# Uber launching self driving cars NOW



## Tim In Cleveland

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on

Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.

"Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.

The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."

Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.

Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.

The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.









Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


----------



## Tim In Cleveland

Otto has developed a kit that allows big-rig trucks to steer themselves on highways, in theory freeing up the driver to nap in the back of the cabin. The system is being tested on highways around San Francisco. Aspects of the technology will be incorporated into Uber's robot livery cabs and will be used to start an Uber-like service for long-haul trucking in the U.S., building on the intracity delivery services, like Uber Eats, that the company already offers.

The Otto deal is a coup for Uber in its simmering battle with Google, which has been plotting its own ride-sharing service using self-driving cars. Otto's founders were key members of Google's operation who decamped in January, because, according to Otto co-founder Anthony Levandowski, "We were really excited about building something that could be launched early."

Levandowski, one of the original engineers on the self-driving team at Google, started Otto with Lior Ron, who served as the head of product for Google Maps for five years; Claire Delaunay, a Google robotics lead; and Don Burnette, another veteran Google engineer. Google suffered another departure earlier this month when Urmson announced that he, too, was leaving.

"The minute it was clear to us that our friends in Mountain View were going to be getting in the ride-sharing space, we needed to make sure there is an alternative [self-driving car]," says Kalanick. "Because if there is not, we're not going to have any business." Developing an autonomous vehicle, he adds, "is basically existential for us." (Google also invests in Uber through Alphabet's venture capital division, GV.)

Unlike Google and Tesla, Uber has no intention of mass-producing its own cars, Kalanick says. Instead, the company will strike deals with auto manufacturers, starting with Volvo Cars, and will develop kits for other models. The Otto deal will help; the company makes its own laser detection, or lidar, system, used in many self-driving cars. Kalanick believes that Uber can use the data collected from its app, where human drivers and riders are logging roughly 100 million miles per day, to quickly improve its self-driving mapping and navigation systems. "Nobody has set up software that can reliably drive a car safely without a human," Kalanick says. "We are focusing on that."









Volvo is expected to deliver a total of 100 specially modified SUVs to Uber by the end of the year.
Source: Courtesy Uber
In Pittsburgh, customers will request cars the normal way, via Uber's app, and will be paired with a driverless car at random. Trips will be free for the time being, rather than the standard local rate of $1.30 per mile. In the long run, Kalanick says, prices will fall so low that the per-mile cost of travel, even for long trips in rural areas, will be cheaper in a driverless Uber than in a private car. "That could be seen as a threat," says Volvo Cars CEO Hakan Samuelsson. "We see it as an opportunity."

Although Kalanick and other self-driving car advocates say the vehicles will ultimately save lives, they face harsh scrutiny for now. In July a driver using Tesla's Autopilot service died after colliding with a tractor-trailer, apparently because both the driver and the car's computers didn't see it. (The crash is currently beinginvestigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.) Google has seen a handful of accidents, but they've been less severe, in part because it limits its cars to 25 miles per hour. Uber's cars haven't had any fender benders since they began road-testing in Pittsburgh in May, but at some point something will go wrong, according to Raffi Krikorian, the company's engineering director. "We're interacting with reality every day," he says. "It's coming."

For now, Uber's test cars travel with safety drivers, as common sense and the law dictate. These professionally trained engineers sit with their fingertips on the wheel, ready to take control if the car encounters an unexpected obstacle. A co-pilot, in the front passenger seat, takes notes on a laptop, and everything that happens is recorded by cameras inside and outside the car so that any glitches can be ironed out. Each car is also equipped with a tablet computer in the back seat, designed to tell riders that they're in an autonomous car and to explain what's happening. "The goal is to wean us off of having drivers in the car, so we don't want the public talking to our safety drivers," Krikorian says.

On a recent weekday test drive, the safety drivers were still an essential part of the experience, as Uber's autonomous car briefly turned un-autonomous, while crossing the Allegheny River. A chime sounded, a signal to the driver to take the wheel. A second ding a few seconds later indicated that the car was back under computer control. "Bridges are really hard," Krikorian says. "And there are like 500 bridges in Pittsburgh."










Bridges are hard in part because of the way that Uber's system works. Over the past year and a half, the company has been creating extremely detailed maps that include not just roads and lane markings, but also buildings, potholes, parked cars, fire hydrants, traffic lights, trees, and anything else on Pittsburgh's streets. As the car moves, it collects data, and then using a large, liquid-cooled computer in the trunk, it compares what it sees with the preexisting maps to identify (and avoid) pedestrians, cyclists, stray dogs, and anything else. Bridges, unlike normal streets, offer few environmental cues-there are no buildings, for instance-making it hard for the car to figure out exactly where it is. Uber cars have Global Positioning System sensors, but those are only accurate within about 10 feet; Uber's systems strive for accuracy down to the inch.

When the Otto acquisition closes, likely this month, Otto co-founder Levandowski will assume leadership of Uber's driverless car operation, while continuing to oversee his company's robotic trucking business. The plan is to open two additional Uber R&D centers, one in the Otto office, a cavernous garage in San Francisco's Soma neighborhood, a second in Palo Alto. "I feel like we're brothers from another mother," Kalanick says of Levandowski.

The two men first met at the TED conference in 2012, when Levandowski was showing off an early version of Google's self-driving car. Kalanick offered to buy 20 of the prototypes on the spot-"It seemed like the obvious next step," he says with a laugh-before Levandowski broke the bad news to him. The cars were running on a loop in a closed course with no pedestrians; they wouldn't be safe outside the TED parking lot. "It was like a roller coaster with no track," Levandowski explains. "If you were to step in front of the vehicle, it would have just run you over."

Kalanick began courting Levandowski this spring, broaching the possibility of an acquisition during a series of 10-mile night walks from the Soma neighborhood where Uber is also headquartered to the Golden Gate Bridge. The two men would leave their offices separately-to avoid being seen by employees, the press, or competitors. They'd grab takeout food, then rendezvous near the city's Ferry Building. Levandowski says he saw a union as a way to bring the company's trucks to market faster.

For his part, Kalanick sees it as a way to further corner the market for autonomous driving engineers. "If Uber wants to catch up to Google and be the leader in autonomy, we have to have the best minds," he says, and then clarifies: "We have to have all the great minds."

_-With Eric Newcomer_


----------



## Tim In Cleveland

Riders will be paired with driver-less cars AT RANDOM because why should they have a choice?


----------



## BurgerTiime

Everyone should quit now and stop bringing in funds to Uber. They want to kill all your jobs.


----------



## m1a1mg

BurgerTiime said:


> Everyone should quit now and stop bringing in funds to Uber. They want to kill all your jobs.


Bye.


----------



## wpguy1967

Sometimes people post things to be dramatic. This is not dramatic at all. If you're in the transportation business, you have around 15 years. No, Uber drivers are not in jeopardy right now. Long term? Self-driving cars will make up 1% of all cars on the road, then 5%, then 50%, etc....

Your grand kids will talk about how we drove cars like our grandparents talked about how they got ice and milk delivered. This is advancement, technology. Where are all the phone operators? Where are all the typists companies used to have to employ? Technology erases entire sectors of jobs. Driving will be one of them.


----------



## tohunt4me

Photos from launch


----------



## elelegido

It's going to be hilarious when an idiot bro/ princess pukes in one of Uber's self driving test cars. I wonder who will have to clean it up.

Anyway, this is just a PR points earner for Uber. There is no other benefit to be derived from involving pax in the testing and development of self driving cars, and it doesn't make full automation any closer than it currently is without having commercial pax in test vehicles.


----------



## wpguy1967

Not to get too far off track here but I'll go on a bit of a tangent on self-driving cars: 

Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right. 

Your choices are:

A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on. 
B: Hit the deer
C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree. 

.....what's the self-driving car going to do?


----------



## UofMDriver

Tim In Cleveland said:


> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
> 
> Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.
> 
> "Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.
> 
> The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."
> 
> Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.
> 
> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.
> 
> The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
> Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


Driver should let a few College kids puke in the car, then go do the next pick up. See what reality looks like.


----------



## m1a1mg

wpguy1967 said:


> Not to get too far off track here but I'll go on a bit of a tangent on self-driving cars:
> 
> Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right.
> 
> Your choices are:
> 
> A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on.
> B: Hit the deer
> C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree.
> 
> .....what's the self-driving car going to do?


Brake faster than a human possibly can. In milliseconds it will determine the best course of action.

Your 60 year old retiree driver, in a car that barely fits Uber's 10 year max, with brakes that should have been replaced 10,000 miles ago, will freak out and do A or C. When B, with hard braking included, is the obvious correct answer.


----------



## tohunt4me

UofMDriver said:


> Driver should let a few College kids puke in the car, then go do the next pick up. See what reality looks like.


And SMELLS like !


----------



## tohunt4me

Tim In Cleveland said:


> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
> 
> Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.
> 
> "Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.
> 
> The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."
> 
> Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.
> 
> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.
> 
> The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
> Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


----------



## tohunt4me

Tim In Cleveland said:


> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
> 
> Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.
> 
> "Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.
> 
> The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."
> 
> Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.
> 
> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.
> 
> The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
> Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


----------



## I_Like_Spam

elelegido said:


> It's going to be hilarious when a dooshbag bro/ princess pukes in one of Uber's self driving test cars. I wonder who will have to clean it up.


Self cleaning restrooms have already been invented.


----------



## uberlyfer

Was just about to post the same story, but thought I'd search first. Yesterday I saw there was a target of 2025 for this, so this is a bit of a surprise. Still I anticipate headline, "_*Driverless Cars Fed Up With Uber Rate Cuts Form SkyNet, Humanity Doomed!*_"


----------



## tohunt4me

I_Like_Spam said:


> Self cleaning restrooms have already been invented.


Just put a TILE FLOOR & PORCELIN SEATS in the car !

No problem !


----------



## I_Like_Spam

This is interesting, particularly as it is happening here. There is a lot on Smallman Street near the 31st Street Bridge where they are storing the vehicles.


----------



## I_Like_Spam

uberlyfer said:


> Still I anticipate headline, "_*Driverless Cars Fed Up With Uber Rate Cuts Form SkyNet, Humanity Doomed!*_"


I'm sure Uber has this covered, and will provide a "tip" option on the app for the driverless ubers.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> Was just about to post the same story, but thought I'd search first. Yesterday I saw there was a target of 2025 for this, so this is a bit of a surprise. Still I anticipate headline, "_*Driverless Cars Fed Up With Uber Rate Cuts Form SkyNet, Humanity Doomed!*_"


Driverless cars complain Uber keeps cutting Voltage !

UNSUSTAINABLE !


----------



## uberlyfer

I_Like_Spam said:


> Self cleaning restrooms have already been invented.


Was thinking something similar, but I actually looked into the self-cleaning public bathrooms a while ago and many of them were eventually discontinued. I think they actually cost more to acquire and maintain than they are currently worth. It's just like how they keep threatening that McDs employees will be replaced by robots, and yet well over half of century of McDs and no robots. I guess it still DOES cost more.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> Was thinking something similar, but I actually looked into the self-cleaning public bathrooms a while ago and many of them were eventually discontinued. I think they actually cost more to acquire and maintain than they are currently worth. It's just like how they keep threatening that McDs employees will be replaced by robots, and yet well over half of century of McDs and no robots. I guess it still DOES cost more.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> Was thinking something similar, but I actually looked into the self-cleaning public bathrooms a while ago and many of them were eventually discontinued. I think they actually cost more to acquire and maintain than they are currently worth. It's just like how they keep threatening that McDs employees will be replaced by robots, and yet well over half of century of McDs and no robots. I guess it still DOES cost more.


----------



## uberlyfer

m1a1mg said:


> Brake faster than a human possibly can. In milliseconds it will determine the best course of action.
> 
> Your 60 year old retiree driver, in a car that barely fits Uber's 10 year max, with brakes that should have been replaced 10,000 miles ago, will freak out and do A or C. When B, with hard braking included, is the obvious correct answer.


Still lots of unanswered questions about driverless cars. Do you remember recent news that under some circumstances they were currently being programmed to potentially swerve and in effect kill the driver to save multiple pedestrians in the road? I thought immediately of a scenario where some young deer are crossing the road in fog and the car swerves and kills the driver, or some reckless teens aware of the behavior of the avoidance systems dart across highways as an atrocious prank knowing the cars will swerve to avoid them.

