# Uber Is Pausing Autonomous Car Tests in All Cities After Fatal Crash in Arizona



## LEO2112

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...nomous-car-tests-in-all-cities-after-fatality


----------



## jocker12

Self driving cars dementia needs to be blocked or more innocent people will be killed by these primitive robots.


----------



## heynow321

Only the beginning. Who could have ever seen this coming?


----------



## transporter007

PR stunt. Uber needs to show public compassion and sympathy.
Family will sue uber, uber can show how distressed they were

"_*Your Honor, my client, Uber Technolgy, ceased all autonomous testing because of this tragedy,
Our CEO, Mr Dara Khosrowshahi, was so effected and withdrawn he cancelled the second fitting of his custom spring wardrobe and delayed his decision on whether to purchase a Gulfstream 550 or 650."*_

A month later uber will restart program.
Deaths are a temporary issue with new technology

When the first plane crashed we didn't stop flying
Ship Tragedies 7 killed on USS Fitzgerald collision w/a container ship, we're not at war with container ships, we weren't in a war zone, we won't shut down the US Navy because of the deaths. 
When cars crash we don't shut down all freeways
Space shuttle disaster, we still go into space

Reminder: waymo is going full speed ahead


----------



## Working4peanuts

THIS THREAD HAS BEEN CLOSED. PLEASE SELECT ONE OF THE OTHER 20 THREADS ON THE SAME TOPIC TO REPLY TO. ACCCCCCCCCCKKKK.


----------



## goneubering

heynow321 said:


> Only the beginning. Who could have ever seen this coming?


Just wondering. Does the Tomato still post here? I blocked him a long time ago.


----------



## heynow321

goneubering said:


> Just wondering. Does the Tomato still post here? I blocked him a long time ago.


 Yeah he still gets paid to try to post propaganda but nobody falls for it. His arguments are so incoherent and poorly researched that his opinions don't carry any weight around here.


----------



## iheartuber

Ahem... uh RamzFanz ? Still think SDCs are "safer" than human drivers?

I won't even bother tagging "that other guy" that we all know...

Also, from the NY post

https://nypost.com/2018/03/19/self-.../?utm_campaign=iosapp&utm_source=facebook_app


----------



## uberdummie

Time to boycott drive for Uber. Good timing to ask for rate increase for driver.
This is the only time. They being taking a lot money from rider fare and give little bit of s**t to driver.
ALL DRIVERS OUT THERE MUST BE TOGETHER AND UNITED !!!!
ONE FOR ALL , ALL FOR ONE !!!
FIGHT FOR OUR FAIR RATE !!!


----------



## WeirdBob

So is Uber going to blame the safety driver, the victim, out both?


----------



## Certain Judgment

Job security.


----------



## goneubering

WeirdBob said:


> So is Uber going to blame the safety driver, the victim, out both?


I have to wonder if the "safety" driver was snoozing.

We need to see the video footage.


----------



## Gung-Ho

goneubering said:


> Just wondering. Does the Tomato still post here? I blocked him a long time ago.





iheartuber said:


> Ahem... uh RamzFanz ? Still think SDCs are "safer" than human drivers?
> 
> I won't even bother tagging "that other guy" that we all know...
> 
> Also, from the NY post
> 
> https://nypost.com/2018/03/19/self-.../?utm_campaign=iosapp&utm_source=facebook_app


I'm fairly certain both of them will be scouring tech blogs and mags searching for days and weeks for some article that will find blame on everyone except the sdc car for being at fault. Then they'll say "SEE! these robot cars are still perfect"


----------



## iheartuber

Gung-Ho said:


> I'm fairly certain both of them will be scouring tech blogs and mags searching for days and weeks for some article that will find blame on everyone except the sdc car for being at fault. Then they'll say "SEE! these robot cars are still perfect"


----------



## heynow321

Well obviously the only solution is to ban pedestrians in the name of safety


----------



## Sydney Uber

Living is risky. Any if us could be taken out through a crazy confluence if circumstances. No one plans to be on the wrong end of an accident. 

I would suggest that there are more people killed by human driven cars, per km travelled than SD cars being tested. 

Technology improves, we didn’t wait around in the 1970s for disc brakes and ABS to be developed and provide safer cars. I can still recall the horrible brake fade those drum brakes would suffer. They did kill people. But life needed to continue.


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> Living is risky. Any if us could be taken out through a crazy confluence if circumstances. No one plans to be on the wrong end of an accident.
> 
> I would suggest that there are more people killed by human driven cars, per km travelled than SD cars being tested.
> 
> Technology improves, we didn't wait around in the 1970s for disc brakes and ABS to be developed and provide safer cars. I can still recall the horrible brake fade those drum brakes would suffer. They did kill people. But life needed to continue.


That's not the point

The point is up until now robot car loyalists have been swearing up and down how robot drivers are "sooo 
much safer" than human drivers. No we can see that... eh, not so much.


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> PR stunt. Uber needs to show public compassion and sympathy.
> Family will sue uber, uber can show how distressed they were


 When a women dies in an accident and you post such a comment it makes everybody understand why driving for Uber could be your biggest achievement ever....



heynow321 said:


> Yeah he still gets paid to try to post propaganda but nobody falls for it. His arguments are so incoherent and poorly researched that his opinions don't carry any weight around here.


 This is about much more drama than a simple annoying troll.



WeirdBob said:


> So is Uber going to blame the safety driver, the victim, out both?


 I will ask all the developers and their bosses to bring their children and line them up in front of moving self driving cars to see how "safe" their products are. If Kalanick is at fault for launching this stupidity, Dara is guilty for not abandoning the oxymoron.



goneubering said:


> We need to see the video footage.


 I doubt they'll release anything of that sort.



Sydney Uber said:


> I would suggest that there are more people killed by human driven cars, per km travelled than SD cars being tested.


 I suggest you do your homework. In the US in 2016 were 1.15 fatalities for every 100 million miles driven ( at 15ooo miles per year, an individual could find himself or herself in a situation of a fatal accident as pedestrian, driver or car passenger in a normal car,* every 6.666 years*)


----------



## Sydney Uber

iheartuber said:


> That's not the point
> 
> The point is up until now robot car loyalists have been swearing up and down how robot drivers are "sooo
> much safer" than human drivers. No we can see that... eh, not so much.


The point is, that there is always improving technology. Have we just waited in cotton-wool homes for a perfect world to roll out before we stepped outside into imperfect safety?

This is a very unfortunate death that will affect the family deeply.

No technology would get the extraordinary regulatory and investor support that self driving cars have garnered if they weren't going to improve transportation on a number of levels.


----------



## Taxi tony

Okay my little ******ed Uber drivers. Do you realize what happens when you burp becomes totally a driverless car company? I'll give you a hint, you are unemployed again.


----------



## transporter007

Taxi tony said:


> Okay my little ******ed Uber drivers. Do you realize what happens when you burp becomes totally a driverless car company? I'll give you a hint, you are unemployed again.


Seriously, u consider an average net earnings of around $3.50 hourly "Employment"
We're NOT earning money, we're borrowing money against our asset. In this case that asset is our vehicle

Uber's a gig, a bridge, a supplement until u secure real employment

Get a markable skill, trade, education
https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/training/adulttraining


----------



## Uberfunitis

It is only smart to temporarily halt testing until you fully understand what happened. I doubt very seriously if this is anything other than gathering more data.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> When a women dies in an accident and you post such a comment it makes everybody understand why driving for Uber could be your biggest achievement ever....
> 
> This is about much more drama than a simple annoying troll.
> 
> I will ask all the developers and their bosses to bring their children and line them up in front of moving self driving cars to see how "safe" their products are. If Kalanick is at fault for launching this stupidity, Dara is guilty for not abandoning the oxymoron.
> 
> I doubt they'll release anything of that sort.
> 
> I suggest you do your homework. In the US in 2016 were 1.15 fatalities for every 100 million miles driven ( at 15ooo miles per year, an individual could find himself or herself in a situation of a fatal accident as pedestrian, driver or car passenger in a normal car,* every 6.666 years*)


*You think like ISIS, wanting to turn the clock back to where we live in caves.*
*No air travel, sea travel, space travel, no automation on our farms, our factories *
*Our lives.*

*WHY? BECAUSE YOU LIVE IN FEAR*


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> The point is, that there is always improving technology. Have we just waited in cotton-wool homes for a perfect world to roll out before we stepped outside into imperfect safety?
> 
> This is a very unfortunate death that will affect the family deeply.
> 
> No technology would get the extraordinary regulatory and investor support that self driving cars have garnered if they weren't going to improve transportation on a number of levels.


Yeah well let's see how much investor and regulatory support (not to mention public buying power) they get now.


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> Yeah well let's see how much investor and regulatory support (not to mention public buying power) they get now.


My bet is after an initial knee jerk there will be little change.


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> The point is, that there is always improving technology. Have we just waited in cotton-wool homes for a perfect world to roll out before we stepped outside into imperfect safety?
> 
> This is a very unfortunate death that will affect the family deeply.
> 
> No technology would get the extraordinary regulatory and investor support that self driving cars have garnered if they weren't going to improve transportation on a number of levels.


The point is the statistics show driving today is incredibly safe as it is, and self driving cars developers know it but prefer to intoxicate the general public with BS partially data to convince you their product is great. All they care about is profit not progress.

A second point is there is a lot more failing technology that doesn't make the news because it's not bringing ratings or clicks per page or profit, so any information about those incredibly many errors is intentionally ignored.


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> My bet is after an initial knee jerk there will be little change.


Oh yeah? Let's put it this way. How many people here have warned that software limitations are but one of the many things that could go wrong with SDCs. There were countless others.

Maybe this one incident by itself is not enough to halt SDCs but when all these things start going wrong then for sure it will be game over. This is just the beginning.


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> *You think like ISIS, wanting to turn the clock back to where we live in caves.*
> *No air travel, sea travel, space travel, no automation on our farms, our factories *
> *Our lives.*
> 
> *WHY? BECAUSE YOU LIVE IN FEAR*


If you say I live in fear you are completely delusional. You consume corporate lies meant to scare the public into buying BS products but prefer to be passive aggressive when it comes to looking in the mirror. If your mother, wife or daughter will die killed by a stupid 2 ton robot and people will post stupid comments like yours the very next hour, you will understand how ridiculous you look right now right here.


----------



## Sydney Uber

iheartuber said:


> Yeah well let's see how much investor and regulatory support (not to mention public buying power) they get now.


*Date:* February 10, 2018 *Time*: 1731
*Location:* Grand Canyon, Arizona
*Operator:* Pallion
*AC Type:* Eurocopter EC 130B4
*Reg:* N155GC * cn: *7091
*Aboard: * 7 *Fatalities: *5 *Ground:* 0
*Route:* Sightseeing
*Details:* The helicopter was observed making strange manoeuvres before clipping a cliff which snapped off its tail end. The aircraft then plummeted 600ft to the base of a gorge. There were strong winds in the area at the time of the accident.

Have they ceased Helicopter Flights?
5 people dead
Life is dangerous, even "established, proven" technology fails - with terrible outcomes.

