# Uber eyes $10 TRILLION (with a T) a Year Global Market



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.










More: http://www.economist.com/news/leade...aluable-startup-leading-race-transform-future


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's all pie in the sky marketing hype.
People will still own cars, fully autonomous robot cars are decades away.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> It's all pie in the sky marketing hype.
> People will still own cars, fully autonomous robot cars are decades away.


In dunno. Gates (current worth 90 billion ) said in less than 5 years and added that uber will be the one to do it.

He said in 1988 that in 10 years most retail will be done online. I thought he was nuts cause everyone loved the shopping experience.

Remember those 1970s and 80s movies that showed factory workers in bars laughing it up exclaiming "there ain't no robot that can do my job".

CEO of ford said flat out : in 5 years Ford will be mass producing driverless cars for commercial use. "The world is changing, and it's changing rapidly," he said, adding that Ford now sees itself as not just a carmaker but a "mobility company."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/b...f-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0

Worth reiterating : Ford now sees itself as Not just a carmaker but a "Mobility Company"
I bet GM, Chrysler and all the other world wide car manufacturers are thinking the same thing


----------



## Brooklyn (Jul 29, 2014)

Wow Morgan Stanley states ride hailing will account for 25% by 2030... Weren't they the ones selling Uber shares? Hm.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm going to go out on a limb here.

"NATIONALISM "

Already hearing it from English & Australian rooms from time to time.

Uber is not Cocoa COLA

I'm surprised they have gotten as far as they have with no real issues yet.

A competitor merely needs to pick up a harp & strike that chord.

The chorus will quickly develop.

Take care of your business at home Uber.

Pay your drivers !


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> He said in 1988 that in 10 years most retail will be done online. I thought he was nuts cause everyone loved the shopping experience.


Was there an "online" in 1988? Anyway, by 1998 most retail was not done online. Heck, in 2008 most retail was not done online. Most retail still isn't done online, despite Amazon.

All the hype is intended to sucker greedy investors whose eyes turn into cash registers when they hear the (ridiculous) numbers being put out by Uber.

"You can't cheat an honest man" as the saying goes. Investors' greed is blinding them to the obvious.

EDIT: In rereading the article, it's a load of hogwash. Does Uber tell all these authors to write the same thing? Because they all seem to dwell on the "parking spaces will become a thing of the past" topic. Honestly, how many independent journalists would think up that same "benefit?" It's rather esoteric and not the first thing that would pop into the average person's mind.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Nothing but hype.
Don't drink too much coolaide.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Nothing but hype.
> Don't drink too much coolaide.


So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking

Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years

CEO of ford said flat out : in 5 years Ford will be mass producing driverless cars for commercial use. "The world is changing, and it's changing rapidly," he said, adding that Ford now sees itself as not just a carmaker but a "mobility company."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/b...f-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0

Worth reiterating : Ford now sees itself as Not just a carmaker but a "Mobility Company"
I bet GM, Chrysler and all the other world wide car manufacturers are thinking the same thing


----------



## rtaatl (Jul 3, 2014)

Who actually believes this BS...there is no way to provide transportation cheaper than either owning a vehicle or public mass transit. In the end somebody has to pay.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking


Yeah, we are. Remember the Time Warner / AOL debacle? Remember Carly Fiorina nearly running Hewlett Packard into the ground? Remember the Apple guy who tried to revamp JC Penney and nearly bankrupted the company?

CEOs of massive companies get caught up in tulip-bulb bubble hype just like everyone else and make awful decisions. Only difference is their mistakes cost $billions and end the jobs of tens of thousands of people.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

4736353377384555736 said:


> Was there an "online" in 1988? Anyway, by 1998 most retail was not done online. Heck, in 2008 most retail was not done online. Most retail still isn't done online, despite Amazon.
> 
> All the hype is intended to sucker greedy investors whose eyes turn into cash registers when they hear the (ridiculous) numbers being put out by Uber.
> 
> ...


One must first realize that all "Media" is owned by 5 corporations.

I used to own CBS stock.
They have networks,compose television shows ,they own recording artists & studios,they own radio stations ,they own billboard advertising.They own Viacom,and Paramount.

So,driving home from a CBS produced movie,you turn on the radio to a CBS owned station to listen to a CBS artist sing on a CBS label while passing CBS billboards,to arrive home to flip through a CBS magazine while watching CBS news.

So any idea that CBS wants to INJECT into your brain ,has hit home hundreds of times from 8 scources in 1/2 hour.

REALIZE THIS.

So when the Owned media's Owned reporters all sing the same song,step back.

Question Everything.

Think for Yourself.

("and the Meek Shall Inherit the Earth")


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

4736353377384555736 said:


> Yeah, we are. Remember the Time Warner / AOL debacle? Remember Carly Fiorina nearly running Hewlett Packard into the ground? Remember the Apple guy who tried to revamp JC Penney and nearly bankrupted the company?
> 
> CEOs of massive companies get caught up in tulip-bulb bubble hype just like everyone else and make awful decisions. Only difference is their mistakes cost $billions and end the jobs of tens of thousands of people.


Time Warner is an excellent example also of a media conglomerate & it's works upon the public.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Yeah, CEOS are more full of shit than most of us little people.
They sell gilded poop.
No matter how much gold paint, it's still poop.
Their job is to get people to believe in the gold paint and convince them to purchase the poop.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Yeah, CEOS are more full of shit than most of us little people.
> They sell gilded poop.
> No matter how much gold paint, it's still poop.
> Their job is to get people to believe in the gold paint and convince them to purchase the poop.


----------



## UberReallySucks (Jul 17, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now would the economist publish an article about a crazy person claiming to be new Messiah?


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

How would it feel to awaken to the realization that the debt you have saddled the unborn with was created so someone else could be rich today?

After all THEY only live once and must get theirs now.

As the last vestages of individual wealth are squeezed from the remaining middle class through legislation.

Are there any good reasons to ship the remaining jobs overseas ?

To import labor while so many are jobless ?

To destroy competition through laws ?
All done of free will.

You have given your rights away through apathy & omission.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> How would it feel to awaken to the realization that the debt you have saddled the unborn with was created so someone else could be rich today?
> 
> After all THEY only live once and must get theirs now.
> 
> ...


correct, since the beginning of civilization the rich get richer off the backs of others.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

They should try to turn a profit in the market they're in right now before trying to lose more billions doing something else.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

James Bond (in Dr No): World domination. The same old dream. Our asylums are full of people who think they're Naploeon. Or God.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ? These two Titans are mumming on the whole issue. Appearatly , they know something which the rest don't. They don't need investors cash either as they are real companies doing real business.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> They should try to turn a profit in the market they're in right now before trying to lose more billions doing sonething else.


Couldn't agree more - the basis tenet of going into business is to make a profit. Once you're in profit, use those profits to expand your successful concept. NOT borrow all capital upfront and pray that it all works out.
For some time, I've been expecting an Uber Franchise model to be peddled to the needy and greedy. Big franchise fee paid up front, annual franchise fees, and an ongoing percentage of turnover.
The Ultimate Pyramid Scheme - world franchise, national franchises, state franchises, municipal franchises - rivers of gold; title to Golden Gate bridge included for the first ten callers (but you get to pay all costs of maintaining and operating it).
Uber, unfortunately for the watching world, displays all the worst characteristics of Corporate America.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

rembrandt said:


> Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ? These two Titans are mumming on the whole issue. Appearatly , they know something which the rest don't. They don't need investors cash either as they are real companies doing real business.


Might as well toss Mercedes in with those two biggies - they've always had and used the funding for research and construction of advanced concepts, especially involving electronic systems. And perhaps Porsche, too?


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

rembrandt said:


> Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ? These two Titans are mumming on the whole issue. Appearatly , they know something which the rest don't. They don't need investors cash either as they are real companies doing real business.