There are a number of troubling questions that still need to be answered about these systems, I think it will be a while before they should really be trusted (but odds are we won't wait and there will be a lot of disasters).


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> Still lots of unanswered questions about driverless cars. Do you remember recent news that under some circumstances they were currently being programmed to potentially swerve and in effect kill the driver to save multiple pedestrians in the road? I thought immediately of a scenario where some young deer are crossing the road in fog and the car swerves and kills the driver, or some reckless teens aware of the behavior of the avoidance systems dart across highways as an atrocious prank knowing the cars will swerve to avoid them.
> 
> There are a number of troubling questions that still need to be answered about these systems, I think it will be a while before they should really be trusted (but odds are we won't wait and there will be a lot of disasters).


Robbers tossing mannequins in front of cars to rob passengers after a crash . . .


----------



## uberlyfer

It's cool stuff, but you can always have an initial example of cool stuff that is still not economically viable yet. You'll know it's viable when it starts popping up everywhere.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> It's cool stuff, but you can always have an initial example of cool stuff that is still not economically viable yet. You'll know it's viable when it starts popping up everywhere.


Like wal Mart self checkout ?

Like Robots building the cars ?


----------



## m1a1mg

uberlyfer said:


> It's cool stuff, but you can always have an initial example of cool stuff that is still not economically viable yet. You'll know it's viable when it starts popping up everywhere.


Agree with both of your posts. Technology will catch up.

Given the number of 60 somethings, and above, still driving, I wonder which is more dangerous.


----------



## tohunt4me

m1a1mg said:


> Agree with both of your posts. Technology will catch up.
> 
> Given the number of 60 somethings, and above, still driving, I wonder which is more dangerous.


When machines can do all of the work,what do you imagine they will do with all of the surplus people ?


----------



## uberlyfer

m1a1mg said:


> Agree with both of your posts. Technology will catch up.
> 
> Given the number of 60 somethings, and above, still driving, I wonder which is more dangerous.


That's true, pick your poison, although I've known plenty of 60-70 year olds that are still very good drivers. Probably the answer for both humans of a certain age & machines is to slow down so most problems aren't so critical.


----------



## uberlyfer

tohunt4me said:


> When machines can do all of the work,what do you imagine they will do with all of the surplus people ?


I think a lot of people "gulp" at that question. It does seem like times are coming when a large portion of the population will not have skills that are needed for production anymore. I've heard futurists & theorists saying we can/should move to a life system where working in the traditional sense is not the focus of most people, and that perhaps everyone would receive the base means of life, with opportunities to improve needed skills to grow their overall prosperity, but it's hard to say.

I have to wonder right now if our ingenuity will really be powerful and timely enough to outpace our consumption of resources that can't be easily replaced.


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> I think a lot of people "gulp" at that question. It does seem like times are coming when a large portion of the population will not have skills that are needed for production anymore. I've heard futurists & theorists saying we can/should move to a life system where working in the traditional sense is not the focus of most people, and that perhaps everyone would receive the base means of life, with opportunities to improve needed skills to grow their overall prosperity, but it's hard to say.
> 
> I have to wonder right now if our ingenuity will really be powerful and timely enough to outpace our consumption of resources that can't be easily replaced.


Yesssss . . . . .

I wonder what the Globalists have planned for us ?

When Robots make us surplus inventory.


----------



## Louisvilleuberguy

This is just a good reason to show no loyalty to a company who can't wait to get rid of you. Lyft has same ultimate goal but unlike uber is taking advantage of ubers mistake and snatching up as many drivers as possible and developing a system that at least for now supports drivers much better,

It will take much longer than uber thinks to get the public used to self driving cars. I know I would not trust them till they are proven and that will take years. I'm doing this for a year or so then I'm out of it so I'm not worried a bit about uber,


----------



## elelegido

I_Like_Spam said:


> Self cleaning restrooms have already been invented.


You can't get driven home in one from the bar though.


----------



## Ringo

The cars are starting this month in pittsburgh


----------



## midtownhm

****ing tech is eating all the jobs, soon there will be nothing to do but go back to farming and living off the grid


----------



## Ringo

Might be the best option


midtownhm said:


> &%[email protected]!*ing tech is eating all the jobs, soon there will be nothing to do but go back to farming and living off the grid


----------



## JHawk

uberlyfer said:


> There are a number of troubling questions that still need to be answered about these systems, I think it will be a while before they should really be trusted (but odds are we won't wait and there will be a lot of disasters).


All the safety issues are the most glaring questions that require answers, but I've always wondered about the solutions to a lot of practical issues specific to ride-sharing. One that always jumps into my mind when I'm driving is when the rider simply drops a pin in the middle of a large apartment complex, which might have multiple doors or access roads for a car to pull up at. Normally there's some type of communication between the driver and rider which helps pinpoint the riders exact pickup location, usually as a result of the rider "guiding in" the driver. How would that work if theres no driver and the car simply drives as close as possible to a dropped GPS pin? Who does the rider call if they make a mistake and need to re-direct the car?

I suppose the TNC's are operating under the assumption that riders will quickly alter their behavior and expectations for these types of situations. Because the cost per ride will become so low, riders will accept some potentially inconvenient situations in exchange for dirt-cheap, on-demand, transportation.


----------



## uberlyfer

JHawk said:


> ...I suppose the TNC's are operating under the assumption that riders will quickly alter their behavior and expectations for these types of situations. Because the cost per ride will become so low, riders will accept some potentially inconvenient situations in exchange for dirt-cheap, on-demand, transportation.


Yes! I don't think it would be too much of an issue. Even if they keep the pin system, they could require requesters to be using the most accurate form of GPS when they make the request. They could also provide a constantly updating screen that shows the pax their proximity to the car, and the car itself could light up or indicate and make itself obvious as the pax got close.


----------



## tohunt4me

.


----------



## Digits

Wait till it kills a pax during a trip. It will also attract many to jump infront of it in hopes of squeezing millions out of uber.


----------



## UberXTampa

I_Like_Spam said:


> Self cleaning restrooms have already been invented.


Merge the 2 concepts and you have a self driving uber restroom.


----------



## UberXTampa

tohunt4me said:


> When machines can do all of the work,what do you imagine they will do with all of the surplus people ?


This is what they will do:


----------



## Buckiemohawk

people will make the cars crash


----------



## uberdriverfornow

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being,


This is really all you need to focus on. They will always be paired with humans. So basically they paid for all of this technology but you will still be paying the driver his rate. Until you remove the driver, which, as I've said many times now, will always be the case, they are basically throwing away money.

Right now, they got below market equilibrium rates combined with money losing/revenue reducing UberPool, while throwing money away at this Utopian driverless car theory, throwing away money offering free rides. And the investors never wonder what happened to the $16 billion dollars Travis has managed to blow through in Uber's 7 year history.

Great job, Travis


----------



## uberdriverfornow

You guys need to keep in mind, they aren't self driving if they aren't self driving.


----------



## uberlyfer

I hope the first driverless car will be referred to as "Hal," and the first driverless attendant shall be named "Dave." 

"Open the Prius Back Doors Hal..."


----------



## tohunt4me

uberlyfer said:


> I hope the first driverless car will be referred to as "Hal," and the first driverless attendant shall be named "Dave."
> 
> "Open the Prius Back Doors Hal..."


----------



## tohunt4me

uberdriverfornow said:


> You guys need to keep in mind, they aren't self driving if they aren't self driving.


I know what you mean ! Wink wink.


----------



## tohunt4me

This has been a long train a running


----------



## Freebyrdie

I just love that uber is nickel and diming the drivers with less and less money while throwing billions at this endeavor. Get rid of over a million drivers? I see an uprising akin to what would happen if the government tried to take away our guns. Black masked ex uber drivers sabotaging the driverless cars world wide. You will never catch me taking a ride in a driverless car, there are far too many variables that require human reasoning to safely navigate through busy city traffic.


----------



## tohunt4me

Freebyrdie said:


> I just love that uber is nickel and diming the drivers with less and less money while throwing billions at this endeavor. Get rid of over a million drivers? I see an uprising akin to what would happen if the government tried to take away our guns. Black masked ex uber drivers sabotaging the driverless cars world wide. You will never catch me taking a ride in a driverless car, there are far too many variables that require human reasoning to safely navigate through busy city traffic.


They are using VOLVO S.U.V.'S.

Excellent choice for black market parts !


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

tohunt4me said:


> They are using VOLVO S.U.V.'S.
> 
> Excellent choice for black market parts !


I see a bright future for you and I...
Running Driverless Uber Chopshop.


----------



## Freebyrdie

I'm curious, what happens to the dmv and insurance companies if people no longer drive. If a human is not driving who bears the responsibility when the machine malfunctions and crashes? Loss of billions in revenue will see the insurance companies fighting this tooth and nail. The dmv will lose too...no need to license people anymore.


----------



## tohunt4me

TwoFiddyMile said:


> I see a bright future for you and I...
> Running Driverless Uber Chopshop.


I'm in !


----------



## tohunt4me

tohunt4me said:


> I'm in !


Would you like a certificate of salvage ,or a regular title with that ?

Do you have a choice of serial numbers ?

La plaqua,
must have la plaqua to export on barge & avoid import tax.


----------



## tohunt4me

Freebyrdie said:


> I'm curious, what happens to the dmv and insurance companies if people no longer drive. If a human is not driving who bears the responsibility when the machine malfunctions and crashes? Loss of billions in revenue will see the insurance companies fighting this tooth and nail. The dmv will lose too...no need to license people anymore.


Whoever the vehicle is registered to is responsible.


----------



## tohunt4me

UberXTampa said:


> Merge the 2 concepts and you have a self driving uber restroom.


They will end up being self driving "Bordellos".


----------



## UberXTampa

uberdriverfornow said:


> This is really all you need to focus on. They will always be paired with humans. So basically they paid for all of this technology but you will still be paying the driver his rate. Until you remove the driver, which, as I've said many times now, will always be the case, they are basically throwing away money.
> 
> Right now, they got below market equilibrium rates combined with money losing/revenue reducing UberPool, while throwing money away at this Utopian driverless car theory, throwing away money offering free rides. And the investors never wonder what happened to the $16 billion dollars Travis has managed to blow through in Uber's 7 year history.
> 
> Great job, Travis


Not exactly money-throwing.

First mover in a technology will quickly acquire so many patents and processes that, the revenue stream coming from others implementing them might suppress your wildest imagination. Google, after all, was just a search algorithm when it started. Look how far they took it and how many new businesses they got into.

For example , Microsoft makes more money from each android phone than google which owns the android operating system.


----------



## UberXTampa

In a self driving uber car, driver's role will be expected to change: entitled pax will expect foot massage to make sure driver is doing something to earn the $2.40 fare.


----------



## HERR_UBERMENSCH

First Travis sells out to the Chinese, now he is buying his robotic cars from them, Didi will own Uber in two years or less.


----------



## Durbin_Uber

So what happens when the robot car get a rating below 4.6? Folks this is a looooooong way off. Travis thinks he has legal issues now. Wait till he tries to put one of these robo cars on the street without a driver, and it kills someone.


----------



## kör dig

I love driving, people love to drive, and in California people love driving.
It's in the culture and it's not changing for a long, long time....


----------



## painfreepc

wpguy1967 said:


> Sometimes people post things to be dramatic. This is not dramatic at all. If you're in the transportation business, you have around 15 years. No, Uber drivers are not in jeopardy right now. Long term? Self-driving cars will make up 1% of all cars on the road, then 5%, then 50%, etc....
> 
> Your grand kids will talk about how we drove cars like our grandparents talked about how they got ice and milk delivered. This is advancement, technology. Where are all the phone operators? Where are all the typists companies used to have to employ? Technology erases entire sectors of jobs. Driving will be one of them.


 and where all these unemployed drivers seek employment, how about all the other people unemployed because of the new technology coming down the road, we are too damn blind to see that we're heading for a dangerous situation here in our society,

Jobs have been replaced because of improvements in technology and Manufacturing but that was usually on a small scale, millions of people who drive for a living where the hell they going to go..


----------



## HERR_UBERMENSCH

It isn't the big robots that worry me, it is the ones that you can't see. Nano-bots will one day multiply and keep making copies of themselves, in large enough quantity they will begin building bigger more complex robots. Imagine the metal equivalent of termites breaking your car down for raw materials. Will they have any concern for human life, no, why should they. People to them will be just another source of raw materials.


