# How about a thread where we talk about all the reasons why SDC's will never work without a driver ?



## uberdriverfornow

So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.

Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?

These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.

Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?

In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?

Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?

School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?

Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?

How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?

How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?

When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?

Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?

In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?

I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.

While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?

A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?

How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W

Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?

Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ? 

Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ? 

Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?

Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.

Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


----------



## jocker12

The Pentagon already has studies about autonomy, and those reports conclusions are that autonomy, the way stupid Silicon Valley nerds promise it in self driving cars technology, is impossible.

From the 2012 DoD declassified report "The role of autonomy in DoD systems" (link below)

"Autonomy is, by itself, not a solution to any problem. The utility of an autonomous capability is a function of the ecology of the specific mission needs, the operating environment, the users and the vehicle-there is no value without context. The expectation that autonomy can be added to fix unmanned vehicle design deficits without considering the larger system is flawed. A negative consequence of the commitment to levels of autonomy is that it deflects focus from the fact that all autonomous systems are joint human-machine cognitive systems. Treating autonomy as a widget or "black box" supports an "us versus the computer" attitude among commanders rather than the more appropriate understanding that there are no fully autonomous systems just as there are no fully autonomous soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines. Perhaps the most important message for commanders is that all systems are supervised by humans to some degree, and the best capabilities result from the coordination and collaboration of humans and machines."

https://fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/autonomy.pdf


----------



## tohunt4me

jocker12 said:


> The Pentagon already has studies about autonomy, and those reports conclusions are that autonomy, the way stupid Silicon Valley nerds promise it in self driving cars technology, is impossible.
> 
> From the 2012 DoD declassified report "The role of autonomy in DoD systems" (link below)
> 
> "Autonomy is, by itself, not a solution to any problem. The utility of an autonomous capability is a function of the ecology of the specific mission needs, the operating environment, the users and the vehicle-there is no value without context. The expectation that autonomy can be added to fix unmanned vehicle design deficits without considering the larger system is flawed. A negative consequence of the commitment to levels of autonomy is that it deflects focus from the fact that all autonomous systems are joint human-machine cognitive systems. Treating autonomy as a widget or "black box" supports an "us versus the computer" attitude among commanders rather than the more appropriate understanding that there are no fully autonomous systems just as there are no fully autonomous soldiers, sailors, airmen or Marines. Perhaps the most important message for commanders is that all systems are supervised by humans to some degree, and the best capabilities result from the coordination and collaboration of humans and machines."
> 
> https://fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/autonomy.pdf


We will colonize Mars with Robots.

Then they will invade us and kill us all . .


----------



## jocker12

tohunt4me said:


> We will colonize Mars with Robots.
> 
> Then they will invade us and kill us all . .


Colonizing Mars is another humongous lie. Titan, Saturn's moon, is a much much better choice.


----------



## RamzFanz

These questions aren't nearly as interesting as your belief that they haven't been considered and addressed by every major auto company and most of the major tech companies, worldwide, before investing their hundreds of billions and, in some cases, their entire futures.

Do you really believe you are out-thinking them? That they haven't once considered flat tires or stop signs?



uberdriverfornow said:


> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?


False. Waymo operates in numerouse cities.

Did you really think all they have been doing for 10 years is mapping Mountain View? Really?

You don't seem to even be aware they went live in Phoenix AZ in Oct. 2017.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?


Hand gestures. This news is many years old. Did you even bother to look?



uberdriverfornow said:


> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?


Programming.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?


Rules of the road, vehicle behavior, and indicating intent. They do it every day right now and with no driver.



uberdriverfornow said:


> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?


Cameras and programming.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?


Internal maps and/or sensors.



uberdriverfornow said:


> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?


Why would it?



uberdriverfornow said:


> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?


GPS.



uberdriverfornow said:


> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?


It doesn't need to.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?


This is false. Waymo has been live with no drivers since Oct. 2017. WePod went live in May 2016.



uberdriverfornow said:


> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?


Again, false. Waymo has programmed their cars to speed so as to not interfere with the flow of traffic. This was addressed in 2015.



uberdriverfornow said:


> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?


Nothing. The car operates with redundancy.



uberdriverfornow said:


> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?


The car will continue using redundant sensors or safely pull over if it needs to.



uberdriverfornow said:


> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W


Jesus, dude. My 10-year-old Kia knows when tire pressure is low.

SDCs have redundant processors to detect malfunctions and take over to safely pull over.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?


Why would they wait when another car can be requested in an instant?

If they did have to wait, they would wait as long as needed, just as we do today.

Please tell me you don't really think SDCs, which are already live and operational, will never work because of flat tires.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?


The car has a passenger override telling it to pull over. The real answer is to not allow it to be hacked.

Regardless, Jeeps have been hacked and controlled remotely... are there still jeeps?



uberdriverfornow said:


> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?


False and strawman.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?


Yes.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.


Strawmman.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


WePod went live in May 2016 and Waymo in Oct. 2017. Your answers are a google away.


----------



## Mikejay

tohunt4me said:


> We will colonize Mars with Robots.
> 
> Then they will invade us and kill us all . .


Cylons they evolved and rebelled and now they have a plan.


----------



## SurgeMasterMN

I am ready to Merge with Machine and become the first Human Cyborg Rideshare Driver for Eternity....


----------



## RamzFanz

*reasons why SDC's will never work without a driver*

1) Because Uber drivers who have done no research on this subject say so.
2) That's all.


----------



## Blatherskite

jocker12 said:


> Colonizing Mars is another humongous lie. Titan, Saturn's moon, is a much much better choice.


At least Titan has sirens.


----------



## Rakos

jocker12 said:


> Colonizing Mars is another humongous lie. Titan, Saturn's moon, is a much much better choice.


Only problem with that is...

I don't drink hydrocarbons...8>O

Now Cherry Pepsi...

That's another thing altogether...8>)

Rakos


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> *reasons why SDC's will never work without a driver*
> 
> 1) Because Uber drivers who have done no research on this subject say so.
> 2) That's all.


If some users don't know you here, I do. Careful now Jason, because you go to the dark side again and you promised you'll do your best not to











Blatherskite said:


> At least Titan has sirens.


Methane sirens.


----------



## Blatherskite

jocker12 said:


> Methane sirens.


This hurdle will be obviated via chrono-synclastic infundibulum.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> These questions aren't nearly as interesting as your belief that they haven't been considered and addressed by every major auto company and most of the major tech companies, worldwide, before investing their hundreds of billions and, in some cases, their entire futures.
> 
> Do you really believe you are out-thinking them? That they haven't once considered flat tires or stop signs?
> 
> False. Waymo operates in numerouse cities.
> 
> Did you really think all they have been doing for 10 years is mapping Mountain View? Really?
> 
> You don't seem to even be aware they went live in Phoenix AZ in Oct. 2017.
> 
> Hand gestures. This news is many years old. Did you even bother to look?
> 
> Programming.
> 
> Rules of the road, vehicle behavior, and indicating intent. They do it every day right now and with no driver.
> 
> Cameras and programming.
> 
> Internal maps and/or sensors.
> 
> Why would it?
> 
> GPS.
> 
> It doesn't need to.
> 
> This is false. Waymo has been live with no drivers since Oct. 2017. WePod went live in May 2016.
> 
> Again, false. Waymo has programmed their cars to speed so as to not interfere with the flow of traffic. This was addressed in 2015.
> 
> Nothing. The car operates with redundancy.
> 
> The car will continue using redundant sensors or safely pull over if it needs to.
> 
> Jesus, dude. My 10-year-old Kia knows when tire pressure is low.
> 
> SDCs have redundant processors to detect malfunctions and take over to safely pull over.
> 
> Why would they wait when another car can be requested in an instant?
> 
> If they did have to wait, they would wait as long as needed, just as we do today.
> 
> Please tell me you don't really think SDCs, which are already live and operational, will never work because of flat tires.
> 
> The car has a passenger override telling it to pull over. The real answer is to not allow it to be hacked.
> 
> Regardless, Jeeps have been hacked and controlled remotely... are there still jeeps?
> 
> False and strawman.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Strawmman.
> 
> WePod went live in May 2016 and Waymo in Oct. 2017. Your answers are a google away.


wheres your proof of any of your comments ? lets see the video, post links to sdc's doing anything you said with no driver being in the vehicle

I'll wait.



RamzFanz said:


> *reasons why SDC's will never work without a driver*
> 
> 1) Because Uber drivers who have done no research on this subject say so.
> 2) That's all.


again, let's see some video proof


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> wheres your proof of any of your comments ? lets see the video, post links to sdc's doing anything you said with no driver being in the vehicle
> 
> I'll wait.
> 
> again, let's see some video proof


I linked two videos.


----------



## heynow321

Bud, we’re still waiting on that video of a sdc entering and exiting a freeway


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> I linked two videos.


You can do better. No links. Try again. I'm curious.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> I linked two videos.


The first video is a 1 minute clip of a car on an isolated road. It then proceeds to say that Waymo still has a driver in them.

The second clip is the same one that was posted years ago that showed nothing with regards to a SDC car following a hand gesture, just a presentation talking about what they aim to achieve.

Try again. This time post a video that shows actual SDC's driving around, with no driver doing anything on public streets and doing any of the aforementioned things I said it can't do.



jocker12 said:


> You can do better. No links. Try again. I'm curious.


He posted links, just not to any sdc doing anything he says they can do, and on a public street and not on a private, isolated road. Instead, more of the video is showing people sitting in the back seat than it shows the car driving on a public road.


----------



## RamzFanz

heynow321 said:


> Bud, we're still waiting on that video of a sdc entering and exiting a freeway


I'm not sure why, I never told you I would link one.

I prefer you remain ignorant for entertainment purposes.



uberdriverfornow said:


> The first video is a 1 minute clip of a car on an isolated road. It then proceeds to say that Waymo still has a driver in them.


False. It shows several trips by multiple cars in a suburban environment with traffic. It clearly both shows and states that there is no safety driver in the front seat.










This has been going on for months now, as you are fully aware.



uberdriverfornow said:


> The second clip is the same one that was posted years ago that showed nothing with regards to a SDC car following a hand gesture, just a presentation talking about what they aim to achieve.


And they have now achieved it. Waymo has stated many times they can now read hand gestures.



uberdriverfornow said:


> Try again. This time post a video that shows actual SDC's driving around, with no driver doing anything on public streets and doing any of the aforementioned things I said it can't do.


I did. This is exactly why I rarely link here, it's a fool's errand, which makes you the better choice for doing your own research.



uberdriverfornow said:


> He posted links, just not to any sdc doing anything he says they can do, and on a public street and not on a private, isolated road. Instead, more of the video is showing people sitting in the back seat than it shows the car driving on a public road.


False.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> I'm not sure why, I never told you I would link one.
> 
> I prefer you remain ignorant for entertainment purposes.


It's ok for you to link us to it even if you never said you would. We wouldn't mind. In fact, link us to any actual video of any company's sdc's doing anything you said they can do. Perhaps anything longer than 1 minute in length and that isn't just a presentation of what they expect it to achieve at some point in history.


----------



## tohunt4me

Coll


uberdriverfornow said:


> So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.
> 
> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?
> 
> These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.
> 
> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?
> 
> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?
> 
> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?
> 
> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?
> 
> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?
> 
> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?
> 
> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?
> 
> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?
> 
> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?
> 
> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?
> 
> I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.
> 
> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?
> 
> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?
> 
> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W
> 
> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?
> 
> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?
> 
> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?
> 
> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?
> 
> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.
> 
> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


Colleges
1.) Roof Surfing
2.) pukers
3.)Drunks
4.) sex in Vehicle
5.) sex on Vehicle
6.)overloading cars
7.) students will call uber to take out garbage.
Load garbage in car.
Wave goodbye.
8.) pranks
Statues, tigers, monkeys
All will be placed into an uber.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

tohunt4me said:


> Coll
> 
> Colleges
> 1.) Roof Surfing
> 2.) pukers
> 3.)Drunks
> 4.) sex in Vehicle
> 5.) sex on Vehicle
> 6.)overloading cars
> 7.) students will call uber to take out garbage.
> Load garbage in car.
> Wave goodbye.
> 8.) pranks
> Statues, tigers, monkeys
> All will be placed into an uber.


these are all common sense, I actually had most of these already, I've told them to pax but forgot to mention them last night lol

very nice !!


