# Something doesn't add up about the self-driving car plans



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.

Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?

Uber was able to undercut cab companies because, among other factors, they don't own the cars. Whereas a cab company has to buy cabs and then pay the price to maintain them (parts, gas, repairs, registration, tax, etc etc), Uber only has to pay for their GPS and API, it's up to the driver to buy his or her own car and pay for its maintenance, repairs and everything else.

Now they suddenly want to own their own fleet? It seems they will save on having to pay drivers a share of the profit (and no benefits, 401k, health, etc, just _part of the profit they generated!_) but they will spend on buying a fleet of sophisticated self driving cars, maintaining the cars AND also maintaining their self driving equipment... how is this more profitable?


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

Say they buy a Prius for 30k. Say the annual maintenance costs & gas are 15k a year, plus 2k for the maintenance of the self-driving systems (that's extra hardware and software not found in regular cars, and which might need calibration or whatever from time to time), that's a 47k expense. Add cleaning and whatever other stuff to close this to 50k. These self-driving ubers won't recover their cost on their first year.

Now, let's suppose enough time passes so somehow they pay for themselves and offset the initial 30k cost of the car. They're still left with 20k a year of car-related expenses on subsequent years, just how is this cheaper than giving drivers a percentage of the profit they generate for them under the current model?


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

Ok, my last post in this flurry, what about the legal aspect?

Uber was able to dance around the legal restrictions cabs have (e.g. cab insurance, cab licenses, medallion system, etc) because uber "doesn't provide transportation", they're just "a platform to connect independent drivers with people who need rides".

If they own a fleet now, wouldn't they pretty much become a self-driving TAXI company, and no longer a ridesharing app platform? Wouldn't that necessarily defeat the purpose of the "we're not a taxi" premise?


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.
> 
> Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?


Because even Uber knows that the most ignorant of drivers will wake up one day and say "hey, I'm not making any money". You can only kick a dog so many times before it stops coming back to you. But I'm sure Travis will give full credit to all the driving partners that destroyed their vehicles for pennies for the better of the Uber app. Travis will go down in history as the only person to give over 2 billion rides without even starting a car. He will not only thank the driving partners, but all the Federal Courts that kept driving partners independent contractors. To be able to dismiss hundreds of thousands of workers in this country without even a blemish on a company's unemployment filings will most likely be a future lecture in some university's business course. However, every time a former Uber partner sees a self driving TNC they can proudly say "I helped to build that business". God, we live in the best country in the world.


----------



## RightTurnClyde (Dec 9, 2015)

I wrote previously on this very subject. 

-----------------------
As of now, independent contractors bear the total cost of car loans/vehicle purchase price, fuel, maintenance, depreciation, insurance, licensing, etc.. As well as the responsibility of avoiding accidentally damaging or destroying the lives and property of others.

Uber is now going to assume responsibility for all these costs and liabilities upon the implementation of using their own vehicles.

Then simultaneously add a highly elaborate, VERY expensive, and so-far unproven system to this uber vehicle, which will also need a human support system in place to operate (hey someone's got to still physically fill the gas tank, right?).

Finally, have this high cost marvel of technology replace the very same drivers who they pay almost nothing for, to replace and do the exact same job already being done in the first place.

Either uber has become so delusional that they've begun to use "uber math" on themselves, or Travis and his minions are bilking another wave of morons (also called investors and the public) into his bs fantasyland.

Hey maybe they'll finally have to admit that they are a "transportation company" and not just a "payment processing company" after this...


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> Say they buy a Prius for 30k. Say the annual maintenance costs & gas are 15k a year,


Our company has full size SUV's and our operational cost including commercial insurance is around that. Gas and maintenance of a new Prius should only be around 4-5k for 60k miles.


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> Our company has full size SUV's and our operational cost including commercial insurance is around that. Gas and maintenance of a new Prius should only be around 4-5k for 60k miles.


So you have a Uber fleet? That rocks.

How do you foresee transforming your business once Uber cars are self driving? Will the possibility of having uber fleets disappear and Uber will own its cars, or maybe car manufacturers will?


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

RightTurnClyde said:


> I wrote previously on this very subject.
> 
> -----------------------
> As of now, independent contractors bear the total cost of car loans/vehicle purchase price, fuel, maintenance, depreciation, insurance, licensing, etc.. As well as the responsibility of avoiding accidentally damaging or destroying the lives and property of others.
> ...


Yeah I'd assume their move to owning vehicles and the like would raise a few eyebrows legally since now they'd truly be a transportation company. How far in the future do you think this will take place?