Does Man give up seeking safer technology because of failures during development ? Apollo/Space Shuttle? DC8s?


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> *Date:* February 10, 2018 *Time*: 1731
> *Location:* Grand Canyon, Arizona
> *Operator:* Pallion
> *AC Type:* Eurocopter EC 130B4
> *Reg:* N155GC * cn: *7091
> *Aboard: * 7 *Fatalities: *5 *Ground:* 0
> *Route:* Sightseeing
> *Details:* The helicopter was observed making strange manoeuvres before clipping a cliff which snapped off its tail end. The aircraft then plummeted 600ft to the base of a gorge. There were strong winds in the area at the time of the accident.
> 
> Have they ceased Helicopter Flights?
> 5 people dead
> Life is dangerous, even "established, proven" technology fails - with terrible outcomes.
> 
> Does Man give up seeking safer technology because of failures during development ? Apollo/Space Shuttle? DC8s?


Well you sound like you have no fear of getting into a robot car. That's great.

Question: how many people are like you?

Answer: not very many.


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> *Date:* February 10, 2018 *Time*: 1731
> *Location:* Grand Canyon, Arizona
> *Operator:* Pallion
> *AC Type:* Eurocopter EC 130B4
> *Reg:* N155GC * cn: *7091
> *Aboard: * 7 *Fatalities: *5 *Ground:* 0
> *Route:* Sightseeing
> *Details:* The helicopter was observed making strange manoeuvres before clipping a cliff which snapped off its tail end. The aircraft then plummeted 600ft to the base of a gorge. There were strong winds in the area at the time of the accident.
> 
> Have they ceased Helicopter Flights?
> 5 people dead
> Life is dangerous, even "established, proven" technology fails - with terrible outcomes.
> 
> Does Man give up seeking safer technology because of failures during development ? Apollo/Space Shuttle? DC8s?


The reality is self driving cars behave like drunk drivers. And that is when they are at their best...,,


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> Well you sound like you have no fear of getting into a robot car. That's great.
> 
> Question: how many people are like you?
> 
> Answer: not very many.


I for one would get into a self driving vehicle. Not many were initially ready to jump onto a flying machine but now it is done all day every day all over the world.


----------



## Sydney Uber

iheartuber said:


> Oh yeah? Let's put it this way. How many people here have warned that software limitations are but one of the many things that could go wrong with SDCs. There were countless others.
> 
> Maybe this one incident by itself is not enough to halt SDCs but when all these things start going wrong then for sure it will be game over. This is just the beginning.


The only thing that I can see "halting" SDCs is a successful hacking of a SDC and subsequent kidnapping of the passengers onboard.

After a police pursuit of a 100miles and the ransom requests by the hackers denied, the SDC is driven off a cliff killing all onboard.

That- would stop SDCs


----------



## tohunt4me

transporter007 said:


> *You think like ISIS, wanting to turn the clock back to where we live in caves.*
> *No air travel, sea travel, space travel, no automation on our farms, our factories *
> *Our lives.*
> 
> *WHY? BECAUSE YOU LIVE IN FEAR*


Isis resents the Satanist Transhumanist Globalists.

Got to give them THAT !

( read Agenda 21 U.N. Directives !)


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> The reality is self driving cars behave like drunk drivers. And that is when they are at their best...,,


Have you ever had a drink and driven?


----------



## tohunt4me

heynow321 said:


> Only the beginning. Who could have ever seen this coming?


We ALL SAW THIS COMING !

And WORSE !


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> If you say I live in fear you are completely delusional. You consume corporate lies meant to scare the public into buying BS products but prefer to be passive aggressive when it comes to looking in the mirror. If your mother, wife or daughter will die killed by a stupid 2 ton robot and people will post stupid comments like yours the very next hour, you will understand how ridiculous you look right now right here.


*Your manifesto against technology is similar to unibomber Ted Kaczynski, life in prison.
Fear of technology, fear of the future* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm


Numerous deaths in the beginning of air travel. Yet we fly
Numerous deaths in the infancy of the automobile. Yet we drive 
Numerous ship sinkings. Yet we cruise

Man was made to evolve and advance.

*YOU stay in the cave, the rest of us are going to the future *


----------



## tohunt4me

Ted was Right.


transporter007 said:


> *Your manifesto against technology is similar to unibomber Ted Kaczynski, life in prison.
> Fear of technology, fear of the future* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm
> 
> 
> Numerous deaths in the beginning of air travel. Yet we fly
> Numerous deaths in the infancy of the automobile. Yet we drive
> Numerous ship sinkings. Yet we cruise
> 
> Man was made to evolve and advance.
> 
> *YOU stay in the cave, the rest of us are going to the future *


The Amish will be only survivors of Solar Flare E.M.P.

The ROBOT DEPENDANT ZOMBIES WILL PERISH IN DAYS...

THE EARTH IS " SELF CLEANSING"

Looks like Time to Flush !


----------



## transporter007

iheartuber said:


> Yeah well let's see how much investor and regulatory support (not to mention public buying power) they get now.


Pure Nonsense. Your illogical ravings would have stopped air travel and the automobile
in their infancy over 100 years ago. investors see the future. That's why u sit in front and they the backseat.

The only thing new is history not read.

Read grasshopper the difficulties emerging technologies had a century ago and the suspicious public

No one trusted the automobile, the train, the airplane, electricity, the telephone was thought a conduit to Satan

Educate yourself, Read, learn then post


----------



## tohunt4me

Humming " Your Time is Going to Come"- Led Zeppelin.

Amen Ra.

. . . " Lying, Cheating, Hurting, thats all you seem to do . . ."


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> *Your manifesto against technology is similar to unibomber Ted Kaczynski, life in prison.
> Fear of technology, fear of the future* http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unabomber/manifesto.text.htm
> 
> 
> Numerous deaths in the beginning of air travel. Yet we fly
> Numerous deaths in the infancy of the automobile. Yet we drive
> Numerous ship sinkings. Yet we cruise
> 
> Man was made to evolve and advance.
> 
> *YOU stay in the cave, the rest of us are going to the future *


You continuing to argue defending your idiotic insulting comment related to the victim confirms my first opinion. Stupidly you say I'm afraid but then immediately you start seeing terrorists around...... Make sure take your medication as prescribed, enjoy your jelly and ask the nurses to cut your access to the hospital's WiFi.



Sydney Uber said:


> Have you ever had a drink and driven?


Do you want to know how many miles self driving cars covered in reality and how many victims they've already made?


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> You continuing to argue defending your idiotic insulting comment related to the victim confirms my first opinion. Stupidly you say I'm afraid but then immediately you start seeing terrorists around...... Make sure take your medication as prescribed, enjoy your jelly and ask the nurses to cut your access to the hospital's WiFi.


*Cowardice is a trait wherein fear and excessive self-concern override doing or saying what is right-it is the opposite of courage.*

*Cowards are satisfied with the present and fear anything new. People of vision and courage advance to the future. *​
*







*​


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> The only thing that I can see "halting" SDCs is a successful hacking of a SDC and subsequent kidnapping of the passengers onboard.
> 
> After a police pursuit of a 100miles and the ransom requests by the hackers denied, the SDC is driven off a cliff killing all onboard.
> 
> That- would stop SDCs


And you really think that's not possible?


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Self driving cars dementia needs to be blocked or more innocent people will be killed by these primitive robots.


----------



## tohunt4me

jocker12 said:


> You continuing to argue defending your idiotic insulting comment related to the victim confirms my first opinion. Stupidly you say I'm afraid but then immediately you start seeing terrorists around...... Make sure take your medication as prescribed, enjoy your jelly and ask the nurses to cut your access to the hospital's WiFi.
> 
> Do you want to know how many miles self driving cars covered in reality and how many victims they've already made?


It is becoming Abundantly clear where the Real Terrorists Lay.

Free Will.
Never Ever Invite Evil in.

No matter What your Corporate Paid Politician tells you !

Man : the Only Animal who must pay to Live.

The Garden of Eden does NOT belong to the self assigned slum lords.

Go Figure


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


>


Obviously you have a hard time understanding a person just died, killed by a 2 ton robot, a person that could be your mother, sister, wife or child. 
Your future? Sign up to be an organ donor and then go step in front of a 40 mph moving self driving car. By donating your organs after the robot does its job, you'll be few people's hero.



tohunt4me said:


> It is becoming Abundantly clear where the Real Terrorists Lay.
> 
> Free Will.
> Never Ever Invite Evil in.
> 
> No matter What your Corporate Paid Politician tells you !
> 
> Man : the Only Animal who must pay to Live.
> 
> The Garden of Eden does NOT belong to the self assigned slum lords.
> 
> Go Figure


I wonder how many people actually understand or are ready to see the obvious.


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> Obviously you have a hard time understanding a person just died, killed by a 2 ton robot, a person that could be your mother, sister, wife or child.
> Your future? Sign up to be an organ donor and then go step in front of a 40 mph moving self driving car. By donating your organs after the robot does its job, you'll be few people's hero.


Actually we don't know that at all, did he not have the proper kneed jerk reaction for you. The police even seem to be indicating that it was not the drivers or Ubers fault but we will see when it all comes to light.


----------



## jocker12

Uberfunitis said:


> Actually we don't know that at all, did he not have the proper kneed jerk reaction for you. The police even seem to be indicating that it was not the drivers or Ubers fault but we will see when it all comes to light.


First - What is that we don't know about?

Second - His #3 comment on this thread, which is about a women that just died, starts with the words "PR stunt." where PR stands for Public Relations or PRopaganda. Now do you know how a person that is not able to feel empathy and keeps seeing terrorists is called? A psychopath! That is what you're trying to defend here.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Obviously you have a hard time understanding a person just died, killed by a 2 ton robot, a person that could be your mother, sister, wife or child.


The *real world* is the place in which one actually must live and the circumstances with which one actually must deal. An *example* of the *real world* is *Life* *and Death ,*as opposed to the *Fantasy* *life* you wish to live. *Tragedies Happen in the real world.*


*People get killed in airplanes falling out of the sky, we still fly*
*People get killed in train wrecks, we still ride*
*People get killed in car crashes, we still ride*
*People get killed in space exploration, we still explore*

Some people are not prepared nor mature for real world issues. Cheers!


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> First - What is that we don't know about?
> 
> Second - His #3 comment on this thread, which is about a women that just died, starts with the words "PR stunt." where PR stands for Public Relations or PRopaganda. Now do you know how a person that is not able to feel empathy and keeps seeing terrorists is called? A psychopath! That is what you're trying to defend here.


We do not really know anything about the crash, the dash cam video has not been released yet and the investigation has not been completed yet. In other words we as in the public have no earthly idea what exactly happened at this point in time.

I have no idea if he feels empathy or not, I do know that you do not have to stop everything just to express empathy. We are not talking to the persons family here at least not directly. All I see so far is people seeing this accident and wanting to exploit it for their own agenda to me that is a psychopath.


