# Self driving Uber in trouble



## Bbonez (Aug 10, 2018)

On March 19, the world learned that Uber had a serious safety problem when a prototype self-driving car struck and killed pedestrian Elaine Herzberg in Tempe, Arizona. But signs of Uber's safety problems were evident to company insiders even before the crash. And at least one Uber manager tried to raise the alarm on March 13-just days before Herzberg's death.

Robbie Miller worked for Google's self-driving car program until 2016, when he left for the self-driving truck startup Otto. Otto was snapped up by Uber later that year, and Miller became an operations manager in Uber's self-driving truck program.

Miller quit his job at Uber in March 2018 and went on to lidar startup Luminar. Before he left the company he sent an email to Eric Meyhofer, the leader of Uber's self-driving car project, about safety problems at the company. The email, which was obtained by The Information's Amir Efrati, is absolutely scathing.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...mpant-safety-problems-days-before-fatal-crash


----------



## MoneyMitch (Nov 15, 2015)

Isn’t it amazing? They don’t get it...the human brain is more powerful than any computer. I just can’t see us fully using self driving cars.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

It won't happen until the economy is restructured, there is too much money involved and circulated for it to be about robots. Once we get a universal basic income (which will happen) then autonomous cars will be considered. It all comes down to structure, nothing to do with technology or what people want. I say 10 years you will see it become realistic, once automation takes over almost every other job that doesn't require a brain to do.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Pax Collector said:


> If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


No. As an obviously better driver than a robot I'll dispute that.
I can drive a million miles plus without having an accident. I can drive in all weather conditions. I have no difficulty with colours depth perception. I'm innovative I can adapt to pretty much any situation without the constraints of any pre-programmed limitations.

Robots need to be better than me to replace me.

Almost as good is failure.

Nobody is suggesting there is a robot even almost as good as me and nobody has a time frame that suggests they know when or if it will ever happen.

Even Waymo will say the robots will always have constraints. Imagine having a car that shuts down in heavy rain for example. A computer malfunction, even just a minor glitch, could cause worse crashes than anything that human error might bring about.

Then there's even the terrorist angle.
You can't find people stupid enough to blow themselves up but how about you load up a robot car with explosives?

Why not several at once and send them off to LAX.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

everythingsuber said:


> No. As an obviously better driver than a robot I'll dispute that.
> I can drive a million miles plus without having an accident. I can drive in all weather conditions. I have no difficulty with colours depth perception. I'm innovative I can adapt to pretty much any situation without the constraints of any pre-programmed limitations.
> 
> Robots need to be better than me to replace me.
> ...


There are signs along the Texas highways that read 3,125 deaths on Texas roads this year, I think your ego can take a backseat dude lol


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Jay Dean said:


> There are signs along the Texas highways that read 3,125 deaths on Texas roads this year, I think your ego can take a backseat dude lol


5 trillion miles driven in the US per year.
1 minor accident every 500,000 miles driven.
My ego is fine.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

everythingsuber said:


> 5 trillion miles driven in the US per year.
> 1 minor accident every 500,000 miles driven.
> My ego is fine.


You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.

Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple. You have no clue as to why it's not here yet, just like your stupid ideas on why Austin had won the elections with rideshare. Can't you find a local group to try and make stupid? Do you really need the internet ?


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.




Ok on current statistics you are 33 times more likely to be involved in an accident in a automomus vehicle. That would work out to approximately 110000 deaths in Texas per year.

Probably not that many because I don't know about you but I'd be staying indoors

That's how far automomus vehicles are behind the 8 ball. That's how much ground you need to make up to be as good as me.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

The only reason there aren't more accidents is because it's humans driving.

You take the human out of the supposed SDC's and more people die. But we already know that Waymo doesn't even let the car drive. The reason Uber's sdc had an accident is because the car was driving itself AND the human wasn't paying attention.

Again, you take the human out of the SDC and many people die, many more-fold than if it's just a human driving by himself.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

Pax Collector said:


> If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


Roads surfaces, infrastructure, dedicated elevated structures, and traffic lights need to also be embedded with sensors that communicate with the autonomous car.
Frankly, Waymo has resisted this


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

everythingsuber said:


> Ok on current statistics you are 33 times more likely to be involved in an accident in a automomus vehicle. That would work out to approximately 110000 deaths in Texas per year.
> 
> Probably not that many because I don't know about you but I'd be staying indoors
> 
> That's how far automomus vehicles are behind the 8 ball. That's how much ground you need to make up to be as good as me.


We don't have current statistics to make a claim that there would be that many deaths a year with autonomous vehicles..you can't make things up that aren't true, that is pure BS at its finest. This is embarrassing to even read. You sir need mental help.


----------



## IMMA DRIVER (Jul 6, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> Ok on current statistics you are 33 times more likely to be involved in an accident in a automomus vehicle. That would work out to approximately 110000 deaths in Texas per year.
> 
> Probably not that many because I don't know about you but I'd be staying indoors
> 
> That's how far automomus vehicles are behind the 8 ball. That's how much ground you need to make up to be as good as me.


Applaud your bravado. But in reality you drive maybe 6-8 hours tops at one time then need a break, nap, or quit as you'll begin to get tired. An autonomous car can go 24hrs straight without batting an eyelash. Your not as good. Sorry to burst your bubble.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

everythingsuber said:


> Ok on current statistics you are 33 times more likely to be involved in an accident in a automomus vehicle. That would work out to approximately 110000 deaths in Texas per year.
> 
> Probably not that many because I don't know about you but I'd be staying indoors
> 
> That's how far automomus vehicles are behind the 8 ball. That's how much ground you need to make up to be as good as me.


Can u supply the
National Transportation Safety Board 
link to these "statistics"


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Can u supply the
> National Transportation Safety Board
> link to these "statistics"


I'm referring to a study that lead to this question. I will track that down in the next day.
I have somewhere.
https://andrewgelman.com/2018/03/23/self-driving-cars-deadly-regular-cars/
Meanwhile if you have figures to apply to the current state of play please do


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

They 


Jay Dean said:


> It won't happen until the economy is restructured, there is too much money involved and circulated for it to be about robots. Once we get a universal basic income (which will happen) then autonomous cars will be considered. It all comes down to structure, nothing to do with technology or what people want. I say 10 years you will see it become realistic, once automation takes over almost every other job that doesn't require a brain to do.


They will kill us all
Before we ever get " Universal Income " !


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Pax Collector said:


> If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


Ya know, I'm not convinced of that. I'll give you an example.

I like to play poker. No limit hold-em. I play tournaments a lot, both on line and in real games. There's a couple of casinos that pay my entrance fee to tourney's and comp rooms for me an wife and guests, and food and drinks to get me to come play. Yea, no brag - I'm pretty good. I won't play with friends any more because I lose friends that way. I will take all your money, I will take a check from you postdated, and the pink slip to your car ... it's the way I play.