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> So you have a Uber fleet? That rocks.
> 
> How do you foresee transforming your business once Uber cars are self driving? Will the possibility of having uber fleets disappear and Uber will own its cars, or maybe car manufacturers will?


We've been in business long before Uber was even a wet spot in Travis' pants and we'll be in business long after that wet spot is all dried and gone. And no we do not have an Uber fleet. We have a fleet of full size SUV's that took advantage of Uber when the Black platform 1st came out in 2012. Now it's extremely rare to get a Black/SUV customer from Uber. Uber has seperated this business to such an extent that the X customer is expecting high end service for pennies. However, the real Black/SUV client is well aware of the difference and doesn't mind paying. There's a big difference between getting a steak at Morton's and getting a steak at Denny's.


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> *We've been in business long before Uber was even a wet spot in Travis' pants and we'll be in business long after that wet spot is all dried and gone*. And no we do not have an Uber fleet. We have a fleet of full size SUV's that took advantage of Uber when the Black platform 1st came out in 2012. Now it's extremely rare to get a Black/SUV customer from Uber. Uber has seperated this business to such an extent that the X customer is expecting high end service for pennies. However, the real Black/SUV client is well aware of the difference and doesn't mind paying. There's a big difference between getting a steak at Morton's and getting a steak at Denny's.


I love the part in bold LOL.

Do you think that self driving cars will end affecting your business?


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> I love the part in bold LOL.
> 
> Do you think that self driving cars will end affecting your business?


Only if they start messing up real bad and cause a spike in commercial insurance premiums. Our clients are high end and expect more then just a computerized ride. For example, when we go pick up our clients at the airport we actually meet them at baggage claim and help them with their luggage. One of my clients told me this, they don't want just any random driver to know they're on a vacation every time they get a ride to the airport. There's a thread in news (3-4 months ago) about a house being robbed by a driver after taking a client to the airport. I suppose if I was just a driver that did random runs Uber and the whole TNC would be affecting us, but we provide something that a computer could never be programmed to do. It's called customer service.


----------



## Atom guy (Jul 27, 2016)

knowledgethrow said:


> I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.
> 
> Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?
> 
> ...


I've wondered the same thing.

Where will all these cars be parked? On Uber owned lots or rented lots? 
Who gasses them, cleans them, plugs them in? 
If they are maintained at central lots, won't there be a lot of dead miles as they take their first rides of the day? 
How will Uber handle the long distance pick ups for short rides? Is Uber really going to send a car 15 minutes to a low rider saturated area for a minimum fare ride? Then have it travel back to the busy area empty?
Where will all these cars park while waiting for rides? How will they find a legal parking spot in a busy city? Or will they stay in continuous motion, contributing to traffic congestion?
How will the cars know when they are dirty inside mid-shift?

The whole idea is ridiculous at this point. Seems pointless and a waste of money. The whole auto industry has succumbed to the self driving idea. $billions wasted.


----------



## wk1102 (Dec 25, 2015)

Uber isn't going to own the fleet. The car companies will.


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

wk1102 said:


> Uber isn't going to own the fleet. The car companies will.


That's an interesting thought. So they'd rather split more of their profits with the car manufacturers than with the drivers... it makes no sense. The car companies won't do this Uber thing out of the goodness of their hearts, they will want their cut too. And they can't be bullied like drivers get bullied.


----------



## wk1102 (Dec 25, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> That's an interesting thought. So they'd rather split more of their profits with the car manufacturers than with the drivers... it makes no sense. The car companies won't do this Uber thing out of the goodness of their hearts, they will want their cut too. And they can't be bullied like drivers get bullied.


Oh there would be a split, I don't know what kind of split ...

I can't see Uber buying the cars for the fleet. This would make them a transportation company and be quite costly.

For the car manufacturers they only need to turn a small profit or break even. Their cars are getting exposure, free advertising, and would need to be replaced every so often.


----------



## drexl_s (May 20, 2016)

Lol, my opinion, they only invest in driverless cars to excite potential investors to give them money. That is all, you work on a driverless car, you are now a "tech" company and open to receive tons of money and more excuses why you can operate with a loss. That is all it is, just funding scheme. Nothing will come of it. If something material does, then I will eat my shorts. I will stream in on youtube for all of you to see.