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> It's ok for you to link us to it even if you never said you would. We wouldn't mind. In fact, link us to any actual video of any company's sdc's doing anything you said they can do. Perhaps anything longer than 1 minute in length and that isn't just a presentation of what they expect it to achieve at some point in history.


I linked you to a video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic, and you denied it.

Do you know Einstein's definition of madness?


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> These questions aren't nearly as interesting as your belief that they haven't been considered and addressed by every major auto company and most of the major tech companies, worldwide, before investing their hundreds of billions and, in some cases, their entire futures.
> 
> Do you really believe you are out-thinking them? That they haven't once considered flat tires or stop signs?
> 
> False. Waymo operates in numerouse cities.
> 
> Did you really think all they have been doing for 10 years is mapping Mountain View? Really?
> 
> You don't seem to even be aware they went live in Phoenix AZ in Oct. 2017.
> 
> Hand gestures. This news is many years old. Did you even bother to look?
> 
> Programming.
> 
> Rules of the road, vehicle behavior, and indicating intent. They do it every day right now and with no driver.
> 
> Cameras and programming.
> 
> Internal maps and/or sensors.
> 
> Why would it?
> 
> GPS.
> 
> It doesn't need to.
> 
> This is false. Waymo has been live with no drivers since Oct. 2017. WePod went live in May 2016.
> 
> Again, false. Waymo has programmed their cars to speed so as to not interfere with the flow of traffic. This was addressed in 2015.
> 
> Nothing. The car operates with redundancy.
> 
> The car will continue using redundant sensors or safely pull over if it needs to.
> 
> Jesus, dude. My 10-year-old Kia knows when tire pressure is low.
> 
> SDCs have redundant processors to detect malfunctions and take over to safely pull over.
> 
> Why would they wait when another car can be requested in an instant?
> 
> If they did have to wait, they would wait as long as needed, just as we do today.
> 
> Please tell me you don't really think SDCs, which are already live and operational, will never work because of flat tires.
> 
> The car has a passenger override telling it to pull over. The real answer is to not allow it to be hacked.
> 
> Regardless, Jeeps have been hacked and controlled remotely... are there still jeeps?
> 
> False and strawman.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Strawmman.
> 
> WePod went live in May 2016 and Waymo in Oct. 2017. Your answers are a google away.


So basically the conversation is going like this:

Collective of Uber drivers: here's a list of potential problems we foresee happening with SDCs

RamzFanz: well, I have no proof of this but I just assume because these people spent billions of dollars they must have already thought of all these things...


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> So basically the conversation is going like this:
> 
> Collective of Uber drivers: here's a list of potential problems we foresee happening with SDCs
> 
> RamzFanz: well, I have no proof of this but I just assume because these people spent billions of dollars they must have already thought of all these things...


Yes. Well, kind of. Many of them have been addressed publicly, but not all.

The answer isn't that they'll just not address them or that there are no answers.

Are you seriously claiming you believe we are out-thinking the collection of every major auto and almost every major tech company in the world? That they haven't considered how they will (are) negotiate stop signs? Comeonman.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> I linked you to a video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic


We're all still waiting for you to show us video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic.

When you're ready to show us such video, feel free to.

Til then, all you're doing is grandstanding for sdc's.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Are you seriously claiming you believe we are out-thinking the collection of every major auto and almost every major tech company in the world? That they haven't considered how they will (are) negotiate stop signs? Comeonman.


I believe that anyone who drives for a living knows the day to day challenges of driving better than some investors and Silicon Valley nerds, yes


----------



## RamzFanz

tohunt4me said:


> Coll
> 
> Colleges
> 1.) Roof Surfing
> 2.) pukers
> 3.)Drunks
> 4.) sex in Vehicle
> 5.) sex on Vehicle
> 6.)overloading cars
> 7.) students will call uber to take out garbage.
> Load garbage in car.
> Wave goodbye.
> 8.) pranks
> Statues, tigers, monkeys
> All will be placed into an uber.


I was paid $80 for a spilled beer in my van that took all of 30 minutes to resolve. What do you think these people will be charged? How do you think that will affect their behavior in the future?


----------



## tohunt4me

RamzFanz said:


> I was paid $80 for a spilled beer in my van that took all of 30 minutes to resolve. What do you think these people will be charged? How do you think that will affect their behavior in the future?


Real Cabs will be busy in the future


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> We're all still waiting for you to show us video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic.
> 
> When you're ready to show us such video, feel free to.
> 
> Til then, all you're doing is grandstanding for sdc's.


You realize everyone knows you're full of it and yet you persist with your laughable lies. Let me guess, _the world is flat_ and _jet beams can't melt steel fuel_?

Here, I'll post it again just for you: No Driver, no one in the front seat, live passengers, in a suburb, in traffic.


----------



## tohunt4me

RamzFanz said:


> You realize everyone knows you're full of it and yet you persist with your laughable lies.
> 
> Here, I'll post it again just for you: No Driver, no one in the front seat, live passengers, in a suburb, in traffic.
> 
> View attachment 219095


Safety driver is in identical white car following it . . . .


----------



## getawaycar

Self-driving tech would add thousands to tens of thousands to the cost of a car, even after costs are brought down. Not many will be able to afford it. When the self driving tech breaks down you will pay a small fortune to have it fixed. Which is why they may be limited to mostly commercial uses like ridesharing.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

getawaycar said:


> Self-driving tech would add thousands to tens of thousands to the cost of a car, even after costs are brought down. Not many will be able to afford it. When the self driving tech breaks down you will pay a small fortune to have it fixed. Which is why they may be limited to mostly commercial uses like ridesharing.


Do you really think anyone other than ridesharing companies will want it ? The only people that would benefit from it will be rideshare companies. Why the hell would i want a car to drive myself around when I can drive myself around 100 times better ?


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> I believe that anyone who drives for a living knows the day to day challenges of driving better than some investors and Silicon Valley nerds, yes


So you agree they haven't considered stop signs and that's going to be the end of SDCs?

By the way, for the record, they are already live and doing all of the things people here are claiming they never will.



getawaycar said:


> Self-driving tech would add thousands to tens of thousands to the cost of a car, even after costs are brought down. Not many will be able to afford it. When the self driving tech breaks down you will pay a small fortune to have it fixed. Which is why they may be limited to mostly commercial uses like ridesharing.


The common estimate is about $5,000 more in full production.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> You realize everyone knows you're full of it and yet you persist with your laughable lies. Let me guess, _the world is flat_ and _jet beams can't melt steel fuel_?
> 
> Here, I'll post it again just for you: No Driver, no one in the front seat, live passengers, in a suburb, in traffic.
> 
> View attachment 219095


You posted the same useless 1 minute video you posted earlier. Again, it means nothing unless we can see "millions of miles" of supposed video of these things working and not just propaganda.

Again, we'll wait for the many hours of video that should be out there. Feel free to show it to us. Can you imagine the gold mine of publicity that would bring to whatever company can actually make these things work ? There should be videos out there. Let's see it.


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> Do you really think anyone other than ridesharing companies will want it ? The only people that would benefit from it will be rideshare companies. Why the hell would i want a car to drive myself around when I can drive myself around 100 times better ?


There's not a chance you are a bet


tohunt4me said:


> Real Cabs will be busy in the future


Yes, they will, and without drivers.


----------



## tohunt4me

getawaycar said:


> Self-driving tech would add thousands to tens of thousands to the cost of a car, even after costs are brought down. Not many will be able to afford it. When the self driving tech breaks down you will pay a small fortune to have it fixed. Which is why they may be limited to mostly commercial uses like ridesharing.


Read Agenda 21 Elimination of Personal Vehicle Ownership.

One of many Defined Strategies is to Drive Cost Up.



RamzFanz said:


> There's not a chance you are a bet
> 
> Yes, they will, and without drivers.


Not at Those Prices!


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> You posted the same useless 1 minute video you posted earlier. Again, it means nothing unless we can see "millions of miles" of supposed video of these things working and not just propaganda.
> 
> Again, we'll wait for the many hours of video that should be out there. Feel free to show it to us. Can you imagine the gold mine of publicity that would bring to whatever company can actually make these things work ? There should be videos out there. Let's see it.


Do you need help with those goalposts?



uberdriverfornow said:


> We're all still waiting for you to show us video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic.
> 
> When you're ready to show us such video, feel free to.
> 
> Til then, all you're doing is grandstanding for sdc's.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

RamzFanz said:


> Do you need help with those goalposts?
> 
> "We're all still waiting for you to show us video showing they are, in fact, giving rides with no safety driver in the front seat, on open suburban roads, in traffic."


That's not a ride, that's a 30 second clip, done for promotional purposes, with no obstacles and basically no cars in it's path. Is that the only clip you can find ?


----------



## heynow321

iheartuber said:


> So basically the conversation is going like this:
> 
> Collective of Uber drivers: here's a list of potential problems we foresee happening with SDCs
> 
> RamzFanz: well, I have no proof of this but I just assume because these people spent billions of dollars they must have already thought of all these things...


That is exactly how he tries to make a point. It's like there's some kind of developmental delay or something.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> These questions aren't nearly as interesting as your belief that they haven't been considered and addressed by every major auto company and most of the major tech companies, worldwide, before investing their hundreds of billions and, in some cases, their entire futures.
> 
> Do you really believe you are out-thinking them? That they haven't once considered flat tires or stop signs?


People have died in Uber and Tesla vehicles while in self-driving mode. Apparently the car companies haven't figured out how to keep people from dying as a result of their self-driving vehicles.

It's 2018 and our engineers can't even build a relatively simple pedestrian bridge that doesn't collapse and crushes people to death. Do you think they can produce something far more complex like a self-driving car that will be safe? I doubt it.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

heynow321 said:


> That is exactly how he tries to make a point. It's like there's some kind of developmental delay or something.


He thinks if he keeps repeating the same propaganda he's been hearing from SDC companies he will start believing it himself.


----------



## heynow321

uberdriverfornow said:


> He thinks if he keeps repeating the same propaganda he's been hearing from SDC companies he will start believing it himself.


 Oh he already does believe it. That's why I was hinting at developmental problems because he can't seem to understand the difference between propaganda and reality like the rest of us can. It's very strange.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

heynow321 said:


> Oh he already does believe it. That's why I was hinting at developmental problems because he can't seem to understand the difference between propaganda and reality like the rest of us can. It's very strange.


Could be trying to use the "Big Lie" technique. lol

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie


----------



## RamzFanz

getawaycar said:


> People have died in Uber and Tesla vehicles while in self-driving mode. Apparently the car companies haven't figured out how to keep people from dying as a result of their self-driving vehicles.


Tesla's are not self-driving. They also don't have Lidar, which I think is a mistake.

Uber is reckless and way behind the pack. I've pointed this out many times over the years.



getawaycar said:


> It's 2018 and our engineers can't even build a relatively simple pedestrian bridge that doesn't collapse and crushes people to death. Do you think they can produce something far more complex like a self-driving car that will be safe? I doubt it.


This isn't at all true. We build far more complicated structures all the time. The fact that one collapsed tells us it wasn't built correctly, not that we can't.

Waymo is already live and has been at fault in no accidents over almost 6M miles, so yes, I know they can because they already have.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> So you agree they haven't considered stop signs and that's going to be the end of SDCs?


Let me be clear: I'm sure they thought of SOME things, but have they thought of ALL things? I'm willing to bet not even close. And I'm also saying without a doubt that the people who drive for a living WILL know about ALL of the things WAY better than the techs and the investors.



RamzFanz said:


> By the way, for the record, they are already live and doing all of the things people here are claiming they never will.