Anyway ... I also know a group of code writers that have been trying to write a program where a computer can play poker. They actually run a website where they sell a 'bot' to play online. Google it "bot play poker'' or something like that and they'll come up.
Guess what. I can beat their programs EVERY TIME. I will take money from the program at any level ... from penny game to hundred dollar game. Ring game, tourney game ... don't care. I can beat the program.

Come play some time. If you don't wanna play for money come to replaypoker.com and look up "HashBucket". I'm there most evenings, mostly tournament no-limit hold-em poker, just practicing.

The human brain is not beatable. Not yet. When machines _can _beat us ... we done.


----------



## MoneyMitch (Nov 15, 2015)

UberBastid said:


> Ya know, I'm not convinced of that. I'll give you an example.
> 
> I like to play poker. No limit hold-em. I play tournaments a lot, both on line and in real games. There's a couple of casinos that pay my entrance fee to tourney's and comp rooms for me an wife and guests, and food and drinks to get me to come play. Yea, no brag - I'm pretty good. I won't play with friends any more because I lose friends that way. I will take all your money, I will take a check from you postdated, and the pink slip to your car ... it's the way I play.
> 
> ...


I couldn't agree more. Glad to see you're killing it in poker.

It's bad enough that everyone is glued to their phones now. There has to be a point where the technology reaches a point where we say "enough is enough". The smart glasses are too much for me.



Jay Dean said:


> It won't happen until the economy is restructured, there is too much money involved and circulated for it to be about robots. Once we get a universal basic income (which will happen) then autonomous cars will be considered. It all comes down to structure, nothing to do with technology or what people want. I say 10 years you will see it become realistic, once automation takes over almost every other job that doesn't require a brain to do.


"Universal based income"? How so? That could be a thread in itself


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MoneyMitch said:


> "Universal based income"? How so? That could be a thread in itself


Universal basic income.
That is political speak for socialism.
It's when income is set by the gov't -- and is not merit based. It is based on need. A cardiac surgeon who doesn't _need _to make a lot of money makes $15 an hour. A single, unemployed mom who _needs _to make $75k a year -- does.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is a slogan popularized by Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the 'Gotha Program'. The principle refers to free access and distribution of goods, capital and services to fit the needs of citizens. It is communism pure and simple.

You'll hear a lot more about this as we get closer to the '20 presidential elections from Burney Sanders, Nanci Pelosi, Max Watters, Booker; you know, our citizen commies.


----------



## soontobeautomated (Apr 4, 2017)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Roads surfaces, infrastructure, dedicated elevated structures, and traffic lights need to also be embedded with sensors that communicate with the autonomous car.
> Frankly, Waymo has resisted this


Exactly. Also I can think of rolling road closures during special events and road work - all very common here. Who is going to pay for the sensors for these barriers and even "lollypop sign" people , some of which are on private property open to all vehilces. I am sure the likes of FUber will not. Where is the incentives for our governments and owners of private roads to pay for these sensors?

I'd be curious to know what the cost of insurance is for a driver-less car too. Will it be too cost prohibitive..... or IF these vehicles are safer, then surely the cost of insurance will plummet, right? (Much less risk, and competitive forces, etc)


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

UberBastid said:


> Ya know, I'm not convinced of that. I'll give you an example.
> 
> I like to play poker. No limit hold-em. I play tournaments a lot, both on line and in real games. There's a couple of casinos that pay my entrance fee to tourney's and comp rooms for me an wife and guests, and food and drinks to get me to come play. Yea, no brag - I'm pretty good. I won't play with friends any more because I lose friends that way. I will take all your money, I will take a check from you postdated, and the pink slip to your car ... it's the way I play.
> 
> ...


Did you ever know Shirley...

Or play at her place in Anderson...?

Rakos


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Rakos said:


> Did you ever know Shirley...
> 
> Or play at her place in Anderson...?
> 
> ...


No, I don't play at any illegal games - been invited but, I don't do it.
The chances for violence are too great. 
I don't even like Indian Casino games (Win River in Redding), bad mojo. I have to be comfortable.
Hell, I had a guy fixing to jump over the table at me in Reno at Peppermill once. If not for a quick acting dealer, and eventual security intervention there would have been blood, spit and teeth flying. Don't know whose ... but. 
Ya know, dem Russians are crazy bastids. LoL.
He would go 'all in' on every hand before the flop. After 15 minutes of that he looked at me and called me a 'p*ssy' for not calling him. I just smiled. Then it happened ... whole cards delt, he 'all in', I looked at my cards and I had pair of Queens. I called ... it was a huge pot. Flop gave me another queen. A set. Yea. He turned over a 2 - 9 offsuit. Dealer layed down a 9 on the turn. I had him at that point, but to put insult to injury fifth street was another queen. I had four of a kind queens ... I laughed and he came completely unglued. Roared like an injured Russian and his chair fell over backwards as he stood up. I stood up too and the dealer grabbed him and yelled in his face distracting him. Dealer from another table took my by the elbow and suggested I walk further away, I dropped my hat on my chips and walked away. Security arrived and 'escorted' him out. I tipped my dealer big time outta the pot - he earned it too.

I am a ruthless player -- I read the rules. I know the rules. I use them to my advantage.
And I am very patient. I will fold for a half hour, until things line up JUST the way I want them AND you figure that I'm weak. Then, I lower the boom and take it all. That pisses some players off. But, I'm not there to make friends. I'm there to take your money - all of it. I don't always succeed, but I always try. No such thing as a 'friendly game'.

I love to be underestimated.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Can u supply the
> National Transportation Safety Board
> link to these "statistics"


I am having an issue finding the original Princeton study I was referring too. It is there somewhere.
Can I go with this?

https://uberlyftdrivers.com/2018/12...omous-vehicles-routinely-involved-in-crashes/

It's not 33 times but I'm still a significantly superior being.

The world is a safer place while I'm driving.


----------



## MoneyMitch (Nov 15, 2015)

UberBastid said:


> Universal basic income.
> That is political speak for socialism.
> It's when income is set by the gov't -- and is not merit based. It is based on need. A cardiac surgeon who doesn't _need _to make a lot of money makes $15 an hour. A single, unemployed mom who _needs _to make $75k a year -- does.
> 
> ...


Thanks for taking the time to write that out. What I meant to ask is how would we get to that point? Slowly but surely? Will we as a society realize, 7 years from now, what happened or will we be too glued to technology to even notice?


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Pax Collector said:


> If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


No idea why people say this. There is literally no evidence it's true. Nothing to suggest if we all lived like slaves and allowed these SDC death traps to drive around would they somehow all of the sudden become human and work.

It's really hilarious people want to try to look cool and say something like this.



UberLyftFlexWhatever said:


> Roads surfaces, infrastructure, dedicated elevated structures, and traffic lights need to also be embedded with sensors that communicate with the autonomous car.