----------



## iheartuber

transporter007 said:


> The *real world* is the place in which one actually must live and the circumstances with which one actually must deal. An *example* of the *real world* is *Life* *and Death ,*as opposed to the *Fantasy* *life* you wish to live. *Tragedies Happen in the real world.*
> 
> 
> *People get killed in airplanes falling out of the sky, we still fly*
> *People get killed in train wrecks, we still ride*
> *People get killed in car crashes, we still ride*
> *People get killed in space exploration, we still explore*
> 
> Some people are not prepared nor mature for real world issues. Cheers!


It took decades for airplanes to go from concept to everyday thing and it will take just as long for SDCs


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> First - What is that we don't know about?
> 
> Second - His #3 comment on this thread, which is about a women that just died, starts with the words "PR stunt." where PR stands for Public Relations or PRopaganda. Now do you know how a person that is not able to feel empathy and keeps seeing terrorists is called? A psychopath! That is what you're trying to defend here.


*You've become unhinged and Boorish *

*







*​


iheartuber said:


> It took decades for airplanes to go from concept to everyday thing and it will take just as long for SDCs


*Swing and a Miss*

1. Wright brothers first flight On *December 17, 1903*
2. On *Jan. 1, 1914*, the St. Petersburg-Tampa AirLine became the world's first scheduled passenger airline service, operating between St. Petersburg and Tampa, Florida

11 years

Cars on ground, planes in air


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> We do not really know anything about the crash, the dash cam video has not been released yet and the investigation has not been completed yet. In other words we as in the public have no earthly idea what exactly happened at this point in time.
> 
> I have no idea if he feels empathy or not, I do know that you do not have to stop everything just to express empathy. We are not talking to the persons family here at least not directly. All I see so far is people seeing this accident and wanting to exploit it for their own agenda to me that is a psychopath.


We have COMMON SENSE. We know that if the robot car was doing 40 then it wasn't a residential street because the speed limit there is 25. Which means it was one of those quasi-highway streets.

Common sense tells us that any pedestrian with a brain knows enough to look for cars on a street like that.


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> We have COMMON SENSE. We know that if the robot car was doing 40 then it wasn't a residential street because the speed limit there is 25. Which means it was one of those quasi-highway streets.
> 
> Common sense tells us that any pedestrian with a brain knows enough to look for cars on a street like that.


And yet they were hit by a car. Did they actually look for a car? Did they just dart out in-front of the vehicle? Were they even visible? Did the SDC sensor malfunction? Was the vehicle hacked in some way?

We as the public have no idea what actually happened at this point in time other than there was a collision between a person pushing a bicycle and a vehicle who had some kind of autonomous feature engaged at the time.


----------



## transporter007

iheartuber said:


> We have COMMON SENSE. We know that if the robot car was doing 40 then it wasn't a residential street because the speed limit there is 25. Which means it was one of those quasi-highway streets.
> 
> Common sense tells us that any pedestrian with a brain knows enough to look for cars on a street like that.


On average, a *pedestrian* was *killed* every 2 hours and injured every 8 minutes in traffic crashes in 2013. In 2013, *pedestrian* deaths accounted for 14 percent of all traffic fatalities in motor *vehicle* traffic crashes. Twenty-six percent of *pedestrian fatalities* occurred from 6 to 8:59 p.m in 2013.

On average, a pedestrian was killed nearly every 1.6 hours and injured more than every 7.5 min- utes in traffic crashes in 2015. In 2015, pedestrian deaths accounted for *15 percent* of all traffic fatalities. Twenty-six percent of pedestrian fatalities occurred from 6 to 8:59 p.m. in 2015.

*4,092 pedestrians* were killed in crashes with motor vehicles and 59,000 were injured


----------



## tohunt4me

transporter007 said:


> The *real world* is the place in which one actually must live and the circumstances with which one actually must deal. An *example* of the *real world* is *Life* *and Death ,*as opposed to the *Fantasy* *life* you wish to live. *Tragedies Happen in the real world.*
> 
> 
> *People get killed in airplanes falling out of the sky, we still fly*
> *People get killed in train wrecks, we still ride*
> *People get killed in car crashes, we still ride*
> *People get killed in space exploration, we still explore*
> 
> Some people are not prepared nor mature for real world issues. Cheers!


At what point might we consider that Their Agenda may not be in the Publics best interest ?

After it is Too Late ?

Free Will.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> First - What is that we don't know about?
> 
> Second - His #3 comment on this thread, which is about a women that just died, starts with the words "PR stunt." where PR stands for Public Relations or PRopaganda. Now do you know how a person that is not able to feel empathy and keeps seeing terrorists is called? A psychopath! That is what you're trying to defend here.


Your position WOULD DEMAND *ALL CARS SHOULD BAND from public roads*

*On average, a pedestrian was killed nearly every 1.6 hours *and injured more than every 7.5 min- utes in traffic crashes

*4,092 pedestrians* were killed in crashes with motor vehicles and 59,000 were injured



tohunt4me said:


> At what point might we consider that Their Agenda may not be in the Publics best interest ?
> 
> After it is Too Late ?
> 
> Free Will.


Tell that to *4,092 pedestrians* that were killed in crashes with motor vehicles
STOP I SAY, STOP all vehicle production and operation in the world

_"Their Agenda may not be in the Publics best interest ?"_
Dude, we live in the USA, a capitalist society, it's all about BUSINESS and rich people getting richer. Don't like it? Move to a place where money is not a determining factor. Heaven? Hell?


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> The *real world* is the place in which one actually must live and the circumstances with which one actually must deal. An *example* of the *real world* is *Life* *and Death ,*as opposed to the *Fantasy* *life* you wish to live. *Tragedies Happen in the real world.*
> 
> 
> *People get killed in airplanes falling out of the sky, we still fly*
> *People get killed in train wrecks, we still ride*
> *People get killed in car crashes, we still ride*
> *People get killed in space exploration, we still explore*
> 
> Some people are not prepared nor mature for real world issues. Cheers!


Keep going and show all the readers on this public forum who and what you are (along with few other "enthusiasts") when it comes to supporting devices and systems that just happen to kill innocents.


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> Keep going and show all the readers on this public forum who and what you are (along with few other "enthusiasts") when it comes to supporting devices and systems that just happen to kill innocents.


Innocents? Do you know that for a fact?


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> On average, a *pedestrian* was *killed* every 2 hours and injured every 8 minutes in traffic crashes in 2013. In 2013, *pedestrian* deaths accounted for 14 percent of all traffic fatalities in motor *vehicle* traffic crashes. Twenty-six percent of *pedestrian fatalities* occurred from 6 to 8:59 p.m in 2013.
> 
> On average, a pedestrian was killed nearly every 1.6 hours and injured more than every 7.5 min- utes in traffic crashes in 2015. In 2015, pedestrian deaths accounted for *15 percent* of all traffic fatalities. Twenty-six percent of pedestrian fatalities occurred from 6 to 8:59 p.m. in 2015.
> 
> *4,092 pedestrians* were killed in crashes with motor vehicles and 59,000 were injured


Do you have an official source for your aberrations?


----------



## tohunt4me

Pay Attention.
2030 is the Globalist Goal Year.
For Wholesale Onslaught of Globalist Agenda 21 Implementation of Global Government Policies.

I for one
Do not care to be an Insect of the Globalist Hive !

Free Will !

It is time
For YOU to step back
And See the Larger Picture.
Not this one strand of the Net
Designed to contain your Freedom.


----------



## jocker12

Uberfunitis said:


> Innocents? Do you know that for a fact?


Please tell me what was she "guilty" (as opposed to "innocent") for? In other words, what are you blaming the victim for?


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> Please tell me what was she "guilty" (as opposed to "innocent") for? In other words, what are you blaming the victim for?


For one thing crossing the road outside of a designated cross walk. I am not saying that she is guilty of anything I am just saying that the investigation has not been completed at this time.


----------



## tohunt4me

Allow Implimentation and they will control every aspect.
Your diet.
Your healthcare.
Where you live.
The crops you consume.
The chemistry of your water.
You will become a Pet
Not a Man.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Do you have an official source for your aberrations?


I give u facts, u respond in typical coward fashion. Deflection 
Sad



Uberfunitis said:


> Innocents? Do you know that for a fact?


We're ALL SINNERS!!!


----------



## tohunt4me

Uberfunitis said:


> For one thing crossing the road outside of a designated cross walk. I am not saying that she is guilty of anything I am just saying that the investigation has not been completed at this time.


And so it begins !
The " shoe tax" to finance the " pedestrian police" biometric monitors to modify Human Behavior to MAKE LIFE EASIER FOR CORPORATE ROBOTS !

You endorse Hell on Earth !

Its the Fascist Way !

Goose Step at Cross Walks !


----------



## jocker12

Uberfunitis said:


> For one thing crossing the road outside of a designated cross walk. I am not saying that she is guilty of anything I am just saying that the investigation has not been completed at this time.


Do you know how self driving cars are supposed to "save" lives because they are much better than humans and because they have sensors to detect objects in the dark or shadow and even capable to see around the corner? That is what you are lied about, because in reality all those sensors failed to detect a person the car was driving towards even if before the impact the person was not in the car's path.

So the robot was incapable to anticipate, prevent or react as presented by it's owners and creators.

By the way - "Police have footage from two cameras inside the vehicle, including one facing the street. The car was traveling at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone, but a screenshot of the road taken by Google Maps suggests it could've been a 45 mph zone. The police department's preliminary investigation indicates the car made no attempt to brake. "

And

"Moir didn't rule out possible criminal charges, and new rules set by an executive order from Arizona's cover leaves Uber potentially liable."

From https://jalopnik.com/video-shows-pedestrian-in-fatal-uber-crash-stepped-in-f-1823922228


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> Do you know how self driving cars are supposed to "save" lives because they are much better than humans and because they have sensors to detect objects in the dark or shadow and even capable to see around the corner? That is what you are lied about, because in reality all those sensors failed to detect a person the car was driving towards even if before the impact the person was not in the car's path.
> 
> So the robot was incapable to anticipate, prevent or react as presented by it's owners and creators.
> 
> By the way - "Police have footage from two cameras inside the vehicle, including one facing the street. The car was traveling at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone, but a screenshot of the road taken by Google Maps suggests it could've been a 45 mph zone. The police department's preliminary investigation indicates the car made no attempt to brake. "
> 
> And
> 
> "Moir didn't rule out possible criminal charges, and new rules set by an executive order from Arizona's cover leaves Uber potentially liable."
> 
> From https://jalopnik.com/video-shows-pedestrian-in-fatal-uber-crash-stepped-in-f-1823922228


Perhaps those sensors did malfunction, perhaps there is a problem in the programing, perhaps the person jumped out in front of the vehicle. That is the point we don't know what happened or if anything could have been done to avoid it by either party at this point.