I don't have enough info to comment on that, but I do know one thing that SDC taxi companies are NOT doing right now: overtaking Uber/Lyft in the rideshare biz. When do you think that's going to be? I'll wait, it's fine. (That was sarcasm, BTW).


----------



## heynow321

RamzFanz said:


> Waymo is already live and has been at fault in no accidents over almost 6M miles, so yes, I know they can because they already have.


Patently false. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wi...s-self-driving-car-may-caused-first-crash/amp


----------



## RamzFanz

uberdriverfornow said:


> That's not a ride, that's a 30 second clip, done for promotional purposes, with no obstacles and basically no cars in it's path. Is that the only clip you can find ?


No, it's not the only clip, but as I've said, linking here is a fool's errand. If you want to move goalposts, do it with someone else. You lied so I'm done with your requests.



iheartuber said:


> Let me be clear: I'm sure they thought of SOME things, but have they thought of ALL things? I'm willing to bet not even close. And I'm also saying without a doubt that the people who drive for a living WILL know about ALL of the things WAY better than the techs and the investors.


Not even close? Comeonman, that's silly. The brain power at their disposal and time they've put in make it obvious they have considered probably every point that's ever been made on here about why SDCs will never work despite the fact they are already a reality.

I think we both know you're being willfully obtuse.



heynow321 said:


> Patently false. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wi...s-self-driving-car-may-caused-first-crash/amp


Not at fault. The Waymo car had the right-of-way. It was a valuable lesson for them and the car or driver should have yielded, but they had the right-of-way and were not found to be at fault.

Oh, and guess what, they went live last Oct.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> No, it's not the only clip, but as I've said, linking here is a fool's errand. If you want to move goalposts, do it with someone else.
> 
> Not even close? Comeonman, that's silly. The brain power at their disposal and time they've put in make it obvious they have considered probably every point that's ever been made on here about why SDCs will never work despite the fact they are already a reality.
> 
> I think we both know you're being willfully obtuse.


Now we're back to your original argument "just because they spent a lot of money that means they thought of everything" except now you're slightly adjusting it by saying "they're really smart people so they must have thought of everything"

Let me put it to you a way you might understand: a Doctor is a smart person, right? Can he fix the plumbing at my house?

Different people are smart in some ways (geniuses even) and totally clueless in other ways.

The real drivers who do this everyday are far more genius than anyone else no matter how much you want to try to minimize the drivers. (You're a driver too, right? Maybe you are minimizing yourself? Is that Freudian?)


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> Tesla's are not self-driving. They also don't have Lidar, which I think is a mistake.
> 
> Uber is reckless and way behind the pack. I've pointed this out many times over the years.


The US government classifies a Tesla in autopilot mode as a level 2 autonomous self-driving vehicle.

A Tesla in autopilot mode brakes, steers and accelerates all by itself, without human input. What do you call that if not self-driving? Just because Tesla wants the human driver to pay attention at all times doesn't mean it isn't driving itself. The human driver isn't doing anything to drive the car, only keeping an eye on it. The car is literally driving itself.


----------



## heynow321

RamzFanz said:


> Not at fault. The Waymo car had the right-of-way. It was a valuable lesson for them and the car or driver should have yielded, but they had the right-of-way and were not found to be at fault.
> 
> Oh, and guess what, they went live last Oct.


Incorrect, yet again. Just because another driver does something when you have the right-of-way doesn't mean you can hit them and not be at fault, especially if the incident is easily avoidable.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...caused-software-trying-predict-driver-do.html


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> Now we're back to your original argument "just because they spent a lot of money that means they thought of everything" except now you're slightly adjusting it by saying "they're really smart people so they must have thought of everything"
> 
> Let me put it to you a way you might understand: a Doctor is a smart person, right? Can he fix the plumbing at my house?
> 
> Different people are smart in some ways (geniuses even) and totally clueless in other ways.
> 
> The real drivers who do this everyday are far more genius than anyone else no matter how much you want to try to minimize the drivers. (You're a driver too, right? Maybe you are minimizing yourself? Is that Freudian?)


Uber drivers are simply not going to outthink them. Sorry if that implies any insult, it's not meant to, but that's the reality.

Anyone who thinks they haven't considered flat tires, stop signs, and school buses are either ignorant of the state of SDCs or disingenuous.

They have already built and deployed self-driving cars. Let me know when any of the things in this thread stops them. The proof that they know what they're doing and have considered these issues is in the pudding.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

RamzFanz said:


> I'm not sure why, I never told you I would link one.
> 
> I prefer you remain ignorant for entertainment purposes.
> 
> False. It shows several trips by multiple cars in a suburban environment with traffic. It clearly both shows and states that there is no safety driver in the front seat.
> 
> View attachment 219081
> 
> 
> This has been going on for months now, as you are fully aware.
> 
> And they have now achieved it. Waymo has stated many times they can now read hand gestures.
> 
> I did. This is exactly why I rarely link here, it's a fool's errand, which makes you the better choice for doing your own research.
> 
> False.


What sort of hand gestures can they read? Because the cops here in Houston are absolutely terrible at directing traffic. I've actually rolled down the window to ask "What do you want me to do?"

They just sort of wander around waving flashlights and expecting you to read their minds.

If I don't know when I'm supposed to go or stop by what they're doing how will an SDC?

BTW I grew up in England and the cops there (at least when I grew up) were taught to direct traffic. I don't think they actually teach them that here in Texas.



getawaycar said:


> People have died in Uber and Tesla vehicles while in self-driving mode. Apparently the car companies haven't figured out how to keep people from dying as a result of their self-driving vehicles.
> 
> It's 2018 and our engineers can't even build a relatively simple pedestrian bridge that doesn't collapse and crushes people to death. Do you think they can produce something far more complex like a self-driving car that will be safe? I doubt it.


Heck we can't get the self checkout at supermarkets to work half the time.


----------



## RamzFanz

heynow321 said:


> Incorrect, yet again. Just because another driver does something when you have the right-of-way doesn't mean you can hit them and not be at fault, especially if the incident is easily avoidable.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...caused-software-trying-predict-driver-do.html


I said they were not at-fault in any accidents. You replied that was _patently false_ and presented an accident where they were not at-fault.

They WERE NOT found to be at-fault.

What part are you missing here?

Waymo has 6 million miles without an at-fault accident. Period. Did they make changes to their programming so as to make better assumptions? Yes, yes they did. That's why you test for 6M miles and hundreds of billions in simulators.



Fuzzyelvis said:


> What sort of hand gestures can they read? Because the cops here in Houston are absolutely terrible at directing traffic. I've actually rolled down the window to ask "What do you want me to do?"
> 
> They just sort of wander around waving flashlights and expecting you to read their minds.
> 
> If I don't know when I'm supposed to go or stop by what they're doing how will an SDC?
> 
> BTW I grew up in England and the cops there (at least when I grew up) were taught to direct traffic. I don't think they actually teach them that here in Texas.


I don't know all of what they can read. They have stated they read bike hand signals and were working on police years ago. Nothing more has been spoken about that I'm aware of.

I'm going with the assumption that a standard will be brought out to ensure the car can read specific hand signals, but that's just a guess.

I can't remember the last time I needed to follow hand signals, so I don't see it as a common issue. Here, when the power and traffic lights go out, as was presented by the OP, we treat it as a 4 way stop. Construction workers all use signs.

-----------

The longer version of the Waymo car doing exactly what heynow321 says it isn't.

Some more.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> Tesla's are not self-driving. * They also don't have Lidar, *which I think is a mistake.


The aesthetic design and looks/appearance of Tesla vehicles are a major selling point of their cars. So having a large spinning contraption sticking out of the roof would destroy the appearance of the car.

Which is why self-driving cars do tend to look pretty goofy in general. Car companies spend a great deal of money to make their cars look attractive, which may not be possible to do with self-driving cars without seriously compromising safety. But for commercial applications appearance wouldn't be that important.


----------



## RamzFanz

getawaycar said:


> The design and looks/appearance of Tesla vehicles are a major selling point of their cars. So having a large spinning contraption sticking out of the roof would destroy the appearance of the car.
> 
> Which is why self-driving cars do tend to look pretty goofy in general. Car companies spend a great deal of money to make their cars look attractive, which may not be possible to do with self-driving cars without seriously compromising safety. But for commercial applications appearance wouldn't be that important.


True, but the spinning contraption is going away. The future is solid state Lidar and is much easier to conceal and MUCH cheaper, projected to be in the hundreds each.

I think Musk is between a rock and a hard place since he's promising self-driving for existing cars without Lidar. This was the wrong path and I think introducing them at level 2 was also. They keep crashing because you just can't trust humans.


----------



## jocker12

uberdriverfornow said:


> The first video is a 1 minute clip of a car on an isolated road. It then proceeds to say that Waymo still has a driver in them.
> 
> The second clip is the same one that was posted years ago that showed nothing with regards to a SDC car following a hand gesture, just a presentation talking about what they aim to achieve.
> 
> Try again. This time post a video that shows actual SDC's driving around, with no driver doing anything on public streets and doing any of the aforementioned things I said it can't do.
> 
> He posted links, just not to any sdc doing anything he says they can do, and on a public street and not on a private, isolated road. Instead, more of the video is showing people sitting in the back seat than it shows the car driving on a public road.


That's like asking someone to write something in Chinese and they write in Japanese. Seriously?


----------



## goneubering

uberdriverfornow said:


> So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.
> 
> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?
> 
> These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.
> 
> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?
> 
> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?
> 
> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?
> 
> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?
> 
> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?
> 
> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?
> 
> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?
> 
> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?
> 
> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?
> 
> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?
> 
> I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.
> 
> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?
> 
> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?
> 
> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W
> 
> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?
> 
> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?
> 
> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?
> 
> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?
> 
> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.
> 
> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


Add fire engines to your list. I saw an idiot in a truck almost get hit by a fire engine in an intersection today. Will an SDC know where to pull over when approached by a fire engine? I assume yes but I wonder.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Uber drivers are simply not going to outthink them. Sorry if that implies any insult, it's not meant to, but that's the reality.
> 
> Anyone who thinks they haven't considered flat tires, stop signs, and school buses are either ignorant of the state of SDCs or disingenuous.
> 
> They have already built and deployed self-driving cars. Let me know when any of the things in this thread stops them. The proof that they know what they're doing and have considered these issues is in the pudding.


There is no pudding yet. Just an early rider program in Phoenix, and a bunch of people who have this fantasy that the proof in the pudding will come very soon.

That's funny, because I still don't see any hard evidence that that will happen.


----------



## heynow321

RamzFanz said:


> I said they were not at-fault in any accidents. You replied that was _patently false_ and presented an accident where they were not at-fault.
> 
> They WERE NOT found to be at-fault.
> 
> What part are you missing here?
> 
> Waymo has 6 million miles without an at-fault accident. Period. Did they make changes to their programming so as to make better assumptions? Yes, yes they did. That's why you test for 6M miles and hundreds of billions in simulators.
> 
> I don't know all of what they can read. They have stated they read bike hand signals and were working on police years ago. Nothing more has been spoken about that I'm aware of.
> 
> I'm going with the assumption that a standard will be brought out to ensure the car can read specific hand signals, but that's just a guess.
> 
> I can't remember the last time I needed to follow hand signals, so I don't see it as a common issue. Here, when the power and traffic lights go out, as was presented by the OP, we treat it as a 4 way stop. Construction workers all use signs.
> 
> -----------
> 
> The longer version of the Waymo car doing exactly what heynow321 says it isn't.
> 
> Some more.


Lol look at how they have to speed up the video do the viewer doesn't notice how painfully slow they are. All I see are a couple cars moving around very slowly on big open neighborhood streets. Not exactly impressive. A 9 year old could drive those streets. Show us a video in the rain on the freeway with traffic. Or how about an extremely simple entering the freeway then exiting. We're all patiently waiting


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

getawaycar said:


> The aesthetic design and looks/appearance of Tesla vehicles are a major selling point of their cars. So having a large spinning contraption sticking out of the roof would destroy the appearance of the car.
> 
> Which is why self-driving cars do tend to look pretty goofy in general. Car companies spend a great deal of money to make their cars look attractive, which may not be possible to do with self-driving cars without seriously compromising safety. But for commercial applications appearance wouldn't be that important.