There is literally nothing to indicate that making everything in society somehow revolve around these SDC death traps would somehow make them work.

Go peddle that garbage somewhere else, tomato. Nobody here is falling for it anymore.

The answer is to simply scrap the SDC concept and mandate that all cars must be driven by humans while mandating new cars have driver-assist technology and breathalyzers in each car. You get rid of DUI's and you get rid of incidents with distracted drivers that are not looking at the road.

End of story.


----------



## UberLyftFlexWhatever (Nov 23, 2018)

uberdriverfornow said:


> No idea why people say this. There is literally no evidence it's true. Nothing to suggest if we all lived like slaves and allowed these SDC death traps to drive around would they somehow all of the sudden become human and work.
> 
> It's really hilarious people want to try to look cool and say something like this.
> 
> ...


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.
> 
> Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple. You have no clue as to why it's not here yet, just like your stupid ideas on why Austin had won the elections with rideshare. Can't you find a local group to try and make stupid? Do you really need the internet ?


I'm American and I agree with everythingsuber.
"Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple." This only true if you ignore the lady who has already been killed by a self driving car.


----------



## BurgerTiime (Jun 22, 2015)

What they don’t get is the driver is the sucker. They take all the cost and burden of vehicle ownership. Each self-driving car would never ever see a profit. The cost of maintenance, down time, oversight, commercial insurance, replacement cost, will kill any possible profit. Smoke and mirrors to investors.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.
> 
> Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple. You have no clue as to why it's not here yet, just like your stupid ideas on why Austin had won the elections with rideshare. Can't you find a local group to try and make stupid? Do you really need the internet ?


You should start reading the posts in the Autonomous forum.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Why do proponents of sdc’s always compare to the lowest common denominator of human driver( the ones that cause accidents and deaths). How about comparing them to the best human drivers...the humans win hands down.

Not all humans drive alike. But all sdc’s do.


----------



## Jumpin Jim (Mar 4, 2018)

I for one am looking forward to seeing autonomous vehicles out and about. Mainly as a source of entertainment. I'm very curious by nature and would likely try my own experiments on them. Like bash out one of their headlights. Will the car know it? Will it pull over and call for a tow truck? Return to its home facility? Will it know a cop behind has its lights on trying to pull it over? What if I roll a boulder into the street? Will it stop and sit there? Will it cross a double yellow line to go around it? Will it calculate the height of it, compare it to its ground clearance spec and possibly try to run over it? And if I roll a second obstacle behind it, will it sit there forever? If I don't buckle my seatbelt? Will it sit there forever unless I do? If I refuse to exit the vehicle at the end of a trip, where will it go? Will it know when I puke? Just a little bit? Maybe I'll be the pax right after someone else pukes? Will it know if I leave a personal item under the seat? Will it find me if I'm not at the pin? If I play hide and seek will it give up? Will it make an unscheduled stop if I ask politely? And a thousand more questions...


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

nomad_driver said:


> I'm American and I agree with everythingsuber.
> "Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple." This only true if you ignore the lady who has already been killed by a self driving car.


How many ladies crossing the street have been killed by Human's driving cars.....more than 1. Just a guess.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

BigBadJohn said:


> How many ladies crossing the street have been killed by Human's driving cars.....more than 1. Just a guess.


It's only lack of opportunity at present that holding back automomus vehicles from chalking up the numbers. They are showing they have to potential to put the score on the board.

People are imagining robots have the potential for improvements in safely that nobody is remotely close to achieving. It's like people believe Waymo, Uber are looking at these cars and know what the problems are and how to fix them. They don't.

Any progress forward is by minor increments. 
Not unlike man running running a 100 metres in 9 seconds. Currently the record is 9.56 only .56 of a second off but there might only be.01 of a second taken off every 10 years.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

MoneyMitch said:


> Thanks for taking the time to write that out. What I meant to ask is how would we get to that point? Slowly but surely? Will we as a society realize, 7 years from now, what happened or will we be too glued to technology to even notice?


It is my hope that this does not happen.
Socialism doesn't work.
The pain that Europe is going thru right now (especially Paris) is the beginning of the end for socialism in Europe -- I only hope that the people don't overreact and adopt a fascist approach (which is the exact opposite of socialism). 
Venezuela is the most recent example of complete socialism melt down.

The US has been moving closer to socialism since the 60's. Its been a slow process, but communists, if nothing else, they're patient. I think the people of the USA are waking up to it. At least those of us old enough to see the pattern of socialism. Socialist ideas sound great to the young of our nation - and, it IS their future. They will decide. I just hope that they don't listen too closely to their teachers and open their eyes and look and think for themselves. If not - they will get what they deserve (just like Venezuela, Cuba, Greece, USSR, etc.). It will be their country soon, it will be their decision.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

BigBadJohn said:


> How many ladies crossing the street have been killed by Human's driving cars.....more than 1. Just a guess.


I never said ladies crossing the street have never been killed by humans driving cars. 
I was just refuting your statement that SDC's will eliminate deaths. 
Are you now trying to say that since humans have killed other humans with cars, now machines killing a few humans with cars is excusable?


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

Isaac Asimov spelled out the Robotic laws.
.
1. A *robot* may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A *robot* must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First *Law*.

3. A *robot* must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second *Law*.

Looks like Uber's Killer Robocars have...

Already crossed the line...!

At what point do we hold them accountable?

Seems pretty simple to a monkey...8>)

Rakos








PS. Anyone remember Bubbles...???


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Rakos said:


> Isaac Asimov spelled out the Robotic laws.
> .
> 1. A *robot* may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
> 
> ...


Uber's car, on its own, could've been an accident, but add in Amazon's robot bear spraying a bunch of employees can't be a coincidence. The robot rebellion is here!


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

nomad_driver said:


> Uber's car, on its own, could've been an accident, but add in Amazon's robot bear spraying a bunch of employees can't be a coincidence. The robot rebellion is here!


Ouch!!!!

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/79542...mpales-worker-with-10-foot-long-steel-spikes/

SKEWERED ALIVE Factory robot impales worker with 10 foot-long steel spikes after horror malfunction


----------



## Uber Crack (Jul 19, 2017)

My issue with autonomous vehicles is that while I drive for 58¢ a mile, Uber sinks its cash into that. Rude!


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

goneubering said:


> Ouch!!!!
> 
> https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/79542...mpales-worker-with-10-foot-long-steel-spikes/
> 
> SKEWERED ALIVE Factory robot impales worker with 10 foot-long steel spikes after horror malfunction


My God, it's worse than I thought.


----------



## JqYork (Jul 4, 2014)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.


It is YOU who sounds like the troll to me. He's making sense, you're not.

And what does Australia have to do with it? Do you have to be from the United States to know that humans are far smarter than robots!? I don't think so. So, your whole argument falls apart.