At this point it seems to me that if anyone would be responsible it would either be the person pushing the bike or the person behind the wheel who was being paid to take over for the car in the event of an emergency.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Do you know how self driving cars are supposed to "save" lives because they are much better than humans and because they have sensors to detect objects in the dark or shadow and even capable to see around the corner? That is what you are lied about, because in reality all those sensors failed to detect a person the car was driving towards even if before the impact the person was not in the car's path.
> 
> So the robot was incapable to anticipate, prevent or react as presented by it's owners and creators.
> 
> By the way - "Police have footage from two cameras inside the vehicle, including one facing the street. The car was traveling at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone, but a screenshot of the road taken by Google Maps suggests it could've been a 45 mph zone. The police department's preliminary investigation indicates the car made no attempt to brake. "
> 
> And
> 
> "Moir didn't rule out possible criminal charges, and new rules set by an executive order from Arizona's cover leaves Uber potentially liable."
> 
> From https://jalopnik.com/video-shows-pedestrian-in-fatal-uber-crash-stepped-in-f-1823922228


_*1 dead by autonomous car. Over 4000 killed by human operated cars per year *_
_*Seems SDC ARE saving lives *_


----------



## tohunt4me

heynow321 said:


> Well obviously the only solution is to ban pedestrians in the name of safety


Thats a " Liberal" PROGRESSIVE SOLUTION !


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Do you know how self driving cars are supposed to "save" lives because they are much better than humans and because they have sensors to detect objects in the dark or shadow and even capable to see around the corner? That is what you are lied about, because in reality all those sensors failed to detect a person the car was driving towards even if before the impact the person was not in the car's path.
> 
> So the robot was incapable to anticipate, prevent or react as presented by it's owners and creators.
> 
> By the way - "Police have footage from two cameras inside the vehicle, including one facing the street. The car was traveling at 38 mph in a 35 mph zone, but a screenshot of the road taken by Google Maps suggests it could've been a 45 mph zone. The police department's preliminary investigation indicates the car made no attempt to brake. "
> 
> And
> 
> "Moir didn't rule out possible criminal charges, and new rules set by an executive order from Arizona's cover leaves Uber potentially liable."
> 
> From https://jalopnik.com/video-shows-pedestrian-in-fatal-uber-crash-stepped-in-f-1823922228


*Which human driver's sensors failed during the slaughter of over 4000 pedestrian annually ? 
All cars should be ban!!! Result: the saving of over 4000 pedestrian lives annual

Signed, jocker12 
*
*PS, while we're at it, Ground all aircraft, stop all trains, dock all ships and ban all footwear that allows pedestrian traffic *

*Only pedestrian should be Shoeless Joe Jackson Jr.*

*I jocker12 have spoken *


----------



## tohunt4me

Next stop
MANDATORY FREE HEALTHCARE FOR ROBO CARS AT TAX PAYER EXPENSE.


----------



## transporter007

*Distraction, On Street And Sidewalk, Helps Cause Record Pedestrian Deaths*

*https://www.npr.org/2017/03/30/522085503/2016-saw-a-record-increase-in-pedestrian-deaths*

A report released today by the Governors Highway Safety Association shows that the number of pedestrians killed in traffic jumped 11 percent last year, to nearly 6,000. That's


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> Ahem... uh RamzFanz ? Still think SDCs are "safer" than human drivers?
> 
> I won't even bother tagging "that other guy" that we all know...
> 
> Also, from the NY post
> 
> https://nypost.com/2018/03/19/self-.../?utm_campaign=iosapp&utm_source=facebook_app


A) I have always maintained that Uber is way behind, not well staffed, and probably dangerous. Using Uber as an example of the state of SDCs is disingenuous.

B) Just like every previous incident, it appears the human pedestrian will be found to have been at fault.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Please tell me what was she "guilty" (as opposed to "innocent") for? In other words, what are you blaming the victim for?


PUBLIC INTOXICATION


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> And yet they were hit by a car. Did they actually look for a car? Did they just dart out in-front of the vehicle? Were they even visible? Did the SDC sensor malfunction? Was the vehicle hacked in some way?
> 
> We as the public have no idea what actually happened at this point in time other than there was a collision between a person pushing a bicycle and a vehicle who had some kind of autonomous feature engaged at the time.


Again, use common sense. It says she was walking her bike across the street not using the crosswalk. When a person does that do they usually, generally, look for cars? Yes.

Sometimes when I'm doing something like that as a pedestrian I may see a car way off in the distance and think that the car will see me and slow down or stop.

Apparently, the robot did neither

Hunan eyes: 1
Sensors: 0



RamzFanz said:


> A) I have always maintained that Uber is way behind, not well staffed, and probably dangerous. Using Uber as an example of the state of SDCs is disingenuous.
> 
> B) Just like every previous incident, it appears the human pedestrian will be found to have been at fault.


So you are saying that apart from Uber there are other, better, players in the SDC space who's, shall we say, more ethical business practices make them a better and more efficient example of how a quick adaptation of robot cars into our society can happen?


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> Again, use common sense. It says she was walking her bike across the street not using the crosswalk. When a person does that do they usually, generally, look for cars? Yes.
> 
> Sometimes when I'm doing something like that as a pedestrian I may see a car way off in the distance and think that the car will see me and slow down or stop.
> 
> Apparently, the robot did neither
> 
> Hunan eyes: 1
> Sensors: 0


Common sense is not common and people constantly do things that they should not be doing and not doing things that they should be doing and end up getting hurt in the process. Just because you should look does not mean that you did actually look.

I can not tell you how many times I see people just looking down and walking around or playing with their phone and walking not paying one bit of attention to the world around them. I am not saying that this is what happened in this case but we just don't know at this point what happened or did not happen.


----------



## HotUberMess

tohunt4me said:


> Humming " Your Time is Going to Come"- Led Zeppelin.
> 
> Amen Ra.
> 
> . . . " Lying, Cheating, Hurting, thats all you seem to do . . ."


Wait people really believe solar flares are going to kill us??


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> Common sense is not common and people constantly do things that they should not be doing and not doing things that they should be doing and end up getting hurt in the process. Just because you should look does not mean that you did actually look.
> 
> I can not tell you how many times I see people just looking down and walking around or playing with their phone and walking not paying one bit of attention to the world around them. I am not saying that this is what happened in this case but we just don't know at this point what happened or did not happen.


When I was a lad in driving school they taught me to always be on the lookout for stuff to go wrong around you: someone backs up out of a driveway without looking, someone blows through a red light, a kid runs out into the street, etc.

They call that "defensive driving"

Methinks the robots are not programmed to do that. Methinks that robots are only programmed to obey the laws and act as if every other driver and pedestrian also obeys the laws.

And Therein lies the problem.


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> When I was a lad in driving school they taught me to always be on the lookout for stuff to go wrong around you: someone backs up out of a driveway without looking, someone blows through a red light, a kid runs out into the street, etc.
> 
> They call that "defensive driving"
> 
> Methinks the robots are not programmed to do that. Methinks that robots are only programmed to obey the laws and act as if every other driver and pedestrian also obeys the laws.
> 
> And Therein lies the problem.


One problem with your observation is that there actually was a human behind the wheel that was there incase the vehicle did not respond as it should. That human did not take action to prevent the incident either.


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> One problem with your observation is that there actually was a human behind the wheel that was there incase the vehicle did not respond as it should. That human did not take action to prevent the incident either.


And that, of course, is also another problem


----------



## tohunt4me

HotUberMess said:


> Wait people really believe solar flares are going to kill us??


Only those utterly codependant on technology for existence.
Can you farm ?
Hunt ?
Preserve meat without refrigeration ?
Can vegetables in jars ?
( you ARE aware Mars HAD an atmosphere ? Before a solar flare.)


----------



## Uberfunitis

iheartuber said:


> And that, of course, is also another problem


perhaps they did not take action because they did not perceive any danger, or perhaps there was no time as it all happened too fast. Again we get back to the fact that we don't know exactly what happened yet.


----------



## tohunt4me

Uberfunitis said:


> One problem with your observation is that there actually was a human behind the wheel that was there incase the vehicle did not respond as it should. That human did not take action to prevent the incident either.


Trusting technology causes death.
As proved here.


----------



## iheartuber

Uberfunitis said:


> perhaps they did not take action because they did not perceive any danger, or perhaps there was no time as it all happened too fast. Again we get back to the fact that we don't know exactly what happened yet.


Technically you are right.

After all, facts and evidence are always key.

But while we wait for that, we can sit around and make educated guesses which is exactly what we are doing


----------



## tohunt4me

transporter007 said:


> Your position WOULD DEMAND *ALL CARS SHOULD BAND from public roads*
> 
> *On average, a pedestrian was killed nearly every 1.6 hours *and injured more than every 7.5 min- utes in traffic crashes
> 
> *4,092 pedestrians* were killed in crashes with motor vehicles and 59,000 were injured
> 
> Tell that to *4,092 pedestrians* that were killed in crashes with motor vehicles
> STOP I SAY, STOP all vehicle production and operation in the world
> 
> _"Their Agenda may not be in the Publics best interest ?"_
> Dude, we live in the USA, a capitalist society, it's all about BUSINESS and rich people getting richer. Don't like it? Move to a place where money is not a determining factor. Heaven? Hell?


One of your beloved ROBO CARS. Smashed into the back of a firetruck the other day.
Didnt "see " that either ?
An 8 foot tall wall of RED METAL !

Lets turn them loose for " further testing".

The fire truck had previous drug arrests ?


----------



## iheartuber

tohunt4me said:


> Trusting technology causes death.
> As proved here.


I think the point that the robot lovers are trying to make is that airplanes have accidents, cause death, and heavily use technology that we all trust. And yet despite the number of plane crashes, people still get on planes everyday.

The robot lovers are trying to say that the day when robot cars are in the same class as airplane travel is approaching quickly. Some are even going so far to say that it is only "weeks away"


----------



## jocker12

Uberfunitis said:


> perhaps they did not take action because they did not perceive any danger, or perhaps there was no time as it all happened too fast. Again we get back to the fact that we don't know exactly what happened yet.


Uber monitors are not very well trained drivers like race drivers are, so regular monitors reaction time from not touching anything to understanding the situation in order to decide what to do, is not fast enough.

I am telling you, if your wife or child will be killed by a robot and a stranger will go on a forum saying "maybe the sensors failed" you won't be so relaxed as you are today commenting here like nothing happened.


----------



## tohunt4me

iheartuber said:


> I think the point that the robot lovers are trying to make is that airplanes have accidents, cause death, and heavily use technology that we all trust. And yet despite the number of plane crashes, people still get on planes everyday.
> 
> The robot lovers are trying to say that the day when robot cars are in the same class as airplane travel is approaching quickly. Some are even going so far to say that it is only "weeks away"


Im shopping for a horse.
No license. No insurance.
Eats grass.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> I think the point that the robot lovers are trying to make is that airplanes have accidents, cause death, and heavily use technology that we all trust. And yet despite the number of plane crashes, people still get on planes everyday.
> 
> The robot lovers are trying to say that the day when robot cars are in the same class as airplane travel is approaching quickly. Some are even going so far to say that it is only "weeks away"


Planes don't have pedestrians crossing in front of their paths....


----------



## iheartuber

tohunt4me said:


> Im shopping for a horse.
> No license. No insurance.
> Eats grass.