----------



## Ubernic

kör dig said:


> I love driving, people love to drive, and in California people love driving.
> It's in the culture and it's not changing for a long, long time....


This, as well as all this.

"Every driver makes hundreds of daily driving decisions that, strictly speaking, break driving laws (for example, crossing the yellow line to pull around a double-parked vehicle). What company is going to program its driverless cars to break the law?"

http://observer.com/2016/02/why-driverless-cars-will-screech-to-a-halt/

No company is going to teach it's robots to break the law, too much liability. So what you will have is a bunch of cars stacking up traffic because an intersection is blocked and they aren't programmed to cross the line to get around it. You're going to have a bunch of computer cars driving, going exactly the speed limit, and not using any common sense, just pissing everyone off, including pax. Stack on top of that every couple realizing they are alone and having sex in the car, just blocking the camera. People are children, they need supervision in situations like taking a car home.


----------



## UberXTampa

When driving becomes 100% autonomous , our city grid should look like a huge Amazon warehouse where everything is so much standardized that, even a robot can do it.


----------



## poopyhead

And when Google maps tries to send you on some undeveloped, unmaintained backroad when there is clearly a more obvious paved route, are they just going to listen to Google maps or will they decide to use common sense?


----------



## Jermin8r89

EVERYONE QUIT YOUR JOBS! Seriously we want to make the country have as low unemployment as possable but arnt we trying to make us not have to work? The higher unemployment the better statistics is for our workless world. So im gonna have to admire my cuzin for getting $600 a week for unemployment. He smokes rides 4 wheeler and watches movies all the time. I wish i was him


----------



## HERR_UBERMENSCH

Who cares, in 30 years we will all be teleporting from place to place, robot cars will be irrelevant.


----------



## painfreepc

kör dig said:


> I love driving, people love to drive, and in California people love driving.
> It's in the culture and it's not changing for a long, long time....


What needs to happen is someone needs to create some type of National Organization for all drivers, not just uber drivers, not just Lyft drivers, all people that drive for a living this technology is not being created to better mankind, it's only purpose is to line the pockets of the people who put the cars on the road and to line the pockets of the companies using that technology.


----------



## painfreepc

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> Who cares, in 30 years we will all be teleporting from place to place, robot cars will be irrelevant.


I do realize that's a Star Trek reference and I do realize you're having fun, but you do realize what is technically needed to actually transport somebody from point A to point B it will never happen get it out of your mind..

And even if it technically could happen (but it never will) religious fanatic would have a field day and I am in no way a religious fanatic but I will certainly join them in their fight.


----------



## Caplan121

What happens if you live in a brand new neighborhood that has not been updated on maps? How will the car be able to get to you? This happened to me a few weeks ago. Pax had to let me know and guide me to them. Hard to do with a robot.


----------



## tohunt4me

Tim In Cleveland said:


> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
> 
> Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.
> 
> "Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.
> 
> The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."
> 
> Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.
> 
> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.
> 
> The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
> Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


----------



## Ubernic

painfreepc said:


> I do realize that's a Star Trek reference and I do realize you're having fun, but you do realize what is technically needed to actually transport somebody from point A to point B it will never happen get it out of your mind..
> 
> And even if it technically could happen (but it never will) religious fanatic would have a field day and I am in no way a religious fanatic but I will certainly join them in their fight.


This person, whose matter was disassembled and reassembled, is it the same person? He claims to be, but how do we know?


----------



## painfreepc

Ubernic said:


> This person, whose matter was disassembled and reassembled, is it the same person? He claims to be, but how do we know?


The disassembly part that would be the major problem, because technically speaking if you have been disassembled you are now dead,
This is the part where the religious Fanatics would have a field day, because if they're going to reassemble you, you have now been resurrected..

As you've already stated are you the same person are you a copy, if you are a Star Trek the Next Generation fan, then you know that there is an episode where William Riker became a copy


----------



## Ubernic

The only way teleportation would work, would be if we found a way to fold space and create our own wormholes and just walk through to our destination. Not be pulled apart and stuck back together.


----------



## tohunt4me

Tim In Cleveland said:


> Otto has developed a kit that allows big-rig trucks to steer themselves on highways, in theory freeing up the driver to nap in the back of the cabin. The system is being tested on highways around San Francisco. Aspects of the technology will be incorporated into Uber's robot livery cabs and will be used to start an Uber-like service for long-haul trucking in the U.S., building on the intracity delivery services, like Uber Eats, that the company already offers.
> 
> The Otto deal is a coup for Uber in its simmering battle with Google, which has been plotting its own ride-sharing service using self-driving cars. Otto's founders were key members of Google's operation who decamped in January, because, according to Otto co-founder Anthony Levandowski, "We were really excited about building something that could be launched early."
> 
> Levandowski, one of the original engineers on the self-driving team at Google, started Otto with Lior Ron, who served as the head of product for Google Maps for five years; Claire Delaunay, a Google robotics lead; and Don Burnette, another veteran Google engineer. Google suffered another departure earlier this month when Urmson announced that he, too, was leaving.
> 
> "The minute it was clear to us that our friends in Mountain View were going to be getting in the ride-sharing space, we needed to make sure there is an alternative [self-driving car]," says Kalanick. "Because if there is not, we're not going to have any business." Developing an autonomous vehicle, he adds, "is basically existential for us." (Google also invests in Uber through Alphabet's venture capital division, GV.)
> 
> Unlike Google and Tesla, Uber has no intention of mass-producing its own cars, Kalanick says. Instead, the company will strike deals with auto manufacturers, starting with Volvo Cars, and will develop kits for other models. The Otto deal will help; the company makes its own laser detection, or lidar, system, used in many self-driving cars. Kalanick believes that Uber can use the data collected from its app, where human drivers and riders are logging roughly 100 million miles per day, to quickly improve its self-driving mapping and navigation systems. "Nobody has set up software that can reliably drive a car safely without a human," Kalanick says. "We are focusing on that."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Volvo is expected to deliver a total of 100 specially modified SUVs to Uber by the end of the year.
> Source: Courtesy Uber
> In Pittsburgh, customers will request cars the normal way, via Uber's app, and will be paired with a driverless car at random. Trips will be free for the time being, rather than the standard local rate of $1.30 per mile. In the long run, Kalanick says, prices will fall so low that the per-mile cost of travel, even for long trips in rural areas, will be cheaper in a driverless Uber than in a private car. "That could be seen as a threat," says Volvo Cars CEO Hakan Samuelsson. "We see it as an opportunity."
> 
> Although Kalanick and other self-driving car advocates say the vehicles will ultimately save lives, they face harsh scrutiny for now. In July a driver using Tesla's Autopilot service died after colliding with a tractor-trailer, apparently because both the driver and the car's computers didn't see it. (The crash is currently beinginvestigated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.) Google has seen a handful of accidents, but they've been less severe, in part because it limits its cars to 25 miles per hour. Uber's cars haven't had any fender benders since they began road-testing in Pittsburgh in May, but at some point something will go wrong, according to Raffi Krikorian, the company's engineering director. "We're interacting with reality every day," he says. "It's coming."
> 
> For now, Uber's test cars travel with safety drivers, as common sense and the law dictate. These professionally trained engineers sit with their fingertips on the wheel, ready to take control if the car encounters an unexpected obstacle. A co-pilot, in the front passenger seat, takes notes on a laptop, and everything that happens is recorded by cameras inside and outside the car so that any glitches can be ironed out. Each car is also equipped with a tablet computer in the back seat, designed to tell riders that they're in an autonomous car and to explain what's happening. "The goal is to wean us off of having drivers in the car, so we don't want the public talking to our safety drivers," Krikorian says.
> 
> On a recent weekday test drive, the safety drivers were still an essential part of the experience, as Uber's autonomous car briefly turned un-autonomous, while crossing the Allegheny River. A chime sounded, a signal to the driver to take the wheel. A second ding a few seconds later indicated that the car was back under computer control. "Bridges are really hard," Krikorian says. "And there are like 500 bridges in Pittsburgh."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bridges are hard in part because of the way that Uber's system works. Over the past year and a half, the company has been creating extremely detailed maps that include not just roads and lane markings, but also buildings, potholes, parked cars, fire hydrants, traffic lights, trees, and anything else on Pittsburgh's streets. As the car moves, it collects data, and then using a large, liquid-cooled computer in the trunk, it compares what it sees with the preexisting maps to identify (and avoid) pedestrians, cyclists, stray dogs, and anything else. Bridges, unlike normal streets, offer few environmental cues-there are no buildings, for instance-making it hard for the car to figure out exactly where it is. Uber cars have Global Positioning System sensors, but those are only accurate within about 10 feet; Uber's systems strive for accuracy down to the inch.
> 
> When the Otto acquisition closes, likely this month, Otto co-founder Levandowski will assume leadership of Uber's driverless car operation, while continuing to oversee his company's robotic trucking business. The plan is to open two additional Uber R&D centers, one in the Otto office, a cavernous garage in San Francisco's Soma neighborhood, a second in Palo Alto. "I feel like we're brothers from another mother," Kalanick says of Levandowski.
> 
> The two men first met at the TED conference in 2012, when Levandowski was showing off an early version of Google's self-driving car. Kalanick offered to buy 20 of the prototypes on the spot-"It seemed like the obvious next step," he says with a laugh-before Levandowski broke the bad news to him. The cars were running on a loop in a closed course with no pedestrians; they wouldn't be safe outside the TED parking lot. "It was like a roller coaster with no track," Levandowski explains. "If you were to step in front of the vehicle, it would have just run you over."
> 
> Kalanick began courting Levandowski this spring, broaching the possibility of an acquisition during a series of 10-mile night walks from the Soma neighborhood where Uber is also headquartered to the Golden Gate Bridge. The two men would leave their offices separately-to avoid being seen by employees, the press, or competitors. They'd grab takeout food, then rendezvous near the city's Ferry Building. Levandowski says he saw a union as a way to bring the company's trucks to market faster.
> 
> For his part, Kalanick sees it as a way to further corner the market for autonomous driving engineers. "If Uber wants to catch up to Google and be the leader in autonomy, we have to have the best minds," he says, and then clarifies: "We have to have all the great minds."
> 
> _-With Eric Newcomer_


A $3.00 laser pointer disables that system.

Kids will be crashing them for sport.

More fun than the cat chasing the red dot !


----------



## tohunt4me

Ubernic said:


> The only way teleportation would work, would be if we found a way to fold space and create our own wormholes and just walk through to our destination. Not be pulled apart and stuck back together.


Starbucks can't get a coffee order right.

You want to be "reassembled" on the molecular level ?


----------



## tohunt4me

painfreepc said:


> The disassembly part that would be the major problem, because technically speaking if you have been disassembled you are now dead,
> This is the part where the religious Fanatics would have a field day, because if they're going to reassemble you, you have now been resurrected..
> 
> As you've already stated are you the same person are you a copy, if you are a Star Trek the Next Generation fan, then you know that there is an episode where William Riker became a copy


It should take 4 minutes ( for brain matter) and up to 2 hours for cells to die on the molecular level due to oxygen depravation.

So technically,you would not be dead upon disassembly.


----------



## tohunt4me

painfreepc said:


> The disassembly part that would be the major problem, because technically speaking if you have been disassembled you are now dead,
> This is the part where the religious Fanatics would have a field day, because if they're going to reassemble you, you have now been resurrected..
> 
> As you've already stated are you the same person are you a copy, if you are a Star Trek the Next Generation fan, then you know that there is an episode where William Riker became a copy


See string theory,quantum physics,Tesla's studies,C.E.R.N. research,Athene's theory of everything,Einsteins space time theory.
Realize atoms are moving and bonded in a brick wall.
So,if you were quick enough you should be able to step through it.( or accelerated) see Montauk/ Philadelphia experiment.
Research vibrational universe also frequencies.also Tesla earthquake machine.see Garuda Vahana,see Hindu Mandala,sacred geometry,see Cymatics,see vibrational universe theory.

Then you will have a background to develop a starting point for appreciation of quantum mechanics,which also parallel ancient teachings . . .everything old is new again ?

As above,so below.

Alpha & Omega.

We will never comprehend the smallest nor the largest.

Although patterns repeat from the microscope to the hubble telescope.
( one day they will learn the Universe is a living thing,a part of a larger body)(que twilight zone music)

Untill then hope God does not sneeze.