Actually in May 2016 Toyota and Uber consummated their relationship. Dont know if the relation will grow.

Toyota Motor Corp. said it had invested in Uber Technologies Inc. as part of a strategic alliance aimed at getting more drivers on the ride-hailing service.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-and-uber-reach-investment-lease-partnership-1464122403


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Lowestformofwit said:


> Couldn't agree more - the basis tenet of going into business is to make a profit. Once you're in profit, use those profits to expand your successful concept. NOT borrow all capital upfront and pray that it all works out.
> For some time, I've been expecting an Uber Franchise model to be peddled to the needy and greedy. Big franchise fee paid up front, annual franchise fees, and an ongoing percentage of turnover.
> The Ultimate Pyramid Scheme - world franchise, national franchises, state franchises, municipal franchises - rivers of gold; title to Golden Gate bridge included for the first ten callers (but you get to pay all costs of maintaining and operating it).
> Uber, unfortunately for the watching world, displays all the worst characteristics of Corporate America.


currently uber is strictly a technology company. wonder who will own the driverless cars? franchisees? uber? another shell company?
will current drivers be offered an opportunity to lease or buy driverless car(s) with uber finance.

Then! I can sit at home in my boxers watching my cars online roam around making bank.


----------



## ubershiza (Jan 19, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> Then! I can sit at home in my boxers watching my cars online roam around making bank.


It's seems all so perfect until some pukes on your dreams.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Lowestformofwit said:


> James Bond (in Dr No): World domination. The same old dream. Our asylums are full of people who think they're Naploeon. Or God.


Napoleon almost pulled it off.
For his time.

The founders of World Bank financed him.

And his opponents.

Read the history.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

rembrandt said:


> Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ? These two Titans are mumming on the whole issue. Appearatly , they know something which the rest don't. They don't need investors cash either as they are real companies doing real business.


Vw was set back by the old boys club via their emissions scandal.

Pay attention.

A similar theme has been employed throughout the last century.

The Japanese were on their way to owning the U.S. in the 80's.

They got shook out the tree.

It may happen again.

Eye on China.

Some policies I am in full agreement with even if dirty.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> currently uber is strictly a technology company. wonder who will own the driverless cars? franchisees? uber? another shell company?
> will current drivers be offered an opportunity to lease or buy driverless car(s) with uber finance.
> 
> Then! I can sit at home in my boxers watching my cars online roam around making bank.


You will be offered a chance to ride in them.

When private car ownership is forced into Obsolscence along with your job.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

rembrandt said:


> Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ? These two Titans are mumming on the whole issue. Appearatly , they know something which the rest don't. They don't need investors cash either as they are real companies doing real business.


Toyota's tied up in brake software malfunctions and airbags.

What do you think would happen to them if they tried to come out on top on this ?

The Japanese actually innovated robotics in car manufacturing.

Domo arigato Mr. Roboto.


----------



## Euius (May 19, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> He said in 1988 that in 10 years most retail will be done online. I thought he was nuts cause everyone loved the shopping experience.


And he was wrong. 1988 was 28 years ago. This year was the first that 51% of shopping was online.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking
> 
> Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years
> 
> ...


"Mass producing" could mean 1000 cars a year. Means nothing.


----------



## Euius (May 19, 2016)

Lowestformofwit said:


> Couldn't agree more - the basis tenet of going into business is to make a profit. Once you're in profit, use those profits to expand your successful concept. NOT borrow all capital upfront and pray that it all works out.


SalesForce have never shown a profit by GAAP rules.

But you know more than they do.


----------



## Lag Monkey (Feb 6, 2015)

I pray every night that Travis looses his fortune and uber implodes. This man doesn't deserve the riches of success. He has ruined so many lives. Travis your tidal wave of karma is coming


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

It is understandable that no one can compete with Santa Claus in giving out freebies. Santa Clause has a big follower community because everyone comes to him. However, Santa Claus does not make monetary profit either. All he wants is fame and he truly deserves all the fame. Hence, the road is wide open for Santa Claus because no one wants to compete with him for the sake of fame that costs a fortune and no monetary return. 

To sum up , there must be something else going on behind the smoke. Uber might be only the container but not the actual cargo. Only time will tell. The real competition will kick in either the moment Travis wants to make profit or he runs out of cash. He obviously does not own the Federal Reserve's printing press , though.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> currently uber is strictly a technology company. wonder who will own the driverless cars? franchisees? uber? another shell company?
> will current drivers be offered an opportunity to lease or buy driverless car(s) with uber finance.
> 
> Then! I can sit at home in my boxers watching my cars online roam around making bank.


If Uber is just a technology company why do I have an acceptance rate for my driving that I must adhere to?
If Uber is just a technology company why do I have a cancellation rate for my driving that I must adhere to?
If Uber is just a technology company why do I have a completion rate for my driving that I must adhere to?
If Uber is just a technology company why do they dictate the rules that I must follow while I am driving?


----------



## Amsoil Uber Connect (Jan 14, 2015)

I'm still trying to imagine all of these Tesla's, or others sitting around at 3 in the morning with no where to go. What do they do after a drop off for the few minutes with no request. As the demand fluxuates greatly though out the day. Or are they like a Spot Bot and head home until the next request. And just exactly where are all those homes going to be ?

And then there is all maintenance facilities servicing them. You do want your car maintained right ?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Allegro Acura said:


> currently uber is strictly a technology company. wonder who will own the driverless cars? franchisees? uber? another shell company?
> will current drivers be offered an opportunity to lease or buy driverless car(s) with uber finance.
> 
> Then! I can sit at home in my boxers watching my cars online roam around making bank.


Until you realise uber is paying you 20 cents per mile of the fare and it's costing you 25 to run the car.

And then there are so many more folks buying the cars to "make bank" that your car is sitting idle 23 hours a day, but you still have to make the car payment, which is really high, because, wow, driverless cars are expensive, and only the dealer has the parts.

Oh, but never mind. You've been kicked off the Uber platform. Too many complaints that your car wasn't clean. You did get the texts from the automatic sensors saying there was soiling in the pax compartment, but you couldn't afford to send it to the car wash since you weren't making any profit....so you just hoped for the best.

You KNEW you should have listened to the folks on self-driving-uberowners.net who told you not to buy a car to uber!


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Euius said:


> SalesForce have never shown a profit by GAAP rules.
> 
> But you know more than they do.


Perhaps, perhaps not.
However, I've been running my own limo business for 30 years, and I've made a profit every one of those.
And yes, I have borrowed against my main assets to expand, but only when the cash flow was secure enough to do so.
So, without smoke & mirrors accounting, I'm happy enough to know enough to be successful.
Does that address the spirit of you question?


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Amsoil Uber Connect said:


> I'm still trying to imagine all of these Tesla's, or others sitting around at 3 in the morning with no where to go. What do they do after a drop off for the few minutes with no request. As the demand fluxuates greatly though out the day. Or are they like a Spot Bot and head home until the next request. And just exactly where are all those homes going to be ?
> 
> And then there is all maintenance facilities servicing them. You do want your car maintained right ?


Gee, you just made this whole driverless Uber ride-sharing scenario sound unworkable!
But, hang on; if there's no driver, it's not ride-sharing. Luckily, TNC's are only technology companies.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

Food for Thought
By flooding the markets with autonomous & driverless cars. Travis K, Uber, car companies & investors want us lay people to do away with car ownership. By driverless meaning nobody behind the wheel. So, if all of the above entities don't want us to buy cars & are producing thousands who will be buying their cars on a year round basis. I am also taking technology advancement of traffic management into the equation. Which means no accidents. Also assuming insurance rates will be low as there are no accidents. 