Have fun cleaning the poop tho


----------



## tohunt4me

iheartuber said:


> Have fun cleaning the poop tho


Fertilizer.
Horse is self driving too.
Knows its way home.



jocker12 said:


> Planes don't have pedestrians crossing in front of their paths....


Just birds . . .
If you hit one at 500 m.p.h.
You will know.

Remember the pilot who landed in the River?
Birds snuffed his jet engines out . . .

Think " Robo Pilot" would have done better job ?

Ask " Sully" Sullenberger if he wishes Robot would have been flying.


----------



## Uberfunitis

jocker12 said:


> Uber monitors are not very well trained drivers like race drivers are, so regular monitors reaction time from not touching anything to understanding the situation in order to decide what to do, is not fast enough.
> 
> I am telling you, if your wife or child will be killed by a robot and a stranger will go on a forum saying "maybe the sensors failed" you won't be so relaxed as you are today commenting here like nothing happened.


First of I am not commenting like nothing happened, something did happen but many are drawing conclusions from that something when we don't exactly know how it happened. I am simply pushing back to knee jerk assertions that are not based on facts.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12 said:


> Planes don't have pedestrians crossing in front of their paths....


Right, airplanes only have 200+ passengers that die in a fireball crash to the earth.
YET, we continue to fly! The inhumanity !

6000 pedestrians died by the hand of a human driver in 2017



tohunt4me said:


> Im shopping for a horse.
> No license. No insurance.
> Eats grass.


*Secretary of Commerce Crushed by Horse, Dies*
*http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-26/news/mn-1228_1_commerce-secretary-malcolm-baldrige*

*







*


----------



## tohunt4me

transporter007 said:


> Right, airplanes only have 200+ passengers that die in a fireball crash to the earth.
> YET, we continue to fly! The inhumanity !
> 
> 6000 pedestrians died by the hand of a human driver in 2017
> 
> *Secretary of Commerce Crushed by Horse, Dies*
> *http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-26/news/mn-1228_1_commerce-secretary-malcolm-baldrige*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Glad you brought that up !
Perfect segue to the FACT. that PLANES " "COULD" conduct entire flights with Robots !
But Airlines( unlike Uber) KNOW
THAT PASSENGERS WILL NEVER ACCEPT THIS !

Good luck marketing Robo Cars to REAL PEOPLE.



transporter007 said:


> Right, airplanes only have 200+ passengers that die in a fireball crash to the earth.
> YET, we continue to fly! The inhumanity !
> 
> 6000 pedestrians died by the hand of a human driver in 2017
> 
> *Secretary of Commerce Crushed by Horse, Dies*
> *http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-26/news/mn-1228_1_commerce-secretary-malcolm-baldrige*
> 
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Russian Hackers hacked horse . . .

( Horse Technology has Advanced since 1987)
( saddlehorn pushed his rodeo belt buckle in to his backbone said Dr.Naran Patel.
New airbag saddles would have helped)
( horse not equiped with roll bar)


----------



## goneubering

ALL the SDC companies testing now should be halted. Not just Uber.


----------



## Uberfunitis

goneubering said:


> ALL the SDC companies testing now should be halted. Not just Uber.


I would go with this with the caveat that the tests should be stoped on public roads and only temporary stoped until the investigation is complete. That seems like a reasonable course of action to me until we all know exactly what happened.


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> Obviously you have a hard time understanding a person just died, killed by a 2 ton robot, a person that could be your mother, sister, wife or child.
> Your future? Sign up to be an organ donor and then go step in front of a 40 mph moving self driving car. By donating your organs after the robot does its job, you'll be few people's hero.
> 
> I wonder how many people actually understand or are ready to see the obvious.


And YOU could have been behind the wheel of the car! In fact there are 1000s of "Human" caused injuries and deaths. But for SOME strange reason that is OK by you, no need to improve that outcome. Some God Given right that it's acceptable for Humans to do harm to others.

A SDC is programmed to avoid accidents in every possible way, BUT unfortunately, this is early days and a tragedy has occurred

Yet DAILY, humans do crazy, stupid, illegal, intentional things on our roads to harm others. Somehow we're supposed to accept that?!

I've lost 2 friends through acts of idiocy on our roads. These simply wouldnt have happened if the at fault drivers had handed over responsibility to another or a SDC.


----------



## transporter007

goneubering said:


> ALL the SDC companies testing now should be halted. Not just Uber.


That ain't gonna happen.
Reminder: the federal government wants SDC operational because that's what the worlds rich folk want so they become richer.

They really don't care if a few middle class and working poor bite the dust in the name of technology advancement.

And hey, it all ain't bad news: The deceased's family will end up millionaires from the wrongful death settlement .

Win Win (except for Flattened dead guy RIP, who would of probably ended up dead anyway from attempted robbery of a 7-11 or worse, alive and an uber driver aka: the Driving Dead)









_I'm 25Years Old, been Driving uber for 15 months, like a mint? Water? I'm sorry did my ear fall off. Near or far corner?_


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> So you are saying that apart from Uber there are other, better, players in the SDC space who's, shall we say, more ethical business practices make them a better and more efficient example of how a quick adaptation of robot cars into our society can happen?


According to the latest information she turned directly into the car. The video is being reviewed.

What I'm saying is that using Uber as an example of what we should expect from an advanced SDC is silly. They are nowhere close.



WeirdBob said:


> So is Uber going to blame the safety driver, the victim, out both?


The investigation is leaning towards the victim based on the video. Uber has no say in it.


----------



## transporter007

RamzFanz said:


> According to the latest information she turned directly into the car. The video is being reviewed.
> 
> What I'm saying is that using Uber as an example of what we should expect from an advanced SDC is silly. They are nowhere close.


Add that to the list:
Suicide by cop
Suicide by uber

Come to think of it, as uber drivers we're all committing slow suicide by uber


----------



## RamzFanz

Gung-Ho said:


> I'm fairly certain both of them will be scouring tech blogs and mags searching for days and weeks for some article that will find blame on everyone except the sdc car for being at fault. Then they'll say "SEE! these robot cars are still perfect"


See above. For the record, Uber sucks at SDCs and I wouldn't have been shocked at all if it was their fault.



jocker12 said:


> When a women dies in an accident and you post such a comment it makes everybody understand why driving for Uber could be your biggest achievement ever....
> 
> This is about much more drama than a simple annoying troll.
> 
> I will ask all the developers and their bosses to bring their children and line them up in front of moving self driving cars to see how "safe" their products are. If Kalanick is at fault for launching this stupidity, Dara is guilty for not abandoning the oxymoron.
> 
> I doubt they'll release anything of that sort.
> 
> I suggest you do your homework. In the US in 2016 were 1.15 fatalities for every 100 million miles driven ( at 15ooo miles per year, an individual could find himself or herself in a situation of a fatal accident as pedestrian, driver or car passenger in a normal car,* every 6.666 years*)


I see you're ignoring injuries, most of them permanent, as well as property damage again. So predictable.

Once again, for the record, so you can't continually make deceiving comments unchallenged, lower fatality rates are because of modernized safety technology, not because we don't suck at driving.


----------



## heynow321

Sydney Uber said:


> *Date:* February 10, 2018 *Time*: 1731
> *Location:* Grand Canyon, Arizona
> *Operator:* Pallion
> *AC Type:* Eurocopter EC 130B4
> *Reg:* N155GC * cn: *7091
> *Aboard: * 7 *Fatalities: *5 *Ground:* 0
> *Route:* Sightseeing
> *Details:* The helicopter was observed making strange manoeuvres before clipping a cliff which snapped off its tail end. The aircraft then plummeted 600ft to the base of a gorge. There were strong winds in the area at the time of the accident.
> 
> Have they ceased Helicopter Flights?
> 5 people dead
> Life is dangerous, even "established, proven" technology fails - with terrible outcomes.
> 
> Does Man give up seeking safer technology because of failures during development ? Apollo/Space Shuttle? DC8s?


You have no statistical proof sdc are safer than humans


----------



## HotUberMess

tohunt4me said:


> Only those utterly codependant on technology for existence.
> Can you farm ?
> Hunt ?
> Preserve meat without refrigeration ?
> Can vegetables in jars ?
> ( you ARE aware Mars HAD an atmosphere ? Before a solar flare.)


It's 100% useless to worry about things you can't predict or control, especially if there's next to zero chance it will ever come to pass. The Earth has survived for 6 billion years. Quit wasting your time with this BS.


----------



## transporter007

heynow321 said:


> You have no statistical proof sdc are safer than humans


2016 six thousand (6000) pedestrians killed by non SDC vehicles
Vrs 1 fatality by SDC

https://www.npr.org/2017/03/30/522085503/2016-saw-a-record-increase-in-pedestrian-deaths



HotUberMess said:


> It's 100% useless to worry about things you can't predict or control, especially if there's next to zero chance it will ever come to pass. The Earth has survived for 6 billion years. Quit wasting your time with this BS.


Who says 6bl years? Your buddy Dara Khosrowshahi? I call BS

By dating the rocks in the crust, as well as neighbors such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is *4.54 billion years* old, with an error range of *50 million years*.

Next you'll be telling us The *Ilya Muromets* was the first passenger airplane

Go peddle your crazy statements elsewhere
We're all full-up on crazies


----------



## Taxi2Uber

iheartuber said:


> When I was a lad in driving school they taught me to always be on the lookout for stuff to go wrong around you: someone backs up out of a driveway without looking, someone blows through a red light, a kid runs out into the street, etc.
> 
> They call that "defensive driving"
> 
> Methinks the robots are not programmed to do that. Methinks that robots are only programmed to obey the laws and act as if every other driver and pedestrian also obeys the laws.
> 
> And Therein lies the problem.


That's the whole deal. ANTICIPATION. SDC don't have it, it seems.
The human driver would (should) be aware of what MIGHT happen, worse case scenario.
In the back of your minds, you are thinking, "Do I have an "out", if this person decides to suddenly jump in front and cross. Maybe even take your foot off the throttle and slow down a little"
SDCs seem reactionary, while humans can anticipate, and maybe plan a few moves ahead.
That's been the age-old problem of AI vs. Humans.
The accident may not have been avoided, but this fundamental problem will always exist.


----------



## RamzFanz

heynow321 said:


> You have no statistical proof sdc are safer than humans


You mean not enough to satisfy you. There is most certainly statistical proof. Live and simulator miles are in the billions.

Regardless, Waymo has enough to be satisfied which is how this works. By your standard, every safety measure we've used in cars were statistically unproven.



Taxi2Uber said:


> That's the whole deal. ANTICIPATION. SDC don't have it, it seems.
> The human driver would (should) be aware of what MIGHT happen, worse case scenario.
> In the back of your minds, you are thinking, "Do I have an "out", if this person decides to suddenly jump in front and cross. Maybe even take your foot off the throttle and slow down a little"
> SDCs seem reactionary, while humans can anticipate, and maybe plan a few moves ahead.
> That's been the age-old problem of AI vs. Humans.
> The accident may not have been avoided, but this fundamental problem will always exist.


This is silly. Not only do they have anticipation, they can anticipate every possible change, in every person or vehicle in range, in 360 degrees, millions of times a second.