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

drexl_s said:


> Lol, my opinion, they only invest in driverless cars to excite potential investors to give them money. That is all, you work on a driverless car, you are now a "tech" company and open to receive tons of money and more excuses why you can operate with a loss. That is all it is, just funding scheme. Nothing will come of it. If something material does, then I will eat my shorts. I will stream in on youtube for all of you to see.


true, plus where are they going to park all these cars when not in use?


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

When is NASA going to build the first Star Ship Enterprise to cruise about the Galaxy? About the same time uber has a fleet of autonomous vehicles driving passengers around.


----------



## superjtrdr (Jun 9, 2015)

I believe we are headed towards a completely driverless society but its not coming as soon as uber wants us to believe. its going to be cost prohibitive for a while. The goal for companies like uber is to end car/ truck ownership in the world. Driverless cars will be safer, carry more affordable insurance and will save uber on average $50, 000 a year for a driver wouldn't be able to drive 23 hours a day. I am counting one hour for maintenance. So if a car cost uber $120,000 plus $10,000 a year to run it it might be worth it. In 3 years they could junk it and buy a new car.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.
> 
> Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?
> 
> ...


It's not.
During George Bush SR. Administration,there was some talk of " Privatizing " some of our nation's highways.

This just so happened to coincide with N.A.F.T.A.,AND THE LOSS of much of America's manufacturing jobs.

Bush was x C.I.A. chief,and a Globalist of the highest order.

What he and his cronies envisioned was a corridor from South America to Canada. A trade route.

Do not be surprised if the theft of America's public roads occurs sometime in the future.

This would be an excellent private corridor for driverless trucks with controlled entry and useage.

Shipping at sea is very interested in crewless ships.they claim 1/3 of their costs are crews pay.

The goal is larger than just driverless cars.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> Ok, my last post in this flurry, what about the legal aspect?
> 
> Uber was able to dance around the legal restrictions cabs have (e.g. cab insurance, cab licenses, medallion system, etc) because uber "doesn't provide transportation", they're just "a platform to connect independent drivers with people who need rides".
> 
> If they own a fleet now, wouldn't they pretty much become a self-driving TAXI company, and no longer a ridesharing app platform? Wouldn't that necessarily defeat the purpose of the "we're not a taxi" premise?


Yes.

It would totally eliminate their current legal standing.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

I suggest that Travis himself may not be aware or involved in the goals of some of his investors.

To many of the Uber investors,Uber is merely a tool to achieve other goals,and they actually have little interest in Uber itself,and do not care about Uber making a profit.

Uber is being " used" to achieve unrelated goals.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> That's an interesting thought. So they'd rather split more of their profits with the car manufacturers than with the drivers... it makes no sense. The car companies won't do this Uber thing out of the goodness of their hearts, they will want their cut too. And they can't be bullied like drivers get bullied.


At this point,to the car companies,Uber is a proving ground.

No one wants to be left behind at this point.


----------



## mikejm (Jun 1, 2016)

knowledgethrow said:


> I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.
> 
> Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?
> 
> ...


Ubers business model is based on creating disruptions and attracting new investors. It isn't based on quarterly gains, just bringing new money to the table with each new disruption in the market. It is almost like a ponzi scheme. Their end game plan, their big vision, is to own a huge chunk of all transportation. A world where you use your phone to hail a self driving vehicle to whisk you away, is a world where nobody owns cars anymore because they no longer make sense. Just get on your phone and a robot will take wherever you want to go. That is the major economic disruption that Uber wants to sell to investors.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

mikejm said:


> Ubers business model is based on creating disruptions and attracting new investors. It isn't based on quarterly gains, just bringing new money to the table with each new disruption in the market. It is almost like a ponzi scheme. Their end game plan, their big vision, is to own a huge chunk of all transportation. A world where you use your phone to hail a self driving vehicle to whisk you away, is a world where nobody owns cars anymore because they no longer make sense. Just get on your phone and a robot will take wherever you want to go. That is the major economic disruption that Uber wants to sell to investors.


That is an abomination and elimination of American Freedom.

His goal correlates to the Globalist goal of elimination of personal vehicles.

I prefer Henry Fords vision.

Of an automobile affordable to every American household.

Not United Nation's Agenda 21 Sustainable Development program.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Uber is a " tool" of larger goals.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Study Agenda 21.

See what your future holds.

If you allow it.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

mikejm said:


> Ubers business model is based on creating disruptions and attracting new investors. It isn't based on quarterly gains, just bringing new money to the table with each new disruption in the market. It is almost like a ponzi scheme. Their end game plan, their big vision, is to own a huge chunk of all transportation. A world where you use your phone to hail a self driving vehicle to whisk you away, is a world where nobody owns cars anymore because they no longer make sense. Just get on your phone and a robot will take wherever you want to go. That is the major economic disruption that Uber wants to sell to investors.