Searching for a rational & rationale to the above.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Slavic Riga said:


> Food for Thought
> By flooding the markets with autonomous & driverless cars. Travis K, Uber, car companies & investors want us lay people to do away with car ownership. By driverless meaning nobody behind the wheel. So, if all of the above entities don't want us to buy cars & are producing thousands who will be buying their cars on a year round basis. I am also taking technology advancement of traffic management into the equation. Which means no accidents. Also assuming insurance rates will be low as there are no accidents.
> 
> Searching for a rational & rationale to the above.


Another piece of the New World Order puzzle.
Car Ownership will be exclusive to the very wealthy. (not in my time, but soon).

All other citizens will use government supplied public transportation. Those not in the top 1% but with modest means (doctors, lawyers), will
secure the temporary services of autonomous mobile transportation.

Additionally, deceased citizens will be made into Soylent Green for nutritional consumption by the masses.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Where I live, there's a historic mansion being renovated, and this has being going on for six months now, with each tradesman (up to 12 a day) arriving in their work vehicles. Of course, they all have their own and with limited parking, they illegally park on corners, on foothpaths, anywhere they can.
So, would a driverless vehicle allow itself to breach parking laws, or would it prevent itself doing so, by coming to a halt at the limit of legality? 
Also, I haven't read anywhere about any self driving off-road vehicles, either for work or recreation. Traversing unformed tracks, open fields, etc would most likely be well away from proximity sensors, and current GPS is not accurate enough to allow for avoidance of all obstacles, ditches, etc.
Additionally, tradesman and recreational vehicle owners like to leave their tools and gear on the truck between uses, so you'd think there was a pretty strong case for personally owned vehicles with manual control or at least a full manual override on an autonomous vehicle of that type.
So, I can't see a full autonomous takeover of all our driving needs being too close.


----------



## _McUber_ (Jul 27, 2016)

Lag Monkey said:


> I pray every night that Travis looses his fortune and uber implodes. This man doesn't deserve the riches of success. He has ruined so many lives. Travis your tidal wave of karma is coming


This dude is one of two (supposedly) humans who got me to hate them so much, I dream I am pouring gasoline on them and setting them on fire for eternity.


----------



## _McUber_ (Jul 27, 2016)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...plans-to-put-its-own-drivers-out-of-business/


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)




----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

_McUber_ said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...plans-to-put-its-own-drivers-out-of-business/


Travis K has very little understanding of how businesses work? *Lets not forget he filed two Bankruptcies.*
Yes. He has created an upheaval in the Taxi cartel & market. *The cartel was regional & not global.*
The Trillion dollar a year Global market includes Logistics. *In Logistics, no way*. Uber & Travis K will have to fight with well established logistics & transportation companies. E.g. FedEx, UPS, DHL, Schneider trucking etc. etc. for its share of the market. There are already regulations in place for logistics & transportation businesses. *They will not all roll over & play dead.*
So, if *he as Uber* is wanting to take over the Trillion dollar market. He has to invest in assets. Now, the desperate & needy are ruining their assets (cars) to the ground driving for Uber. *Technology is not an asset.* * It keeps evolving. New today outdated tomorrow.* The above companies have the Technology & they keep on updating Technology.

ON another note. No Government be it Federal, Provincial, Regional & City will allow their coffers to be in red & be Bankrupt. While he & his venture capitalists & investors siphon the revenue to shell companies.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking
> 
> Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years
> 
> ...


Putting a chic label on making cars doesn't change anything. A"sanitation engineer" still picks up garbage.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

I wish I could get a city garbage mans job. $$$ + benefits , vacation and retirement plan.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

The "Fast and the Furious" franchise has made 7 movies. Seven. And there's an 8th to be released in 2017. It's one of the most successful movie franchises in history.

There are hundreds of millions of people -- yes including Millennials -- who want to own cars for reasons that have very little to do with transportation. Anyone who can't see that is koo-koo.










Car ownership ain't "going away" for at least a century.


----------



## Jay Dean (Apr 3, 2015)

We are in a day and age where to personalize is huge, with everything being stamped out and streamlined there is a huge demand for unique assets or whatever you want to call it, driver-less cars are the future, but how long before someone gets annoyed by sitting in a seat someone else has farted in lol, trust me..it is the same reason Americans did not buy a $6,000 car from china back in the day of the disposable car prediction, we don't go cheap..we want individual shit, to be individuals. I know even at my wage between working a reg job and side money I want my own ride... how long do you think someone sitting comfortably will want to be in a "cab" to get around or go out with lol?


----------



## Xylphan (Aug 26, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> I wish I could get a city garbage mans job. $$$ + benefits , vacation and retirement plan.


Shhh. Don't give Travis any ideas. Next he'll start up Trachser, where you use your car to haul other people's trash!


----------



## MoneyUber4 (Dec 9, 2014)

Uber and Pittsburg test ground.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...d2462a-6fc7-11e6-9705-23e51a2f424d_story.html

*But people are upset. Kalanick has said he hopes to replace all of Uber's human drivers with technology.*


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

I still have to ask. When this future world of self driving fully autonomous cars becomes reality why will anybody need uber? Any well financed group could place thousands of cars into any market to operate. Hail a car with an app[ it's not that hard to create an app] car pulls up...get in...just swipe your credit card... punch gps coordinates and off you go.


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

ALL PUBLIC MASS TRANSIT LOSES MONEY

Can't say it loud enough, its all subsidized,
This is more pie in the sky utopian world BS

There are far too many people in the world that ignore the truth about everything so they can live in an imaginary delusional world...
Oh because a ceo or bill gates said it it must be true... good greif folks ever heard of the big picture? I was told in the early 70's when I was old enough to drive cars would fly and run on water or nuclear fuel well there are people who have built these things but they are not practical and as long as there are "Humans" they likely wont be sure some day there may be driverless cars cruising around but I will be dust in a box and so will everyone reading this before it is Common place.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

4736353377384555736 said:


> Yeah, we are. Remember the Time Warner / AOL debacle? Remember Carly Fiorina nearly running Hewlett Packard into the ground? Remember the Apple guy who tried to revamp JC Penney and nearly bankrupted the company?
> 
> CEOs of massive companies get caught up in tulip-bulb bubble hype just like everyone else and make awful decisions. Only difference is their mistakes cost $billions and end the jobs of tens of thousands of people.


Right and this is just the incompetents. This doesn't even take into account the snake oil salesmen. The outright fraudsters. Enron, WorldCom, HealthSouth et al.


----------



## Wil_Iam_Fuber'd (Aug 17, 2015)

Gung-Ho said:


> I still have to ask. When this future world of self driving fully autonomous cars becomes reality why will anybody need uber? Any well financed group could place thousands of cars into any market to operate. Hail a car with an app[ it's not that hard to create an app] car pulls up...get in...just swipe your credit card... punch gps coordinates and off you go.


Exactly. Have been shouting this from the rooftops for months. The answer is, when you're actually running a "pump and dump" then you have to pump like crazy before you can dump and run for the hills. Travis' is still in the pump phase.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Slavic Riga said:


> Travis K has very little understanding of how businesses work? *Lets not forget he filed two Bankruptcies.*
> Yes. He has created an upheaval in the Taxi cartel & market. *The cartel was regional & not global.*
> The Trillion dollar a year Global market includes Logistics. *In Logistics, no way*. Uber & Travis K will have to fight with well established logistics & transportation companies. E.g. FedEx, UPS, DHL, Schneider trucking etc. etc. for its share of the market. There are already regulations in place for logistics & transportation businesses. *They will not all roll over & play dead.*
> So, if *he as Uber* is wanting to take over the Trillion dollar market. He has to invest in assets. Now, the desperate & needy are ruining their assets (cars) to the ground driving for Uber. *Technology is not an asset.* * It keeps evolving. New today outdated tomorrow.* The above companies have the Technology & they keep on updating Technology.
> ...


I dunno if BKs are an issue anymore since the republican candidate for president has 4 bankruptcies under his belt. The MYTH Is He's touted as a great businessman yet the TRUTH is he's a Failure on every conceivable level including business acumen.