Doesn't the extra equipment affect handling and gas consumption? I mean, cars are built these days to be aerodynamic as much as possible within the look they're going for.



RamzFanz said:


> They keep crashing because you just can't trust humans.


That's the funniest thing you've said all day.



RamzFanz said:


> I don't know all of what they can read. They have stated they read bike hand signals and were working on police years ago. Nothing more has been spoken about that I'm aware of.
> 
> I can't remember the last time I needed to follow hand signals, so I don't see it as a common issue. Here, when the power and traffic lights go out, as was presented by the OP, we treat it as a 4 way stop. Construction workers all use signs.
> 
> -----------
> 
> The longer version of the Waymo car doing exactly what heynow321 says it isn't.
> 
> Some more.


The time when hand signals are needed is often during events and after accidents when drivers are directed to go the wrong way down a street, illegally cross into the opposite lane, cut through parking lots, etc etc.

Precisely times when traffic is bad, other drivers are making mistakes (because they don't know what the cop wants either) and there are disoriented/stupid/drunk people milling around.

And if a cop can actually communicate to an SDC to turn around and drive the wrong way down the freeway and off the on ramp after an accident (I have done this several times in Houston) couldn't anyone in a uniform (if that's even needed) do the same thing?

Seems like a low tech hack to me.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Doesn't the extra equipment affect handling and gas consumption? I mean, cars are built these days to be aerodynamic as much as possible within the look they're going for.
> 
> That's the funniest thing you've said all day.
> 
> The time when hand signals are needed is often during events and after accidents when drivers are directed to go the wrong way down a street, illegally cross into the opposite lane, cut through parking lots, etc etc.
> 
> Precisely times when traffic is bad, other drivers are making mistakes (because they don't know what the cop wants either) and there are disoriented/stupid/drunk people milling around.
> 
> And if a cop can actually communicate to an SDC to turn around and drive the wrong way down the freeway and off the on ramp after an accident (I have done this several times in Houston) couldn't anyone in a uniform (if that's even needed) do the same thing?
> 
> Seems like a low tech hack to me.


hand signals will really be the show stopper with these things


----------



## jocker12

Fuzzyelvis said:


> The time when hand signals are needed is often during events and after accidents when drivers are directed to go the wrong way down a street, illegally cross into the opposite lane, cut through parking lots, etc etc





uberdriverfornow said:


> hand signals will really be the show stopper with these things


Sometimes traffic agents direct traffic in clear conflict with the stop lights, especially when official motorcades or mortuary motorcades are passing thru high traffic areas. The rest of the traffic still gets going, but the lights and the agents are not coordinated.


----------



## RamzFanz

getawaycar said:


> The US government classifies a Tesla in autopilot mode as a level 2 autonomous self-driving vehicle.
> 
> A Tesla in autopilot mode brakes, steers and accelerates all by itself, without human input. What do you call that if not self-driving? Just because Tesla wants the human driver to pay attention at all times doesn't mean it isn't driving itself. The human driver isn't doing anything to drive the car, only keeping an eye on it. The car is literally driving itself.


The SAE levels document is called "Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems." They have a level 0 too which is no automation at all.

Tesla's autopilot is usually described as driver assist. The driver is ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle so it's not considered self-driving. Self-driving is a car that needs no overseeing. Level 4 minimum for SDC. Level 5 is autonomy.



heynow321 said:


> Lol look at how they have to speed up the video do the viewer doesn't notice how painfully slow they are. All I see are a couple cars moving around very slowly on big open neighborhood streets. Not exactly impressive. A 9 year old could drive those streets. Show us a video in the rain on the freeway with traffic. Or how about an extremely simple entering the freeway then exiting. We're all patiently waiting


Waiting for what?

I was asked for a video of driverless cars driving in traffic in a suburb. That's what I provided. Three of them to this point. I'm waiting for you to acknowledge the truth. When you admit that's what they are doing, every day, we can move the goalposts yet again.


----------



## heynow321

RamzFanz said:


> The SAE levels document is called "Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems." They have a level 0 too which is no automation at all.
> 
> Tesla's autopilot is usually described as driver assist. The driver is ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle so it's not considered self-driving. Self-driving is a car that needs no overseeing. Level 4 minimum for SDC. Level 5 is autonomy.
> 
> Waiting for what?
> 
> You asked for a video of driverless cars driving in traffic in a suburb. That's what I provided. Three of them to this point. I'm waiting for you to acknowledge the truth.


Lol no. I repeatedly asked for a video of a google car entering a freeway, dealing with traffic, merging onto another freeway, then exiting. I'll make it even easier for you. Show us a video of any sdc entering a freeway from city streets then exiting back to city streets. Any weather conditions. We're all still waiting. Don't disappoint us like your sprinkler system customers.


----------



## RamzFanz

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Doesn't the extra equipment affect handling and gas consumption? I mean, cars are built these days to be aerodynamic as much as possible within the look they're going for.
> 
> That's the funniest thing you've said all day.
> 
> The time when hand signals are needed is often during events and after accidents when drivers are directed to go the wrong way down a street, illegally cross into the opposite lane, cut through parking lots, etc etc.
> 
> Precisely times when traffic is bad, other drivers are making mistakes (because they don't know what the cop wants either) and there are disoriented/stupid/drunk people milling around.
> 
> And if a cop can actually communicate to an SDC to turn around and drive the wrong way down the freeway and off the on ramp after an accident (I have done this several times in Houston) couldn't anyone in a uniform (if that's even needed) do the same thing?
> 
> Seems like a low tech hack to me.


Yes, these outlier situations will have to be/are being addressed. I don't have the answers because their plans aren't public yet.

Are they aware they will have to deal with these issues? Of course they are.



heynow321 said:


> Lol no. I repeatedly asked for a video of a google car entering a freeway, dealing with traffic, merging onto another freeway, then exiting. I'll make it even easier for you. Show us a video of any sdc entering a freeway from city streets then exiting back to city streets. Any weather conditions. We're all still waiting. Don't disappoint us like your sprinkler system customers.


When did I ever say such a video exists, that I would share it with you if it did, or that what you demand as evidence has any bearing on reality? You're just a goalpost mover, nothing more.

If you insult me again you're joining Jocker on my ignore list. Grow up.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> The SAE levels document is called "Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems." They have a level 0 too which is no automation at all.
> 
> Tesla's autopilot is usually described as driver assist. The driver is ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the vehicle so it's not considered self-driving. Self-driving is a car that needs no overseeing. Level 4 minimum for SDC. Level 5 is autonomy.


In autopilot mode the driver does nothing to drive the car. Hence the car is self-driving. Any car that can steer, brake, accelerate and decelerate on its own with no human input is by definition driving itself. Tesla can call it what they want for legal purposes, but that doesn't change the fact the car is literally driving itself, and hence is a self-driving car.

If my 16 year old son is driving my car with a learners permit, and I am monitoring him from the passenger seat, does that make me the driver of the car? Of course it doesn't. My son is still driving the car.


----------



## jocker12

heynow321 said:


> Lol no. I repeatedly asked for a video of a google car entering a freeway, dealing with traffic, merging onto another freeway, then exiting. I'll make it even easier for you. Show us a video of any sdc entering a freeway from city streets then exiting back to city streets. Any weather conditions. We're all still waiting. Don't disappoint us like your sprinkler system customers.


You are talking to a "person" that will intentionally install faulty sprinkler systems to himself, only to make his point how "there is no problem, it happens all the time", ignoring the main problem he just stupidly created.

As you can understand, the idea is to ignore the main question or request and recreate the frame to present a failure as a success. I call it monumental BS.


----------



## iheartuber

No one is really addressing this point:

if anyone can go to a car dealership and buy a car that has SD features, no one would ever need to use an uber again.

This being the case, why do SD manufacturers even give a rip about starting their own version of a taxi service?


----------



## heynow321

jocker12 said:


> You are talking to a "person" that will intentionally install faulty sprinkler systems to himself, only to make his point how "there is no problem, it happens all the time", ignoring the main problem he just stupidly created.
> 
> As you can understand, the idea is to ignore the main question or request and recreate the frame to present a failure as a success. I call it monumental BS.


 Oh of course. He knows the cars can't do what I'm asking just like the rest of us know. I just like seeing what kind of stupid excuses he comes up with and how he tries to dodge the question. He just discredits himself further and further


----------



## RamzFanz

getawaycar said:


> In autopilot mode the driver does nothing to drive the car. Hence the car is self-driving. Any car that can steer, brake, accelerate and decelerate on its own with no human input is by definition driving itself. Tesla can call it what they want for legal purposes, but that doesn't change the fact the car is literally driving itself, and hence is a self-driving car.
> 
> If my 16 year old son is driving my car with a learners permit, and I am monitoring him from the passenger seat, does that make me the driver of the car? Of course it doesn't. My son is still driving the car.


I will have to disagree. It's not self-driving any more than using cruise control is self-driving. The driver must keep their hands on the wheel of a level 2 and take over as needed. It's meant for highway use only, doesn't react to stop signs or lights, or to anything other than lane keeping and obstacle avoidence (hopefully).

No one in the industry calls a level 2 car self-driving. You'll see it used for Tesla's in clickbait article headlines by uninformed journalists but never by someone in the industry.

A self-driving car is one where no one needs to be in the driver seat, ever.

A level 4 car is self-driving. No driver is ever needed but it may be geofenced, speed limited, or have some other restriction like no driving in snow. A level 5 is autonomous, can do everything a human can, wherever they can, and in any weather conditions they can.


----------



## hanging in there

uberdriverfornow said:


> So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.
> 
> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?
> 
> These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.
> 
> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?
> 
> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?
> 
> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?
> 
> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?
> 
> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?
> 
> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?
> 
> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?
> 
> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?
> 
> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?
> 
> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?
> 
> I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.
> 
> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?
> 
> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?
> 
> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W
> 
> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?
> 
> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?
> 
> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?
> 
> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?
> 
> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.
> 
> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


Isis bomb delivery vehicle... no suicide necessary.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> I will have to disagree. It's not self-driving any more than using cruise control is self-driving. The driver must keep their hands on the wheel of a level 2 and take over as needed.


Cruise control does not steer or brake for you. You are still controlling the steering and braking, hence you are driving the car. Tesla says you must keep hands on the steering wheel in autopilot mode. But in practice almost no one does that.

Even Waymo says the the Tesla autopilot system is inherently dangerous, and they are correct. People have lost their lives or have been seriously injured by it.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> No one is really addressing this point:
> 
> if anyone can go to a car dealership and buy a car that has SD features, no one would ever need to use an uber again.
> 
> This being the case, why do SD manufacturers even give a rip about starting their own version of a taxi service?


Because people are already giving up their cars. SDCs will be cheaper than Uber so owning a car that is almost always idol won't be cost effective in the future. Also, the TNC market is estimated to be a barely tapped $14T market they can get a piece of with far less cars and production will be slow at first. Why sell off a quantity limited asset that can produce that much cash for yourself? The value of a TNC far far exceeds the value of a single sale.

Keep in mind the initial cost to the auto makers is wholesale so it's much cheaper for them to own.



heynow321 said:


> Oh of course. He knows the cars can't do what I'm asking just like the rest of us know. I just like seeing what kind of stupid excuses he comes up with and how he tries to dodge the question. He just discredits himself further and further


How did I dodge anything? I'm not your fetch. If you want to know the facts, go look them up.

We both know that every time you're proven wrong you move the goalpost and insult the people who proved you wrong.

I'm uninterested in your games or demands.



getawaycar said:


> Cruise control does not steer or brake for you. You are still controlling the steering and braking, hence you are driving the car. Tesla says you must keep hands on the steering wheel in autopilot mode. But in practice almost no one does that.
> 
> Even Waymo says the the Tesla autopilot system is inherently dangerous, and they are correct. People have lost their lives or have been seriously injured by it.