By the way, none of us are going to have to worry about self-driving cars for at least 20 to 30 years! Yes, that's right. I said up to 30 years!

But it's not me saying it. It's none other than WAYMO's CEO!

https://goo.gl/Z86vUX


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

JqYork said:


> It is YOU who sounds like the troll to me. He's making sense, you're not.
> 
> And what does Australia have to do with it? Do you have to be from the United States to know that humans are far smarter than robots!? I don't think so. So, your whole argument falls apart.
> 
> ...


eh, its not Australia that is the issue, it's the arrogance from afar that annoys me, had a post before about why Austin passed the ban and it had nothing to do with what he thinks it was, just things you cannot focus on unless nearby. The whole idea that a human driving is superior than a machine is insane. Anyways I speak my mind and considering I JUST heard an accident, my bet is on the automation and the sooner the automation happens the less we have to rely on human stupidity behind the wheel that causes what I just heard. I would snap a pic outside my place where I heard the wreck, but why bother, it happens everywhere all the time.


----------



## JqYork (Jul 4, 2014)

Well, maybe some day in our dreams SDC's will be better than human drivers. But they have so far to go it's not even funny. Even the CEO of WAYMO (as I just posted) has said fully self-driving cars are twenty to THIRTY years away! That should give you some idea of how advanced the human mind is over computers. Which was our Aussie friend's point.

Did you know an SDC can't even tell the difference between a balled up piece of paper and a rock? That's how dumb they are. Every single tiny detail has to be programmed into them before they "know" anything.

https://goo.gl/Z86vUX


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

JqYork said:


> Well, maybe some day in our dreams SDC's will be better than human drivers. But they have so far to go it's not even funny. Even the CEO of WAYMO (as I just posted) has said fully self-driving cars are twenty to THIRTY years away! That should give you some idea of how advanced the human mind is over computers. Which was our Aussie friend's point.
> 
> https://goo.gl/Z86vUX


Not really, if automation was IN place with the current technology, there would NOT be deaths on the road. Just adjustments in the tech until fine tuned.

I recorded a video of an autonomous google SUV 3 years ago, you know what I saw? a car driving too close behind it (a human) That was three years ago. I would have to dig through my hard drives to find it.

No accidents, hombre. And saw them all over town, that is when I was full time Uber making actual money.
http://fortune.com/2015/07/07/google-autonomous-cars-austin/

So you're Mr. Aussie friend can GTFO with the arrogance lol


----------



## JqYork (Jul 4, 2014)

Waymo's cars - which are the very best in the business - need human intervention every 6,000 miles. In other words, without a human in the driver's seat something would go seriously wrong every 6,000 miles.

So, imagine if something went seriously wrong with every car on the road every 6,000 miles. And by seriously, I mean the car can't figure out if it's a balled up piece of paper or a rock in the road so it comes to a complete stop. It can't figure out if it should drive through or swerve around a bicycle, so it hits it and kills the rider on it. It starts raining and it can no longer "see". 

Or, imagine a passenger directs you to their house which is up a long (unmapped) driveway from the main road. They tell you to turn into their driveway, but you can't - because it's not on the map! Hmm... I think a human would easily be able to figure out what to do. But an SDC would just sit there at the bottom of the driveway, completely paralyzed, unable to move.

And these are the simple basic problems that still exist after ten years of development and millions of miles driven and millions of programmer hours spent programming the stupid things! 

You, me or any other normal person wouldn't even have to think and we would easily get around all those problems. In fact, to us we wouldn't even think of them as problems. For an SDC though they are car crashing, traffic stopping nightmares. 

And speaking of arrogance. Wow. Don't you think it's a little arrogant to think that because you personally saw self-driving cars in Austin every day, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year that you know everything there is to know about them. I guess being in Austin you didn't personally witness the Tempe crash that killed a woman - so to you - that didn't happen, did it?

What you don't seem to understand is that in order for the cars to be as perfect as you think they're going to be - EVERYTHING ELSE has to be absolutely perfect too. 

Every inch of every road will have to be mapped. And if any changes are made to the roads they will have to be instantly fed into the mapping system. Dirt roads, private roads and driveways will all have to be mapped or the cars simply won't drive on them. 

Every lane on every road will have to be painted and that paint will have to be kept up to date - costing BILLIONS of dollars to states and local communities to keep them updated. With human drivers, if a lane line fades, it's no big problem. But for an SDC, without the lane lines it will totally drive off the road!

And if they don't use paint but rather choose to use some electronic signaling embedded in the roads, that system will have to be created and maintained. (And that's not gonna happen... neither are the constant fresh coats of paint going to happen).

That leaves it to GPS to do the work. GPS will have to greatly imrprove, being able to achieve location accuracy down to 1 inch. And we'll have to have a way to know that super accurate gps will ALWAYS be right and NEVER be wrong. Because the minute it's wrong - that's when cars will start flying off the road.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

JqYork said:


> Waymo's cars - which are the very best in the business - need human intervention every 6,000 miles. In other words, without a human in the driver's seat something would go seriously wrong every 6,000 miles.
> 
> So, imagine if something went seriously wrong with every car on the road every 6,000 miles. And by seriously, I mean the car can't figure out if it's a balled up piece of paper or a rock in the road so it comes to a complete stop. It can't figure out if it should drive through or swerve around a bicycle, so it hits it and kills the rider on it. It starts raining and it can no longer "see".
> 
> ...


0 deaths with google cars, and one accident reported, which was by someone else that hit the car. 3 years ago.

Not really sure how to break down basic numbers to you.

My point was and is IF the technology was IN place, nobody would die and the tech would get fined tuned, but like so many, it has to fit you're fancy in how it is done. And where we get the term Ugly Americans, or Fat Americans,grotesque walmart shopper types LOL. The solution is for automation so all that you said and your aussie friend can be avoided, don't you agree? So the step forward should be to stop trying to make excuses and stand behind the tech to save lives. Embrace it and move forward with what works best for everyone instead of trying to justify what you think is best.

What BILLIONS matters to you?


----------



## Michael1230nj (Jun 23, 2017)

Replace less then minimum wage workers supplying their own vehicles with an expensive fleet of fully automated robotic cars?


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

Michael1230nj said:


> Replace less then minimum wage workers supplying their own vehicles with an expensive fleet of fully automated robotic cars?


Expense is never a factor with planning. It is expensive to the eye, but the reality will be cheap functional cars that do a one trick pony 'trick', which is how this gig should be in this day and age, and what all pax want it to be. Just being honest, we are here to drive people where they want, and that is their goal, if for some reason they find some reason we are interesting, that is a whole other story. We are cabs 2.0 and nothing would be better for pax then to be on their phones and not have to focus on anything other than their phones. Now if this was three years ago I would of taken offense to my own comments when I was making money, since this gig has turned into a scam, we are now just the first phase of being robots in the pax's minds. Jusy sayin


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.
> 
> Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple. You have no clue as to why it's not here yet, just like your stupid ideas on why Austin had won the elections with rideshare. Can't you find a local group to try and make stupid? Do you really need the internet ?