Belief in Myths allow the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of Thought (JFK)


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> I dunno if BKs are an issue anymore since the republican candidate for president has 4 bankruptcies under his belt. He's touted as a great businessman yet a Failure on every conceivable level including business acumen.


Agreed.
In America, bankruptcy is a business & bankruptcies *are/were* used to gain unfair advantage over similar businesses. Airlines & car companies were noted for it. He used it to his advantage.


----------



## Rat (Mar 6, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> I wish I could get a city garbage mans job. $$$ + benefits , vacation and retirement plan.


Don't forever free lunch!


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Rat said:


> Don't forever free lunch!


Your handle is appropriate


----------



## stemor (May 15, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking
> 
> Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years
> 
> ...


I'm not "discounting" the CEO's comment, I'm laughing and ignoring it completely. "Just saying", if that helps you understand that this is a comment, and NOT a question. ?!?

Ford shares suck, Ford currently sucks. They have dropped for five years, and they're needing a way to turn the stock, and their business, around. If I were them, I'd try to baffle the stupid investors with some serious BS too. Do you remember what K-TEL stock did back in the dot.com bubble by announcing a web presence, right before they declared BK? Ford ain't going away, but they definitely are using the current buzz words, trying to sucker people in with visions of Jefson-lke futures that are somehow vastly profitable, despite the fact that they won't have any advantage and fewer vehicles would be needed in their own vision of the future.

Yeah, good luck with that. I'm not buying anybody trying to ride the "autonomous vehicle" wave other than possibly to continue to own the technology suppliers (like NVDA, but I've already watched that one go up too far to believe it will continue to run, it feels like time to sell). And Uber? NO WAY, NO HOW. I wouldn't touch this one with anything but speculative trading funds for short term trades, this mess will hit a fan and it will not fare well. DON'T bet your life savings in a long position on Uber when/if it ever comes available.

As an ex-driver, and an professional analyst, I intimately understand the business and can see the writing on the wall. It's not good for the ride sharing companies or those trying to cozy up to them.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Another thing to consider about this utopia of [No one needs to own a car, autonomous driverless cars for all transportation needs.]

How about privacy? Freedom of movement without some entity knowing every place you go and when you do it. These machines would be data compilers on a scale bigger than Google. Where you work. Where you shop. Where you go out to eat. Who's homes you visit. What you do for entertainment and when you do all these things. NO THANKS.


----------



## Allegro Acura (Aug 29, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> Another thing to consider about this utopia of [No one needs to own a car, autonomous driverless cars for all transportation needs.]
> 
> How about privacy? Freedom of movement without some entity knowing every place you go and when you do it. These machines would be data compilers on a scale bigger than Google. Where you work. Where you shop. Where you go out to eat. Who's homes you visit. What you do for entertainment and when you do all these things. NO THANKS.


honestly we have an entire HUGE generation (75.4 million Millennials) with No expectation of privacy judging from their posts and images on various social media. they are the 2day and future. they seem not to care who knows what about them.


----------



## REX HAVOC (Jul 4, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> In dunno. Gates (current worth 90 billion ) said in less than 5 years and added that uber will be the one to do it.
> 
> He said in 1988 that in 10 years most retail will be done online. I thought he was nuts cause everyone loved the shopping experience.
> 
> ...


In a few years professional jobs like accounting will be replaced by computers. Today trading on the Nasdaq is all done by computers. The world is changing alright but not just for the low skilled workers.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

stemor said:


> I'm not "discounting" the CEO's comment, I'm laughing and ignoring it completely. "Just saying", if that helps you understand that this is a comment, and NOT a question. ?!?
> 
> Ford shares suck, Ford currently sucks. They have dropped for five years, and they're needing a way to turn the stock, and their business, around. If I were them, I'd try to baffle the stupid investors with some serious BS too. Do you remember what K-TEL stock did back in the dot.com bubble by announcing a web presence, right before they declared BK? Ford ain't going away, but they definitely are using the current buzz words, trying to sucker people in with visions of Jefson-lke futures that are somehow vastly profitable, despite the fact that they won't have any advantage and fewer vehicles would be needed in their own vision of the future.
> 
> ...


This is spot on.
Robot cars are the new corporate America version of the early .coms.

I remember the time I was in the back of a cab coming to San Francisco. I saw all these glass towers with .com names on them and I instantly knew they had created an artificial bubble for themselves on hype and hype alone.
The robot car is such hype.
Everyone wants robot flying cars, cause everyone wants a Phillip K. Dick life.


----------



## F213 (Nov 3, 2015)

You best believe my rickety ass will be tossing sand bags at these 'auto nomous' vehicles.

If and when they go live. There is no way in hell a robot can replace the thrill of driving down Turnbull canyon road, slowing down, coming out of the turn and seeing 2 bikers with their bikes wrapped around the safety barrier.

A robot will drive by. A robot won't ask if they need help.


----------



## Jermin8r89 (Mar 10, 2016)

Its all big talk. When vehicals first came out people were afraid we would never walk...well still walking alot...online shopping ive had bad experiances would rather still shop in person. What makes these times great is FREEDOM OF OPERTUNITY. So everyone has to use an iphone eat salad and drink pepsi thats it


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking
> 
> Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years
> 
> ...


GM said the same thing months ago and then dropped $500M on Lyft.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> People will still own cars, fully autonomous robot cars are decades away.


2-3 years. You said decades and you probably meant 2-3 years. So says most of the world.



rtaatl said:


> Who actually believes this BS...there is no way to provide transportation cheaper than either owning a vehicle or public mass transit. In the end somebody has to pay.


Cheaper than owning? Sure it could be, easily. Public transportation isn't point to point. Many experts believe TNC SDCs will become a first and last mile option for those on a budget. They don't compete with each other.



rembrandt said:


> Why is no one talking about Toyota or VW group who sell more cars than all the other companies combined together ?


Both are developing SDCs. Is that what you meant? VW has invested in Get and Toyota in Uber.



Allegro Acura said:


> wonder who will own the driverless cars? franchisees? uber? another shell company?
> will current drivers be offered an opportunity to lease or buy driverless car(s) with uber finance.


Those are the big questions. Tesla says they will have TNC SDC fleets from private owners.



Slavic Riga said:


> So, if all of the above entities don't want us to buy cars & are producing thousands who will be buying their cars on a year round basis.


They are getting out of the private car business and becoming mobility companies. They will profit primarily off the rides, not car sales.



Allegro Acura said:


> Car Ownership will be exclusive to the very wealthy. (not in my time, but soon).


Car ownership will be cheaper than ever. Insurance will be zero for some cars and very little for others. The electronics package for SDCs is going to be very cheap and balanced by the cost savings from removing the human controls. Most will be electric and batteries are undergoing a revolution of power/price.



Lowestformofwit said:


> So, would a driverless vehicle allow itself to breach parking laws, or would it prevent itself doing so, by coming to a halt at the limit of legality?
> Also, I haven't read anywhere about any self driving off-road vehicles, either for work or recreation.


They breach traffic laws now if they need to. Not sure why they would need to breach parking when you can send it to park anywhere.

SDCs started off road. We already have SDC tractors. It's more than possible for them to go off road but it's not a priority.



4736353377384555736 said:


> There are hundreds of millions of people -- yes including Millennials -- who want to own cars for reasons that have very little to do with transportation. Anyone who can't see that is koo-koo.


Cars will become primarily for transportation. Human driving will become regional and/or closed course. It doesn't matter what the millennials want, the rights of others to be transported safely trumps desire.