I'm not speaking about Uber's SDCs.

The human driver proved your point to not be true. You do realize he didn't avoid the accident, yes?


----------



## heynow321

No, not enough to satisfy those that understand math. Sorry, fake human programmed simulator miles don’t count


----------



## RamzFanz

heynow321 said:


> No, not enough to satisfy those that understand math


More than enough to satisfy people who understand that simulator miles are the same as real world.


----------



## transporter007

*Police chief: Uber self-driving car "likely" not at fault in fatal crash*

*https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/0...car-likely-not-at-fault-in-fatal-crash/?amp=1

After viewing video captured by the Uber vehicle, Moir concluded that "it's very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway."*


----------



## heynow321

RamzFanz said:


> More than enough to satisfy people who understand that simulator miles are the same as real world.


Omg. Yeah that's why airline pilots exclusively train in simulators then just jump into planes. Exactly the same thing. Is your dementia medication causing problems?


----------



## transporter007

*Will there be No future fatalities involving SDC? Only if airplanes stop falling from the sky or trains stop derailing or ships stop colliding*

*USS Fitzgerald collision deaths ruled negligent homicide by Japanese coast guard*
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ide-charges-in-uss-fitzgerald-collision-case/


----------



## goneubering

transporter007 said:


> That ain't gonna happen.
> 
> Reminder: the federal government wants SDC operational because that's what the worlds rich folk want so they become richer.
> 
> They really don't care if a few middle class and working poor bite the dust in the name of technology advancement.
> 
> And hey, it all ain't bad news: The deceased's family will end up millionaires from the wrongful death settlement .
> 
> Win Win (except for Flattened dead guy RIP, who would of probably ended up dead anyway from attempted robbery of a 7-11 or worse, alive and an uber driver aka: the Driving Dead)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _I'm 25Years Old, been Driving uber for 15 months, like a mint? Water? I'm sorry did my ear fall off. Near or far corner?_


Don't be so sure. There's huge public pressure now. Plus Toyota is doing the right thing.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...bot-car-program-citing-drivers-emotional-toll

Toyota Motor Corp. has halted tests of its "Chauffeur" autonomous driving system on U.S. public roads after a Uber Technologies Inc. vehicle operating in autonomous mode under the supervision of a human safety driver struck and killed a woman in Tempe, Arizona, on Sunday evening.


----------



## iheartuber

transporter007 said:


> 2016 six thousand (6000) pedestrians killed by non SDC vehicles
> Vrs 1 fatality by SDC
> 
> https://www.npr.org/2017/03/30/522085503/2016-saw-a-record-increase-in-pedestrian-deaths
> 
> Who says 6bl years? Your buddy Dara Khosrowshahi? I call BS
> 
> By dating the rocks in the crust, as well as neighbors such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is *4.54 billion years* old, with an error range of *50 million years*.
> 
> Next you'll be telling us The *Ilya Muromets* was the first passenger airplane
> 
> Go peddle your crazy statements elsewhere
> We're all full-up on crazies


Two things:

1. Let's say you have a bowl of skittles and I told you that one of them was poison and if you ate it you will die. Would you grab a handful and eat them?
2. It's one death NOW. Who knows how many more are to come, especially if more SDCs hit the road.


----------



## transporter007

iheartuber said:


> Two things:
> 
> 1. Let's say you have a bowl of skittles and I told you that one of them was poison and if you ate it you will die. Would you grab a handful and eat them?
> 2. It's one death NOW. Who knows how many more are to come, especially if more SDCs hit the road.


Gee, u should've been around to warn the crew of the DDG USS Fitzgerald.
I choose not to hide under my bed in fear of the world, I choose to experience life. Death be Not Proud, bring it on

*USS Fitzgerald collision deaths ruled negligent homicide by Japanese coast guard*
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ide-charges-in-uss-fitzgerald-collision-case/


----------



## goneubering

transporter007 said:


> Gee, u should've been around to warn the crew of the DDG USS Fitzgerald.
> I choose not to hide under my bed in fear of the world, I choose to experience life. Death be Not Proud, bring it on
> 
> *USS Fitzgerald collision deaths ruled negligent homicide by Japanese coast guard*
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ide-charges-in-uss-fitzgerald-collision-case/


You've lost it. Are you the poster formerly known as the Tomato?


----------



## iheartuber

goneubering said:


> You've lost it. Are you the poster formerly known as the Tomato?


I thought the same thing. The Tomato has been mia lately



transporter007 said:


> Gee, u should've been around to warn the crew of the DDG USS Fitzgerald.
> I choose not to hide under my bed in fear of the world, I choose to experience life. Death be Not Proud, bring it on
> 
> *USS Fitzgerald collision deaths ruled negligent homicide by Japanese coast guard*
> https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...ide-charges-in-uss-fitzgerald-collision-case/


Fear and caution are two different things

I'm not saying a person should be so afraid they never leave their house

What I am saying is don't take a gun with one bullet in there, put it to your head and say "well, I have a five in six chance of living (83%), so that's pretty good.. I should be ok let's go let's pull the trigger! I'm not afraid!"

SDCs are so new right now the bugs have not all been worked out so the Russian roulette analogy is totally appropriate.


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> 6000 pedestrians died by the hand of a human driver in 2017


Child, you have no clue about how numbers, statistics or mathematics works.... for every 100 million miles (that a driver could cover in 6666.6 years of driving if he/she does 15000 miles per year) are only 1.15 deaths. Here are the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) numbers









So a person could face death as a pedestrian, driver or passenger in a car with a driver every .... 6666.6 years.

Even Chris Urmson, the "main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software", "CEO of Aurora and former CTO of self-driving cars at Google" admits it - "Well, it's not even that they grab for it, it's that they experience it for a while and it works, right? And maybe it works perfectly every day for a month. The next day it may not work, but their experience now is, "Oh this works," and so they're not prepared to take over and so their ability to kind of save it and monitor it decays with time. So you know in America, s*omebody dies in a car accident about 1.15 times per 100 million miles. That's like 10,000 years of an average person's driving*. So, let's say the technology is pretty good but not that good. You know, someone dies once every 50 million miles. We're going to have twice as many accidents and fatalities on the roads on average, but for any one individual they could go a lifetime, many lifetimes before they ever see that." - https://www.recode.net/2017/9/8/162...iving-car-engineer-chris-urmson-recode-decode

To put it in hours terms, worldwide - "Steven Shladover, a transportation engineer at the California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology program in Richmond, has calculated that a fatal crash now occurs once every 3.3 million hours of vehicle travel; an automated system will need to be extremely reliable to beat that record." - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/12/are-we-going-too-fast-driverless-cars

I am afraid you try to look smarter than you really are and soon you'll understand how incompetent you are.



Sydney Uber said:


> In fact there are 1000s of "Human" caused injuries and deaths. But for SOME strange reason that is OK by you, no need to improve that outcome.


Now you start dreaming.... Show me where did you get this idea from? If I tell and show you how safe driving already is today, doesn't mean I am OK with people dying. 
Drivers need more education and training instead of few insane corporations trying to sell to the general public the idea that their product, the self driving primitive robots, will save lives. 
If your kid has problems at math, like some drivers have problems driving, you *do not* buy your child a better and faster calculator (or replace your child with a cute piece of metal)....* you try as much as possible to help your kid LEARN*. That is exactly what us, as society need to do with the problematic drivers.



RamzFanz said:


> Once again, for the record, so you can't continually make deceiving comments unchallenged, lower fatality rates are because of modernized safety technology, not because we don't suck at driving


Ooooo.... like my comments about you knowingly installing faulty products for your customers?.... Wait a second.... that was actually you making that comment








At least you admit it - you wont put your daughter in a self driving car, because you know that if she gets anywhere near one of those robots, her life is in danger, like this lady's life was. Make sure you keep your wife and daughter inside your car driven by you, because I have a feeling (and I mean no offence or disrespect my friend), your wife and daughter see better than these ridiculously primitive 2 tone robots see, despite their "so many sensors" you kept pumping up your "voice" around here, "educating" people how good autonomous cars are at.... detecting objects even around the corner? Seriously?

Good luck with your loved ones! (and hide from us here)




iheartuber said:


> I thought the same thing. The Tomato has been mia lately





goneubering said:


> You've lost it. Are you the poster formerly known as the Tomato?


This one is worse because he is not paid to be stupid on public forums.... so it's absolute/perfect stupidity...


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> Child, you have no clue about how numbers, statistics or mathematics works.... for every 100 million miles (that a driver could cover in 6666.6 years of driving if he/she does 15000 miles per year) are only 1.15 deaths. Here are the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) numbers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So a person could face death as a pedestrian, driver or passenger in a car with a driver every .... 6666.6 years.
> 
> Even Chris Urmson, the "main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software", "CEO of Aurora and former CTO of self-driving cars at Google" admits it - "Well, it's not even that they grab for it, it's that they experience it for a while and it works, right? And maybe it works perfectly every day for a month. The next day it may not work, but their experience now is, "Oh this works," and so they're not prepared to take over and so their ability to kind of save it and monitor it decays with time. So you know in America, s*omebody dies in a car accident about 1.15 times per 100 million miles. That's like 10,000 years of an average person's driving*. So, let's say the technology is pretty good but not that good. You know, someone dies once every 50 million miles. We're going to have twice as many accidents and fatalities on the roads on average, but for any one individual they could go a lifetime, many lifetimes before they ever see that." - https://www.recode.net/2017/9/8/162...iving-car-engineer-chris-urmson-recode-decode
> 
> To put it in hours terms, worldwide - "Steven Shladover, a transportation engineer at the California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology program in Richmond, has calculated that a fatal crash now occurs once every 3.3 million hours of vehicle travel; an automated system will need to be extremely reliable to beat that record." - https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/12/are-we-going-too-fast-driverless-cars
> 
> I am afraid you try to look smarter than you really are and soon you'll understand how incompetent you are.
> 
> Now you start dreaming.... Show me where did you get this idea from? If I tell and show you how safe driving already is today, doesn't mean I am OK with people dying.
> Drivers need more education and training instead of few insane corporations trying to sell to the general public the idea that their product, the self driving primitive robots, will save lives.
> If your kid has problems at math, like some drivers have problems driving, you *do not* buy your child a better and faster calculator (or replace your child with a cute piece of metal)....* you try as much as possible to help your kid LEARN*. That is exactly what us, as society need to do with the problematic drivers.
> 
> Ooooo.... like my comments about you knowingly installing faulty products for your customers?.... Wait a second.... that was actually you making that comment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least you admit it - you wont put your daughter in a self driving car, because you know that if she gets anywhere near one of those robots, her life is in danger, like this lady's life was. Make sure you keep your wife and daughter inside your car driven by you, because I have a feeling (and I mean no offence or disrespect my friend), your wife and daughter see better than these ridiculously primitive 2 tone robots see, despite their "so many sensors" you kept pumping up your "voice" around here, "educating" people how good autonomous cars are at.... detecting objects even around the corner? Seriously?
> 
> Good luck with your loved ones! (and hide from us here)
> 
> 
> This one is worse because he is not paid to be stupid on public forums.... so it's absolute/perfect stupidity...