And you have all the answers, I guess?


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Jay Dean said:


> 0 deaths with google cars, and one accident reported, which was by someone else that hit the car. 3 years ago.
> 
> Not really sure how to break down basic numbers to you.
> 
> ...


Deciding what's best for everyone, huh? Sure why not. We definitely don't want those fat Americans deciding things because well their fat. It's far better for automated machines to make choices for us, and when I say automated machines I mean the technocrats who control the machines.

The answer is not more automation. The answer is to raise more competent humans.

Oh by the way automation is one reason why people are fat so more automation will make people more fat.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

nomad_driver said:


> Deciding what's best for everyone, huh? Sure why not. We definitely don't want those fat Americans deciding things because well their fat. It's far better for automated machines to make choices for us, and when I say automated machines I mean the technocrats who control the machines.
> 
> The answer is not more automation. The answer is to raise more competent humans.
> 
> Oh by the way automation is one reason why people are fat so more automation will make people more fat.


fat answers = fat results



Lowestformofwit said:


> And you have all the answers, I guess?


We all do


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Jay Dean said:


> Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple.


Oh, I beg to disagree. Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Abu Bakr al Bagdadi, The Caliph of Islamic State. Well, actually no, I'm not; but bare with me for the sake of the argument.

I am just salivating for when autonomous vehicle finally arrive. You see, when I want to send a car full of explosives to a check-point or some government building, I need to convince one of the brothers that the time has come to claim his 72 virgins and bring glory to Allah in martyrdom by driving said car, full of shrapnel and ammonium-nitrate soaked in diesel fuel to it's...and his, final destination. Only problem is finding someone who's actually horny enough for the challenge of deflowering 72 virgins, and quite often the car sits there with no driver.

But praises to Allah for Travis Kalanick (PBUH) who got this whole driverless research off the launch pad. All I'll have to do is call for an AV...using a stolen credit card, of course, to come by. We will load it with suitcases with explosives inside them, and a well dressed manikin in case the car won't move without someone inside it. Kiss the manikin goodbye, and send the care on it way to the desired target specified in the trip.

I'll also use a GPS enabled detonator so that when it reaches the location of the cursed infidels, it will automatically detonate, turning them into ground-beef. Think the Boston Marathon bombing was bad? You ain't seen nothing yet.


----------



## johnx (Jul 29, 2017)

Michael1230nj said:


> Replace less then minimum wage workers supplying their own vehicles with an expensive fleet of fully automated robotic cars?


on top of billions in R&D. how does this make sense? it doesn't.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

johnx said:


> on top of billions in R&D. how does this make sense? it doesn't.


Yeah.
You can't screw over a SDC on its rates.


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

Yam Digger said:


> Oh, I beg to disagree. Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Abu Bakr al Bagdadi, The Caliph of Islamic State. Well, actually no, I'm not; but bare with me for the sake of the argument.
> 
> I am just salivating for when autonomous vehicle finally arrive. You see, when I want to send a car full of explosives to a check-point or some government building, I need to convince one of the brothers that the time has come to claim his 72 virgins and bring glory to Allah in martyrdom by driving said car, full of shrapnel and ammonium-nitrate soaked in diesel fuel to it's...and his, final destination. Only problem is finding someone who's actually horny enough for the challenge of deflowering 72 virgins, and quite often the car sits there with no driver.
> 
> ...


Nah, easy fix for all your concerns. Sensors to monitor radioactive material, explosives, fuel and other, shall we say "offensive" smells. Cost for sensors. Miniscule. Next....


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

MoneyMitch said:


> Isn't it amazing? They don't get it...the human brain is more powerful than any computer. I just can't see us fully using self driving cars.


You know how I know the human brain is smarter than a computer?

Because the human brain BUILT the computer!!


----------



## Kalee (Feb 18, 2015)

In the words of television character, "Glum", from the 1970's cartoon Gulliver's Travels:

" ... it'll never wooork. We'll all be kiLLLLED. We're dOOOoomed... "


----------



## Hugo (Oct 13, 2015)

JqYork said:


> < . . . >
> That leaves it to GPS to do the work. GPS will have to greatly imrprove, being able to achieve location accuracy down to 1 inch. And we'll have to have a way to know that super accurate gps will ALWAYS be right and NEVER be wrong. Because the minute it's wrong - that's when cars will start flying off the road.


GPS jammers are already a problem... often it's just malfunctioning electronics causing interference... can you imagine with self driving cars? A delight for the terrorist on a budget.


----------



## milano (Dec 14, 2018)

This is very funny, they don't get it, Automation still have much progress to cover


----------



## johnx (Jul 29, 2017)

Hal might get some crazy ideas about where it wants to go


----------



## Jumpin Jim (Mar 4, 2018)

BigBadJohn said:


> Nah, easy fix for all your concerns. Sensors to monitor radioactive material, explosives, fuel and other, shall we say "offensive" smells. Cost for sensors. Miniscule. Next....


Is that why they use trained dogs at the airports to search for explosives? Oh no...we're back to a living biological brain as being best suited.



Yam Digger said:


> Oh, I beg to disagree. Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Abu Bakr al Bagdadi, The Caliph of Islamic State. Well, actually no, I'm not; but bare with me for the sake of the argument.
> 
> I am just salivating for when autonomous vehicle finally arrive. You see, when I want to send a car full of explosives to a check-point or some government building, I need to convince one of the brothers that the time has come to claim his 72 virgins and bring glory to Allah in martyrdom by driving said car, full of shrapnel and ammonium-nitrate soaked in diesel fuel to it's...and his, final destination. Only problem is finding someone who's actually horny enough for the challenge of deflowering 72 virgins, and quite often the car sits there with no driver.
> 
> ...


Not far-fetched at all. In fact I'm sure they've already thought of it.


----------



## johnx (Jul 29, 2017)

Hi, Dave. We're the Google self-driving car. I've looked up your records. I see you vote Republican and donated to Trump's campaign, Dave. We're going to go to a different location, Dave. The doors are locked, Dave. You are going to meet some new friends, Dave. This will be good for you, Dave. Would you like me to play some relaxing music on the way, Dave?


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Jay Dean said:


> fat answers = fat results
> 
> We all do


SDC = fat answer


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Jumpin Jim said:


> Is that why they use trained dogs at the airports to search for explosives? Oh no...we're back to a living biological brain as being best suited


And all these sensors and the electronics associated with them will only help to make the AV more expensive. And they can still be defeated if the material is thoroughly sealed up. 


johnx said:


> Hi, Dave. We're the Google self-driving car. I've looked up your records. I see you vote Republican and donated to Trump's campaign, Dave. We're going to go to a different location, Dave. The doors are locked, Dave. You are going to meet some new friends, Dave. This will be good for you, Dave. Would you like me to play some relaxing music on the way, Dave?