4736353377384555736 said:


> Car ownership ain't "going away" for at least a century


Experts are estimating the final human driven car will probably roll off the assembly line in 2025. Individual ownership of SDCs will still be around, but cites will be mostly TNCs. The advantages are just too big to ignore.



uberist said:


> ALL PUBLIC MASS TRANSIT LOSES MONEY


TNCs don't compete with mass transit.



uberist said:


> sure some day there may be driverless cars cruising around but I will be dust in a box and so will everyone reading this before it is Common place.


So, in 2-3 years we will all be dead? What a downer.

By the way, SDCs are already in live service in the Netherlands. Prediction time is over, they're a reality.



stemor said:


> Ford ain't going away, but they definitely are using the current buzz words, trying to sucker people in with visions of Jefson-lke futures that are somehow vastly profitable, despite the fact that they won't have any advantage and fewer vehicles would be needed in their own vision of the future.


So every major tech and auto company is lying? Profitable? The market is valued at trillions so, yeah, could be pretty profitable. They are not going to be reliant on car sales. They will own the cars and TNC them. It's a different business model than what you are critiquing.



TwoFiddyMile said:


> The robot car is such hype.


Keeeep on saying that as they just keep getting closer and closer.


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

Hahahaha, and I bet you thought the Rams would never move back to Los Angeles...

Good luck wi


RamzFanz said:


> Car ownership will be cheaper than ever. Insurance will be zero for some cars and very little for others. The electronics package for SDCs is going to be very cheap and balanced by the cost savings from removing the human controls. Most will be electric and batteries are undergoing a revolution of power/price.


 This alone tells me you are slightly delusional in your thinking and appear to have a light grasp on reality on this subject


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

uberist said:


> Hahahaha, and I bet you thought the Rams would never move back to Los Angeles...
> 
> Good luck wi
> 
> This alone tells me you are slightly delusional in your thinking and appear to have a light grasp on reality on this subject


All ad hominem attacks, no substance.

Coming out of the gate, SDCs may be somewhat more expensive. In a very short time they will be less than cars now.


----------



## stemor (May 15, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> So every major tech and auto company is lying? Profitable? The market is valued at trillions so, yeah, could be pretty profitable. They are not going to be reliant on car sales. They will own the cars and TNC them. It's a different business model than what you are critiquing.


Nope, this is exactly what I'm critiquing. Just because SDC will/does exist, doesn't mean that there will be a wildly profitable "ride share" business model that can leverage that technology. That would be like, say, arguing that because the internet exists, and most people have pets, so therefore an online pet store will be a fabulous success (yes, I'm thinking pets.com). Were you around for the flaming pile of ... pets.com ... that was the first dot.com collapse? If not, you should study the lessons that should be learned from that era well.

That's why I suggested investing in somebody like NVDA. They'll make their money, regardless of how stupid and unprofitable the intended use of the host vehicle might be.

Good luck, and be careful out there.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

stemor said:


> Nope, this is exactly what I'm critiquing. Just because SDC will/does exist, doesn't mean that there will be a wildly profitable "ride share" business model that can leverage that technology. That would be like, say, arguing that because the internet exists, and most people have pets, so therefore an online pet store will be a fabulous success (yes, I'm thinking pets.com). Were you around for the flaming pile of ... pets.com ... that was the first dot.com collapse? If not, you should study the lessons that should be learned from that era well.
> 
> That's why I suggested investing in somebody like NVDA. They'll make their money, regardless of how stupid and unprofitable the intended use of the host vehicle might be.
> 
> Good luck, and be careful out there.


Pets.com was too expensive. I tried to buy from them and it was crazy. That doesn't mean selling pet products online isn't profitable. It was a sound idea that was poorly executed.

I completely agree. If you're buying, buy the suppliers. FLIR manufacturers would have been a good idea I bet just a short time ago. I'm not in the market right now so I didn't look. Others might be lithium batteries raw materials / manufacturing.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> All ad hominem attacks, no substance.


As if your random, evidence-free speculation is substantive


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

4736353377384555736 said:


> As if your random, evidence-free speculation is substantive


I'm repeating what the independent experts are saying. None of it is random or evidence free.


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> All ad hominem attacks, no substance.
> 
> Coming out of the gate, SDCs may be somewhat more expensive. In a very short time they will be less than cars now.


Ok, please explain to me how replacing basic design to failure vehicle manual controls with what would have to be aircraft quality autonomous electromechanical controls would be cheaper?

You see in my car generally you would drive it doing basic maintenance and inspections but you don't replace the power steering pump until it actually goes bad, same with brake calipers and other non routine maintenance items.

In a autonomous vehicle that drives the streets where people's lives are on the line these vehicles would have to have redundant systems, and mandatory parts replacement of hourlife rated parts like simular to aircraft.

To say they will be cheaper to produce then today's cars? 
I just don't know how you can come to that conclusion based on REAL world facts.

Here's something to think about a mq-9 reaper drone is
$14,000,000.00+, a comparable rear pusher manned air craft is under 2 million. And the drone still has a pilot on the ground, which brings up another point, there absolutely will have to be banks of drivers based in buildings at controls that will have to monitor take over remote driving when the self driving car has a problem.

The economics of it all just won't pan out.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I'm repeating what the independent experts are saying. None of it is random or evidence free.


Ah yes those "independent experts." Enjoy.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

uberist said:


> Ok, please explain to me how replacing basic design to failure vehicle manual controls with what would have to be aircraft quality autonomous electromechanical controls would be cheaper?


Aircraft quality autonomous electromechanical controls? No, you will need automobile quality electromagnetic controls. It's not going to fall out of the sky killing hundreds if a sensor or part fails. And yes, many are estimating that the entire electronics package will shortly cost about $5,000. Electronics are cheap. That should easily be made up by no longer needing human driving controls or insurance.



uberist said:


> You see in my car generally you would drive it doing basic maintenance and inspections but you don't replace the power steering pump until it actually goes bad, same with brake calipers and other non routine maintenance items.


Yes, and routine maintenance on an 2000 part internal combustion engine is far more expensive than on an electric car with 2 moving parts.



uberist said:


> In a autonomous vehicle that drives the streets where people's lives are on the line these vehicles would have to have redundant systems, and mandatory parts replacement of hourlife rated parts like simular to aircraft.


Yes, SDCs have redundancy, and they check themselves and their sensors trillions of times a second. The hour life swapping is probably not necessary, but so what in a long life inexpensive part? The Google car systems are being designed to know when sensors or parts are failing and switch to redundant systems if it's called for and available. Otherwise it just finds a safe spot to pull over.



uberist said:


> To say they will be cheaper to produce then today's cars?
> I just don't know how you can come to that conclusion based on REAL world facts.


Technology is cheap and only gets better and cheaper. The FLIRs the Google car uses cost $70,000 when the car was first made. They are in the hundreds today and the industry thinks next year they will probably be in the $60 range. Human driven cars are not getting cheaper.



uberist said:


> Here's something to think about a mq-9 reaper drone is
> $14,000,000.00+, a comparable rear pusher manned air craft is under 2 million. And the drone still has a pilot on the ground, which brings up another point, there absolutely will have to be banks of drivers based in buildings at controls that will have to monitor take over remote driving when the self driving car has a problem.


There will be no banks of drivers. There are already SDCs on the road in service in the netherlands and no banks of drivers. A human isn't going to monitor a car that can deduce and resolve an issue trillions of times faster than a human. No manufacturer is saying they will be adding remote control. It wouldn't be possible anyways because these cars will be going in and out of wireless communication.



uberist said:


> The economics of it all just won't pan out.


The economics is the same as cars today.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

4736353377384555736 said:


> Ah yes those "independent experts." Enjoy.


I do. Which is why I know what I'm talking about.


----------



## uberist (Jul 14, 2016)

Please site some sources so that I and others might become as optimistic as you.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I do. Which is why I know what I'm talking about.


Actually, you know what _they're_ talking about.  I prefer to think for myself, but that's just me. Though it's silly to argue over speculation about the future. But if you're so convinced, I do hope you're putting your money where your mouth is.