It's just a different scale of driver assist. Cruise control is for speed control, self braking is for deceleration, lane assist is for steering, it's all the same kind of thing but for different functions. Putting them together doesn't make a car self-driving. Not ever needing a driver is what makes a car self-driving.

Which is why I think Tesla is wrong for introducing level 2 cars. They are not self-driving but are close enough to lull drivers into a false sense of security. Yes, Waymo discovered this early on when they allowed regular employees use the cars which is why they went straight to level 4, self-driving, before allowing the public to ride in them.

A car that needs a driver is, by the very definition, not self-driving.


----------



## heynow321

The goal posts have been moved to make it easier for you. We all enjoy your dodging though. You must have played a ton of dodgeball.


----------



## Pedro Paramo66

uberdriverfornow said:


> So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.
> 
> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?
> 
> These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.
> 
> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?
> 
> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?
> 
> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?
> 
> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?
> 
> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?
> 
> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?
> 
> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?
> 
> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?
> 
> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?
> 
> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?
> 
> I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.
> 
> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?
> 
> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?
> 
> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W
> 
> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?
> 
> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?
> 
> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?
> 
> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?
> 
> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.
> 
> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


All this articles regarding this Travis scam are misinforming people because they never mention that uber self driving car is the last thing Uber is interested on, the main asset Travis has is the bunch of stupid creepy losers brainwashed willing to drive for charity and donations, Uber don't have to worry about, clean up, insurance, maintenance, repairs, parking, gas......... Uber know they have the stupid drivers willing to do that for charity and donations or less
Self driving car is a hoax Uber invented to threat the drivers: "you better keep driving for such ridiculous cheap fares because I'm about to replace you" and the stupid drivers believe so
I believe sdcis a reality but not Uber business
Lol


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Pedro Paramo66 said:


> All this articles regarding this Travis scam are misinforming people because they never mention that uber self driving car is the last thing Uber is interested on, the main asset Travis has is the bunch of stupid creepy losers brainwashed willing to drive for charity and donations, Uber don't have to worry about, clean up, insurance, maintenance, repairs, parking, gas......... Uber know they have the stupid drivers willing to do that for charity and donations or less
> Self driving car is a hoax Uber invented to threat the drivers: "you better keep driving for such ridiculous cheap fares because I'm about to replace you" and the stupid drivers believe so
> I believe sdcis a reality but not Uber business
> Lol


nothing wrong with what you wrote but feel free to add to the list of reasons that sdc's will never work

just try to think of some that havent been mentioned


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Because people are already giving up their cars. SDCs will be cheaper than Uber so owning a car that is almost always idol won't be cost effective in the future.


Out of every 100 people I drive, maybe 5 are "giving up their cars". Don't think this is bigger than it really is.

For the average consumer, using rideshare is good once in a while if you want to go out drinking or to the airport or whatever, but if you literally "ubered everywhere" you would pay much more than what it would cost to just own a car.

And the idea that TNC's can slash prices to ridiculous levels if there's a robot driver is just silly. a car is a car is a car and maintenance per mile is still the same. Sure, robots don't need to make a salary of $20- $40k per year but between the fuel costs, garaging, software and hardware upgrades, and CSR's to handle the 800 number of customer service that money is eaten away. Not to mention that buying a fleet of SDCs new will cost a pretty penny (even if bought at a discount) and after 3 years and 200k miles they'd be junk anyway-- which means a whole new set of cars. In other words: expensive.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> No one is really addressing this point:
> 
> if anyone can go to a car dealership and buy a car that has SD features, no one would ever need to use an uber again.


not sure what you mean, please explain your reasoning


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> not sure what you mean, please explain your reasoning


Imagine every car on the road today was a SDC. If dealers started selling new cars that can be either human driven or robot driven at the flick of a switch, eventually the human only driven cars will be phased out and we would get to the point where most if not all cars on the road can be used as an SDC.

Now imagine you're going out for the night and you want to drink. No need to get an uber because you can just have your robo car drive you around and you can get as drunk as you want.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> A car that needs a driver is, by the very definition, not self-driving.


But that's not true of the Tesla in autopilot mode. In autopilot mode you don't have to do anything to make the car drive. The car will keep driving itself whether your hands are on the wheel or not. Which proves the autopilot system in fact does not require any physical human input to function while in autopilot mode.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> 1. Imagine every car on the road today was a SDC. If dealers started selling new cars that can be either human driven or robot driven at the flick of a switch, eventually the human only driven cars will be phased out and we would get to the point where most if not all cars on the road can be used as an SDC.
> 
> 2. Now imagine you're going out for the night and you want to drink. No need to get an uber because you can just have your robo car drive you around and you can get as drunk as you want.


1. If there is a flick of a switch to either human or robot driven, they wouldn't need to phase out the human driven aspect since they will have the ability to theoretically choose one or the other. If you have two things, why would you want to only have one instead ?

2. This assumes that sdc's will not have an accident. Why would someone want to risk an accident and either being at fault or their car being at fault when they can put that on an Uber driver or, theoretically, an Uber SDC ?


----------



## Pedro Paramo66

uberdriverfornow said:


> nothing wrong with what you wrote but feel free to add to the list of reasons that sdc's will never work
> 
> just try to think of some that havent been mentioned


Read carefully, I said: SDC is a reality but isn't Uber business
Lol


----------



## iheartuber

uberdriverfornow said:


> 1. If there is a flick of a switch to either human or robot driven, they wouldn't need to phase out the human driven aspect since they will have the ability to theoretically choose one or the other. If you have two things, why would you want to only have one instead ?


Because sometimes people will just want to drive, duh



uberdriverfornow said:


> 2. This assumes that sdc's will not have an accident. Why would someone want to risk an accident and either being at fault or their car being at fault when they can put that on an Uber driver or, theoretically, an Uber SDC ?


Ahhhhh now you bring up an excellent question. Maybe people just don't trust robots that much? Well well well... maybe they don't. But if so, that alone kinda kills the whole "robot revolution"


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> Out of every 100 people I drive, maybe 5 are "giving up their cars". Don't think this is bigger than it really is.
> 
> For the average consumer, using rideshare is good once in a while if you want to go out drinking or to the airport or whatever, but if you literally "ubered everywhere" you would pay much more than what it would cost to just own a car.
> 
> And the idea that TNC's can slash prices to ridiculous levels if there's a robot driver is just silly. a car is a car is a car and maintenance per mile is still the same. Sure, robots don't need to make a salary of $20- $40k per year but between the fuel costs, garaging, software and hardware upgrades, and CSR's to handle the 800 number of customer service that money is eaten away. Not to mention that buying a fleet of SDCs new will cost a pretty penny (even if bought at a discount) and after 3 years and 200k miles they'd be junk anyway-- which means a whole new set of cars. In other words: expensive.


When I say things like "people are already giving up their cars", I mean it as an fact. People, especially urban residents, the main target for Uber and now SDC TNCs, are statistically giving up their cars. Your 5% (it's much higher) will become much much higher when costs of TNC come down. It won't happen overnight, but neither will SDC TNCs.

Your vantage point on the math is wrong. If a car is being worn out, it's because it's producing profit. The faster they wear out the better.

Your position that the costs are all the same is way off base. Individual costs, retail repair and maintenance, dwarf fleet costs. Same as parking. Same as initial costs which are wholesale.

In other words, there's not a single part of owning a fleet vehicle at wholesale cost that is more expensive. Yes, CSRs and the like are an additional expense, but nothing compared to individual ownership retail costs.

Now consider they will all eventually be electric which is very low maintenance cost. Batteries negate that quite a bit now, but the entire world is seeking cheaper batteries. Musk is building the world's largest battery manufacturing plants.



getawaycar said:


> But that's not true of the Tesla in autopilot mode. In autopilot mode you don't have to do anything to make the car drive. The car will keep driving itself whether your hands are on the wheel or not. Which proves the autopilot system in fact does not require any physical human input to function while in autopilot mode.


This simply isn't true. If you take your hands off the wheel, it will pull over and stop. YOU are the driver, the car is assisting you. It is incapable of driving itself and, therefore, not self driving.

In a self-driving car, you can get in the back and do nothing other than give it a destination within it's geographical or other self-imposed limitations. Tesla's are nowhere near that level.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> When I say things like "people are already giving up their cars", I mean it as an fact. People, especially urban residents, the main target for Uber and now SDC TNCs, are statistically giving up their cars. Your 5% (it's much higher) will become much much higher when costs of TNC come down. It won't happen overnight, but neither will SDC TNCs.
> 
> Your vantage point on the math is wrong. If a car is being worn out, it's because it's producing profit. The faster they wear out the better.
> 
> Your position that the costs are all the same is way off base. Individual costs, retail repair and maintenance, dwarf fleet costs. Same as parking. Same as initial costs which are wholesale.
> 
> In other words, there's not a single part of owning a fleet vehicle at wholesale cost that is more expensive. Yes, CSRs and the like are an additional expense, but nothing compared to individual ownership retail costs.
> 
> Now consider they will all eventually be electric which is very low maintenance cost. Batteries negate that quite a bit now, but the entire world is seeking cheaper batteries. Musk is building the world's largest battery manufacturing plants.
> 
> This simply isn't true. If you take your hands off the wheel, it will pull over and stop. YOU are the driver, the car is assisting you. It is incapable of driving itself and, therefore, not self driving.
> 
> In a self-driving car, you can get in the back and do nothing other than give it a destination within it's geographical or other self-imposed limitations. Tesla's are nowhere near that level.


Bro, a car is a car is a car.

Human driver or robot driver the car still needs maintenance. That costs money. There is NO WAY costs can come down much further than what Uber has already set them on.

So when you say "TNC costs will come down further..." I simply cannot take anything you said after that seriously.

This is not personal. You seem like a nice guy, but you are very misguided.

Oh... also fun fact: you said "SDC TNCs won't happen overnight".. that is literally exactly what I've been saying all along. The theme from the robo loving crowd seems to be it WILL come so soon it's almost as if it's "overnight" (in their opinion). So now you're what... backpedaling?


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Bro, a car is a car is a car.
> 
> Human driver or robot driver the car still needs maintenance. That costs money. There is NO WAY costs can come down much further than what Uber has already set them on.
> 
> So when you say "TNC costs will come down further..." I simply cannot take anything you said after that seriously.
> 
> This is not personal. You seem like a nice guy, but you are very misguided.
> 
> Oh... also fun fact: you said "SDC TNCs won't happen overnight".. that is literally exactly what I've been saying all along. The theme from the robo loving crowd seems to be it WILL come so soon it's almost as if it's "overnight" (in their opinion). So now you're what... backpedaling?


His misguidance comes from the fact that he wants self driving cars to happen so bad, that every person should agree with him. It is not about now, but shouldn't be in 1000 years either, because he wants the revolution to happen "soon" in order for his younger family members to take advantage of it. If self driving cars developers will come out in a week saying they will have 100% autonomy in 900 years, Ramz/Jason will say "Screw it! I don't like that!"

The fallacies he expresses without any form of intellectual proof, shows you how the very important details of this technology are not important to him, and by contrary, the tunnel vision he has makes you understand he is like a child waiting for Santa. And if 1 billion people on this planet choose to tell their children Santa exists (like the companies involved in autonomous cars technology chose to invest billions in it) then Santa IS REAL.