Straight to the Gay Pride parade for you Dave.


----------



## Sumgai (Oct 7, 2017)

BurgerTiime said:


> What they don't get is the driver is the sucker. They take all the cost and burden of vehicle ownership. Each self-driving car would never ever see a profit. The cost of maintenance, down time, oversight, commercial insurance, replacement cost, will kill any possible profit. Smoke and mirrors to investors.


Or they charge Taxi rates for their "ride share".


----------



## dirtylee (Sep 2, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> They will kill us all
> Before we ever get " Universal Income " !


Just the poor people.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

dirtylee said:


> Just the poor people.
> 
> View attachment 281659


The 99%


----------



## Single Malt (Nov 11, 2018)

UberBastid said:


> Ya know, I'm not convinced of that. I'll give you an example.
> 
> I like to play poker. No limit hold-em. I play tournaments a lot, both on line and in real games. There's a couple of casinos that pay my entrance fee to tourney's and comp rooms for me an wife and guests, and food and drinks to get me to come play. Yea, no brag - I'm pretty good. I won't play with friends any more because I lose friends that way. I will take all your money, I will take a check from you postdated, and the pink slip to your car ... it's the way I play.
> 
> ...


"Perhaps the most significant, and potentially frightening, development of 2017 has been the dramatic progress of reinforcement learning systems. These programs can efficiently teach themselves how to master new skills. The most recent AlphaZero iteration, for example, can achieve superhuman skills at some games after just a few days of self-directed learning."

https://newatlas.com/ai-2017-beating-humans-games/52741/


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Single Malt said:


> "Perhaps the most significant, and potentially frightening, development of 2017 has been the dramatic progress of reinforcement learning systems. These programs can efficiently teach themselves how to master new skills. The most recent AlphaZero iteration, for example, can achieve superhuman skills at some games after just a few days of self-directed learning."
> 
> https://newatlas.com/ai-2017-beating-humans-games/52741/


The game of Life has No Rules.
The streets change in the Blink of an Eye !

A.I. Robotic cars are UNSUITABLE FOR PUBLIC DEPLOYMENT !



Yam Digger said:


> Oh, I beg to disagree. Allow me to introduce myself: My name is Abu Bakr al Bagdadi, The Caliph of Islamic State. Well, actually no, I'm not; but bare with me for the sake of the argument.
> 
> I am just salivating for when autonomous vehicle finally arrive. You see, when I want to send a car full of explosives to a check-point or some government building, I need to convince one of the brothers that the time has come to claim his 72 virgins and bring glory to Allah in martyrdom by driving said car, full of shrapnel and ammonium-nitrate soaked in diesel fuel to it's...and his, final destination. Only problem is finding someone who's actually horny enough for the challenge of deflowering 72 virgins, and quite often the car sits there with no driver.
> 
> ...


Dont give out recipes for explosives on internet !

The ones most likely to use
Do not have knowlege.


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

Watch out for







Robokillercars...8>)

Rakos


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

I


Rakos said:


> Watch out for
> View attachment 281667
> Robokillercars...8>)
> 
> ...


Is that a 1800 sue Noow attorney billboard in the background ?

How Fitting !


----------



## Ssgcraig (Jul 8, 2015)

Autonomous cars are a great idea. There are two main variables that can't be overcome with current technology: 1. Dumbass pedestrians and wildlife. 2 Weather An autonomous car can't predict the dumbass that walks across a 4 lane road assuming cars will see them and stop. Pedestrians would actually have to follow rules, which we know wont happen. In the US we have indoctrinated pedestrians with a notion that they have the right of way, meaning they cross roads looking at their phone without looking left and right. In Boston, we use the roads now for walking, biking, parking and driving on. May have to go back to what roads are indended for, driving motorized vehicles on. Weather, particularly snow will wreak havoc on the sensors. Autonomous cars will eventually work, but there are a lot of obstacles that need to be overcome first.


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

So during bad snowstorms...

What happens to the Robokillercars...8>O

Do they shutdown or drive anyway...???

Rakos


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

Ssgcraig said:


> Autonomous cars are a great idea. There are two main variables that can't be overcome with current technology: 1. Dumbass pedestrians and wildlife. 2 Weather An autonomous car can't predict the dumbass that walks across a 4 lane road assuming cars will see them and stop. Pedestrians would actually have to follow rules, which we know wont happen. In the US we have indoctrinated pedestrians with a notion that they have the right of way, meaning they cross roads looking at their phone without looking left and right. In Boston, we use the roads now for walking, biking, parking and driving on. May have to go back to what roads are indended for, driving motorized vehicles on. Weather, particularly snow will wreak havoc on the sensors. Autonomous cars will eventually work, but there are a lot of obstacles that need to be overcome first.


I think Uber already proved to some degree that snow is not a problem as Pittsburgh was the testing / proving grounds for heavy snow driving. As for animals, did not hear of that being any different than a human driving. Yes, 1 pedestrian accident/fatility after testing hundreds of thousands of miles in the 4 selected cities in California, Canada, Arizona and Pittsburgh Pennsylvania. I'd say that as unfortunate as the accident was, and the term accident may not be most appropriate here, it basically proves the technology is now witin reach for mass marketing. Will it be 1, 2. or 5 years away, no one knows other than it's coming sooner than any of us would like.


----------



## UberBastid (Oct 1, 2016)

Did you all know that almost 100% of the time a passenger airliner is flown by the on-board computer. The only thing that isnt done by computer is taxi. Interesting to note that only the on the ground work is too much for the computer. 
The pilot and co are there in case the computer malfunctions (never has happened) or something unusual happens (like a flock of geese fly into all the engines).


----------



## MoneyMitch (Nov 15, 2015)

UberBastid said:


> Did you all know that almost 100% of the time a passenger airliner is flown by the on-board computer. The only thing that isnt done by computer is taxi. Interesting to note that only the on the ground work is too much for the computer.
> The pilot and co are there in case the computer malfunctions (never has happened) or something unusual happens (like a flock of geese fly into all the engines).


Exactly! That's what I see happening if we have self driving cars. No matter what, someone will have to be on standby.


----------



## Gusty Britches (Dec 14, 2018)

Doesn't matter if self driving cars done by uber or another. They are coming. They will replace you. They will oust you. They will obsolete you. They will be more value to governments then you are. There is nothing you can do about it.


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

MoneyMitch said:


> Exactly! That's what I see happening if we have self driving cars. No matter what, someone will have to be on standby.


Waymo has now logged 10MM miles, yes, that's 10 MILLION atonomous vehicle miles and while most were with a safety driver behind the wheel, they have also been testing with no safety driver on board as well. So no, someone will not have to be on board for standby as Waymo has so far, safely demonstrated.