Let me guess, you are probably comfortable with US gun laws as they stand.


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> Let me guess, you are probably comfortable with US gun laws as they stand.


Do you understand my first comment on the top of this thread, or you're just disappointed of yourself? Comparing firearms with vehicles only to try to support a point... how low can somebody go from here?


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> This one is worse because he is not paid to be stupid on public forums.... so it's absolute/perfect stupidity...


The Aussie guy is a little misguided but he's basically ok.

But the transporter007 guy? He might just be a Tomato by another name


----------



## transporter007

Sydney Uber said:


> Let me guess, you are probably comfortable with US gun laws as they stand.


Actually jocker12 is a 327lb 48YO unemployed woman who chains smokes Parliment Cigarettes, collects welfare, on food stamps while residing at the south seas trailer park in Gary, Indiana. jocker12 only familiarity with uber is Once as a passenger using a free promo. Driver rated her 1* and requested a cleaning fee. No further info was available how jocker12 soiled the uber vehicle.









jocker12 on break from surfing the world wide Webb


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> The Aussie guy is a little misguided but he's basically ok.
> 
> But the transporter007 guy? He might just be a Tomato by another name


Aussie super ok and genuine. The culprit on the other hand keeps making stupid comments showing what and who the vast majority of the self driving cars enthusiasts are... In the real world people are getting killed because of the autonomous cars developers incompetency and lies, while the ADD child covers his ears yelling lalalalalalala.... again, a mouse pumped up with a lot of bad energy, screaming to fight the tigers and thinking he will be the winner. Well, tigers only use mice as toothpicks....


----------



## UberLaLa

SDC's will kill people. Guaranteed. The question is will they kill less or more than human driven cars do now?

_"We should be concerned about automated driving," Smith said. "We should be terrified about human driving."

In 2016, the latest year available, more than 6,000 U.S. pedestrians were killed by vehicles.
_
Personally, I have no idea. But that is *the question*, in the end.


----------



## iheartuber

UberLaLa said:


> SDC's will kill people. Guaranteed. The question is will they kill less or more than human driven cars do now?
> 
> _"We should be concerned about automated driving," Smith said. "We should be terrified about human driving."
> 
> In 2016, the latest year available, more than 6,000 U.S. pedestrians were killed by vehicles.
> _
> Personally, I have no idea. But that is *the question*, in the end.


6,000 pedestrians were killed last year with how many cars on the road? Tens of millions? Maybe hundreds of millions? Put that many SDCs on the road and then see how many pedestrians are killed. There are less than 1000 SDCs on the road and 1 person was killed. That's about 1000 deaths for every million. If the numbers are extrapolated that's about 7-10x the murder rate of human drivers.



transporter007 said:


> Actually jocker12 is a 327lb 48YO unemployed woman who chains smokes Parliment Cigarettes, collects welfare, on food stamps while residing at the south seas trailer park in Gary, Indiana. jocker12 only familiarity with uber is Once as a passenger using a free promo. Driver rated her 1* and requested a cleaning fee. No further info was available how jocker12 soiled the uber vehicle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jocker12 on break from surfing the world wide Webb


This is exactly the kind of post the Tomato would do.

I'm really thinking this guy is the Tomato


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> Do you understand my first comment on the top of this thread, or you're just disappointed of yourself? Comparing firearms with vehicles only to try to support a point... how low can somebody go from here?


Both guns and cars can be and are lethal.

Just wondering your level of comfort. Would you rather protect the status quo or try making advances in technology and policy to make the world a safer place?



iheartuber said:


> This is exactly the kind of post the Tomato would do.
> 
> I'm really thinking this guy is the Tomato


You could be right


----------



## Taxi tony

Just goes to show how desperate Uber is. An ex-con behind the wheel of one of theirs self-driving cars? how many of you drivers out there now are ex-cons? Or crackheads?


----------



## LEO2112

Taxi tony said:


> Just goes to show how desperate Uber is. An ex-con behind the wheel of one of theirs self-driving cars? how many of you drivers out there now are ex-cons? Or crackheads?


I gave my Lyft referral code to three other Uber drivers all of whom were failed or were rejected by Lyft's background check process.


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> Both guns and cars can be and are lethal.
> 
> Just wondering your level of comfort. Would you rather protect the status quo or try making advances in technology and policy to make the world a safer place?
> 
> You could be right


From their inception, firearms are designed TO KILL as effectively as possible. So, educating people about firearms is not about how you should secure them against an accidental discharge, is about how to shoot better, projectile trajectory, distance effectiveness and so fort. Whoever tells you educating people about firearms is about how to block the release device from being released is lying to you. This is how the gun enthusiasts and media confuse the general public about firearms. Guns are meant to kill and no society needs tools to kill.

Cars, on the other hand.... your comparison is completely ridiculous my friend. Educating the drivers to use the product meant for transportation to extract the most out of that product in accordance to the environment that product operates in, has nothing to do with killing.

If you want to talk about lethal things.... a fork could be lethal.... see the absurdity you are pushing towards?


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> no society needs tools to kill..


Unless of course you need to protect yourself or prevent some tyrant from illegally entering your property.

That was kind of the whole point of the 2nd Ammendment.



Sydney Uber said:


> You could be right


Not sure what the Tomato's reason was for deactivating the Tomato account and starting up a whole new account but if he was trying to "hide" there's no way to do that unless he changes his entire personality.

No matter what he calls his profile you can spot his arrogant name-calling vibe a mile away.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Unless of course you need to protect yourself or prevent some tyrant from illegally entering your property.
> 
> That was kind of the whole point of the 2nd Ammendment.
> 
> Not sure what the Tomato's reason was for deactivating the Tomato account and starting up a whole new account but if he was trying to "hide" there's no way to do that unless he changes his entire personality.
> 
> No matter what he calls his profile you can spot his arrogant name-calling vibe a mile away.


About the second it's a little more complicated... not the right place to comment about it though.


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> About the second it's a little more complicated... not the right place to comment about it though.


Fine- then let's talk about what REALLY matters in this forum: THE TOMATO!! Where is he? has he basically admitted by his absence that everything he said is not really going to happen, especially now after the death in Arizona? Inquiring minds want to know


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Fine- then let's talk about what REALLY matters in this forum: THE TOMATO!! Where is he? has he basically admitted by his absence that everything he said is not really going to happen, especially now after the death in Arizona? Inquiring minds want to know


Out of respect for the victim I don't want to deviate from the topic. I think the right answer to your question is " time will tell".


----------



## LEO2112

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-driving-Uber-history-traffic-violations.html


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> Out of respect for the victim I don't want to deviate from the topic. I think the right answer to your question is " time will tell".


I forgot that this particular thread was on the tragic accident in Arizona that left a woman dead. I post so much on UP about the subject of Autonomous cars that they all get blurred together. Yes, this is no place to talk about "that guy"


----------



## Taxi2Uber

RamzFanz said:


> This is silly. Not only do they have anticipation, they can anticipate every possible change, in every person or vehicle in range, in 360 degrees, millions of times a second.
> 
> I'm not speaking about Uber's SDCs.
> 
> The human driver proved your point to not be true. You do realize he didn't avoid the accident, yes?


What you describe is reaction, not anticipation. If you see a 90 lb person walking a 100 lb dog across the street from a cat sanctuary, your brain tells you there is possible danger, where a SDC would just see a pedestrian. Another poster put it more eloquently than I could,"... humans can read the slight movement (head, hands, eyes) of other drivers around them. And, avert potential accidents. I believe overall, SDC's can react quicker and have 360 'vision' around the car, but SDC's can not read the subtle indicators other drivers and pedestrians make..."

Regarding the SDC human driver, yes she didn't avoid the accident, but she wasn't driving. She was just a backup, in the event the SDC would warn her to take control. In this case, things appeared to happen too fast. Besides, if you think a safety backup driver has the same awareness as if she was driving herself, then I think you're being disingenuous, or to use your word, silly.


----------



## Lame Beaver

goneubering said:


> Just wondering. Does the Tomato still post here? I blocked him a long time ago.


You block everyone besides your 10 closest losers you can identify with.


----------



## Sydney Uber

iheartuber said:


> Fine- then let's talk about what REALLY matters in this forum: THE TOMATO!! Where is he? has he basically admitted by his absence that everything he said is not really going to happen, especially now after the death in Arizona? Inquiring minds want to know


Tomato may have been juiced



jocker12 said:


> From their inception, firearms are designed TO KILL as effectively as possible. So, educating people about firearms is not about how you should secure them against an accidental discharge, is about how to shoot better, projectile trajectory, distance effectiveness and so fort. Whoever tells you educating people about firearms is about how to block the release device from being released is lying to you. This is how the gun enthusiasts and media confuse the general public about firearms. Guns are meant to kill and no society needs tools to kill.
> 
> Cars, on the other hand.... your comparison is completely ridiculous my friend. Educating the drivers to use the product meant for transportation to extract the most out of that product in accordance to the environment that product operates in, has nothing to do with killing.
> 
> If you want to talk about lethal things.... a fork could be lethal.... see the absurdity you are pushing towards?


It's absurd if new technologies to make gun and car use safer are not adapted.

Fingerprint unlocking of firearms could be one step towards helping reduce unauthorised gun use - do you agree it should be persued, developed and hopefully deployed?

In some states, a driver who had been charged for DUI needs to utilise a vehicle unlocking system by taking a breath anylisis before the car starts - technology making life safer.

Do you feel there any of the systems that make up Autonomous cars that can aid in making cars safer?


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> It's absurd if new technologies to make gun and car use safer are not adapted.
> 
> Fingerprint unlocking of firearms could be one step towards helping reduce unauthorised gun use - do you agree it should be persued, developed and hopefully deployed?
> 
> In some states, a driver who had been charged for DUI needs to utilise a vehicle unlocking system by taking a breath anylisis before the car starts - technology making life safer.
> 
> Do you feel there any of the systems that make up Autonomous cars that can aid in making cars safer?


In my opinion guns are in the same place as drugs are, but legal; while drugs are in the same place as guns, but illegal. Legalize drugs and make guns illegal and you'll have a reversed situation with no solution in sight. The same way people deal illegal drugs today, they will deal illegal guns tomorrow, and the same way you have victims of shootings today, you'll have more victims of overdoses tomorrow. It is really complicated, and fingerprint unlocking, even if implemented as regulation wont be respected by many of the gun owners. The private gun makers (no serials) will make fortunes by going against the regulations and sell on the black market (the same way drug dealers do with drugs today). As long as the market for a specific product is there, the market will be supplied with the requested product.

Actually BMW asked to make cars with breathalyzer ignitions but be exempt from regular crash testes, and NHTSA refused. If the corporations really want to save lives, they will install this kind of devices by default, but they are not interested in saving lives. They only want to build the product with the minimum cost and extract the most amount of money from the customers. Corporations don't care about progress (you mentioned progress somewhere above) and if progress will stay in their path to make bigger profits, they will fight against progress. As long as you understand how corporations work, you'll already make a huge step forward in understanding their propaganda.