----------



## tohunt4me

Ubernic said:


> The only way teleportation would work, would be if we found a way to fold space and create our own wormholes and just walk through to our destination. Not be pulled apart and stuck back together.


P.S. teleportation has been DONE already.several times.on a miniscule level for short distance.baby steps.

ANTI matter has been produced in Alaska and at C.E.R.N
Anti matter occurs naturally in lightening storms.

Look into C.E.R.N.S activities and admire their " DANCING SHIVA".


----------



## tohunt4me

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> First Travis sells out to the Chinese, now he is buying his robotic cars from them, Didi will own Uber in two years or less.


Perhaps,that is the plan.

In the 80's the Japanese were buying America.

Then ,BLACK MONDAY !

DOOM & GLOOM.

We bought it all back for .20 cents on the dollar and kept the change.

Got to love a shake ride.

As in musical chairs,whomever is left holding the "Sac Du Mal" when the music stops,loses.

To quote Jim Morrison " when the musics over,turn out the lights".


----------



## tohunt4me

painfreepc said:


> and where all these unemployed drivers seek employment, how about all the other people unemployed because of the new technology coming down the road, we are too damn blind to see that we're heading for a dangerous situation here in our society,
> 
> Jobs have been replaced because of improvements in technology and Manufacturing but that was usually on a small scale, millions of people who drive for a living where the hell they going to go..


SOYLENT GREEN


----------



## tohunt4me

painfreepc said:


> What needs to happen is someone needs to create some type of National Organization for all drivers, not just uber drivers, not just Lyft drivers, all people that drive for a living this technology is not being created to better mankind, it's only purpose is to line the pockets of the people who put the cars on the road and to line the pockets of the companies using that technology.


Let's hire LOBBYISTS !

To represent the working man's rights !

We could have elections to pick them.

Maybe we could call them . . .
Senators & Representatives !

Think that would work ?


----------



## Ubernic

tohunt4me said:


> View attachment 56111
> 
> P.S. teleportation has been DONE already.several times.on a miniscule level for short distance.baby steps.
> 
> ANTI matter has been produced in Alaska and at C.E.R.N
> Anti matter occurs naturally in lightening storms.
> 
> Look into C.E.R.N.S activities and admire their " DANCING SHIVA".


Of course antimatter occurs during lightning storms, we've known that ever since the Doc sent Marty back in time.


----------



## tohunt4me

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> It isn't the big robots that worry me, it is the ones that you can't see. Nano-bots will one day multiply and keep making copies of themselves, in large enough quantity they will begin building bigger more complex robots. Imagine the metal equivalent of termites breaking your car down for raw materials. Will they have any concern for human life, no, why should they. People to them will be just another source of raw materials.


One of these flying around injecting Ebola could take care of all those pesky surplus humans!
" Useless Eaters"- see Dr. Henry Kissinger's papers " Food as a Weapon".( N.S.C. papers 1974)


----------



## tohunt4me

tohunt4me said:


> One of these flying around injecting Ebola could take care of all those pesky surplus humans!
> " Useless Eaters"- see Dr. Henry Kissinger's papers " Food as a Weapon".( N.S.C. papers 1974)


AGENDA 21

Familiarize yourself .
The Globalists are throwing a party.

" it's a big club ,and you're not in it"-George Carlin

You thought the Mayan Pyramid Sacrifices were something ?

You ain't seen nothing yet.


----------



## tohunt4me

Ubernic said:


> Of course antimatter occurs during lightning storms, we've known that ever since the Doc sent Marty back in time.


And N.A.S.A. confirms Marty MC Fly's scientific studies !( sans early onset Parkinson's due to unclean methods of alkyd refinement with petro base instead of acetone )( gotta watch them ketones)( know your cook)


----------



## tohunt4me

midtownhm said:


> &%[email protected]!*ing tech is eating all the jobs, soon there will be nothing to do but go back to farming and living off the grid


Govt. Claims it " OWNS THE RAIN"
think I'm kidding ?
Google it.
Just wait for the " SOLAR TAX" too many going with solar panels.( ask Australians how they enjoyed their now defunct " Carbon Tax")

Yet some states tax you for the rain.( per square foot of property vs. Estimated runoff)

Also Google people arrested for growing a tomatoe.arrested for giving away grown food.arrested for drinking non pasteurized milk.

{Man,the only animal that pays to live}


----------



## 1995flyingspur

m1a1mg said:


> Agree with both of your posts. Technology will catch up.
> 
> Given the number of 60 somethings, and above, still driving, I wonder which is more dangerous.


I do and always have loved driving, period...I will never give it up. However I don't think it would be a bad idea to make people over 70 use this technology. Otherwise I will keep on driving!


----------



## uber strike

THIS IS PROPAGANDA. THEY ARE NOT DRIVERLESS CARS. DRIVERLESS CARS MEANS THERE ARE NO DRIVERS. THERE ARE DRIVERS IN THE CARS. THIS SHOWS THAT THEY ARE NOT SAFE. UBER IS TRYING TO CONDITION PEOPLE INTO THINKING DRIVERLESS CARS ARE SAFE SO THAT WHEN THEY ROLL THEM OUT IT WILL BE THE NORM. BUT DO NOT FALL INTO THIS THESE ARE NOT DRIVERLESS CARS.


----------



## tohunt4me

1995flyingspur said:


> I do and always have loved driving, period...I will never give it up. However I don't think it would be a bad idea to make people over 70 use this technology. Otherwise I will keep on driving!


The Globalist Government and it's AGENDA 21 sustainable development do not wish for you to own a car.
Or property. Or rainwater.
Peruse their goals.learn it.study it.
FIGHT IT !
UBER & UNITED NATIONS AGENDA 21 have the same goals.
Don't take my word.
Research it.
Research the INVESTORS.
Analyze the goals " think for yourself".

Millions of dollars are spent annually on "Think Tanks" to develop strategies and force scenarios to pry you from your rights.You should spend a few minutes getting to learn about them.
( the Truth shall set you free,one spoonful at a time)

See table 1 sec.(i)below regarding national and sub national economic policy to increase costs of car ownership and operation( fuel costs,mandatory insurance,regulatory costs ,taxation licensing ,etc.) In order to reduce & eliminate private ownership.
THIS IS A PLAN TO TAKE YOUR RIGHTS !

READ IT !


----------



## tohunt4me

In case anyone needs help finding materials themselves:

( it is my humble opinion that these " GLOBALISTS" are vampires opportunistically feeding financially on the average citizen as if we are merely livestock..God gave man Free Will.
Why give free will away to the likes of this lot ?)

I suggest these elite free loaders enriching themselves through legislation are " UNSUSTAINABLE "!


----------



## tohunt4me

uber strike said:


> THIS IS PROPAGANDA. THEY ARE NOT DRIVERLESS CARS. DRIVERLESS CARS MEANS THERE ARE NO DRIVERS. THERE ARE DRIVERS IN THE CARS. THIS SHOWS THAT THEY ARE NOT SAFE. UBER IS TRYING TO CONDITION PEOPLE INTO THINKING DRIVERLESS CARS ARE SAFE SO THAT WHEN THEY ROLL THEM OUT IT WILL BE THE NORM. BUT DO NOT FALL INTO THIS THESE ARE NOT DRIVERLESS CARS.


I beg of you to look at the " Bigger Picture".

If just 2 more people's interest are fostered in looking up from the grazing trough long enough to see . . .


----------



## UberXTampa

Caplan121 said:


> What happens if you live in a brand new neighborhood that has not been updated on maps? How will the car be able to get to you? This happened to me a few weeks ago. Pax had to let me know and guide me to them. Hard to do with a robot.


Programming the robots will be a good job. Never ending patch and program improvements.


----------



## SEAL Team 5

Ubernic said:


> Of course antimatter occurs during lightning storms, we've known that ever since the Doc sent Marty back in time.


But that was only 1.21 jiggawatts. We need much more so auntie does matter.


----------



## tohunt4me

UberXTampa said:


> Programming the robots will be a good job. Never ending patch and program improvements.


Think they can do it from Sri Lanka ?


----------



## SEAL Team 5

tohunt4me said:


> Think they can do it from Sri Lanka ?


After Hillary gets in they won't have to outsource it overseas. The new West Sri Lanka will only be 4 miles south of Compton and East Sri Lanka will be just east of Harlem. Give us your tired, your hungry, your poor, your weak and your terrorist. God did try to Bless America.


----------



## tohunt4me

SEAL Team 5 said:


> After Hillary gets in they won't have to outsource it overseas. The new West Sri Lanka will only be 4 miles south of Compton and East Sri Lanka will be just east of Harlem. Give us your tired, your hungry, your poor, your weak and your terrorist. God did try to Bless America.


Soros doesn't like borders.


----------



## NoCommission

Tim In Cleveland said:


> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...eet-arrives-in-pittsburgh-this-month-is06r7on
> 
> Near the end of 2014, Uber co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick flew to Pittsburgh on a mission: to hire dozens of the world's experts in autonomous vehicles. The city is home to Carnegie Mellon University's robotics department, which has produced many of the biggest names in the newly hot field. Sebastian Thrun, the creator of Google's self-driving car project, spent seven years researching autonomous robots at CMU, and the project's former director, Chris Urmson, was a CMU grad student.
> 
> "Travis had an idea that he wanted to do self-driving," says John Bares, who had run CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center for 13 years before founding Carnegie Robotics, a Pittsburgh-based company that makes components for self-driving industrial robots used in mining, farming, and the military. "I turned him down three times. But the case was pretty compelling." Bares joined Uber in January 2015 and by early 2016 had recruited hundreds of engineers, robotics experts, and even a few car mechanics to join the venture. The goal: to replace Uber's more than 1 million human drivers with robot drivers-as quickly as possible.
> 
> The plan seemed audacious, even reckless. And according to most analysts, true self-driving cars are years or decades away. Kalanick begs to differ. "We are going commercial," he says in an interview with _Bloomberg Businessweek_. "This can't just be about science."
> 
> Starting later this month, Uber will allow customers in downtown Pittsburgh to summon self-driving cars from their phones, crossing an important milestone that no automotive or technology company has yet achieved. Google, widely regarded as the leader in the field, has been testing its fleet for several years, and Tesla Motors offers Autopilot, essentially a souped-up cruise control that drives the car on the highway. Earlier this week, Ford announced plans for an autonomous ride-sharing service. But none of these companies has yet brought a self-driving car-sharing service to market.
> 
> Uber's Pittsburgh fleet, which will be supervised by humans in the driver's seat for the time being, consists of specially modified Volvo XC90 sport-utility vehicles outfitted with dozens of sensors that use cameras, lasers, radar, and GPS receivers. Volvo Cars has so far delivered a handful of vehicles out of a total of 100 due by the end of the year. The two companies signed a pact earlier this year to spend $300 million to develop a fully autonomous car that will be ready for the road by 2021.
> 
> The Volvo deal isn't exclusive; Uber plans to partner with other automakers as it races to recruit more engineers. In July the company reached an agreement to buy Otto, a 91-employee driverless truck startup that was founded earlier this year and includes engineers from a number of high-profile tech companies attempting to bring driverless cars to market, including Google, Apple, and Tesla. Uber declined to disclose the terms of the arrangement, but a person familiar with the deal says that if targets are met, it would be worth 1 percent of Uber's most recent valuation. That would imply a price of about $680 million. Otto's current employees will also collectively receive 20 percent of any profits Uber earns from building an autonomous trucking business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Travis Kalanick, CEO of Uber
> Photograph: Britta Pedersen/Picture-Alliance/DPA v


Can anyone mention one highly secured system never got hacked?. It just needs one successful hacking attempt with one order to the car system "never stop" and Travis will wake up immediately from his dream back to offer drivers guarantees.


----------



## SEAL Team 5

NoCommission said:


> Can anyone mention one highly secured system never got hacked?. It just needs one successful hacking attempt with one order to the car system "never stop" and Travis will wake up immediately from his dream back to offer drivers guarantees.


Fort Knox


----------



## tohunt4me

NoCommission said:


> Can anyone mention one highly secured system never got hacked?. It just needs one successful hacking attempt with one order to the car system "never stop" and Travis will wake up immediately from his dream back to offer drivers guarantees.


Bull.
They hijacked by Hacking many Jeep products years ago.

