

PT Go said:


> Think about a city such as San Francisco. So many things that could go wrong with GPS and the like. If it's working off a map algorithm that hasn't been recently updated, there is certainly a strong potential for error in that regards. We know that GPS coordinates are depending on precise satellite reception, but that's not always the case. I agree, liability is a huge issue. I wouldn't use one. No control. And Google getting more of your personal information. Probably would put TV screens showing advertising based on what they know about you.


Right now you go downtown at certain times of the day or night and the gps will spin in circles. I have actually already presented Google with a semi workable answer to this.

Another possible solution is ground implants. But when you think about it half the streets in SF are torn to suit right now. Do they really want to undertake an implanted system right now?


----------



## uber genesis (Nov 24, 2014)

Montgomery said:


> I find this interesting. My question then becomes why has Google invested close to 300 million into Uber? I did notice last week I used google maps app and on the route guidance options before you hit navigate it suggested an Uber ride, saying that a car was 5 minutes away.
> 
> I imagined the long term vision was for Uber and Google sort of partner up with the driverless car project but if this article is true so much for that theory.
> Who knows.


google hasnt invested, GV (google ventures) which is kinda of a separate spin off with it's own board of directors did


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

the car in that pic looks like a suicide mobile


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

Bart McCoy said:


> the car in that pic looks like a suicide mobile


If they had those cars when I was a teenager we would have had our own reserved rooms in juvenile hall.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

PT Go said:


> This brings up another point. When, where and how do you recharge. Tesla's one caveat has been the amount of charging stations available. Google hasn't succeed in making even wi-fi widely available. What if on a longer trip the car dies. 40 miles per hour? I may be wrong, but I don't see this happening for a long time and then, in a very limited sense.


No, 40 KM/hr which is 24MPH.


----------



## PT Go (Sep 23, 2014)

RamzFanz said:


> No, 40 KM/hr which is 24MPH.


I stand corrected....even worse!


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

PT Go said:


> I stand corrected....even worse!


Yeah, that's no good. There's not even room to stretch out for a snooze.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

uberxbayarea said:


> Driverless cars won't hit the road for over a decade, it's not something that's going to happen before 2025-2030


I can wait. (do you think they'll take a ride request now for May 1st, 2027?)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Why does a driverless car have side rearview mirrors?



Montgomery said:


>


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> Why not? They are sourcing information from Uber as we speak. All that info Uner doesn't want to release? Google is getting it. Travel times to riders. Route efficiency. Addresses of customers of both Lyft and Uber.
> 
> But like you said...who knows?


I use a Garmin. UBER always wants me to turn up an alley. NTTTIAWWT But I make sure to check the addy and enter that into my Garmin. Sure enough90 percent of the time UBEr is having me turn 150 feet short of the street into the alley.


----------



## ReviTULize (Sep 29, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> Why not? They are sourcing information from Uber as we speak. All that info Uner doesn't want to release? Google is getting it. Travel times to riders. Route efficiency. Addresses of customers of both Lyft and Uber.
> 
> But like you said...who knows?


Agreed. They're paying for info. $300mil is pocket change to google


----------



## ReviTULize (Sep 29, 2014)

frndthDuvel said:


> I use a Garmin. UBER always wants me to turn up an alley. NTTTIAWWT But I make sure to check the addy and enter that into my Garmin. Sure enough90 percent of the time UBEr is having me turn 150 feet short of the street into the alley.


The uber app works perfect for me 99% of the time. Tulsa is a small city though. I only use nav if i am unsure of the best way to a pickup or out of a neighborhood.


----------



## cybertec69 (Jul 23, 2014)

Seriously people, this will not happen anytime soon, and I mean a long time from now, if ever, especially here in nyc, LOL. I wasted enough of my time with this story.


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

ReviTULize said:


> The uber app works perfect for me 99% of the time. Tulsa is a small city though. I only use nav if i am unsure of the best way to a pickup or out of a neighborhood.


My wife was in Tulsa today, finishing up celebrating her Mom's 90th. . She is an Okie from muskoggee. I was there last October, My Dad was born in Sapaulpa, thankfully his parents moved him to Arizona in the Dust Bowl days. Thankfully I moved from arizona before it became almost as wacky as Alabam or Miss. Or oklahoma of course. I am not too proud to say I use GPS every ****ing time. Garmin that is. YMMV


----------