Autonomous cars are not about safety at all, and consumers can see it clearly. Let me ask you a question - why do you think more and more people embrace the electric cars idea, even if they cost more money, while 70% of the American consumers don't trust the self driving cars? Both new technologies, and then read this - How Henry Ford And Thomas Edison Killed The Electric Car

Please read this paper based on a 2012 military declassified report about Autonomy. You can understand how autonomous systems are impossible to create - http://cmapsinternal.ihmc.us/rid=1M06PB7MQ-Y4BTVG-1C1V/51. Myths of Autonomy.pdf


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> Ooooo.... like my comments about you knowingly installing faulty products for your customers?.... Wait a second.... that was actually you making that comment


You see, when you add the word "knowingly" in order to change what I said, you once again embarrass yourself and lose even more credibility.



jocker12 said:


> At least you admit it - you wont put your daughter in a self driving car, because you know that if she gets anywhere near one of those robots, her life is in danger, like this lady's life was.


No, again, not my words. More fake quotes.

Neither of us yet KNOWS how safe SDCs will be.



jocker12 said:


> Make sure you keep your wife and daughter inside your car driven by you, because I have a feeling (and I mean no offence or disrespect my friend), your wife and daughter see better than these ridiculously primitive 2 tone robots see, despite their "so many sensors" you kept pumping up your "voice" around here, "educating" people how good autonomous cars are at.... detecting objects even around the corner? Seriously?


All you ever mean is offense and disrespect to anyone who points out your omissions, edits, cherrypicking and misquotes.

So, again, and as you are well aware, I have never supported Uber's SDC efforts or believed they were really in the running. And yes, sensors have in fact been developed that can sense around corners. If that makes you butthurt, there's not much I can do to help.


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> You see, when you add the word "knowingly" in order to change what I said, you once again embarrass yourself and lose even more credibility.
> 
> No, again, not my words. More fake quotes.
> 
> Neither of us yet KNOWS how safe SDCs will be.
> 
> All you ever mean is offense and disrespect to anyone who points out your omissions, edits, cherrypicking and misquotes.
> 
> So, again, and as you are well aware, I have never supported Uber's SDC efforts or believed they were really in the running. And yes, sensors have in fact been developed that can sense around corners. If that makes you butthurt, there's not much I can do to help.


I only have one sentence for you - stop smoking what you're smoking!


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> I only have one sentence for you - stop smoking what you're smoking!


More insults. It's all you have left after your agenda, lies, omissions, alterations, and cherrypicking in order to deceive have been exposed.


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> More insults. It's all you have left after your agenda, lies, omissions, alterations, and cherrypicking in order to deceive have been exposed.


It's time you stop this BS about you being insulted. If you want to be a victim (by association) get your wife and daughter and put them in front of a 40 mph moving 2 ton robot and they will go where the Tempe victim went. You'll bring them flowers every Sunday.

There is where self driving cars take you..,,


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> It's time you stop this BS about you being insulted. If you want to be a victim (by association) get your wife and daughter and put them in front of a 40 mph moving 2 ton robot and they will go where the Tempe victim went. You'll bring them flowers every Sunday.
> 
> There is where self driving cars take you..,,


Oh, I'm not insulted by your babble. I mostly just chuckle. I'm pointing out that all you have left are insults. Failed insults, but insults none the less.

You fabricate, edit, omit, alter, and lie in order to deceive. That's what you do and it's self-evident to everyone here.

I wouldn't let even you go near an Uber test vehicle without a warning. You're well aware they are not ready and shouldn't be on the road. That's on them, not the responsible and sensible companies.


----------



## tohunt4me

Human Rights !
Not
Mechanical Rights.
You 2 bicker in P.M.


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> Oh, I'm not insulted by your babble. I mostly just chuckle. I'm pointing out that all you have left are insults. Failed insults, but insults none the less.
> 
> You fabricate, edit, omit, alter, and lie in order to deceive. That's what you do and it's self-evident to everyone here.
> 
> I wouldn't let even you go near an Uber test vehicle without a warning. You're well aware they are not ready and shouldn't be on the road. That's on them, not the responsible and sensible companies.


None of those primitive drunk driving like robots should be on the public roads,

The media, the public and the legislators just zoomed in on this BS masquerade.


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> None of those primitive drunk driving like robots should be on the public roads,
> 
> The media, the public and the legislators just zoomed in on this BS masquerade.


SDC companies may lay low with the media for a week or two but then they'll be right back at it.

The media will print whatever headline gets the most clicks and then it will fade away.

The public will read the headlines, lose attention, and hop in the lowest priced service for the most part.

The idea that legislatures will do anything even mildly impactful is laughable.


----------



## tohunt4me

RamzFanz said:


> SDC companies may lay low with the media for a week or two but then they'll be right back at it.
> 
> The media will print whatever headline gets the most clicks and then it will fade away.
> 
> The idea that legislatures will do anything even mildly impactful is laughable.


DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY !

" The BOT. STOPS HERE !"- Harry S. Truman


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> SDC companies may lay low with the media for a week or two but then they'll be right back at it.
> 
> The media will print whatever headline gets the most clicks and then it will fade away.
> 
> The public will read the headlines, lose attention, and hop in the lowest priced service for the most part.
> 
> The idea that legislatures will do anything even mildly impactful is laughable.


This was before the fatal accident 
Another Oooops - Dianne Feinstein Smacks Silicon Valley, Blocks Self-Driving Car Deregulation

Now how come I am the only one laughing and you look like a deer in the headlights?


----------



## Bart McCoy

iheartuber said:


> Again, use common sense. It says she was walking her bike across the street not using the crosswalk. When a person does that do they usually, generally, look for cars? Yes.
> 
> Sometimes when I'm doing something like that as a pedestrian I may see a car way off in the distance and think that the car will see me and slow down or stop.
> ?


So you thought a car would yield to your lawbreaking and negligence?
unreal

And if they look for cars and see them (esp ones with bright headlights shining), would they generally not cross the street, or cross it anyway???


----------



## jocker12

Bart McCoy said:


> So you thought a car would yield to your lawbreaking and negligence?
> unreal
> 
> And if they look for cars and see them (esp ones with bright headlights shining), would they generally not cross the street, or cross it anyway???


Allow me to answer this, please.

A driver would slow down, out of common sense. If a person makes a mistake doesn't mean you can kill that person. Educated drivers SHARE the road and back off in questionable situations because life it's much more important than anything else and everybody makes mistakes, after all. Do you know anything about defensive driving?

Usually, pedestrians will take their chances, especially the ones that are not drivers and have no clue about drivers perspective.


----------



## tohunt4me

Bart McCoy said:


> So you thought a car would yield to your lawbreaking and negligence?
> unreal
> 
> And if they look for cars and see them (esp ones with bright headlights shining), would they generally not cross the street, or cross it anyway???


Well
By that standard it would be legal to lynch litterers on the spot !


----------



## iheartuber

Bart McCoy said:


> So you thought a car would yield to your lawbreaking and negligence?
> unreal
> 
> And if they look for cars and see them (esp ones with bright headlights shining), would they generally not cross the street, or cross it anyway???


1. Even if the pedestrian is totally at fault 99% of every human driver would yield to their negligence. The other 1% are psychopaths

2. Avoiding fatalities is a joint responsibility of both the driver and the pedestrian. Usually if one or the other is negligent for one reason or another the other party would compensate. However, in this case, what happened was the pedestrian was not paying attention, there was no human driver, the human back up was not paying attention, and the robot sensors failed.


----------



## tohunt4me

I knew this older handicapped man.
He walked with a limp.
I would cross street quickly.
He would take his time
Saying " Theyll slow down".
His faith in humanity was greater than mine.

Sadly
This incident proves Me right.

The poor woman with the bike
May have said " Theyll slow down"
Or
"They can go around, its only 2 feet."

She is Dead.

My " trust issues" stand proven.

Humanity sucks.

If the courts fail to cite the inattentive safety driver with fault . . . it endorses death over a white line as cause.

Yet
No charges were filed against a school security guard who hid
While bullets flew
In florida.
So dereliction of duties that causes death is a hold harmless non offense now.
Society is not improving.


----------



## Bart McCoy

jocker12 said:


> Allow me to answer this, please.
> 
> A driver would slow down, out of common sense. If a person makes a mistake doesn't mean you can kill that person. Educated drivers SHARE the road and back off in questionable situations because life it's much more important than anything else and everybody makes mistakes, after all. Do you know anything about defensive driving?.


So drivers should SHARE the road with pedestrians? I can even read the rest of your reply with that remark. Roads are meant to be crossed safely and legally, not shared with moving cars.



tohunt4me said:


> Well
> By that standard it would be legal to lynch litterers on the spot !


Well that makes no common sense, at all


----------



## jocker12

Bart McCoy said:


> So drivers should SHARE the road with pedestrians? I can even read the rest of your reply with that remark. Roads are meant to be crossed safely and legally, not shared with moving cars.


Most of the American suburbs are NOT pedestrian friendly. It was designed that way and is not pedestrians or drivers fault. but because of that, you will have pedestrians running, walking their dogs or just simply walking to exercise on the shoulder (when such addition is present) or on the side of the road cars are driving on.

Believe me I know where you are coming from and I appreciate the fact that, even you have a different opinion, you actually are "listening". I am telling you that trying to push pedestrians off the road is a very very dangerous maneuver and if something bad happens you'll have an instant regret.

The best way to look at it is to think your child is that pedestrian in the middle or on the side of the road.


----------



## Bart McCoy

jocker12 said:


> The best way to look at it is to think your child is that pedestrian in the middle or on the side of the road.


My child knows not to walk in the middle of the road. She knows the road is meant for cars. And get this, as young as she is, she even knows to look for oncoming traffic before crossing the road!!! I mean, she's not a rocket scientist, but she's knows that much at least


----------



## jocker12

Bart McCoy said:


> My child knows not to walk in the middle of the road. She knows the road is meant for cars. And get this, as young as she is, she even knows to look for oncoming traffic before crossing the road!!! I mean, she's not a rocket scientist, but she's knows that much at least


Good for her and for you, but how about her friends? What if they don't know yet? Could you afford not to care and say - this road is for carsssss... bam! Sorry, not my problem you didn't pay attention!


----------



## Bart McCoy

jocker12 said:


> Sorry, not my problem you didn't pay attention!


Right, and not my problem this pedestrian didn't pay attention to the Uber car coming


----------



## jocker12

Bart McCoy said:


> Right, and not my problem this pedestrian didn't pay attention to the Uber car coming


In that case, you are playing with fire...


----------



## Jayjay9317

LEO2112 said:


> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...nomous-car-tests-in-all-cities-after-fatality


Uber is pursuing uber helicopter too.


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> This was before the fatal accident
> Another Oooops - Dianne Feinstein Smacks Silicon Valley, Blocks Self-Driving Car Deregulation
> 
> Now how come I am the only one laughing and you look like a deer in the headlights?


Have the Feds blocked self-driving cars?

No, no they haven't, and no they won't.

Let me know when you have a real point to make.


----------