Some believe journalist Michael Hastings who broke psy OPS officers being used to solicit funds for Afghanistan war in Senate for Rolling Stones magazine to have been killed by his Mercedes being hacked.

Who knows. . . ask Snowden ?


----------



## tohunt4me

SEAL Team 5 said:


> Fort Knox


But Ft. Knox is empty . . .


----------



## tohunt4me

NoCommission said:


> Can anyone mention one highly secured system never got hacked?. It just needs one successful hacking attempt with one order to the car system "never stop" and Travis will wake up immediately from his dream back to offer drivers guarantees.


Did you know Hacking originated with people manipulating telephone signals & equipment to get free calls ?


----------



## HERR_UBERMENSCH

tohunt4me said:


> Did you know Hacking originated with people manipulating telephone signals & equipment to get free calls ?


I think it goes a bit farther back than that, Alan Turing? WWII, Enigma?


----------



## SEAL Team 5

tohunt4me said:


> But Ft. Knox is empty . . .


Since 1964? Isn't that when we stopped with the silver in coins? I really don't know the whole legist.


----------



## tohunt4me

HERR_UBERMENSCH said:


> I think it goes a bit farther back than that, Alan Turing? WWII, Enigma?


True.
In a way,Turing was the father of computers.

Unless you include the abacus.


----------



## tohunt4me

The old computers were punch card machines,followed by magnetic reel computer rooms.


----------



## tohunt4me

And of course the old mechanical adding machines,long before Texas instruments made them main stream.
You always had to keep a can of 
3 in 1 oil close by for when they jammed.( worked good on ceiling fans with open bearings too)


----------



## tohunt4me

SEAL Team 5 said:


> Since 1964? Isn't that when we stopped with the silver in coins? I really don't know the whole legist.


I saw a guy at a racetrack gas station with cash register coin dispenser get a silver quarter the other day.( used to happen all the time when I was a kid).( you don't hardly see the coin trays on a register anymore either)
I could tell by the sound what it was. He tells cashier he didn't want that quarter,something was wrong with it !
Had to explain to him what it was.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Durbin_Uber said:


> So what happens when the robot car get a rating below 4.6? Folks this is a looooooong way off. Travis thinks he has legal issues now. Wait till he tries to put one of these robo cars on the street without a driver, and it kills someone.


Robots won't get ratings genius.
Sheesh.


----------



## El Janitor

The automated checkouts at the markets and stores break all the time so theres a person to correct it. Factory robots that perform variois tasks require a big red KILL switch when they go beserk and have to be corrected. Self driving cars will do what when they glitch and oh go full throttle down the street and plow into a store full of people, or a school yard full of children?

Uber will probably not have to pay a penny due to loopholes in the law regarding insurance laws when people do die from automated cars. Call me stupid, call me paranoid, when they pull your childs mangled lifeless body from under the car and the curb you'll wish you were paying attention when there was something you could still do to prevent it.

I can't tell you how many times I have heard this working for xyz company. Customer:" All my pictures are gone, and my work, and why won't the name brand computer manufacturer get it all back for me?!?!?!? I paid good money for this laptop I demand that this name brand well known company gets all that back for me!!!!"

Sorry it's company policy that you are required to back up your own stuff, but we would be happy to replace your computer with a new one, but we have to charge you to get your data and put it on the new one we will give you." Because you know computers are perfect and robots are computers and..... I hope you back up your loved ones so you can bring them back when Uber wont, and hides behind lawyers and keeps making money regardless. Hindsight is always 20/20 when your holding your head in your hands crying asking why.


----------



## jack badly

Fully Self-Driving car is not going to happen just yet.. A driver is required to be in the driver seat at all times to monitor any situations that might go wrong, which means uber will still have to pay the guy sitting there whose not doing any shit 80% of his time. 

It is ok.. Your uber jobs are still safe.. 

There are still many things the developers need to fix: snow storm, sunlight, unmarked roads etc..


----------



## jack badly

It is the same as trying to cure hair loss. They keep saying its almost there or 5 years away from now will have a cure. 5 years after 5 years there is still no cure..

Just don't put your hopes too high. It will happen but it will takes a long ass time to get there.


----------



## NoCommission

Imagine if that was the rider.


----------



## NoCommission

Or the car doesn't want stop for the rider and the trip already started while the rider trying to get in till finally the car stops in the rider destination "Thank you for riding with Uber, We charged your card $375, come again".


----------



## Buckiemohawk

Freebyrdie said:


> I'm curious, what happens to the dmv and insurance companies if people no longer drive. If a human is not driving who bears the responsibility when the machine malfunctions and crashes? Loss of billions in revenue will see the insurance companies fighting this tooth and nail. The dmv will lose too...no need to license people anymore.


It would kill the industry. Multi billion dollare industries. I'm talking about. I had a car dealer in my taxi not to long ago. And he said if Uber thinks they can go against the car and the insurance industry. They are dumb. He also predicts the flop of both Uber and Lyft. Collision insurance and repair in Central Florida makes millions every month on just idiots getting in fender benders, you think there going to allow Uber into their pockets. They have other world coming to them


----------



## uberdriverfornow

So who's going to be the first state to ban any car driving without a driver in it ? California ?

Or will there have to be a certain amount of deaths for it to happen? Perhaps it has to be a baby first ?


----------



## ANGRY UBER MAN

Uber does not even have a 24/7 phone line you can call if you are a driver or pax. How the duck do they expect to use driverless cars with the only way to get in contact with uber is by emailing workers in 3rd world countries? This company is so quick to rush out bs because of this expensive and poorly planned push for driverless cars by their investors.


----------



## El Janitor

jack badly said:


> Fully Self-Driving car is not going to happen just yet.. A driver is required to be in the driver seat at all times to monitor any situations that might go wrong, which means uber will still have to pay the guy sitting there whose not doing any shit 80% of his time.
> 
> It is ok.. Your uber jobs are still safe..
> 
> There are still many things the developers need to fix: snow storm, sunlight, unmarked roads etc..


I've worked in offices, and I have to say I've seen more people sitting in cubicles posting to Facebook, and playing games, and surfing porn, and shopping during hours that you are getting paid to be working not playing on someone else's dime. I've had bosses who rarely show up for work, and go play golf, and sit in their office and do God knows what else but it wasn't work when nobody's around. I've seen people in many lines of work slave away while someone sits in an office for 8 hours a day and does maybe 2 hours of work a day at most and makes ridiculous amounts of money, and gets promoted to a higher paying position.

I got in vehicles day after day and drove hour after hour you know doing nothing 80 percent of the time. I wasn't worried that when some jerk cut me off while I was driving in the rain that well you know I wouldn't hit the brakes and hydroplane and kill 49 people and whoever else may have gotten hurt because I wasn't really doing anything 80% of the time. I wasn't really needed to go clear the intersections so people could get to work, or go shopping, or go play instead of going to work. The products drive themselves to the store, and they unload themselves, The packages you order online magically appear at your doorstep. Your maid doesn't do much either right? Anyone can spend all day washing windows and vacuuming, and cleaning the house that you paid for by working 20% of the time.

Maybe we need to design a management robot that works for 12 hours a day and doesn't claim vacations as business trips for tax purposes. Careful what you wish for you may just get it.


----------



## Aging Prius

Not having to pay drivers is a powerful incentive towards Uber making this work as quickly as they possibly can.


----------



## knowledgethrow

Aging Prius said:


> Not having to pay drivers is a powerful incentive towards Uber making this work as quickly as they possibly can.


This is true, but something doesn't add up.

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

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


----------



## ANGRY UBER MAN

My guess is what they will do is make a new category for driverless cars(uber bot) and charge $2.00 or more per mile and have a huge min fare. But I agree the driverless cars are still a long ways away from being the norm because of all the variables and high costs to store and maintain them.


----------



## Buckpasser

Aren't there plenty of driverless cars on the road already pretending to be human


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

knowledgethrow said:


> This is true, but something doesn't add up.
> 
> Uber was able to undercut cab companies because, among other factors, they don't own the cars. Whereas a cab company has to buy cabs and then pay the price to maintain them, Uber only has to pay for the GPS and API, it's up to the driver to buy his or her own car and pay for its maintenance and repairs.
> 
> Now they suddenly want to own their own fleet too? It seems they will save on having to pay drivers a share of the profit (and no benefits, 401k, health, etc, just part of the generated profit!) and then spend on buying a fleet of sophisticated self driving cars, maintaining the cars AND also maintaining their self driving equipment... how is this more profitable?


All probability points to Uber playing Tom Sawyer and getting car Manufacturers to own the fleet.
I ran some preliminary numbers on here and yes it's profitable at a 50/50 split. 
Also yes, the fare will go back up to taxi numbers.
Cheap subsidized fares is temporary, only designed to tske out taxis busses and trains.
Uber on.


----------



## iPHX

m1a1mg said:


> Brake faster than a human possibly can. In milliseconds it will determine the best course of action.
> 
> Your 60 year old retiree driver, in a car that barely fits Uber's 10 year max, with brakes that should have been replaced 10,000 miles ago, will freak out and do A or C. When B, with hard braking included, is the obvious correct answer.


The human brain is (currently) faster than any computer - a digital computer of the 21st century is limited by it's programming. It's cannot learn in the same fashion as organic logic. It would require endless programming exceeding the current availability of computer resources to emulate the critical decision capacity of a human brain. We often forget that the 3lb bundle of neurons atop of our shoulders has evolved over several million years in response to external stimulus - it is optimized for self preservation - a computer is cold and calculating - mathematically modeling situations and choosing the best outcome even if it is unethical. This is something humanity needs to decide on for the interest of our society.


----------



## knowledgethrow

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Cheap subsidized fares is temporary, only designed to tske out taxis busses and trains.


That sounds pretty evil...


----------



## canyon

It will not happen and if it does it will be for communities with senior citizens and the speed limit will be about miles an hr.


----------



## knowledgethrow

canyon said:


> It will not happen and if it does it will be for communities with senior citizens and the speed limit will be about miles an hr.


Some say it will happen in 5 years, some say in 10, some say never. It's so interesting.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

knowledgethrow said:


> That sounds pretty evil...


Oh it's real @#$_&-+ evil.
Read around this forum, friend.
Fuber is out to dominate all motorized transportation.


----------



## hounddogman

Have to say, a lot of the responses in this thread seem more insightful than a lot of the news coverage of the Pittsburgh fleet.


----------



## luckytown

This story makes no sense considering what the Uber model is. They want to make up to 28% or more on the fares with as little investment as possible on cost. They dont want the cost of owning fleet vehicles and the expenses that come with that. I am sure that insurance and maintanance cost will not go away. they want the humans to absorb all the cost of doing business and they just want to reap the awards of all the sweat equity???????


----------



## UberXTampa

As long as Uber builds the technology and the platform, car manufacturers wanting to sell millions of autonomous cars to Uber will figure a way of owning/financing the fleet. Or leasing the vehicles. I think the ownership issue and gist of it is irrelevant in this context. All uber wants is to become first mover in a new technology and take up the space.


----------



## knowledgethrow

luckytown said:


> This story makes no sense considering what the Uber model is. They want to make up to 28% or more on the fares with as little investment as possible on cost. They dont want the cost of owning fleet vehicles and the expenses that come with that. I am sure that insurance and maintanance cost will not go away. they want the humans to absorb all the cost of doing business and they just want to reap the awards of all the sweat equity???????


Exactly, this is the part that blows my mind, now all of a sudden they want to own their own fleet?


----------



## knowledgethrow

UberXTampa said:


> As long as Uber builds the technology and the platform, car manufacturers wanting to sell millions of autonomous cars to Uber will figure a way of owning/financing the fleet. Or leasing the vehicles. I think the ownership issue and gist of it is irrelevant in this context. All uber wants is to become first mover in a new technology and take up the space.


Perhaps they'd develop a business model where others buy the (self driving) cars and Uber pairs them up with clients?


----------



## luckytown

knowledgethrow said:


> Perhaps they'd develop a business model where others buy the (self driving) cars and Uber pairs them up with clients?


Agreed....If they want a fleet then thier model has changed......and now they are a transportation company with totally different regulatory discretion>>>


----------



## Flarpy

I too am confused. Uber has always billed itself as a "technology company" rather than a "transportation company." If it goes whole-hog into autonomous vehicles (including owning fleets of them) it will no longer be a general technology company and will truly be a transportation company.