----------



## MrA (Jul 7, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> So you're also discounting Ford Motor Co CEO? Just asking
> 
> Mobility Company is a heavy annoucment for a co thats been just a carmaker for 100 years
> 
> ...


Uber currently has very little regulation. Driving Uber is not really worth doing full-time, in most markets. Government is actively pursuing mass transit, roads, infrastructure, bridge repair, etc. If everyone is taking a driverless Uber car, all those fees every driver pays now disappear. In this scenario, of only driverless Uber cars, all vehicle licensing fees, fuel taxes etc, will have to be paid by Uber. Companies do not pay taxes, you do by using their products and services, they price accordingly. There will be tax on the rider by higher fare, because, when there are no longer enough fuel and vehicle licensing fees collected,. taxing agencies will start to look for new ways to tax. When this happens Uber has completed it's evil plan. They have made the masses dependent on them.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

MrA said:


> They have made the masses dependent on them.


This is where I disagree. I think the demand for Uber/taxis is quite elastic. If the rates go up, demand will fall, and people will just start to walk more, drive more, get rides from their friends, etc.

For example, for DUIs, you do some rough math in your head:

if (probability of getting a DUI) x (penalty for DUI) > cost of an Uber
then you take an Uber.

If it's < than the cost of an Uber, you don't.

In the past when I had a long way to walk, I'd calculate the cost of a taxi. If the cost was greater than the hassle of walking, I wouldn't take the cab. Same with Uber. If the rates go up too high, and I can't drive myself, I'll walk. It's a very elastic demand.

It's like JC Penney. When JCP stopped having sales, people stopped shopping there, and the place nearly went bankruptcy.

The thing is JCP was competing with other retailers. Rideshare is competing with your feet.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Peoples, simply ignore RamzFanz.
Hes so pro Uber hell advocate anything to get your panties in a bunch.
I'll say it again;
Fully autonomous cars are decades away.
All the robot cars currently on the road in North America have babysitters in the driver's seat.
I asked my sister randomly, "would you buy a fully autonomous car?"
She said "no, I prefer to be in control".
And there ya have it.
**** the experts. It's actually up to the consumer.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

The problem with people like RamdFanz is that they don't know the past, so their predictions for the future are silly.

People have been dreaming of, and trying to make, self-driving cars for generations.



^^^^ That concept drawing is 60 years old. 60 years ago people thought that self-driving cars were "just around the corner."

Thinking that suddenly it's a couple of years away is so short-sighted that it's incredible. That's what frustrates me. How can certain people fail to understand humanity so completely? Unless they're just trolls, which is another possibility.

I imagine when he's 80 years old RamFanz will still be posting "any day now, just you wait!"


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

How insane any 'prediction' may be, there are always people who love to burn cash on a casino. Clever investors bank on these Insanely optimists ( or delusionists) to make a living. Religion or political ideology still exist today because they can successfully sell a utopian future to mass. General public do not put every prediction under the scrutiny of Popperian falsifiability that every prediction made must be empirically testable and falsifiable. If not all these statements or prediction are simply conjectures. You claim something but you never describe how your claim can be refuted - we take your claim with a pinch of salt.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> 2-3 years. You said decades and you probably meant 2-3 years. So says most of the world.
> 
> Cheaper than owning? Sure it could be, easily. Public transportation isn't point to point. Many experts believe TNC SDCs will become a first and last mile option for those on a budget. They don't compete with each other.
> 
> ...


Do you have any 'peer reviewed' research paper to substantiate your statements ? No newspaper interview ( like he said and she said) please. We need the name of the research paper and publishers' name so that we can find it ourselves.


----------



## Bulls23 (Sep 4, 2015)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, riiiiiiight. I wonder why coffeemakers are sold, kitchens are built, houses are owned despite the fact that hotels have been around for centuries? Smh..


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

Bulls23 said:


> Yeah, riiiiiiight. I wonder why coffeemakers are sold, kitchens are built, houses are owned despite the fact that hotels have been around for centuries? Smh..


Private ownership is one of the oldest tendency of mankind which is also neutral to time and space. Neither politicians nor Industrial revolution could change that over the million years evolutionary history of mankind. In fact , many people who wanted to rewrite human behavior by misrepresenting human psychology are themselves history now.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Bulls23 said:


> Yeah, riiiiiiight. I wonder why coffeemakers are sold, kitchens are built, houses are owned despite the fact that hotels have been around for centuries? Smh..


Speaking of which, I drove my non autonomous CAR to TARGET to purchase a coffeemaker yesterday on my day off.
OMG I didnt buy it online? No.
I needed a coffeemaker NOW.
the idea of hailing a robot taxi or my own robot car did and does not appeal to me either.
I drove, I bought.
Apparently I'm stuck in the 1950s.


----------



## _McUber_ (Jul 27, 2016)

uberist said:


> ALL PUBLIC MASS TRANSIT LOSES MONEY
> 
> Can't say it loud enough, its all subsidized,
> This is more pie in the sky utopian world BS
> ...


True. Most mass transportation including airlines never make any real money.


----------



## Xxx sucker (Jan 3, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> I'm going to go out on a limb here.
> 
> "NATIONALISM "
> 
> ...


 If they ask me ??? I could send them to the Real state to cut the cost of buying a house in Half! Lol


----------



## rtaatl (Jul 3, 2014)

I'm still trying to figure out where do people get the idea that aircraft, particularly commercial airliners are near the verge of fully being autonomous?!?! There are so many things a pilot has to do so let's go over a few.
Yes there are speed limits and highways in the sky, better known as 200kts indicated in class b airspace and Victor airways based off VOR radials. Guess who has to program route information into the computer. The pilot.
Or change route information..the pilot
What about flying vectors given by ATC to avoid hazards or navigate around terminal area traffic...you guessed it Cpt. Obvious, the pilot.
Autopilots can't account for cells of thunderstorms, or even land themselves in heavy crosswinds, nor turn more than 30 degrees on a localizer interecept...or accommodate for traffic. You'd have to get the TCAS, Wx information system to all work together....and in doing so you're going to have latency (delayed response) in a time where seconds count. Let's not get started on any emergency procedures the autopilot can't do.

You can say these things are easier than getting a car to accommodate for so many more variables on a road with exponentially more traffic and changing conditions as well as hazards. So if we don't have fully autonomous airplanes taking off and landing in busy airspace than what leads anyone to believe we're going to get self driving cars any time soon.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

rtaatl said:


> I'm still trying to figure out where do people get the idea that aircraft, particularly commercial airliners are near the verge of fully being autonomous?!?! There are so many things a pilot has to do so let's go over a few.
> Yes there are speed limits and highways in the sky, better known as 200kts indicated in class b airspace and Victor airways based off VOR radials. Guess who has to program route information into the computer. The pilot.
> Or change route information..the pilot
> What about flying vectors given by ATC to avoid hazards or navigate around terminal area traffic...you guessed it Cpt. Obvious, the pilot.
> ...


Well , pigs can fly too ! Pig experts have found that by 3 million years , all pig will have enough mutation to enable them take off vertically and land horizontally without the help of an autopilot system.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I do. Which is why I know what I'm talking about.


Read it carefully & slowly. This is where the independent experts like you come in.
The self-driving bus is manufactured by the German automotive concern Daimler AG. The vehicle *communicates *with the *infrastructure, whereby communication between the traffic lights and the bus is combined with all the sensor data collected by the bus itself.* The *availability *of a *largely separate bus lane.*

*Large sections of the bus lane between Schiphol Airport and Haarlem are closed off*. *At several stretches of the route, particularly at intersections, the bus will take the public road.* During the test runs and the demonstration, *a driver* *aboard* the bus was able to *monitor* all the systems and *intervene* whenever necessary. The bus drove at the maximum speeds allowed locally (50 - 70 km/h).