----------



## goneubering

RamzFanz said:


> When I say things like "people are already giving up their cars", I mean it as an fact. People, especially urban residents, the main target for Uber and now SDC TNCs, are statistically giving up their cars. Your 5% (it's much higher) will become much much higher when costs of TNC come down. It won't happen overnight, but neither will SDC TNCs.
> 
> Your vantage point on the math is wrong. If a car is being worn out, it's because it's producing profit. The faster they wear out the better.
> 
> Your position that the costs are all the same is way off base. Individual costs, retail repair and maintenance, dwarf fleet costs. Same as parking. Same as initial costs which are wholesale.
> 
> In other words, there's not a single part of owning a fleet vehicle at wholesale cost that is more expensive. Yes, CSRs and the like are an additional expense, but nothing compared to individual ownership retail costs.
> 
> Now consider they will all eventually be electric which is very low maintenance cost. Batteries negate that quite a bit now, but the entire world is seeking cheaper batteries. Musk is building the world's largest battery manufacturing plants.
> 
> This simply isn't true. If you take your hands off the wheel, it will pull over and stop. YOU are the driver, the car is assisting you. It is incapable of driving itself and, therefore, not self driving.
> 
> In a self-driving car, you can get in the back and do nothing other than give it a destination within it's geographical or other self-imposed limitations. Tesla's are nowhere near that level.


Maybe in NYC. Other than there car ownership is probably increasing except for people who can't afford to buy one.


----------



## tomatopaste

uberdriverfornow said:


> So let's go. I'm going to throw out a bunch of scenarios why SDC's will never work. Everyone can add their own and let's see how far we can go finding reasons why we don't wanna die by these things.
> 
> Waymo has been doing their SDC's solely in Mountain View for atleast 5 years. I have never even seen them on a freeway or outside city limits. They aren't even close to being ready and there are 10,000 cities in the US. Do the math, how long til they map every city ?
> 
> These are a bunch right off the top of my head. You can add your own.
> 
> Let's say there's a power outage and a police officer is directly traffic, how's that car gonna know when that car is allowed to proceed?
> 
> In a construction zone and the cones have the sdc going into the opposing lane for a bit. How's it going to know that's ok ?
> 
> Stop signs, how's that car going to know when to proceed and who to yield to ?
> 
> School buses, the lights are flashing, how's that car gonna know to stop?
> 
> Drive-thru's, how's that car going to navigate the Jack-In-The-Box drive-thru ?
> 
> How's it going to know a safe spot to illegally stop in traffic to pick up a pax?
> 
> How's it going to know exactly where the pax is ?
> 
> When the pax calls the car to tell it where it really is how's the car going to understand it ?
> 
> Remember, each and every single SDC on the road right now has a human driver in there to bail it out because none of them ever work or will ever work like a human. Ever. Imagine completely taking the driver out ?
> 
> In Mountain View those stupid cars are ALWAYS atleast 15 mph below the speed limit and you gotta go around it, how is that going to be better for the pax than with a human driver doing the speed limit ? Why would a pax get into a car like that ?
> 
> I will add more as I think of em. This is just to start it off.
> 
> While at a stop light a sensor gets hit with some bird shit, and it malfunctions, what's the pax going to do ?
> 
> A sensor malfunctions for any reason and you're on the freeway doing 65 mph, you're the pax, what are you going to do ? What is the car doing to do ?
> 
> How does the car know that the car itself is malfunctioning ? How is that car going to know the tire is punctured and it must pull over ? W
> 
> Who's going to change the tire ? The pax ? How long must the pax wait for someone to come change the tire since there is no human driver ?
> 
> Someone hacks the car and drives it into a wall. How are you going to stop it ? Will you just jump out ?
> 
> Remember, these are all scenarios when there is no driver in the car and you gotta somehow be the driver now. Is that what you signed up for ?
> 
> Think about all the things the human brain has to process over the going of driving this car with this pax around. Can you really program all of these common sense things into a program that can't think for itself ?
> 
> Also, remember that even if the SDC wouldn't otherwise hit someone, it will be erring so far under caution that it's going to be such an inconvenience to be in one. Why would pax that are already paying bus rates want to pay just a little less to be so far inconvenienced in one that has no driver in it that they have to worry about or be inconvenienced ? They won't.
> 
> Also, note that I have yet to see any video of these cars driving themselves ? Does anyone have video released that shows them driving the car with absolutely no intervention by the driver ?


And then how about a thread where we contemplate the ingredients in pixie dust? Seems like a waste to get all blotto for just one thread. How about we pick one day a week where we all get totally smashed and then start stupid threads?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

tomatopaste said:


> And then how about a thread where we contemplate the ingredients in pixie dust? Seems like a waste to get all blotto for just one thread. How about we pick one day a week where we all get totally smashed and then start stupid threads?


If you don't like the thread, then don't post in it.


----------



## tohunt4me

How will these cars
React to EARTHQUAKES !?!?

Freeze up ?
Try to drive ?
Sensory overload ?

Causing Massive pile ups and loss of Life !?



tomatopaste said:


> And then how about a thread where we contemplate the ingredients in pixie dust? Seems like a waste to get all blotto for just one thread. How about we pick one day a week where we all get totally smashed and then start stupid threads?


Waymo waste billions on pixie dust ?
In addition to Transhumanism ?

Satans way.
Spend billions to cast humans into poverty

Spend none on hunger or housing.

( they dont plan on us living !)


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> Because sometimes people will just want to drive, duh
> 
> Ahhhhh now you bring up an excellent question. Maybe people just don't trust robots that much? Well well well... maybe they don't. But if so, that alone kinda kills the whole "robot revolution"


Let's do this. Let's present you with a hypothetical situation.

You plan on drinking so you decide to take your sdc with you to the bar. You down 12 beers and decide to head home in your sdc and turn the switch on to sdc mode. Along the way, your sdc causes an accident by running a red light and kills someone.

Do you get a ticket for running the red light ? Do you get charged with a dui ? Do you get charged with manslaughter ?

Does the automaker that made your car get a ticket for any of the above ? Does the software company that designed the software for the car get a ticket for any of the above ?


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> And then how about a thread where we contemplate the ingredients in pixie dust? Seems like a waste to get all blotto for just one thread. How about we pick one day a week where we all get totally smashed and then start stupid threads?


This is the second time you have used the word "blotto"

The first time was on a Saturday afternoon in the fall of 2017 when I asked where Monica was and you said "it's Saturday she's probably blotto at the bar right now"



uberdriverfornow said:


> Let's do this. Let's present you with a hypothetical situation.
> 
> You plan on drinking so you decide to take your sdc with you to the bar. You down 12 beers and decide to head home in your sdc and turn the switch on to sdc mode. Along the way, your sdc causes an accident by running a red light and kills someone.
> 
> Do you get a ticket for running the red light ? Do you get charged with a dui ? Do you get charged with manslaughter ?
> 
> Does the automaker that made your car get a ticket for any of the above ? Does the software company that designed the software for the car get a ticket for any of the above ?


1. According to tomatopaste that will never happen and if someone would even ask that question that person would be crazy and stupid (his words)
2. But, just for fun, I'll entertain your idea and say that if it would ever happen the owner would be held responsible but then the owner can and will sue the manufacturer for negligent malfunction


----------



## tomatopaste

uberdriverfornow said:


> If you don't like the thread, then don't post in it.


who said I didn't like stupid threads?



uberdriverfornow said:


> Let's do this. Let's present you with a hypothetical situation.
> 
> You plan on drinking so you decide to take your sdc with you to the bar. You down 12 beers and decide to head home in your sdc and turn the switch on to sdc mode. Along the way, your sdc causes an accident by running a red light and kills someone.
> 
> Do you get a ticket for running the red light ? Do you get charged with a dui ? Do you get charged with manslaughter ?
> 
> Does the automaker that made your car get a ticket for any of the above ? Does the software company that designed the software for the car get a ticket for any of the above ?


How about this:
You take a Waymo Jaguar self driving i-pace taxi to do some shopping on Rodeo drive in Beverly Hills. You buy a Prada leather man bag, and on the way home a voice comes on over the speakers from the command center saying: oh honey, that bag with those shoes? Who do you sue; Prada, Waymo, Jaguar, the city of Beverly Hills?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

tomatopaste said:


> who said I didn't like stupid threads?
> 
> How about this:
> You take a Waymo Jaguar self driving i-pace taxi to do some shopping on Rodeo drive in Beverly Hills. You buy a Prada leather man bag, and on the way home a voice comes on over the speakers from the command center saying: oh honey, that bag with those shoes? Who do you sue; Prada, Waymo, Jaguar, the city of Beverly Hills?


I wouldn't be caught dead in a sdc death trap and most people feel the same way.


----------



## tomatopaste

uberdriverfornow said:


> I wouldn't be caught dead in a sdc death trap and most people feel the same way.


So that's a yes to the Prada man bag?



iheartuber said:


> This is the second time you have used the word "blotto"
> 
> The first time was on a Saturday afternoon in the fall of 2017 when I asked where Monica was and you said "it's Saturday she's probably blotto at the bar right now"


and you guys thought Facebook was intrusive


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> This is the second time you have used the word "blotto"
> 
> The first time was on a Saturday afternoon in the fall of 2017 when I asked where Monica was and you said "it's Saturday she's probably blotto at the bar right now"


Have I ever used the words; inebriated and vaunted and yahoos, in the same sentence? It's possible, but I don't recall.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Have I ever used the words; inebriated and vaunted and yahoos, in the same sentence? It's possible, but I don't recall.


I don't drink but I don't mind if Monica does. You probably sniff glue


----------



## IDriveGNV

In the university town I drive in, the students are told to just go ahead and walk into traffic anytime they feel like it. If they're near the university they are told they always have the right of way in all circumstances. They don't have to use a crosswalk. Their usual mode of crossing the road is wearing dark clothing at night and walking with their head down looking at their phone. It's really unusual to even see them look up to check the traffic they're walking into. They're that stupid.

When I approach an intersection in the university area, sometimes there are hundreds of students within sight. The driver must look in at least eight directions when approaching the intersection, not including watching the traffic. The driver must be aware of every direction a pedestrian may dart out from, every direction a bicycle may choose to whiz through the intersection against traffic, and all the while reading the body language of several potential road casualties. After taking all this into consideration, the driver can plan where he's going to drive his vehicle through this mess. While getting slowly underway, he must again check all 8 directions for everything that may have changed in the last 3 seconds. It's a miracle we don't have more fatalities in Gainesville.

At the risk of repeating some of the previous suggestions, I'll add my short list here.

1. Reading the body language of a person just deciding to cross the road.

2. Passengers who severely need to urinate or worse with no one present to stop them from doing it in the car.

3. Passengers who want to eat their meal in the car and have no one to keep them from leaving all the trash behind.

4. Hoodlums who want to entirely strip an SDC of all available parts. Simply call it to a remote location and stand around it so that it cannot leave.

5. Delivering bombs or other terrorist devices to any location without suspicion. Will these cars accept packages without passengers?

6. Pranksters covering the seats with super glue.

7. Will the car know to eject a passenger who puts tape over the security cameras?

8. Bodily fluids from sexual behavior or incontinence.

9. Recognizing whether a person waving a flashlight at an intersection is a real law enforcement officer.

10. Understanding the rules of the road at intersections under conditions of power outages, where human drivers may be too impatient to follow those rules.

11. Recognizing subtle signals that drivers may give each other at a four way stop.

12. Does a car know the difference between a cell phone and a pipe bomb left behind on the seat?

13. If phone chargers are provided will the car leave them dangling to be entangled in the feet of the next passenger?

14. Will the car know the difference between spoken commands and words overheard while the passenger talks on his or her phone?

15. Does the car know when someone has quietly vomited all over everything before another person jumps in? Or does every passenger have to check that the car is sanitary before entering it?

16. Can the car smell the difference between burning engine oil and burning cannabis, cigarettes or vaping? Can it tell when the stench is great enough to require cleaning?

17. As many drivers know, the lower the fare rates, the lower the quality of passengers. The appeal of an SDC is that it is super cheap with more privacy than a bus.

Once passengers learn what they can get away with I would expect these cars to be about as sanitary as a public toilet.

The more I think about it the less I want to get into one of these driverless cars.