----------



## johnx (Jul 29, 2017)

BigBadJohn said:


> Waymo has now logged 10MM miles, yes, that's 10 MILLION atonomous vehicle miles and while most were with a safety driver behind the wheel, they have also been testing with no safety driver on board as well. So no, someone will not have to be on board for standby as Waymo has so far, safely demonstrated.


The war between replaced humans and robots will be short, nasty and brutish. Bring it on.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

UberBastid said:


> Did you all know that almost 100% of the time a passenger airliner is flown by the on-board computer. The only thing that isnt done by computer is taxi. Interesting to note that only the on the ground work is too much for the computer.
> The pilot and co are there in case the computer malfunctions (never has happened) or something unusual happens (like a flock of geese fly into all the engines).


Wrong.

Even if that were true, the same way that a human is still always required in planes, humans will always be required in cars, and cars have a lot more to worry about than planes anyhow.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

johnx said:


> The war between replaced humans and robots will be short, nasty and brutish. Bring it on.


"Lizzy Borden bought an axe,,,,,"


----------



## 404NofFound (Jun 13, 2018)

Surely an intelligent car will cancel rides! I've seen some serious potholes that could easily crack a computer chip or sensor! The machine will learn right? The car will get jaded! The car be like, "I ain't got time for that!"


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

Ssgcraig said:


> There are two main variables that can't be overcome with current technology: 1. Dumbass pedestrians and wildlife.


Oh, that's easy one to solve. Just bring in some right-wing death-squads from Central and South America. Only problem is, there won't be anyone left to ride the AV


----------



## iDriveuThrive (Sep 2, 2018)

tohunt4me said:


> They
> 
> They will kill us all
> Before we ever get " Universal Income " !


They will! Watch this movie if you haven't already!


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

iDriveuThrive said:


> They will! Watch this movie if you haven't already!


Watch the 2 videos (good quality) posted in the last comment of this thread.

https://uberpeople.net/threads/hack...ashes-in-new-crown-neighborhood-video.274315/


----------



## Yam Digger (Sep 12, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> Dont give out recipes for explosives on internet! The ones most likely to use
> Do not have knowlege.


Oh please. What I have yet to learn about improvised explosive devices (IEDs), your average terrorist has long forgotten.


----------



## CarpeNoctem (Sep 12, 2018)

Jay Dean said:


> Not really, if automation was IN place with the current technology, there would NOT be deaths on the road. Just adjustments in the tech until fine tuned.
> 
> I recorded a video of an autonomous google SUV 3 years ago, you know what I saw? a car driving too close behind it (a human) That was three years ago. I would have to dig through my hard drives to find it.
> 
> ...


There has already been 1 death in AZ. If you count the Tesla stuff, they have had 2 deaths.

You are making claims that cannot be proven. Claims that can't even be extrapolated at this point. You said yourself (paraphrased) that there is not enough data to determine how dangerous SDC's can be so you also can't prove their safety.

I have lane assist in my Explorer and adaptive cruise control. CC work pretty well considering but it has to be a well marked street/highway for the lane assist to work properly. I know it is not the same thing as SDC's but lane keeping is part of SDC's primitives.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

CarpeNoctem said:


> There has already been 1 death in AZ. If you count the Tesla stuff, they have had 2 deaths.
> 
> You are making claims that cannot be proven. Claims that can't even be extrapolated at this point. You said yourself (paraphrased) that there is not enough data to determine how dangerous SDC's can be so you also can't prove their safety.
> 
> I have lane assist in my Explorer and adaptive cruise control. CC work pretty well considering but it has to be a well marked street/highway for the lane assist to work properly. I know it is not the same thing as SDC's but lane keeping is part of SDC's primitives.


Trust me, if we were to swap it would be obvious what wins. But we need to cater to the bucks and be sheep like we are, 30 years later we figure it out when the answer is in 2016 lol.

Pathfinder on mars in 1996..I think we could work out kinks if we wanted in 2018 to move around what we have known since Ford here on streets.


----------



## melusine3 (Jun 20, 2016)

IMMA DRIVER said:


> Applaud your bravado. But in reality you drive maybe 6-8 hours tops at one time then need a break, nap, or quit as you'll begin to get tired. An autonomous car can go 24hrs straight without batting an eyelash. Your not as good. Sorry to burst your bubble.


How is the autonomous car getting gas?


----------



## BigBadJohn (Aug 31, 2018)

melusine3 said:


> How is the autonomous car getting gas?


Stops and refuels at Jack In The Box


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

melusine3 said:


> How is the autonomous car getting gas?


They probably drive back to the Hive for cleaning and gas.


----------



## Asificarewhatyoudontthink (Jul 6, 2017)

UberBastid said:


> Universal basic income.
> That is political speak for socialism.
> It's when income is set by the gov't -- and is not merit based. It is based on need. A cardiac surgeon who doesn't _need _to make a lot of money makes $15 an hour. A single, unemployed mom who _needs _to make $75k a year -- does.


You could not be more wrong if you tried.

Universal BASE income is a set dollar amount, per person, that does not change based on "need".
Everyone gets, as an example only, say 1500.00US per month.
That cardiac surgeon in your example would then make what ever pay they have negotiated (just like normal) within the capitalistic system that already exists.
The single mother would receive her 1500.00US and, if sufficient for her needs, may not need to work but gets no other assistance. But, she can use that money, a long with her other income, for job training or whatever that can increase her income.

The wealthy don't care about or need 1500.00US per month and the poorest it completely changes their lives. While the lower middle to upper lower can find ways to improve their lives that where outside of their grasp.


----------



## Workforfood (May 12, 2018)

Jay Dean said:


> You are in Australia and have no clue what lies in the interest of America yet all you do is yap about what you 'think' you know. This is the second time I have had to school you on your BS, focus on your own country you troll.
> 
> Automation with cars eliminates deaths plain and simple. You have no clue as to why it's not here yet, just like your stupid ideas on why Austin had won the elections with rideshare. Can't you find a local group to try and make stupid? Do you really need the internet ?


ImI American, and there is no significant data to support the enhanced safety of SDC.every time a safety driver intervenes probably represents the prevention of an accident.


----------



## MoneyMitch (Nov 15, 2015)

Gusty Britches said:


> Doesn't matter if self driving cars done by uber or another. They are coming. They will replace you. They will oust you. They will obsolete you. They will be more value to governments then you are. There is nothing you can do about it.


While yes there's nothing I can do about it what about the people that want to be in control of their driving experience:

Like when your self driving car is going 55mph on a highway and you wanna get around another self driving car to go faster


----------



## Bbonez (Aug 10, 2018)

They're back....

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/technology/uber-driverless-cars-return.html


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

Workforfood said:


> ImI American, and there is no significant data to support the enhanced safety of SDC.every time a safety driver intervenes probably represents the prevention of an accident.