A robot will NOT take you where you want to go,because your freedom of movement will be severely constricted.

This is the actual " End Game".


----------



## Tired of this (Apr 10, 2015)

Take heart. Self driving cars will never be an effective option for Uber. Trains/subways which operate on a fixed track with fixed stops and with knowledge of traffic flow still require a conductor to handle certain situations. There is just too many variables for a self driving car to handle with regards to driving and safety while also dealing with pax. 

1. How do they deal with the myriad of customer service issues we deal with, ie bringing in more pax than allowed, drinks, smoking, vomit. Do they get cleaned out between rides?
2. What happens if the pin is put in an incorrect place? Will the car be able to contact person and assess situation?
3. GPS inaccuracies. 
4. Traffic. Given that these vehicles will rightly be overly conservative with regard to safety I don't imagine how they will handle picking up/dropping off passengers at crowded events, concerts, football games, etc. Pedestrian traffic will make it extremely difficult for the vehicle to navigate.
5. After the first 2 or 3 major accidents, lawsuits will make it no longer a viable option. Right now, Uber can just blame us when shit hits the fan. With their self driving cars, they can no longer do this. 

Ultimately, I can see cars that are mostly autonomous but still require the presence of an operator to correct certain situations. Think of a self checkout line. It flows and for the most part operates smoothly, but you need that one customer service rep to handle all the unique situations (even for such a simple activity).

Uber's reasoning for developing self driving technology is not really to replace us. We drivers are best thing that happened to Uber, no joke! They have a fleet of drivers, who clean, maintain, and insure their cars at zero cost to Uber. The only reason they are investing in this tech is to drive up Uber's valuation and also to receive money from venture capitalists who may be excited by the tech and prospects of it.


----------



## Undermensch (Oct 21, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> A robot will NOT take you where you want to go,because your freedom of movement will be severely constricted.
> 
> This is the actual " End Game".


In management we talk about having a "healthy paranoia" of things that could go wrong.

I think you might have gone a bit too far and made it an unhealthy paranoia.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

people who think self driving cars are going to become a reality in less than 40 years from now are clowns, who in reality, are too intellectually deficient to do anything better than drive for uber.

and i'm not talking about autopilot or any form of driver assist. i mean cars where you can enter, push the seat back, sleep and safely wake up at your destination.

try self driving cars in NYC traffic. Got to laugh.

here i have the most advanced smartphone and yet it freezes up every once in a while. What exactly is going to happen when self driving car systems freeze up when doing 75 mph on the highway?

now the clowns out there will say "they will have backup systems" or "other cars will electronically assist" while failing to mention how much extra this would add to the cost. 

Even the latest version of tesla's autopilot cannot recognize stop signs or traffic light. We have a long way to go.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

Tired of this said:


> Uber's reasoning for developing self driving technology is not really to replace us. We drivers are best thing that happened to Uber, no joke! They have a fleet of drivers, who clean, maintain, and insure their cars at zero cost to Uber. The only reason they are investing in this tech is to drive up Uber's valuation and also to receive money from venture capitalists who may be excited by the tech and prospects of it.


Smart, intelligent reasoning. I 110% agree.

Right now, there are plenty of people who drive for FREE. What I men is, they use late model cars during the high depreciation years to drive for Uber at 0.85 a mile. After gas and depreciation, they end up with less then 5 bucks an hour. It makes no sense working at that rate. Even illegals won't work at that rate. And they get ZERO benefits from this uber job. But yet they do it.

I know of a girl who's a teacher, she drove for 2 or 3 months in the summer doing Uber. she has an older car fully depreciated. towards the end, her check engine light came on and she went to the repair shop and they kept repairing one thing, only to see another thing go wrong. she ended up paying around $3,000 on repairs. After deducting this and gas, she roughly ended up working for $3 an hour for those 3 months. What other company in the first world, can get away with having people work for them for 3 bucks an hour with zero benefits?

There is not a single reason in the world for uber to buy self driving cars.


----------



## Undermensch (Oct 21, 2015)

Slim Pete said:


> people who think self driving cars are going to become a reality in less than 40 years from now are clowns, who in reality, are too intellectually deficient to do anything better than drive for uber.
> 
> and i'm not talking about autopilot or any form of driver assist. i mean cars where you can enter, push the seat back, sleep and safely wake up at your destination.
> 
> ...