I'm really starting to think that Uber has arrived at its pinnacle of success out of sheer luck and nothing more. 

The Pool concept of "carpooling with strangers" has pissed off drivers and riders alike. The design of its new logo turned into a laughable mess. The desperate attempt to put autonomous cars on the road before they're ready... 

These things say a great deal about how the company is run: what Travis says goes, no matter how bad the idea. I don't think Travis actually knows what he's doing and it's only because the taxi companies were so corrupt and lazy that his ridesharing plan has achieved the success it has.

Some day Uber will run out of luck and the whole company will come crashing down when the myriad of awful decisions finally come home to roost. It's inevitable.


----------



## Aging Prius

knowledgethrow said:


> This is true, but something doesn't add up.
> 
> Uber was able to undercut cab companies because, among other factors, they don't own the cars. Whereas a cab company has to buy cabs and then pay the price to maintain them, Uber only has to pay for the GPS and API, it's up to the driver to buy his or her own car and pay for its maintenance and repairs.
> 
> Now they suddenly want to own their own fleet too? It seems they will save on having to pay drivers a share of the profit (and no benefits, 401k, health, etc, just part of the generated profit!) and then spend on buying a fleet of sophisticated self driving cars, maintaining the cars AND also maintaining their self driving equipment... how is this more profitable?


Drivers get paid 75% of what they take in. Seems like enough money to run a fleet to me. Except being Uber, they'll come up with some diabolical way to have someone else pay for most of it.


----------



## Flarpy

Here's another article on it....

Self-driving cars go public; Uber offers rides in Pittsburgh

http://6abc.com/automotive/self-driving-cars-go-public;-uber-offers-rides-in-pittsburgh/1475666/

Here's a notable quote from that article:

*"He predicted that drivers will often have to intervene in Pittsburgh, with its winding, hilly roads and vast number of bridges. Each winter the city gets about 30 inches of snow, which can cover lane lines and trick autonomous car sensors that use them to help guide the ride.

"Use of the backup drivers is also an acknowledgement that current autonomous driving systems cannot handle the wide range of unpredictable circumstances on public roads."*​
So basically these "autonomous" cars are going to be driven anywhere from _some of the time_ to _most of the time_ by human drivers.

It's all a publicity stunt, and likely a sham to get more investment money and get people talking about the company. These "autonomous" cars won't be anything of the sort.

Another quote:

*"This is a way to get autonomous cars out there and accepted and increase the adoption rate," Carone said. "It will take a decade of testing before an 18-year-old can get in the car and tell it where to go."
*​A decade of testing. A decade. Travis is going to have to put up with "another dude in the car" for another 10 years or so. Get used to it, Travis.

And if anyone here is still driving for Uber a decade from now I will personally come over and slap you silly.


----------



## knowledgethrow

Flarpy said:


> And if anyone here is still driving for Uber a decade from now I will personally come over and slap you silly.


I'm not a driver (I'm just deeply interested in technology and its impact on human well being, for better or worse), but I will say... some people have no choice but to drive for Uber. It's a tough world out there dude.


----------



## UberXTampa

What Arm Holdings (ARMH) is for microprocessor design, Uber will become for transportation technology products. ARMH designs processors among many things also used in iPhones. They don't even manufacture the processors. They farm them out to foundries. Same will happen with Uber: with relatively small number of engineers, they will be able to design a lot of solutions. Ride sharing software is the flagship product. Others will follow. Autonomous car technologies is simply more vertical integration of technologies in this field. I don't believe TK "is confused" and "doesn't know what he is doing".


----------



## Driving and Driven

Uber and Lyft will be the Coca-Cola and Pepsi of local, short-trip transportation on a global level.

They aren't going to go away any time soon and they have a lot of expanding to do. You will see.


----------



## MoneyUber4

This is just their advertising to call the attention of Investors (new suckers). Uber needs cash again.

Follow their money search. 
1. They get a loan from Arabs Investors - 2 Billion 
2. Sold their part to Didi China..
3. Next... need more money to keep afloat. They have to do something different. They want attention. They can't buy Lyft not even at 2 Billion. Uber is short of cash...
4. They said, they are worth but don't have 60B. If they had the money, they would have bought Lyft for 2B.


----------



## Driving and Driven

Wait a minute. That can't be what they are releasing in Pittsburgh. I know they will have engineers at first but I thought the cars were capable of start-to-finish trips, not just sections of it.


----------



## A Morgan

wpguy1967 said:


> Not to get too far off track here but I'll go on a bit of a tangent on self-driving cars:
> 
> Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right.
> 
> Your choices are:
> 
> A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on.
> B: Hit the deer
> C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree.
> 
> .....what's the self-driving car going to do?


What all confused computers do; Freeze and lock up; Dah!


----------



## water4tips

U


wpguy1967 said:


> Not to get too far off track here but I'll go on a bit of a tangent on self-driving cars:
> 
> Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right.
> 
> Your choices are:
> 
> A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on.
> B: Hit the deer
> C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree.
> 
> .....what's the self-driving car going to do?


Beep Beep. Does not compute. Uber on Beep Beep... have a great day. And fraaak off! 
Beep Beep is everyone dead? Beep my liquid coolant is leaking. Beep Beep it burnssss


----------



## water4tips

One day when they realise there is no mathematical viability to any of this. It's just turning an industry dependant on ft workers who make enough to buy a house and raise a family. To an average of 200 dollar per week side job guys around the city at various times. 
It translates to watering down the pool in and outside the platform. Can the same happen to other jobs one day? Forget transport. The uber ripple effect into people's livelihoods in general is what is at stake my friends. Imagine getting "deactivated" from your job because some purchasing agent or sales guy at your client company gives you "a bad rating, complimented with a damming screen shot of you whilst off gaurd" 
Imagine how ratings and a passive aggressive customer Base tied to an email only system where it is easy as shit to lie, can become a mental slavery in a very direct literal sense.


----------



## knowledgethrow

water4tips said:


> One day when they realise there is no mathematical viability to any of this. It's just turning an industry dependant on ft workers who make enough to buy a house and raise a family. To an average of 200 dollar per week side job guys around the city at various times.
> It translates to watering down the pool in and outside the platform. Can the same happen to other jobs one day? Forget transport. The uber ripple effect into people's livelihoods in general is what is at stake my friends. Imagine getting "deactivated" from your job because some purchasing agent or sales guy at your client company gives you "a bad rating, complimented with a damming screen shot of you whilst off gaurd"
> Imagine how ratings and a passive aggressive customer Base tied to an email only system where it is easy as shit to lie, can become a mental slavery in a very direct literal sense.


I was riding an Uber and a driver BEGGED me, almost with tears in his eyes, to please give him a 5. Why? Well, some (redated) thinks that having water bottles in your UberX car is mandatory, so the driver had no waters and he gave him a 1 star. The driver was legit afraid he'd lose the Uber gig


----------



## bingybingyfoo

*1. Yes it's gonna happen, this isn't it. *This is a test of lots of things, but it's also publicity /public relations. There's still a long way to go, but real life testing like this will obviously need to happen from time to time.
*2. Yes, your job is endangered,* in the next 5/10 years I would say any driving job in the US is definitely endangered. Know that, and make plans to leave a dying industry. The paid drivers will go away long before the private cars. (And those "dudes", in the front seat? Don't be a fool, those dudes are engineers. They get paid way more than us, and they don't represent the future of the job.)
*3. It will be better. It will be safer. *Vehicular causes of death will plummet. There will be other benefits, driving will become more efficient (even traffic jams will probably dissappear). Our blood pressure will drop, en masse. No i am not kidding. Human beings are inferior to [even today] machines in nearly every meaningful measure of driving ability. And they keep improving the machines, while you and i just get older and slower.
*4. It's still going to take a long time*, especially re the private sector. The US fleet is estimated at thirty years out, most cars replaced, and that's if the change isn't dramatically delayed for some reason, but if the change continues to go at this pace, more and more features will be included (and after market mods may be common too), such as self parking, lane awareness, lots of things available already for years on US cars.
*5. It's gonna be expensive,* monumentally so for those "in on the ground floor," and it's no coincidence that the wealthiest interests are driving the change, but with the involvement of TK and anyone else who is poised (eventually) to profit from the change, it will happen, but making a big enough change to be rid of the majority of drivers is still far, far away.
*6*. You guys are freaking out about *the tech*, and yes, the tech is nearly ready (though that stage can be long, obv weaknesses like hacking are no small thing), but, aside from cultural resistance, the biggest obstacles (and they are very big) are *legislation, and infrastructure.* When it's really done, we'll have redundancy. We'll have_ Smart Streets_. Long before that, we'll need laws, lots of them, and you know how that goes.
So it will start small. Local. Probably in SF (ooh unless they get it to work in another country first - that's probably in line). When you hear that all the drivers in SF, or LA or NY, are being replaced, then worry. If they can't make it work in the densest, "smartest" (redundancy in tech systems d/t propinquity), places, they can't yet, make it work in your town.
But make plans. Especially if you drive OTR. That day comes first, I say.


----------



## bingybingyfoo

Lol and you know something else? Speaking of legislation, in this crazy Country I love, no doubt at least one State will refuse to accept driverless for some silly amount of time, and anyone who really really wants to keep doing this can probably move there and work for whatever replaces Uber in a place like that


----------



## CrazyTaxi

Not something to worry about anytime soon.


----------



## knowledgethrow

bingybingyfoo said:


> *2. Yes, your job is endangered,* in the next 5/10 years I would say any driving job in the US is definitely endangered. Know that, and make plans to leave a dying industry. The paid drivers will go away long before the private cars.
> *4. It's still going to take a long time*, especially re the private sector. The US fleet is estimated at thirty years out, most cars replaced, and that's if the change isn't dramatically delayed for some reason, but if the change continues to go at this pace, more and more features will be included (and after market mods may be common too), such as self parking, lane awareness, lots of things available already for years on US cars.
> .


Sorry, I haven't had my coffee yet (lol). So will it take around 5/10 years like in # 2, or more than that ("a long time", and/or 30 years) like in # 4?


----------



## bingybingyfoo

knowledgethrow said:


> Sorry, I haven't had my coffee yet (lol). So will it take around 5/10 years like in # 2, or more than that ("a long time", and/or 30 years) like in # 4?


 The private cars in the US are probably mostly replaced in thirty years. Drivers paid to be human behind a wheel, going in 5/10 years in my estimate. But lots of forces are still potentially going to slow that down.


----------



## MoneyUber4

Oh I forgot. Uber said, no fingerprinting required because drivers will have no hands.


----------



## CrazyTaxi

I went to pick up an elderly woman, she had typed in the address, but the pin was on a main road well away from where she was standing in the shopping center. I showed up after a phone call, and she came and asked me how much it would be, I guided her through the app on my phone and showed her the price. She realized the price for a Select ride was too much, so I offered to show her how to order an Uber X ride, she ordered the ride, and I went on my way.

I saw the Uber X driver, going the wrong way like I did onto the main road, I followed him, trying to tell him where she was, he glanced at me as I honked like he was annoyed, and I saw him cancel on her, not even a phone call, just a cancel because the pin was in the wrong location. So I went back to the elderly woman, asked her if the driver cancelled, she confirmed, he did indeed cancel. She ordered another Uber, but the driver also could not find her, so I offered to speak to the driver on her behalf, I called the driver, and explained to her where the woman was, and I waited with the woman until the other driver showed up, then they went on their way.

This is a scenario where a machine will be of no help to us, there are situations where human guidance is necessary, and there always will be. Machines do very well when in fixed scenarios, meaning the same thing over and over again. If I tell a machine to chop a 1oz piece of cheese off the block, it will be much more accurate than me. However if a child asks that machine to do something it is not programmed to do with the cheese, the machine will do nothing, or do the wrong thing, unless it is able to adapt, which will require true artificial intelligence, which is very far away, and some say may even be impossible.


----------



## jack badly

*Uber fleet to be driverless by 2030. Other sources stated around 2025-2030. *
*
http://www.driverless-future.com/?page_id=384

No worries. we still have 10-15 years to uber. Still alot of money to be made.