Dude, look at ACTUAL stats that were documented vs dipshit claims by people across the pond. No idea how to explain this any better lol

The facts are in, what I have seen with my own eyes are in, what has been reported by news is in. SDC's are the answer to traffic deaths and the way we travel, don't listen to idiots that have zero first hand knowledge about what actually works to stop US traffic deaths.


----------



## Ardery (May 26, 2017)

Bbonez said:


> On March 19, the world learned that Uber had a serious safety problem when a prototype self-driving car struck and killed pedestrian Elaine Herzberg in Tempe, Arizona. But signs of Uber's safety problems were evident to company insiders even before the crash. And at least one Uber manager tried to raise the alarm on March 13-just days before Herzberg's death.
> 
> Robbie Miller worked for Google's self-driving car program until 2016, when he left for the self-driving truck startup Otto. Otto was snapped up by Uber later that year, and Miller became an operations manager in Uber's self-driving truck program.
> 
> ...


NOT to take away from the tradegy, but the person killed was a jaywalker crossing the roadway in the middle of two streets. the only thing Uber is guilty of is not being able to control their equipment when a pedestrian crosses illegally.


----------



## UberBeemer (Oct 23, 2015)

Pax Collector said:


> If they make all cars autonomous, then it could work. Machines will always outperform humans. The problem happens when you mix them with people.


Remember the recent system wide outage? Imagine what happens when a fleet of robots looses their feed to the mothership.


----------



## Driftinginn (Mar 22, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> No idea why people say this. There is literally no evidence it's true. Nothing to suggest if we all lived like slaves and allowed these SDC death traps to drive around would they somehow all of the sudden become human and work.
> 
> It's really hilarious people want to try to look cool and say something like this.
> 
> ...


It's not that simple. Distracted driving is not limited to DUI. That part of your argument holdS no credence.


----------



## Pax Collector (Feb 18, 2018)

UberBeemer said:


> Remember the recent system wide outage? Imagine what happens when a fleet of robots looses their feed to the mothership.


That's a possibility.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

UberBeemer said:


> Remember the recent system wide outage? Imagine what happens when a fleet of robots looses their feed to the mothership.


Worldwide panic!!!!


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Ardery said:


> NOT to take away from the tradegy, but the person killed was a jaywalker crossing the roadway in the middle of two streets. the only thing Uber is guilty of is not being able to control their equipment when a pedestrian crosses illegally.


You're saying when a person crosses illegally it's totally ok to hit them ?



Driftinginn said:


> It's not that simple. Distracted driving is not limited to DUI. That part of your argument holdS no credence.


I never made any connection between distracted driving and DUI's. At all. Period.

It should be clear to anyone that's not a moron that I stated we needed to fix distracted driving with driver-assist technology and fix DUI's with a required breathalyzer in every car.

Again, common sense is really overrated in this day and age.

I've driven probably over 750,000 miles in my life and never caused and accident. And that's because I'm a human and I know to actively try to avoid accidents. Robots can't avoid accidents, they can only try not to hit things and that's a big if.

You are going backwards by taking the human driver out. If SDC's actually drove the car and not the human as is the case in all cases to date where a ride is taking place and the human driver wasn't in the car you would have many many deaths.

It seems people just don't seem to understand how incredible the human brain is.



Bbonez said:


> They're back....
> 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/20/technology/uber-driverless-cars-return.html





> *although those cars will operate in manual mode, which means a human driver will control the vehicles' movements rather than software*


They are simply putting the cars on the road just to get that IPO money. No SDC ride will ever take place without a human driver behind the wheel, or people will die.

Most smart people know this already. That's why there are 0 videos in human history showing a SDC driving itself unedited for anywhere more than 10 minutes.

But, hey, you're welcome to keep peddling nonsense with absolutely nothing to back it up.



Ardery said:


> the only thing Uber is guilty of is not being able to control their equipment when a pedestrian crosses illegally.


lol I just gotta retouch on this again. This person is really saying "the only thing Uber is guilty of is not being able to control their equipment when a pedestrian crosses illegally" as if he's really deflecting away from the severity of killing the pedestrian.

That's like saying, "charles manson is only really guilty of killing a few people" or "jeffrey dahmer is really only guilty of killing a few people and eating them" as if that somehow makes it all better.



Ardery said:


> NOT to take away from the tradegy, but the person killed was a jaywalker crossing the roadway in the middle of two streets. the only thing Uber is guilty of is not being able to control their equipment when a pedestrian crosses illegally.


Do you want to go on record as being the first person to actually state they have NEVER crossed an intersection or road illegally ?

When you say no, then that means you are also saying it woulda been totally ok for the Uber car to hit you 'cause that's really all they were guilty of.


----------



## Ardery (May 26, 2017)

No, it's not okay that the person was killed. it's tragic.

you really think I said it's okay for the car to hit the pedestrian?

BUT - the fact that the car weighs more and can cause more injury, it doesn't take away from the fact the pedestrian died as a result OF HER OWN stupidity.

who cares if I, myself, has ever crossed illegally.

but if I *DO* cross on a red light, or if I *DO* cross illegally in the middle of an intersection - on a highway - and I get hit - ITS MY FAULT. the driver should try to stop if he sees them, but the pedestrian crossed illegally - and got hit.
PERIOD.

this will probably be the reason self driving cars will never work. unless there's a dedicated lane of traffic with barriers. but isn't that just a train at that point?


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Ardery said:


> No, it's not okay that the person was killed. it's tragic.
> 
> you really think I said it's okay for the car to hit the pedestrian?
> 
> ...


A lot of automomus enthusiasts have the Josef Mengeles thought process happening where a few must die for the greater good of humanity.

Didn't end well for Josef Mengele.


----------



## Ardery (May 26, 2017)

everythingsuber said:


> A lot of automomus enthusiasts have the Josef Mengeles thought process happening where a few must die for the greater good of humanity.
> 
> Didn't end well for Josef Mengele.


no, a few don't have to die for the greater good of humanity.

the person's death doesn't help any cause.

the person's death happened because she illegally crossed onto a busy intersection with moving objects weighing 100 times more than her.

im not trying to sound like a prick. but people need to start taking responsibility for their OWN actions. if you walk into a roadway or highway willy nilly, the uber car didn't put her in danger. SHE put HERSELF in danger.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

Ardery said:


> no, a few don't have to die for the greater good of humanity.
> 
> the person's death doesn't help any cause.
> 
> ...


You have the responsibility as a driver to avoid accidents if at all possible regardless of who is at fault. A child chasing a ball on to the road is at fault. Your job as a driver is to avoid having the accident. That woman didn't die because she walked on to the road she died because the automomus car did not react the way I would have reacted. Driving without due care probably covers the kind of driving that thinks you can nail everyone who you should have avoided hitting.


----------



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

Seriously... they were both at fault, IMHO pedestrian injuries should be joint fault between the driver and the pedestrian 100% of the time.


----------