Never before has humanity put this much money into something and had it not work out.

Consider going to the moon, or even launching a rocket *at all*. There was no shortage of people who didn't work in that field (or even who did) who thought they could explain how humanity would never be able to do that let alone in the near future.

As someone who works in the field, and as someone who has previously accurately predicted when advancements in technology would arrive, I can tell you this is going to happen and it's going to be within the next 5 to 10 years, max.

You won't agree. You don't have to agree.

But at least recognize your place in this: you are a nay sayer, you do it about a lot of things, and many of those things happen regardless of what you say about them.


----------



## Slim Pete (Nov 21, 2014)

Undermensch said:


> Never before has humanity put this much money into something and had it not work out.
> 
> Consider going to the moon, or even launching a rocket *at all*. There was no shortage of people who didn't work in that field (or even who did) who thought they could explain how humanity would never be able to do that let alone in the near future.
> 
> ...


the technology could very well exist in 7 years time, I even believe I think it's Univ of Michigan, where they have created an entire "artificial village" just to refine driverless technology. but i think it's more of a point of, when the tech will be safe enough to implement in the real world.

It's not just the technology that has to be available but the price has to be right as well.

I guess it's one of those "fill the cup to the brim without spilling" type cases, where filling 90% of the cup with water takes only 10% of the time. The top 10%, to fill, without spilling, takes most of the time. Meaning the final fine-tuning of the technology to make it work reliably in a highly litigious society, AND at a cost effective price, will be the real challenge.

Best correlation I can draw is autopilot in airplanes, it's been around for decades, but still every plane has human pilots, at least 2 in fact. so no doubt in 7 years, cars may have many driver-assist features, but would still require a driver to be alert at all times.


----------



## zordac (Aug 2, 2016)

What happens when the camera or sensors get covered with dirt, mud, snow, ice etc.? Does the car just stop in the middle of the road and wait for the Uber repair tech to show up? Not likely. I think it starts doing unexpected things like running over pedestrians and hitting other cars. They only way they will be able to safely put driver less cars on the road is if they have real people in a building some where controlling them remotely. Similar to the way the military controls their UAV's


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> A robot will NOT take you where you want to go,because your freedom of movement will be severely constricted.".


This also worries me a bit.

Right now if you get hungry at 2 AM and decide to drive to the 24hr diner, you can. Imagine getting hungry at 2 AM in the self driving car era. You might end waiting 20 minutes for the next available car... only to be told by the system that it will NOT take you there. Why? Fill in the blanks, system maintenance, "for your own safety" (e.g. it's late and dark), or because of emissions controls or whatever. Heck maybe the company decides you got a late fee so now they will deny you service until you pay up.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

wk1102 said:


> Uber isn't going to own the fleet. The car companies will.


Absolutely correct. Why everyone thinks that Uber and Google will want to own cars is beyond logic. They'll not be using your car, they'll be using GM, Ford, BMW etc. The race will now be on the manufacturers to design and build either to Google's specs or to create a vehicle that will hold its' own in competitive markets. We will also see automated service centres where automated vehicles are cleaned and maintained by service robots. McDonalds is terrified of $15 dollar minimum wage and are building and testing robots that cook and serve. The Japanese car manufacturers have already built robots that attend to elderly people in institutional settings. We've entered a new age of robots vs humans. Manufacturers worldwide prefer less human involvement in plant and equipment. The service side of capitalism doesn't include you. We are in the midst of the greatest change since the end of feudalism. The vast scale of the displacement of workers will be felt world wide. The wealth these mindful machines create pose a bigger question. How will we distribute the new wealth created by this new 'general knowledge'.


----------



## ChiChilly (Jun 9, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> Only if they start messing up real bad and cause a spike in commercial insurance premiums. Our clients are high end and expect more then just a computerized ride. For example, when we go pick up our clients at the airport we actually meet them at baggage claim and help them with their luggage. One of my clients told me this, they don't want just any random driver to know they're on a vacation every time they get a ride to the airport. There's a thread in news (3-4 months ago) about a house being robbed by a driver after taking a client to the airport. I suppose if I was just a driver that did random runs Uber and the whole TNC would be affecting us, but we provide something that a computer could never be programmed to do. It's called customer service.