*


----------



## UberXTampa

water4tips said:


> One day when they realise there is no mathematical viability to any of this. It's just turning an industry dependant on ft workers who make enough to buy a house and raise a family. To an average of 200 dollar per week side job guys around the city at various times.
> It translates to watering down the pool in and outside the platform. Can the same happen to other jobs one day? Forget transport. The uber ripple effect into people's livelihoods in general is what is at stake my friends. Imagine getting "deactivated" from your job because some purchasing agent or sales guy at your client company gives you "a bad rating, complimented with a damming screen shot of you whilst off gaurd"
> Imagine how ratings and a passive aggressive customer Base tied to an email only system where it is easy as shit to lie, can become a mental slavery in a very direct literal sense.


And some people still wonder why we produce the most mass murderers, serial killers and gun violence related attacks in this most advanced country: people don't matter and companies are there to enslave them, take away their livelihood and make sure it ends up in the hands of the elite.


----------



## Just one more trip




----------



## knowledgethrow

Just one more trip said:


>


lol!!!


----------



## knowledgethrow

Also, what about road conditions? Like snow or floods....


----------



## wpguy1967

About 15 to 20 years sounds about right. After 20 years, once self-driving cars are readily available, insurance companies will make sure no human is behind a wheel by jacking the rates through the ceiling: 

A) Self-driving car = $50/mo
B) Oh....you're driving it? $800/mo


----------



## wpguy1967

knowledgethrow said:


> Also, what about road conditions? Like snow or floods....


....hence the 15 to 20 years to really work through this. But let's get one thing clear, humans are absolutely the worst in poor weather conditions, typically driving too fast or not understanding how to correct a skid. A self-driving car is going to be far better.


----------



## FrankMartin

wpguy1967 said:


> Not to get too far off track here but I'll go on a bit of a tangent on self-driving cars:
> 
> Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right.
> 
> Your choices are:
> 
> A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on.
> B: Hit the deer
> C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree.
> 
> .....what's the self-driving car going to do?


You touch on a good point. The programming of these cars include these moral choices, which may include sacrificing the passengers and the robotics. A human driver will not intentionally sacrifice himself....


----------



## knowledgethrow

FrankMartin said:


> You touch on a good point. The programming of these cars include these moral choices, which may include sacrificing the passengers and the robotics. A human driver will not intentionally sacrifice himself....


I read an article about this.

Basically there may be some "moral" system built into self driving cars, which will make terrible choices. Say the guy next to you is driving a 1980 Geo metro that will basically turn to dust if hit, and you're driving a nice, brand new Chevy Suburban. You got airbags, everything is in order, and you're a great driver, while the guy in the Geo metro is drunk.

Let's suppose the Geo metro guy is about to cause an accident with the self driving car. The self driving car realizes the Geo Metro is small and in a bad shape, and the driver would probably sustain terrible injuries if hit. The only way to avoid that is... to purposefully crash against your Chevy Suburban, causing you injuries (which would be way less bad than the ones the Geo driver would sustain) and totaling your car, but at least causing the less damage. The self driving car would decide to crash against you on purpose, even when you did nothing wrong, to avoid the greater damage to the Geo Metro driver.

This is terrible because (1) It's not your fault he is drunk (2) it's not your fault he's driving a small clunker (3) you did nothing wrong. But the self driving software did its intended purpose, it "minimized vehicle and passenger damage". That sucks doesn't it?


----------



## water4tips

I would like to see a scenario where robo car has a choice of killing a person or itself. I.e. is the command more important than self preservation? In that case you want the kamikaze suicidal robocar to go off the bridge, and not kill the person (if its driving empty). If it has a person in the car, it will be given an algorithm, based on age, bank account status maybe, race maybe, whatever you want to program. Perhaps, who is the better uber customer? And that is how the supercomputer in trunk figures who dies.

Edit: it can also look at health records, and criminal. This will definitely be monitored and edited by insurers and other crooks.
You have already proven that for "safety" you are willing to give up your privacy withh the patriot act. So thanks for that.


----------



## water4tips

wpguy1967 said:


> ....hence the 15 to 20 years to really work through this. But let's get one thing clear, humans are absolutely the worst in poor weather conditions, typically driving too fast or not understanding how to correct a skid. A self-driving car is going to be far better.


Have you seen these youtube comoilations of ukrain and russian accidents. Some are doing 100mph in heavy snow! Its totally insane. Self driver will be safer. I want to go mechanic and controls tech college now. Im 35+, its not too late right?


----------



## wpguy1967

water4tips said:


> Have you seen these youtube comoilations of ukrain and russian accidents. Some are doing 100mph in heavy snow! Its totally insane. Self driver will be safer. I want to go mechanic and controls tech college now. Im 35+, its not too late right?


First of all, let's get get this much right - assume there were no cars; they didn't exist but just got invented. After a lot of studies, it was determined that there would be around 35,000 deaths per year and hundreds of thousands of smaller accidents.

Sounds horrible, right? But we accept that risk because we want convenience. I don't care how many youtube videos you watch, self-driving cars will great reduce the number of deaths and accidents.

So if self-driving cars kill 5,000 people a year, I'll take it from 35,000 a year.


----------



## Just one more trip

Will Travis be king of the self-driving cars?


----------



## knowledgethrow

Just one more trip said:


> Will Travis be king of the self-driving cars?


hopefully not!


----------



## rembrandt

Let them show what technology they have. Any argument is pointless as every claim will be put to test in real word.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

wpguy1967 said:


> ....hence the 15 to 20 years to really work through this. But let's get one thing clear, humans are absolutely the worst in poor weather conditions, typically driving too fast or not understanding how to correct a skid. A self-driving car is going to be far better.


Really?
Because you have shared the road with thousands of robot cars to base this on?


----------



## uberboy48

ANGRY UBER MAN said:


> Uber does not even have a 24/7 phone line you can call if you are a driver or pax. How the duck do they expect to use driverless cars with the only way to get in contact with uber is by emailing workers in 3rd world countries? This company is so quick to rush out bs because of this expensive and poorly planned push for driverless cars by their investors.


They recently started opening call centers but hopefully its a big fail, hopefully people wont suport it


----------



## UberXTampa

knowledgethrow said:


> I read an article about this.
> 
> Basically there may be some "moral" system built into self driving cars, which will make terrible choices. Say the guy next to you is driving a 1980 Geo metro that will basically turn to dust if hit, and you're driving a nice, brand new Chevy Suburban. You got airbags, everything is in order, and you're a great driver, while the guy in the Geo metro is drunk.
> 
> Let's suppose the Geo metro guy is about to cause an accident with the self driving car. The self driving car realizes the Geo Metro is small and in a bad shape, and the driver would probably sustain terrible injuries if hit. The only way to avoid that is... to purposefully crash against your Chevy Suburban, causing you injuries (which would be way less bad than the ones the Geo driver would sustain) and totaling your car, but at least causing the less damage. The self driving car would decide to crash against you on purpose, even when you did nothing wrong, to avoid the greater damage to the Geo Metro driver.
> 
> This is terrible because (1) It's not your fault he is drunk (2) it's not your fault he's driving a small clunker (3) you did nothing wrong. But the self driving software did its intended purpose, it "minimized vehicle and passenger damage". That sucks doesn't it?


http://www.justiceharvard.org

I can see Michael Sandel rewriting his lectures to include the choices of robot-drivers.


----------



## jack badly

watch @ 1:30

self driving is still at infancy stage. lol

wtf was that


----------



## uberlyfer

tohunt4me said:


> Like wal Mart self checkout ?
> 
> Like Robots building the cars ?


Wasn't saying it's not here in places or is not coming, but even in the KFC example you showed the food was still getting made by people. Kiosks for everything is sort of the half-way work around, with most successful example being ATMs, but there are still plenty of stumbling blocks.

I live in a nice area, and yet both my local CVS & Grocery have removed self checkout. Some people don't like talking and interacting with machines, and no business wants to lose out on a sale for those that prefer human interaction. I like machines where they speed me along to taking care of a task, but who doesn't hate those obnoxious customer service phone trees where all you want is to speak to a representative and they're trying to save a buck by wasting your time with a robot that doesn't understand your needs?


----------



## uberlyfer

water4tips said:


> I would like to see a scenario where robo car has a choice of killing a person or itself. I.e. is the command more important than self preservation? In that case you want the kamikaze suicidal robocar to go off the bridge, and not kill the person (if its driving empty). If it has a person in the car, it will be given an algorithm, based on age, bank account status maybe, race maybe, whatever you want to program. Perhaps, who is the better uber customer? And that is how the supercomputer in trunk figures who dies.
> 
> Edit: it can also look at health records, and criminal. This will definitely be monitored and edited by insurers and other crooks.
> You have already proven that for "safety" you are willing to give up your privacy withh the patriot act. So thanks for that.


Another option: for the 99.9% of the time the car is not under a bridge, overpass, or high tension wire, it ejects you in a parachute bucket seat like Bruce Willis in Die Hard 2...about as sensible as the idea of this stuff really coming any time soon.


----------



## uberlyfer

Given everything you know about us as people, what are the odds that people will even accept driverless cars that kill people from time to time as long as they can now use all that car time to do other things? If the number of people killed in driverless accidents is at or below the number of people that were being killed in human driver accidents per year, what happens then?


----------



## knowledgethrow

uberlyfer said:


> Given everything you know about us as people, what are the odds that people will even accept driverless cars that kill people from time to time as long as they can now use all that car time to do other things? If the number of people killed in driverless accidents is at or below the number of people that were being killed in human driver accidents per year, what happens then?


Good point. Consumers are getting way too dumb, and this is especially evident in the electronics or computer markets. Some people will go out of their way to justify companies that pretty much scammed them, for example now airlines are "de-coupling", meaning your ticket gets you a (smaller) seat and not much else and now you got to pay for things you used to get for free, and somehow people talk themselves into thinking it is a good thing (e.g. "this is good, this lowers prices, I don't need baggage/water/ an intact neck" ... yeah but you're still paying the same price!)


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

*Self-Driving 'Robo Taxis' hit the Streets of Singapore*
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2016/08/self-driving-robo-taxis-hit-the-streets-of-singapore.html
AutoGuide.com Aug 26, 2016









*Self-driving taxis are now a reality, at least in one small area in Singapore. *​
Startup company nuTonomy has begun the first-ever public trial of a service it calls "robo-taxi," allowing Singapore residents to summon a ride using an app. An engineer from the company will ride in the vehicle, ready to take over at all times, while also observing system performance.

Rides will be given in specially prepared Renault Zoe and Mitsubishi i-MiEV vehicles, limited to Singapore's one-north business district. The company says it has been testing the cars in the area since April and that the data collected from its self-driving cars will help the brand refine its software moving into the future.

The company's goal is to have a widely-available commercial robo-taxi service by 2018.

The brand's "first-in-the-world public trial is a direct reflection of the level of maturity that we have achieved with our AV software system," said CEO and co-founder of nuTonomy, Karl Iagnemma. "The trial represents an extraordinary opportunity to collect feedback from riders in a real-world setting, and this feedback will give nuTonomy a unique advantage as we work toward deployment of a self-driving vehicle fleet in 2018."

Self-driving cars from nuTonomy are also being testing in Michigan and the United Kingdom.


----------



## RamzFanz

elelegido said:


> It's going to be hilarious when an idiot bro/ princess pukes in one of Uber's self driving test cars. I wonder who will have to clean it up.


The person who gets paid $200 to clean puke for 30 minutes? (the passenger pays)

People will line up to be puke cleaners.



wpguy1967 said:


> Scenario: You're doing 45 on a two lane country road. A deer jumps out. Within fractions of a second, you know there's an oncoming car in the other lane and trees to the right.
> 
> Your choices are:
> 
> A: Swerve into the left lane and get hit head on.
> B: Hit the deer
> C: Yank the wheel to the right and hit the tree.
> 
> .....what's the self-driving car going to do?


First, the SDC knew the deer was there because all previous SDCs saw the deer approaching and relayed that. So while we would be speeding along in the dark, the SDC could know they were emerging and where to slow. The answer is obviouse, all SDCs work with all other SDCs to preserve their passengers. You brake.



uberlyfer said:


> It's just like how they keep threatening that McDs employees will be replaced by robots, and yet well over half of century of McDs and no robots. I guess it still DOES cost more.


McDonalds has robots. Look into it. So does Wendy's and many other chains. The cost is falling massively and constantly. Soon, we won't need to work full time, but we will need a process of distributing the wealth.



tohunt4me said:


> Robbers tossing mannequins in front of cars to rob passengers after a crash . . .