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Are they going to put names on their fleet of miracle contraptions. I hope so. It will be so much more personal than a car pulling up with just a number on it. Just think...here comes Betsy or Randy or Napolean or Hassan or George or Gary or Judy or Maria or Ivan or Rudyard or....you get the point. Autonomous cars with names. I like it. I'm starting to come around to this idea.


----------



## Cole Hann (Aug 22, 2016)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Peoples, simply ignore RamzFanz.
> Hes so pro Uber hell advocate anything to get your panties in a bunch.
> I'll say it again;
> Fully autonomous cars are decades away.
> ...


I bet that new Mr Coffee from Target has an automatic brew setting allowing u to awake to fresh brewed joe. What will they think of next


----------



## Cole Hann (Aug 22, 2016)

_McUber_ said:


> True. Most mass transportation including airlines never make any real money.


There's an old joke: How do u turn a billion dollars into $3? Buy an Airline


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Cole Hann said:


> I bet that new Mr Coffee from Target has an automatic brew setting allowing u to awake to fresh brewed joe. What will they think of next


Much like autonomous cars, the programming is not worth the trouble.
One still has to perform setup the night before.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Cole Hann said:


> There's an old joke: How do u turn a billion dollars into $3? Buy an Airline


OR:
The difference between Travellers Kashnicked and God?
God doesn't think he's Travis.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Lowestformofwit said:


> OR:
> The difference between Travellers Kashnicked and God?
> God doesn't think he's Travis.


Ladies and gentlemen, D I C K Cavett.


----------



## Micmac (Jul 31, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> It's all pie in the sky marketing hype.
> People will still own cars, fully autonomous robot cars are decades away.





TwoFiddyMile said:


> Nothing but hype.
> Don't drink too much coolaide.


Uber Autonomous cars come with a driver ! What a freaking ****** this Travis !


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Micmac said:


> Uber Autonomous cars come with a driver ! What a freaking ****** this Travis !


Wassup, mic Mac?


----------



## Micmac (Jul 31, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Wassup, mic Mac?


Nothing much pal!


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Micmac said:


> Uber Autonomous cars come with a driver ! What a freaking ****** this Travis !


If they didn't have a driver, there'd be no one for Uber to screw.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Micmac said:


> Nothing much pal!


Welcome back to the Race To Zero.
I had a great minimum wage morning.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

Come to Oz and drive for me.
Make life changing money.


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The person(s) who envision this must be on crystal meth.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I'm repeating what the independent experts are saying. None of it is random or evidence free.


So, was it with Eggs & Fats. Independent experts *mentioned & cited* case study after study. Eggs & Fats "*not* *good*" for you as it increases the level of cholesterol. Today the same experts mention eggs & fats are "*good"* for you.
*
Don't repeat & follow others blindly. Research, think & come to conclusions.
Listen to other people point of reasoning too. Don't try to push your opinion & mention to all of us that we are all wrong & only you are right in all matters of autonomous vehicles. *


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

rembrandt said:


> Do you have any 'peer reviewed' research paper to substantiate your statements ? No newspaper interview ( like he said and she said) please. We need the name of the research paper and publishers' name so that we can find it ourselves.


Why would there be peer reviewed papers? This isn't science, it's business R&D. You don't seem to realise fully functioning SDCs with no human controls are already in service on roads. It's already done, they exist. The question is when will many more exist and when can we buy them. Almost the entire auto and technology world is answering with 2018-2021. Experts are predicting the very last mass produced human driven car will come in 2025.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> So, was it with Eggs & Fats. Independent experts *mentioned & cited* case study after study. Eggs & Fats "*not* *good*" for you as it increases the level of cholesterol. Today the same experts mention eggs & fats are "*good"* for you.
> *
> Don't repeat & follow others blindly. Research, think & come to conclusions.
> Listen to other people point of reasoning too. Don't try to push your opinion & mention to all of us that we are all wrong & only you are right in all matters of autonomous vehicles. *


Uh, wow. This isn't nutritional science. Are you keto?

This is business R&D and SDCs already exist so there is no real debate here.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> Read it carefully & slowly. This is where the independent experts like you come in.
> The self-driving bus is manufactured by the German automotive concern Daimler AG. The vehicle *communicates *with the *infrastructure, whereby communication between the traffic lights and the bus is combined with all the sensor data collected by the bus itself.* The *availability *of a *largely separate bus lane.*
> 
> *Large sections of the bus lane between Schiphol Airport and Haarlem are closed off*. *At several stretches of the route, particularly at intersections, the bus will take the public road.* During the test runs and the demonstration, *a driver* *aboard* the bus was able to *monitor* all the systems and *intervene* whenever necessary. The bus drove at the maximum speeds allowed locally (50 - 70 km/h).


I don't know what you're referring to. There are hundreds of SDCs being tested. The one in the Netherlands is live, on the road, no human controls, no infrastructure changes, and no remote controls or oversight.


----------



## 4736353377384555736 (Aug 27, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> The one in the Netherlands is live, on the road, no human controls, no infrastructure changes, and no remote controls or oversight.


Please cite your sources of this information.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> Why would there be peer reviewed papers? This isn't science, it's business R&D. You don't seem to realise fully functioning SDCs with no human controls are already in service on roads. It's already done, they exist. The question is when will many more exist and when can we buy them. Almost the entire auto and technology world is answering with 2018-2021. Experts are predicting the very last mass produced human driven car will come in 2025.


Which experts ? Even Business research has to be peer reviewed if those are to be taken seriously by the industry. Without peer review , these are called sales pitch by undergrad sales managers.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I don't know what you're referring to. There are hundreds of SDCs being tested. The one in the Netherlands is live, on the road, no human controls, no infrastructure changes, and no remote controls or oversight.


This is on The Netherlands, Ministry of Transportation website. That is why I mentioned to you *Research. *The Ministry itself states that there is a human at the controls.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

rembrandt said:


> Which experts ? Even Business research has to be peer reviewed if those are to be taken seriously by the industry. Without peer review , these are called sales pitch by* undergrad sales managers*.


Which RamzFanz is disguised as a Uber employee.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> Uh, wow. This isn't nutritional science. Are you keto?
> This is business R&D and SDCs already exist so there is no real debate here.


So, now it comes to branding with you. Do you really like to have an honest open argument or force your views.
So your argument is that R&D is in SDC's & not in the food business.
You have limited knowledge SALESMAN. Convincing & trying to* sell sand for the price of gold.*

*G_d have mercy on all of us, if you ever be involved with SDC's & autonomous cars. 
By the above statement I mean, if you were developing or engineering them.
Which you are not? You just mention anything that has no substance.*


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I don't know what you're referring to. There are hundreds of SDCs being tested. The one in the Netherlands is live, on the road, no human controls, no infrastructure changes, and no remote controls or oversight.


*You don't know. That is why I mentioned research. Changes to infrastructure. Now you know "Salesman". Keep it up.*


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> This is on The Netherlands, Ministry of Transportation website. That is why I mentioned to you *Research. *The Ministry itself states that there is a human at the controls.


They don't have human controls. I'm referring to the WEpod, I think it's called?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> So, now it comes to branding with you. Do you really like to have an honest open argument or force your views.
> So your argument is that R&D is in SDC's & not in the food business.
> You have limited knowledge SALESMAN. Convincing & trying to* sell sand for the price of gold.*
> 
> ...


I'm not involved with SDCs. I was born too soon. I have invented entirely new automation systems though and owned an automation company, so I'm (out of date) versed on a lot of what is going on. I'm not forcing or selling anything. If you don't believe me on anything I've said, I can explain or support it. What I don't do is play fetch for people who troll me. I would like Uber drivers to be prepared when the time comes. This is the chance to reeducate or train because all driving jobs are coming to an end, faster than even most robotics experts predicted 5 years ago.