Exactly. A good company ensures customer service, professionalism, expertise, and safety. There is something to be said for knowing the quality and character of a driver employed in your service. Just like with automated cars, Uber doesn't have a clue and relies on the public for that information, but their clientele are riders that just want a cheap fares while expecting five star service. Uber doesn't invest their time nor money to retain these values. You simply cannot replace accountability, safety and quality with a cheap service. Maybe I've just been on the professional side too long here with higher expectations. This is more like a taxi service, except even then the rider knows to tip and not expect limo service.


----------



## NFIH (Jul 26, 2016)

Karl Marx said:


> Absolutely correct. Why everyone thinks that Uber and Google will want to own cars is beyond logic. They'll not be using your car, they'll be using GM, Ford, BMW etc. The race will now be on the manufacturers to design and build either to Google's specs or to create a vehicle that will hold its' own in competitive markets. We will also see automated service centres where automated vehicles are cleaned and maintained by service robots. McDonalds is terrified of $15 dollar minimum wage and are building and testing robots that cook and serve. The Japanese car manufacturers have already built robots that attend to elderly people in institutional settings. We've entered a new age of robots vs humans. Manufacturers worldwide prefer less human involvement in plant and equipment. The service side of capitalism doesn't include you. We are in the midst of the greatest change since the end of feudalism. The vast scale of the displacement of workers will be felt world wide. The wealth these mindful machines create pose a bigger question. How will we distribute the new wealth created by this new 'general knowledge'.


What new wealth? Take McDonald's, for instance. Who is its primary customer? That would be the low-income consumer, would it not?

And isn't that low-income consumer low income because they work (if they're employed at all) for low-paying employers like McDonald's? I'd say yes.

And if those low-income consumers lose even that income as a result of automation at McDonald's, exactly who is going to be buying those burgers and fries? Their target consumer now has NO MONEY (finance).

I don't think all the tech boosters have thought through the implications of this trend. That's because they're focused on the whiz-bang tech aspect itself and fail to consider that in a market economy tech means nothing if there is no FINANCE to leverage it.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

mikejm said:


> Ubers business model is based on creating disruptions and attracting new investors. It isn't based on quarterly gains, just bringing new money to the table with each new disruption in the market. It is almost like a ponzi scheme. Their end game plan, their big vision, is to own a huge chunk of all transportation. A world where you use your phone to hail a self driving vehicle to whisk you away, is a world where nobody owns cars anymore because they no longer make sense. Just get on your phone and a robot will take wherever you want to go. That is the major economic disruption that Uber wants to sell to investors.


Will there be a 'panic' button in autonomous vehicles?


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

NFIH said:


> What new wealth? Take McDonald's, for instance. Who is its primary customer? That would be the low-income consumer, would it not?
> 
> And isn't that low-income consumer low income because they work (if they're employed at all) for low-paying employers like McDonald's? I'd say yes.
> 
> ...


Basically, robots are creating the demise of finance and industrial capitalism. Whats left in its' wake will be social chaos that will be easily exploited by political opportunists. Whoever thought work would have such profound meaning to the lives of human beings.


----------



## zordac (Aug 2, 2016)

Karl Marx said:


> Whoever thought work would have such profound meaning to the lives of human beings.


It's not the work that has such profound meaning. It's the compensation from doing the work that has profound meaning in the lives of human beings.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

zordac said:


> It's not the work that has such profound meaning. It's the compensation from doing the work that has profound meaning in the lives of human beings.


Yes indeed, you are correct not everyone can say they enjoyed their work.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

I wonder if the robot cars will be programmed to beaytch incessantly about non-tipping, star banging pins. Whatever will become of this place??


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

The other thing I wonder about a future fleet of truly autonomous/SDV, if Guber doesn't own the fleet...then why would they exist? 

Does one believe a team of engineers capable of building an ASDV will program it with a hacked mashup of software's from a half-baked engineer that flunked out of UCLA? 

Or will they code their own fleet management use-sharing programs? If it comes to fruition, the future robot state will be a lose for current uber drivers AND investors.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

Many of us cannot even begin to ponder life when economics is no longer the dominant form of individual and societal relationships. Modern day cities and their transportation infrastructures can no longer hold up to the modern day needs of our sophisticated technical and physical needs. If robots can smooth out our transition to post-capitalism it may give us a fighting chance to save ourselves and the planet.


----------



## Tired of this (Apr 10, 2015)

Apparently the test runs are going to come with two employees, but here is to protest the self driving cars. I posted this in the wrong forum earlier, but:

1. Request
2. Cancel.
3. Have one person stand in front of self driving car. One person stand in back. 

Self driving car cannot move. Shows how important that "dude" is in the car to take care of any issues.