----------



## iheartuber

IDriveGNV said:


> In the university town I drive in, the students are told to just go ahead and walk into traffic anytime they feel like it. If they're near the university they are told they always have the right of way in all circumstances. They don't have to use a crosswalk. Their usual mode of crossing the road is wearing dark clothing at night and walking with her head down looking at their phone. It's really unusual to even see them look up to check the traffic they're walking into. They're that stupid.
> 
> When I approach an intersection in the university area, sometimes there are hundreds of students within sight. The driver must look in at least eight directions when approaching the intersection, not including watching the traffic. The driver must be aware of every direction a pedestrian may dart out from, every direction a bicycle may choose to whiz through the intersection against traffic, and all the while reading the body language of several potential road casualties. After taking all this into consideration, the driver can plan where he's going to drive his vehicle through this mess. While getting slowly underway, he must again check all 8 directions for everything that may have changed in the last 3 seconds. It's a miracle we don't have more fatalities in Gainesville.
> 
> At the risk of repeating some of the previous suggestions, I'll add my short list here.
> 
> 1. Reading the body language of a person just deciding to cross the road.
> 
> 2. Passengers who severely need to urinate or worse with no one present to stop them from doing it in the car.
> 
> 3. Passengers who want to eat their meal in the car and have no one to keep them from leaving all the trash behind.
> 
> 4. Hoodlums who want to entirely strip an SDC of all available parts. Simply call it to a remote location and stand around it so that it cannot leave.
> 
> 5. Delivering bombs or other terrorist devices to any location without suspicion. Will these cars accept packages without passengers?
> 
> 6. Pranksters covering the seats with super glue.
> 
> 7. Will the car know to eject a passenger who puts tape over the security cameras?
> 
> 8. Bodily fluids from sexual behavior or incontinence.
> 
> 9. Recognizing whether a person waving a flashlight at an intersection is a real law enforcement officer.
> 
> 10. Understanding the rules of the road at intersections under conditions of power outages, where human drivers may be too impatient to follow those rules.
> 
> 11. Recognizing subtle signals that drivers may give each other at a four way stop.
> 
> 12. Does a car know the difference between a cell phone and a pipe bomb left behind on the seat?
> 
> 13. If phone chargers are provided will the car leave them dangling to be entangled in the feet of the next passenger?
> 
> 14. Will the car know the difference between spoken commands and words overheard while the passenger talks on his or her phone?
> 
> 15. Does the car know when someone has quietly vomited all over everything before another person jumps in? Or does every passenger have to check that the car is sanitary before entering it?
> 
> 16. Can the car smell the difference between burning engine oil and burning cannabis, cigarettes or vaping? Can it tell when the stench is great enough to require cleaning?
> 
> 17. As many drivers know, the lower the fare rates, the lower the quality of passengers. The appeal of an SDC is that it is super cheap with more privacy than a bus.
> 
> Once passengers learn what they can get away with I would expect these cars to be about as sanitary as a public toilet.
> 
> The more I think about it the less I want to get into one of these driverless cars.


The robo lovers are just gonna say you're crazy

But in the real world you make a lotta sense


----------



## IDriveGNV

iheartuber said:


> The robo lovers are just gonna say you're crazy
> 
> But in the real world you make a lotta sense


Thanks. I was going to include just a few points but once I got started thinking about it...


----------



## getawaycar

IDriveGNV said:


> In the university town I drive in, the students are told to just go ahead and walk into traffic anytime they feel like it. If they're near the university they are told they always have the right of way in all circumstances. They don't have to use a crosswalk. Their usual mode of crossing the road is wearing dark clothing at night and walking with her head down looking at their phone. It's really unusual to even see them look up to check the traffic they're walking into. They're that stupid.
> 
> When I approach an intersection in the university area, sometimes there are hundreds of students within sight. The driver must look in at least eight directions when approaching the intersection, not including watching the traffic. The driver must be aware of every direction a pedestrian may dart out from, every direction a bicycle may choose to whiz through the intersection against traffic, and all the while reading the body language of several potential road casualties. After taking all this into consideration, the driver can plan where he's going to drive his vehicle through this mess. While getting slowly underway, he must again check all 8 directions for everything that may have changed in the last 3 seconds. It's a miracle we don't have more fatalities in Gainesville.
> 
> At the risk of repeating some of the previous suggestions, I'll add my short list here.
> 
> 1. Reading the body language of a person just deciding to cross the road.
> 
> 2. Passengers who severely need to urinate or worse with no one present to stop them from doing it in the car.
> 
> 3. Passengers who want to eat their meal in the car and have no one to keep them from leaving all the trash behind.
> 
> 4. Hoodlums who want to entirely strip an SDC of all available parts. Simply call it to a remote location and stand around it so that it cannot leave.
> 
> 5. Delivering bombs or other terrorist devices to any location without suspicion. Will these cars accept packages without passengers?
> 
> 6. Pranksters covering the seats with super glue.
> 
> 7. Will the car know to eject a passenger who puts tape over the security cameras?
> 
> 8. Bodily fluids from sexual behavior or incontinence.
> 
> 9. Recognizing whether a person waving a flashlight at an intersection is a real law enforcement officer.
> 
> 10. Understanding the rules of the road at intersections under conditions of power outages, where human drivers may be too impatient to follow those rules.
> 
> 11. Recognizing subtle signals that drivers may give each other at a four way stop.
> 
> 12. Does a car know the difference between a cell phone and a pipe bomb left behind on the seat?
> 
> 13. If phone chargers are provided will the car leave them dangling to be entangled in the feet of the next passenger?
> 
> 14. Will the car know the difference between spoken commands and words overheard while the passenger talks on his or her phone?
> 
> 15. Does the car know when someone has quietly vomited all over everything before another person jumps in? Or does every passenger have to check that the car is sanitary before entering it?
> 
> 16. Can the car smell the difference between burning engine oil and burning cannabis, cigarettes or vaping? Can it tell when the stench is great enough to require cleaning?
> 
> 17. As many drivers know, the lower the fare rates, the lower the quality of passengers. The appeal of an SDC is that it is super cheap with more privacy than a bus.
> 
> Once passengers learn what they can get away with I would expect these cars to be about as sanitary as a public toilet.
> 
> The more I think about it the less I want to get into one of these driverless cars.


Because of all those problems you listed, every self-driving rideshare vehicle will need several interior cameras to monitor passenger activity. And those cameras will need actual people to observe the cameras on the other end. So in the end you still have to pay a real person to monitor what goes on inside the car, erasing the cost savings from eliminating the human driver.


----------



## getawaycar

RamzFanz said:


> This simply isn't true. If you take your hands off the wheel, it will pull over and stop. YOU are the driver, the car is assisting you. It is incapable of driving itself and, therefore, not self driving.
> 
> In a self-driving car, you can get in the back and do nothing other than give it a destination within it's geographical or other self-imposed limitations. Tesla's are nowhere near that level.


I've seen about a dozen demonstrations of the autopilot on Youtube. In all these videos that were made by Tesla owners and car reviewers none of them had their hands on the wheel while in autopilot mode. And there are no visible or audio warnings the car makes to warn the driver to keep their hands on the wheel.

For example,






Here's a longer video. The driver has his hands off the wheel for over 10 minutes, but the car keeps driving. It does not ever attempt to pull over and stop.


----------



## IDriveGNV

getawaycar said:


> Because of all those problems you listed, every self-driving rideshare vehicle will need several interior cameras to monitor passenger activity. And those cameras will need actual people to observe the cameras on the other end. So in the end you still have to pay a real person to monitor what goes on inside the car, erasing the cost savings from eliminating the human driver.


Hah! You're right.

There will be a guy whose job it is to monitor a dozen or more feeds for anything that looks suspicious.

He'll bump the feed with questionable behavior to another person whose job it is to study the playback and make a determination.

Then that person will pass it along to someone whose job it is to contact local law enforcement or vehicle maintenance and determine what must be done in each case.

Then yet another person will coordinate with law enforcement and that vehicle in real time to facilitate their rendezvous and possible police actions. Or perhaps they'll simply route the vehicle to the nearest clean up facility.

After all this, we are putting a lot of people to work aren't we? Not to mention the cost of this massive technical infrastructure and the video bandwidth overhead.

Maybe Uber would do best by letting the other companies get hopelessly mired in this huge mess. Entirely jettison crazy man Travis's driverless car and flying car pipe dreams. The novelty having worn off, by this time people will ridicule these urine smelling death traps. Uber can become known as the company that provides "real drivers providing real services." That smells like money to me.

Automated travel might work in an ideal world populated by robots. But we're talking about humans here.


----------



## getawaycar

IDriveGNV said:


> Hah! You're right.
> 
> There will be a guy whose job is to monitor a dozen or so feeds for anything that looks suspicious.
> 
> He'll bump the feed with questionable behavior to another person whose job it is to study the playback and make a determination.
> 
> Then that person will pass it along to someone whose job it is to contact local law enforcement or vehicle maintenance and determine what must be done in each case.
> 
> Then yet another person will coordinate with law enforcement and that vehicle in real time to facilitate their rendezvous and possible police actions. Or perhaps they'll simply route the vehicle to the nearest clean up facility.
> 
> After all this, we are putting a lot of people to work aren't we? Not to mention the cost of this whole technical infrastructure.
> 
> Maybe Uber would do best by letting the other companies get hopelessly mired in this entire mess. Entirely jettison crazy man Travis's flying car and driverless car pipe dream. The novelty having worn off, by this time people will ridicule these urine smelling death traps. Uber can become known as the company that provides "real drivers providing real services." That smells like money to me.
> 
> Automated travel might work in an ideal world. But we're talking about humans here.


Plus they will need a large team of people to clean up all the daily litter and messes made by the passengers. Plus the need to hire a large team of mechanics to do daily maintenance and repairs, plus pay for the gas and people to fill them up, in addition to paying for highly trained specialized technicians to take care of maintenance and repair of the autonomous systems that regular mechanics cannot do. Those specialized technicians will not be cheap.

With human drivers they don't need to do any of those things because the drivers are required to pay for their own gas and maintenance. And passengers are much more likely to behave themselves when there is a human driver in the car to watch them.

In conclusion, the driverless rideshare business model makes little sense.


----------



## IDriveGNV

getawaycar said:


> In conclusion, the driverless rideshare business model makes little sense.


Precisely. But Big Money won't realize this until they've thoroughly road-tested it. Pun intended.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberdriverfornow said:


> Let's do this. Let's present you with a hypothetical situation.
> 
> You plan on drinking so you decide to take your sdc with you to the bar. You down 12 beers and decide to head home in your sdc and turn the switch on to sdc mode. Along the way, your sdc causes an accident by running a red light and kills someone.
> 
> Do you get a ticket for running the red light ? Do you get charged with a dui ? Do you get charged with manslaughter ?
> 
> Does the automaker that made your car get a ticket for any of the above ? Does the software company that designed the software for the car get a ticket for any of the above ?


You go to jail.
Mostly for YOUR protection.
So family of killed person does not kill you.

EVERYONE GETS SUED.