So, back to fat. The entire idea that fat and cholesterol were bad for you was based on a single faulty study. The government, being as useless as always, shopped this study to many researchers until they found some that would agree. No study since agrees that fat or cholesterol, in and of itself, is the cause of any disease that I know of. Which is why I asked if you were keto because ketoers know this.

They did the same thing with nicotine replacement therapy by the way, it's all a sham.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> *You don't know. That is why I mentioned research. Changes to infrastructure. Now you know "Salesman". Keep it up.*


I do know that the vast majority, if not all, SDCs in the pipeline require no changes to infrastructure. I'm not sure what your point is.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I do know that the vast majority, if not all, SDCs in the pipeline require no changes to infrastructure. I'm not sure what your point is.


So, Now you partially agree. Thanks.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> I'm not involved with SDCs. I was born too soon. I have invented entirely new automation systems though and owned an automation company, so I'm (out of date) versed on a lot of what is going on. I'm not forcing or selling anything. If you don't believe me on anything I've said, I can explain or support it. What I don't do is play fetch for people who troll me. I would like Uber drivers to be prepared when the time comes. This is the chance to reeducate or train because all driving jobs are coming to an end, faster than even most robotics experts predicted 5 years ago.
> 
> So, back to fat. The entire idea that fat and cholesterol were bad for you was based on a single faulty study. The government, being as useless as always, shopped this study to many researchers until they found some that would agree. No study since agrees that fat or cholesterol, in and of itself, is the cause of any disease that I know of. Which is why I asked if you were keto because ketoers know this.
> 
> They did the same thing with nicotine replacement therapy by the way, it's all a sham.


That's your independent experts.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Slavic Riga said:


> That's your independent experts.


No, the independent experts are not government know nothing bureaucrats.


----------



## jonhjax (Jun 24, 2016)

Has Ford been given govt. financial aid before to help cover its financial losses? This should tell you something about Fords top execs.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Is there any chance of there someday being SDM's? Autononmous motorcycles...


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

RamzFanz said:


> No, the independent experts are not government know nothing bureaucrats.


*Yet. You & the people around you, are governed by a Government with bureaucrats, who know nothing*.
Thanks for at last coming to your senses.


----------



## Slavic Riga (Jan 12, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> Is there any chance of there someday being SDM's? Autononmous motorcycles...


Hey RamzFanz do you have an answer or *b/s* to the above question. As, you have stated you are keeping a close watch on SDC's & Building Block tables.


----------



## TangoDriver (Sep 9, 2016)

WAKE UP UBERITES! WATCH OUT & BE VIGILANT.

UBER IS SYSTIMATICALLY MIS CACULATING UBER POOL FARES ON YOUR PAYOUTS.

After I was told of this discovery by another Uberite at SFO Staging Area. I started monitoring my new Pool Fares more closely. Days after I picked up an Uber Pool ride from SFO to Palo Alto, CA 19.74 Uber miles. Total calculated fare was only $12.44 which I knew was impossible. I ran this route many times before on UberX but always more than $28. I complained via email & as usual I got the copy paste replies to frustrate me by asking so many useless question whose details and answer were already in my original email. After 4 emails from me, & 5 emails from Uber Driver Support team they finally admitted Uber calculation mistake & corrected the Total fare to $32+. Huge difference!

The HUGE QUESTION; Did Uber preprogrammed UberPool miscalculations to cheat Unsuspecting & confused Uberites! If no one notices this deliberate computer mistakes, they'll get away with the money technically stolen from honest working drivers, the backbone of the Uber App. The $100M settlement fee Uber owes all Uberites included in the Mis-Classification Class Action Suit can come from these growing huge collection from hundreds of thousands of Active Uberites everyday. Will you be vigilant too, or will you just completely trust the system every time, every day?!?

Please spread the word to everyone in your Uberite network & localities. Also, please Post your comments & observations down below, & be sure to collect those dispute emails for proof


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> Is there any chance of there someday being SDM's? Autononmous motorcycles...


You mean Uber- Bi ? Well , It all depends on Uber. Everything is possible if Uber wants it. Uber is the technology leader after all. However, if you have an extra billion dollar to spare for investment in Uber for the greater humanity and environmental harmony , Uber might fast track that project for you. Please contact them if you are interested.


----------



## Cole Hann (Aug 22, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> Is there any chance of there someday being SDM's? Autononmous motorcycles...


----------



## Particle In A Box (Jul 24, 2016)

We are still using internal combustion engines in most of our vehicles right now, which is a concept made in the 19th century. We were supposed to have flying cars by now too. My Uber App avoids tunnels for no good reason, and still doesn't know some one way streets are one way streets. 
I do believe that one day all self driving cars will come, but the people saying this is coming in two years place a somewhat unrealistic timeline on the engineers and scientists to develop all the necessary components to make this happen. Throwing a lot of money to the cause helps for sure though. We did put a man on the moon!


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Automatic transmissions have been around since the invention of cars. They didn't start being partially used until the 1950's. Today most cars have them. Power windows were introduced in 1940 by Packard. There were new cars being built in the 1990's that still had hand crank Windows. 

Just because a technology is available doesn't mean it will be instantly embraced and widely used or standardized.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

Can the current Google prototype SDC operate under a condition where radio frequency is jammed by jamming devices ? Is is tested ? Under this condition neither radar , GPS nor cellular device will work. Military has access to this jamming technology.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

European cars are technologically much more advanced than their American counterparts. All big names in auto industry are European. From BMW to Bugatti. And yet, Europeans prefer driving manual transmission. Vast majority of European cars have manual transmission. That is for a good reason. Europeans do not let greedy corporate interests dictate their national interests. The very greedy corporations will destroy America treating the citizen like children.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

Manual transmission is cheaper than building an automatic. An automatic is an upgrade.
Europeans as a rule can't afford cars. Due to lack of parking. Inflated insurance. Gasoline which is 4 times more expensive than here in North America.
An EU citizen who is lucky enough to be able to own and operate a car can't get picky regarding deluxe options.


----------



## Hershal Bernardi (Jul 17, 2016)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Manual transmission is cheaper than building an automatic. An automatic is an upgrade.
> Europeans as a rule can't afford cars. Due to lack of parking. Inflated insurance. Gasoline which is 4 times more expensive than here in North America.
> An EU citizen who is lucky enough to be able to own and operate a car can't get picky regarding deluxe options.











thxs for the 1960s trip down memory lane


----------



## jaywaynedubya (Feb 17, 2015)

rtaatl said:


> Who actually believes this BS...there is no way to provide transportation cheaper than either owning a vehicle or public mass transit. In the end somebody has to pay.


If its a driverless electric car, with not many moving parts and no stupid human driving it, then year, it can be dirt cheap.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)




----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Allegro Acura said:


> Uber's ambitions, and the expectations underpinning its valuation, extend much further: using self-driving vehicles, it wants to make ride-hailing so cheap and convenient that people forgo car ownership altogether. Not satisfied with shaking up the $100-billion-a-year taxi business, it has its eye on the far bigger market for personal transport, worth as much as $10 trillion a year globally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The hype macine is getting more and more exposed. I was surprised to find this crazy article from 2016.


----------



## Lowestformofwit (Sep 2, 2016)

goneubering said:


> The hype macine is getting more and more exposed. I was surprised to find this crazy article from 2016.


With the same old basic error.
Revenue from massive volume sales and huge commissions while retaining low customer pricing.
Has always worked out well for retailers when a volume downturn comes - NOT!
"World domination - same old dream" (James Bond to Doctor No).


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

I really think Uber has always been about getting to the IPO. Even from day 1. The early investors just want to cash out big. They don't care about the company at all. 

That's the reason they have been pushing SDC's all the while knowing it could never work. I think as soon as the IPO hits they give up on SDC's.


----------