They could do this now. They don't.



tohunt4me said:


> When machines can do all of the work,what do you imagine they will do with all of the surplus people ?


Feed and house them? Think about how much less the cost of living will be and you'll start to see how the world population will benefit. No more kids eating from dumps because of costs? What is that worth?



uberlyfer said:


> I have to wonder right now if our ingenuity will really be powerful and timely enough to outpace our consumption of resources that can't be easily replaced.


We are about 2 years from solar being the most efficient energy source. This is why we invest when it isn't.



Louisvilleuberguy said:


> It will take much longer than uber thinks to get the public used to self driving cars.


Not so. The vast majority of people are on board or sitting the fence. If it's safer, and it is, people will change quickly. Why would I put my child in a 5% chance of death vs .0005%?



midtownhm said:


> &%[email protected]!*ing tech is eating all the jobs, soon there will be nothing to do but go back to farming and living off the grid


No chance of farming for a living, self driving tractors are a thing. What you will do are human things that require little compensation because your cost of living will be next to nothing. It all comes out in the wash. Automation of car manufacturing didn't end car buying from lack of customers as they claimed, it made car ownership more widespread.



JHawk said:


> One that always jumps into my mind when I'm driving is when the rider simply drops a pin in the middle of a large apartment complex, which might have multiple doors or access roads for a car to pull up at. Normally there's some type of communication between the driver and rider which helps pinpoint the riders exact pickup location, usually as a result of the rider "guiding in" the driver. How would that work if theres no driver and the car simply drives as close as possible to a dropped GPS pin? Who does the rider call if they make a mistake and need to re-direct the car?


Really? They just tell the pax. You must have access or meet them. Every gated community will comply because they must.



JHawk said:


> I suppose the TNC's are operating under the assumption that riders will quickly alter their behavior and expectations for these types of situations. Because the cost per ride will become so low, riders will accept some potentially inconvenient situations in exchange for dirt-cheap, on-demand, transportation.


Yes. Accuracy of pin drop will be on pax.



knowledgethrow said:


> Some people will go out of their way to justify companies that pretty much scammed them, for example now airlines are "de-coupling", meaning your ticket gets you a (smaller) seat and not much else and now you got to pay for things you used to get for free, and somehow people talk themselves into thinking it is a good thing (e.g. "this is good, this lowers prices, I don't need baggage/water/ an intact neck" ... yeah but you're still paying the same price!)


This is how the middle class got to fly. I fly Southwest almost exclusively. Peanuts and paid drinks. My parents couldn't fly often because they couldn't afford luxuries. Why should we attach options to a service we don't want and can't afford? When I was young you had meal services on every flight and they sucked while being a huge burden on ticket prices. Today, I bring a sandwich and pay far less considering inflation.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

RamzFanz said:


> The person who gets paid $200 to clean puke for 30 minutes? (the passenger pays)
> 
> People will line up to be puke cleaners.
> 
> First, the SDC knew the deer was there because all previous SDCs saw the deer approaching and relayed that. So while we would be speeding along in the dark, the SDC could know they were emerging and where to slow. The answer is obviouse, all SDCs work with all other SDCs to preserve their passengers. You brake.
> 
> McDonalds has robots. Look into it. So does Wendy's and many other chains. The cost is falling massively and constantly. Soon, we won't need to work full time, but we will need a process of distributing the wealth.
> 
> They could do this now. They don't.
> 
> Feed and house them? Think about how much less the cost of living will be and you'll start to see how the world population will benefit. No more kids eating from dumps because of costs? What is that worth?
> 
> We are about 2 years from solar being the most efficient energy source. This is why we invest when it isn't.
> 
> Not so. The vast majority of people are on board or sitting the fence. If it's safer, and it is, people will change quickly. Why would I put my child in a 5% chance of death vs .0005%?
> 
> No chance of farming for a living, self driving tractors are a thing. What you will do are human things that require little compensation because your cost of living will be next to nothing. It all comes out in the wash. Automation of car manufacturing didn't end car buying from lack of customers as they claimed, it made car ownership more widespread.
> 
> Really? They just tell the pax. You must have access or meet them. Every gated community will comply because they must.
> 
> Yes. Accuracy of pin drop will be on pax.
> 
> This is how the middle class got to fly. I fly Southwest almost exclusively. Peanuts and paid drinks. My parents couldn't fly often because they couldn't afford luxuries. Why should we attach options to a service we don't want and can't afford? When I was young you had meal services on every flight and they sucked while being a huge burden on ticket prices. Today, I bring a sandwich and pay far less considering inflation.


Best post you've ever made here!  Seriously.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Best post you've ever made here!  Seriously.


Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


ha!


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Michael - Cleveland said:


> ha!


I sharpen my tongue every morning before dawn.


----------



## RamzFanz

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Best post you've ever made here!  Seriously.


OMFG, hell has frozen.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

RamzFanz said:


> OMFG, hell has frozen.


Nah.
Heck I even agrees with you once or twice.


----------



## RamzFanz

wpguy1967 said:


> If you're in the transportation business, you have around 15 years. No, Uber drivers are not in jeopardy right now. Long term? Self-driving cars will make up 1% of all cars on the road, then 5%, then 50%, etc....


I doubt the biggest impact is that far out, myself, unless the god damned government gets involved. We need to consider that every major automaker in the world and most major tech companies will be putting out/helping to put out SDCs for TNCs as fast as possible. When they come, they will come en masse because of the number of manufacturers who will produce them and their race for market share. One expert believes the last human driven car will be made in 2025.



knowledgethrow said:


> Also, what about road conditions? Like snow or floods....


MIT came up with an interesting solution for snow: Ground penetrating radar. The underground is mapped using it. The underground is static so the car would know exactly where it was in any conditions. Flooding, I have no idea yet, but it seems fairly straight forward. The car will know something is wrong because the roads have changed. It will then need to understand why.



jack badly said:


> self driving is still at infancy stage. lol


Tesla's aren't self driving. The self driving cars like Google's are probably nearing testing completion. This is the end game.



knowledgethrow said:


> (e.g. "this is good, this lowers prices, I don't need baggage/water/ an intact neck" ... yeah but you're still paying the same price!)


Airlines are very price competitive.


----------



## 4736353377384555736

Funny how people are so adamant about their speculations about the future. It's easy to go on the internet and make wild predictions about what's going to happen. By the time those predictions fail to come true, nobody remembers (or cares) what you said anyway. 

Anyway, please link me to some passenger reviews of these self-driving taxis, as people must have taken them by now.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

As I said in the other RF dominated thread, fully autonomous cars will be up to the consumer.
If the buying public wants them, they will come.
If not, they won't.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

TwoFiddyMile said:


> As I said in the other RF dominated thread, fully autonomous cars will be up to the consumer.
> If the buying public wants them, they will come.
> If not, they won't.


Caveat: we don't always know what we want - and are more likely to scoff at new things, until we actually use them and get hooked. It wasn't that long ago that computer industry experts thought it was absurd that companies were working on building 'personal computers' that could be in every home.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

Michael - Cleveland said:


> Caveat: we don't always know what we want - and are more likely to scoff at new things, until we actually use them and get hooked. It wasn't that long ago that computer industry experts thought it was absurd that companies were working on building 'personal computers' that could be in every home.


I.E. IBM.
This current wave is an opposite trend, Michael.
EXPERTS are telling us well be in robot cars.
CONSUMERS?
Not so much.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland

we'll see... most consumers (mass-market) don't know anything about autonomous cars right now -
just as most consumers (mass-market) in 1975 didn't have any idea of the utility a computer would bring to them.


----------



## 4736353377384555736

There must be some reviews of the self driving cars in PA. They've supposedly been on the roads for two weeks now.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile

4736353377384555736 said:


> There must be some reviews of the self driving cars in PA. They've supposedly been on the roads for two weeks now.


You mean "regular cars with GPS Autopilot and Babysitters".


----------



## 4736353377384555736

TwoFiddyMile said:


> You mean "regular cars with GPS Autopilot and Babysitters".


Or that  I'm just surprised I haven't read 1 review anywhere online of these supposed cars.


----------



## rembrandt

4736353377384555736 said:


> Or that  I'm just surprised I haven't read 1 review anywhere online of these supposed cars.


----------



## andaas

4736353377384555736 said:


> There must be some reviews of the self driving cars in PA. They've supposedly been on the roads for two weeks now.


I think the rides being provided are "free" right now, there is probably an NDA involved to get your "free" ride.


----------



## andaas

...then again...

Uber's test track almost ready still no official word on when self-driving cars will roll out (9/3/2016)


----------



## 4736353377384555736

andaas said:


> I think the rides being provided are "free" right now, there is probably an NDA involved to get your "free" ride.


I very much doubt that. Also, seems like Uber would want people talking about them as much as possible.


----------



## Fireguy50

4736353377384555736 said:


> I very much doubt that. Also, seems like Uber would want people talking about them as much as possible.


Agree, they would have a ribbon cutting ceremony and YouTube videos of the fun PAX excitement. Uber needs positive press!


----------



## Jermin8r89

I went on Pittsburgh in uber app and where am i suppose to find if i want a SDC?


----------



## 4736353377384555736

They're supposed to be assigning them at random but I have a feeling they're not on the roads. I'm just guessing, but it seems there would be a whole lot of reports by now. And every news article says "They're coming in late August" even though it's now nearing the middle of September.


----------



## Fireguy50

Just like the Google Street view car gets photographs when in local towns. The proof would have surfaced by now if it were true.

Smoke and mirrors, Uber lies!


----------



## Jermin8r89

Exactly. Also would you think they would put SDC like how you can choose pool\x. Uber liesssss


----------



## andaas

Considering Uber hasn't even got a test track set up completely yet - I doubt they'll be running the cars in mixed traffic this month, let alone last month.


----------



## 4736353377384555736

Is this yet another lie by Uber? Seems like this one could really bite them on the *ss because they're not just disappointing drivers this time, they're disappointing customers (riders) and investors as well by not following through on this much-hyped tech wonder.


----------



## knowledgethrow

maybe there is some sort of "review and press embargo" like they do with some movies and the like?


----------



## Djc

Ubernic said:


> The only way teleportation would work, would be if we found a way to fold space and create our own wormholes and just walk through to our destination. Not be pulled apart and stuck back together.


Yes this would be the easier route. Technically speaking we are not that far away from technology that can disassemble and reassemble a human body but the problem is transporting the life energy or spirit or soul whatever you want to call it. We know nothing about that stuff cos all humans do is play in the physical world atm.


----------



## Djc

knowledgethrow said:


> This is true, but something doesn't add up.
> 
> Uber was able to undercut cab companies because, among other factors, they don't own the cars. Whereas a cab company has to buy cabs and then pay the price to maintain them, Uber only has to pay for the GPS and API, it's up to the driver to buy his or her own car and pay for its maintenance and repairs.
> 
> Now they suddenly want to own their own fleet too? It seems they will save on having to pay drivers a share of the profit (and no benefits, 401k, health, etc, just part of the generated profit!) and then spend on buying a fleet of sophisticated self driving cars, maintaining the cars AND also maintaining their self driving equipment... how is this more profitable?


If cost of operating a new car including depreciation is $0.54 a mile then there is still a big gab between current rates and breakeven. And lower rates = more riders so even a small margin in the price charged per mile will equal way more profit. These autonomous cars will not cost much more than regular cars. All those sensors are dirt cheap. The computer program build cost over millions or cars is negligible.


----------



## 4736353377384555736

Djc said:


> Yes this would be the easier route. Technically speaking we are not that far away from technology that can disassemble and reassemble a human body but the problem is transporting the life energy or spirit or soul whatever you want to call it. We know nothing about that stuff cos all humans do is play in the physical world atm.


I don't believe in "souls" or any of that supernatural silliness. However, think about it, if you were transporting people like in Star Trek, would you simply be making a clone of them and killing the original person? And, even more profoundly, can anyone ever find out? The clone would think it's you, everyone else would think it's you, and you'd be dead so you wouldn't be around to disagree. Whether it transports "you" or simply kills you and clones you... the end result is exactly the same thing.


----------



## Tenderloin

Travis on the Mission


----------



## 4736353377384555736

What's strange to me too is that they originally said the cars would be assigned randomly to riders; now it says riders have to be on a special list to get them.

Also shady.


----------