----------



## goneubering

IDriveGNV said:


> In the university town I drive in, the students are told to just go ahead and walk into traffic anytime they feel like it. If they're near the university they are told they always have the right of way in all circumstances. They don't have to use a crosswalk. Their usual mode of crossing the road is wearing dark clothing at night and walking with her head down looking at their phone. It's really unusual to even see them look up to check the traffic they're walking into. They're that stupid.
> 
> When I approach an intersection in the university area, sometimes there are hundreds of students within sight. The driver must look in at least eight directions when approaching the intersection, not including watching the traffic. The driver must be aware of every direction a pedestrian may dart out from, every direction a bicycle may choose to whiz through the intersection against traffic, and all the while reading the body language of several potential road casualties. After taking all this into consideration, the driver can plan where he's going to drive his vehicle through this mess. While getting slowly underway, he must again check all 8 directions for everything that may have changed in the last 3 seconds. It's a miracle we don't have more fatalities in Gainesville.
> 
> At the risk of repeating some of the previous suggestions, I'll add my short list here.
> 
> 1. Reading the body language of a person just deciding to cross the road.
> 
> 2. Passengers who severely need to urinate or worse with no one present to stop them from doing it in the car.
> 
> 3. Passengers who want to eat their meal in the car and have no one to keep them from leaving all the trash behind.
> 
> 4. Hoodlums who want to entirely strip an SDC of all available parts. Simply call it to a remote location and stand around it so that it cannot leave.
> 
> 5. Delivering bombs or other terrorist devices to any location without suspicion. Will these cars accept packages without passengers?
> 
> 6. Pranksters covering the seats with super glue.
> 
> 7. Will the car know to eject a passenger who puts tape over the security cameras?
> 
> 8. Bodily fluids from sexual behavior or incontinence.
> 
> 9. Recognizing whether a person waving a flashlight at an intersection is a real law enforcement officer.
> 
> 10. Understanding the rules of the road at intersections under conditions of power outages, where human drivers may be too impatient to follow those rules.
> 
> 11. Recognizing subtle signals that drivers may give each other at a four way stop.
> 
> 12. Does a car know the difference between a cell phone and a pipe bomb left behind on the seat?
> 
> 13. If phone chargers are provided will the car leave them dangling to be entangled in the feet of the next passenger?
> 
> 14. Will the car know the difference between spoken commands and words overheard while the passenger talks on his or her phone?
> 
> 15. Does the car know when someone has quietly vomited all over everything before another person jumps in? Or does every passenger have to check that the car is sanitary before entering it?
> 
> 16. Can the car smell the difference between burning engine oil and burning cannabis, cigarettes or vaping? Can it tell when the stench is great enough to require cleaning?
> 
> 17. As many drivers know, the lower the fare rates, the lower the quality of passengers. The appeal of an SDC is that it is super cheap with more privacy than a bus.
> 
> Once passengers learn what they can get away with I would expect these cars to be about as sanitary as a public toilet.
> 
> The more I think about it the less I want to get into one of these driverless cars.


That's one dumb university.


----------



## iheartuber

getawaycar said:


> Because of all those problems you listed, every self-driving rideshare vehicle will need several interior cameras to monitor passenger activity. And those cameras will need actual people to observe the cameras on the other end. So in the end you still have to pay a real person to monitor what goes on inside the car, erasing the cost savings from eliminating the human driver.


I've said this so many times and yet tomatopaste just keeps saying I'm crazy



IDriveGNV said:


> Precisely. But Big Money won't realize this until they've thoroughly road-tested it. Pun intended.


Any businessman with common sense would figure this out.

You would think Big Money investors are businessmen with common sense.


----------



## getawaycar

iheartuber said:


> Any businessman with common sense would figure this out.
> 
> You would think Big Money investors are businessmen with common sense.


Even the smartest business people can fall for hype. When big well-respected industry titans like Google and Tesla are heavily promoting self-driving cars as the wonderful utopian future of transportation, then its hard to argue against them. People don't like to question authority.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I've said this so many times and yet tomatopaste just keeps saying I'm crazy


This is true. He does.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> This is true. He does.


BRING BACK MONICA!!

She's cool

Tomato is lame


----------



## IDriveGNV

goneubering said:


> That's one dumb university.


Tell me about it.

It's outright insulting when they walk right in front of you as if you're not there.

That's why every road within a mile of the university is just 20 miles per hour speed limit. It's to cut down on the roadkill.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> Bro, a car is a car is a car.
> 
> Human driver or robot driver the car still needs maintenance. That costs money. There is NO WAY costs can come down much further than what Uber has already set them on.
> 
> So when you say "TNC costs will come down further..." I simply cannot take anything you said after that seriously.
> 
> This is not personal. You seem like a nice guy, but you are very misguided.
> 
> Oh... also fun fact: you said "SDC TNCs won't happen overnight".. that is literally exactly what I've been saying all along. The theme from the robo loving crowd seems to be it WILL come so soon it's almost as if it's "overnight" (in their opinion). So now you're what... backpedaling?


A car is not just like every other for costs. You just refuse to hear the facts. Waymo is going electric which is way cheaper in both fuel and maintenance. The cars come at wholesale. No driver to pay. Fleet management costs are way below retail.

You don't want to believe costs and fares are going down? Don't then.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> BRING BACK MONICA!!
> 
> She's cool
> 
> Tomato is lame


Tomato 2.0. Even rottener.


----------



## RamzFanz

goneubering said:


> Maybe in NYC. Other than there car ownership is probably increasing except for people who can't afford to buy one.


Car ownership is dropping in the US. Melinials are not buying cars like past generations.



getawaycar said:


> I've seen about a dozen demonstrations of the autopilot on Youtube. In all these videos that were made by Tesla owners and car reviewers none of them had their hands on the wheel while in autopilot mode. And there are no visible or audio warnings the car makes to warn the driver to keep their hands on the wheel.
> 
> For example,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a longer video. The driver has his hands off the wheel for over 10 minutes, but the car keeps driving. It does not ever attempt to pull over and stop.


I'm unimpressed by Tesla's and don't follow them closely. Tesla says they will warn a driver to return their hands to the wheel and pull over if they don't. I've seen the cars do the warnings in videos. This may be a case where owners haven't updated the cars yet. This feature was added later.

However, in the second video he does jump cuts all through the video so you have no idea what he actually did or what the car did. He also refers to it as autonomous mode which is 100% false.

Regardless, they are not self-driving cars. Period. Are not. A self-driving car needs no driver. Tesla's 100% need a driver.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> A car is not just like every other for costs. You just refuse to hear the facts. Waymo is going electric which is way cheaper in both fuel and maintenance. The cars come at wholesale. No driver to pay. Fleet management costs are way below retail.
> 
> You don't want to believe costs and fares are going down? Don't then.


1. The cost of electricity is about 60% of what gas costs, so it's cheaper but it's not free
2. Waymo is going to have to build and maintain garage/charging stations, which will eliminate any savings that electric vehicles give over gas
3. Why on earth would car manufacturers sell Waymo the cars wholesale and make no profit?
4. I cannot convince you. I'll just have to wait 10 years, show you how what you say never came true, and then say "see???!??"


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> Car ownership is dropping in the US. Melinials are not buying cars like past generations.
> 
> I'm unimpressed by Tesla's and don't follow them closely. Tesla says they will warn a driver to return their hands to the wheel and pull over if they don't. I've seen the cars do the warnings in videos. This may be a case where owners haven't updated the cars yet. This feature was added later.
> 
> However, in the second video he does jump cuts all through the video so you have no idea what he actually did or what the car did. He also refers to it as autonomous mode which is 100% false.
> 
> Regardless, they are not self-driving cars. Period. Are not. A self-driving car needs no driver. Tesla's 100% need a driver.


Let's cut thru the BS again - 
"The homeownership rate in the United States is in decline since 2004 and amounted to 64.2 percent in 2017." - https://www.statista.com/statistics/184902/homeownership-rate-in-the-us-since-2003/#0

So, according to this user genius logicall fallacy, the US houses are dissapearing.... because the house ownership is in decline and, as a consequence, whomever is building houses right now within US borders is doomed to go bankrupt? Yup, and Santa is real.

The real reasons for the decline are financial not preferential. It is not about the taste, it's about the pockets and millennials are much poorer (a lot more debt generated by their education costs) than their parents and need to adapt to the financial reality they live with.



iheartuber said:


> 1. The cost of electricity is about 60% of what gas costs, so it's cheaper but it's not free
> 2. Waymo is going to have to build and maintain garage/charging stations, which will eliminate any savings that electric vehicles give over gas
> 3. Why on earth would car manufacturers sell Waymo the cars wholesale and make no profit?
> 4. I cannot convince you. I'll just have to wait 10 years, show you how what you say never came true, and then say "see???!??"


You are having a comment exchange with a child waiting for Santa to bring self driving cars, and try to explain to that child Santa is a fantasy.... oh well....


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> 1. The cost of electricity is about 60% of what gas costs, so it's cheaper but it's not free


Yes, a 40% savings in fuel cost matters. Now imagine you're a nationwide corporate buyer and stop pretending Waymo will pay retail. They won't.



iheartuber said:


> 2. Waymo is going to have to build and maintain garage/charging stations, which will eliminate any savings that electric vehicles give over gas


It's true that garaging them is going to be a cost, but nowhere near a retail cost. They can park way closer to each other (no room needed for doors to open), in cheaper geographical areas, and at ownership cost instead of what you pay retail. You understand efficiencies of scale, yet you refuse to apply it.



iheartuber said:


> 3. Why on earth would car manufacturers sell Waymo the cars wholesale and make no profit?


Waymo isn't buying cars. Manufacturers will be leasing their SDC platform. Therefore, the manufacturer manufactures at wholesale.

You still haven't wrapped your head around what is happening here. Waymo leases their platform to manufacturers, manufacturers come after your work. ALL manufacturers could, right now, go level 4 using Waymo's product, should they choose to. Even as a stop-gap measure to stay in the race.



iheartuber said:


> 4. I cannot convince you. I'll just have to wait 10 years, show you how what you say never came true, and then say "see???!??"


10 years? Dude, I'll be saying that to you this year. Oh, look, Jaguar just signed on with Waymo for 20,000 cars, "see?" That's on top of the other manufacturers that are playing ball with Waymo. Headlines about deals are coming. In a few years, manufacturers will have made deals with Waymo, be making deals with Waymo, betting on another horse, or launching their own product. The last ones to the finish line are bankrupt.

If you're a betting man and an investor, bet on the companies that are doing deals with Waymo. OR, better yet, bet against those that aren't and aren't in the race.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Yes, a 40% savings in fuel cost matters. Now imagine you're a nationwide corporate buyer and stop pretending Waymo will pay retail. They won't.
> 
> It's true that garaging them is going to be a cost, but nowhere near a retail cost. They can park way closer to each other (no room needed for doors to open), in cheaper geographical areas, and at ownership cost instead of what you pay retail. You understand efficiencies of scale, yet you refuse to apply it.
> 
> Waymo isn't buying cars. Manufacturers will be leasing their SDC platform. Therefore, the manufacturer manufactures at wholesale.
> 
> You still haven't wrapped your head around what is happening here. Waymo leases their platform to manufacturers, manufacturers come after your work. ALL manufacturers could, right now, go level 4 using Waymo's product, should they choose to. Even as a stop-gap measure to stay in the race.
> 
> 10 years? Dude, I'll be saying that to you this year. Oh, look, Jaguar just signed on with Waymo for 20,000 cars, "see?" That's on top of the other manufacturers that are playing ball with Waymo. Headlines about deals are coming. In a few years, manufacturers will have made deals with Waymo, be making deals with Waymo, betting on another horse, or launching their own product. The last ones to the finish line are bankrupt.
> 
> If you're a betting man and an investor, bet on the companies that are doing deals with Waymo. OR, better yet, bet against those that aren't and aren't in the race.


In the words of Luke Skywalker from
"The Last Jedi":

Every word of what you just said was wrong.

(If you don't like Star Wars then you're an a-hole)

PS- you really think sometime this year something major is going to happen with robot taxis to show they are on the road to world domination? Great. I won't even have to wait that long to say I told you so.

You wanna know my prediction for this year in robo taxis? At any given time in the calendar year 2018 (up to and including Dec 31, 2018) the robot taxi business will come nowhere near taking over the rideshare/taxi biz that Uber currently dominates.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

iheartuber said:


> In the words of Luke Skywalker from
> "The Last Jedi":
> 
> Every word of what you just said was wrong.
> 
> (If you don't like Star Wars then you're an a-hole)
> 
> PS- you really think sometime this year something major is going to happen with robot taxis to show they are on the road to world domination? Great. I won't even have to wait that long to say I told you so.
> 
> You wanna know my prediction for this year in robo taxis? At any given time in the calendar year 2018 (up to and including Dec 31, 2018) the robot taxi business will come nowhere near taking over the rideshare/taxi biz that Uber currently dominates.


He's living in virtual reality.


----------



## heynow321

And yet has yet to produce the very simple video that has been requested in this thread. That speaks volumes


----------



## iheartuber

heynow321 said:


> And yet has yet to produce the very simple video that has been requested in this thread. That speaks volumes


It's not just that.

He tends to state things that MIGHT happen as if they already DID happen.

The video thing is just the tip of the iceberg


----------