I'm sure one of the employees will exit vehicle to talk to you but hey, you are doing them a favor. You are just showing them one major flaw of SDCs.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

Tired of this said:


> Apparently the test runs are going to come with two employees, but here is to protest the self driving cars. I posted this in the wrong forum earlier, but:
> 
> 1. Request
> 2. Cancel.
> ...


Every autonomous car will be equipped with stun guns, wouldn't want those pesky protesters to ruin a day in the life of a Pax.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

Ice cream trucks could be the last human driven vehicles on the road.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/02/driverless-cars-will-kill-the-most-jobs-in-select-us-states.html


----------



## Victour B (Aug 21, 2016)

But , If the Uber App tells them to turn left, turn left. turn left. Turn Left.. what will the cars do then... I have sense enough to not do that . will they ??


----------



## knowledgethrow (Aug 23, 2016)

Victour B said:


> But , If the Uber App tells them to turn left, turn left. turn left. Turn Left.. what will the cars do then... I have sense enough to not do that . will they ??


Most likely not.

I've heard on the news of cases of a few human drivers actually driving into lakes because they were looking at their GPS, I imagine it'd be much worse with any self driving, human-less setup, especially since maps are never 100% up to date 100% of the time. A friend of mine lives in a nice cul de sac, with at least 5 parallel streets to the main street. Uber's map actually stops right at the beginning of the cul de sac, so it's up to me to tell the driver to keep driving for a quarter of a mile, then take the 3rd street to the right... my friend has lived there for 3 years and his house is 5 years old, so you'd think the Uber map would know better by now!


----------



## beezlewaxin (Feb 10, 2015)

Why would anyone use Uber if all cars are self-driving? Would you pay Uber for a ride if your own self-driving car will do it for free?

Uber will help fund the transition to a world of self-driving cars, after which they will have no way to compete with what comes next:

"Ridesharing"

Ironically I think Uber will be made obsolete by small groups of people using their own self-driving cars, which can be used for errands when not needed, or rented out perhaps just like Uber.

It will be a new global industry, that could be as simple as dad sending his car to pick up the kids, or as complex as can be imagined. 

One thing is certain, Millennials would never pay Uber for something that their own idle vehicle would do for them and their friends for free. 

Remember, Uber is just an app, and apps can always be done better. 

And people will always want to own a car, *especially* if it is self-driving, and can be put to use without having to be in it..


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

beezlewaxin said:


> Why would anyone use Uber if all cars are self-driving? Would you pay Uber for a ride if your own self-driving car will do it for free?
> 
> Uber will help fund the transition to a world of self-driving cars, after which they will have no way to compete with what comes next:
> 
> ...


 With the ever increasing prospect of AI combined with drones, we'll see drones that will lift 1 or more passengers in the new year. These machines will be powered by electric motors and will cover relatively small distances at first. You can be sure Uber, Amazon, Tesla and Google will all be in this new air race. I like your idea for either private or collective ownership of self driving/flying vehicles. Perhaps even private ownership may become obsolesced in this new transportation network. Strange thing as you get older is you tend to like to get rid of stuff. This summer I bought a motorcycle and spent much of the summer not driving my car. I could have easily leased it out to people wanting it for say a vacation or some other purpose, the thing about things is that when your not using them they still have an associated expense. Most cars are used only 4 per cent of their existence time. With powerful new computing and AI on the way we'll only be limited by our imaginations. My neighbour has a tenants, young couple in her basement and she lends her car to them. They drive the car more than she does and she likes that they wash, fuel and maintenance. She says they are now even paying her insurance. We are living in a new world where owning and being responsible for things is not the be all and end all. Capitalism has run its' course and we need to be much more creative in the way we live and move.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

knowledgethrow said:


> I posted this as a reply in another topic here, but I feel this point can generate enough discussion as to deserve its own topic.
> 
> Why is uber pushing for self driving cars?
> 
> ...


You're assuming they will buy and own the SDCs. They may partner with an auto company who will own them like Lyft has. They may also just use privately owned ones like they do now.

And no, they didn't undercut cab companies because they didn't pay for the cars or costs. They pay all costs in the amount they pay you PLUS you make a profit. They undercut cabs because cabs way overcharge.


----------



## dnlbaboof (Nov 13, 2015)

will never happen these self driving cars are to drum up funding and hype thats all


----------



## AllanJ (Jun 30, 2016)

With respect, I believe some of you are looking at the next five-seven years, not Uber's (and, fx, Musk, Branson) vision for 20-25 years out. 

Of course, Uber is talking about SDCs, as are other companies, to attract investor and research interest. At the same time, none are saying SDCs are ready for consumer prime time, now or any time soon. 

But they will be ready for prime time in some applications within five years... baggage trucks at airports, for example, which are actually driven fairly inefficiently by humans. And from that, we will learn a lot, and the tech will migrate to our daily lives. 

Take the fax. The first fax machine I encountered in the Navy 36 years ago was a $100K piece of delicate equipment... now who even faxes today? And if you need to, you can do it for $0.25 a page at a truck stop. Back then, the estimated page cost was $250 (but the public had only read about the tech in the WSJ or WaPo, of course). 

Same with the Internet, and later the Web: remember all those 1996-97 articles that it was a fad, no application, companies will never adopt email, etc... ?

Even though I am an Uber driver *now*, I am quite excited by the prospects these visionaries are exploring. Bring it on.... I love disruption.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

AllanJ said:


> With respect, I believe some of you are looking at the next five-seven years, not Uber's (and, fx, Musk, Branson) vision for 20-25 years out.
> 
> Of course, Uber is talking about SDCs, as are other companies, to attract investor and research interest. At the same time, none are saying SDCs are ready for consumer prime time, now or any time soon.
> 
> ...


The disruption will be even more so in the next several years. The number of wars we've been through since 9/11 will make for faster innovation and new information technologies.

The biggest changes will be as it relates to intelligence. Accepting open-source info and expertise as the source of first resort will create an enormous shift in the intelligence community. Analysts will become researchers rather being tasked as part of collection based intelligence systems. The end of group think will be one of the most important goals in securing our physical and digital infrastructure from hostile state actors and terrorists organizations.

Edward Snowden represents not just the failure of the NSA but also its' future as an open source collaborative intelligence gathering system. With the rapid advances in AI and robotics the new systems we create will be taught to make mindful millisecond defensive/offensive decisions be it on the ground, airspace or digital realm. The Russians knew the importance to grant Snowden political asylum and our political leaders did not. We've chucked away a genius. Why would Putin let him leave to go back to the U.S. to build new algorithms and intelligent systems. The political/military elites have in my opinion, made a strategic mistake, that could haunt us in an attack that Snowden could have helped us to avoid. Of course this is all predicated on Putin allowing him to leave. As of this evening Russians and Americans are no longer communicating with one another as the Syrian war festers into a regional war that is now spreading beyond the middle east. Benghazi was an intelligence failure, somebody should have told Clinton. Although she took responsibility, someone must have known Libya was falling apart. I dread the morning we awake a crippled and humiliated nation. Strangely, we have made no national plans in the event of this sort of outcome. Germany, this past August informed its' citizens that they should have a *stockpile of food and water in case of a terrorist or cyber attacks, as its' first civil  defence strategy since the end of the Cold War. *


----------



## AllanJ (Jun 30, 2016)

Karl Marx said:


> The disruption will be even more so .....*stockpile of food and water in case of a terrorist or cyber attacks, as its' first civil  defence strategy since the end of the Cold War. *


None of that made any sense and, quite frankly I would find you a pretty creepy driver.


----------



## ragnarkar (Sep 2, 2016)

I think self driving cars will replace humans in phases. It's not like one day Uber will ban all human drivers and unleash its fleet of self driving cars. They'll buy a few here and there for all of the major cities. In the Uber app, there will be a new option (let's call it UberS for Uber Self Driving) that you can choose which will be cheaper than pool but will be a driverless car.

As UberS becomes more popular and more self-driving vehicles get added, drivers receive wave after wave of pay cuts. Eventually, almost nobody is willing to work for these low wages and Uber eventually shuts down its human driver program and operates entirely with self driving cars.


----------



## Karl Marx (May 17, 2016)

ragnarkar said:


> I think self driving cars will replace humans in phases. It's not like one day Uber will ban all human drivers and unleash its fleet of self driving cars. They'll buy a few here and there for all of the major cities. In the Uber app, there will be a new option (let's call it UberS for Uber Self Driving) that you can choose which will be cheaper than pool but will be a driverless car.
> 
> As UberS becomes more popular and more self-driving vehicles get added, drivers receive wave after wave of pay cuts. Eventually, almost nobody is willing to work for these low wages and Uber eventually shuts down its human driver program and operates entirely with self driving cars.


The future of Uber is contextual.


----------

