# The SDC That'll Never Arrive - Self-driving cars are delusional tech optimism rooted in greed, sorry



## jocker12

Optimism about self-driving cars has sustained a fever pitch for so many years, at this point, that some die-hard boosters of the concept would still insist it's an inevitability. Countless journalists who have experienced, with their own bodies and two eyes, a self-driving car journey, have declared it the inevitable future. These journeys have only taken place thus far on little obstacle courses that amount to little more than* a carnival ride*, or in at least one case, a road test where the car does fine by itself until it encounters any remotely challenging human-interaction scenario. At that point, the PR handler or engineer in the driver seat slickly takes over driving just for a split second, *hoping the journalist doesn't register that those split seconds are when the self-driving cars' abilities, or lack thereof, matter the most.*

But it hasn't been a great six months for self-driving vehicles. In March, a self-driving Uber car in Arizona killed a woman who was walking a bike across a street. Public relations messaging around the death first cast aspersions on the testing driver in the seat, saying he was a felon and then also maybe watching Hulu, and then on the victim, saying she was walking a bike across the street outside of a crosswalk, and how was a car AI to distinguish her as a thing it shouldn't hit? Final reports suggested the car's emergency braking system had been disabled by Uber itself, and that was the ultimate cause of the incident.

Laying the blame on a critical failure conveniently sidesteps the whole issue of whether a self-driving car can adequately identify a thing it shouldn't run into, which should be almost the entire point of a car that drives itself. But then, per the Verge, "the vehicle decided it needed to brake 1.3 seconds before striking a pedestrian, but Uber had previously disabled the Volvo's automatic emergency braking system in order to prevent erratic driving." Read: The car correctly identified a threat, but in a broken-clock-is-right-twice-a-day way, such that its threat identification reaction had become so annoying and frequent it was turned off.

Just last week, Uber released its Q2 financial reports showing a nearly billion-dollar loss, and a report from _The Information_ revealed the company is losing at least a million dollars per day on its self-driving car project alone. _Bloomberg_ reported its investors are pressuring the company, which is still struggling with profitability, to get rid of its self-driving car project to perhaps focus on making the dire economics of ridesharing even a little viable and, uh, maybe scooter rentals rather than split their efforts by trying to invent the self-driving wheel.

For its part, Google, the erstwhile self-driving industry leader, spun off its self-driving car department, Waymo, back in 2018. *Waymo continues to trickle out tentative optimism to cooperative outlets that are iterations of "any day now,"* and publications keep falling for it. (2016, _Wired_: "Google's Self Driving Car Company Is Finally Here." 2018, _Bloomberg_: "Waymo's Self Driving Cars are Near." Ok. Good to know the self-driving car can also drive itself in reverse.)

If that weren't enough, self-driving car engineers themselves seem to finally be growing frustrated enough with the whole endeavor that they are engaging in some wild reality-distortion-field tactics. They have begun to *blame the cars' lack of success on non-negotiable aspects of reality*. The problem is not that self-driving AI is bad at driving, their logic now goes; it's that people are bad at walking. The _Bloomberg_ report from Thursday detailing this tension included these devastating paragraphs:

With these timelines slipping, driverless proponents like Ng say there's one surefire shortcut to getting self-driving cars on the streets sooner: persuade pedestrians to behave less erratically. If they use crosswalks, where there are contextual clues-pavement markings and stop lights-the software is more likely to identify them. *But to others the very fact that Ng is suggesting such a thing is a sign that today's technology simply can't deliver self-driving cars as originally envisioned.* "The AI we would really need hasn't yet arrived," says Gary Marcus, a New York University professor of psychology who researches both human and artificial intelligence. He says Ng is "just redefining the goalposts to make the job easier," and that if the only way we can achieve safe self-driving cars is to completely segregate them from human drivers and pedestrians, we already had such technology: trains.

A conversation about self-driving cars is really a conversation about AI. AI as a concept has lately had even broader setbacks; IBM's Watson managed to win at Jeopardy but has proven a catastrophic failure at its much more noble ultimate goal of helping treat cancer with more success than human doctors. While we've made progress in the time since sci-fi went from pulp to high art, our reach continues to cyclically elude our grasp. Quite simply, it is both very hard and not good.

In her latest book _Life in Code_, Ellen Ullman, a four-decade veteran programmer and an integral figure in the early days of several different Silicon Valley companies, wrote extensively about the periodic waves of excitement around the potential of AI. She described watching AI "fail spectacularly in fulfilling its grand expectations" to understand humans equally as well as humans do back in the 70s and 80s.

In an interview around the launch of her book last summer, Ullman told me she did not believe self-driving cars were anywhere near where they needed to be to reach the aspirations of companies developing them:

Our intelligence comes from social existence. We call somebody smart who can look in our eye, and we can trade understanding. If you're on the highway, you can see far ahead. You could see far behind. If you're an experienced driver, there are many ways that you see a car as another person, in a way. You can read that car. Self-driving cars do proximity around your own vehicle, and don't really look very far ahead.* They're following rules like playing chess.* An experienced good driver has these capabilities that I don't believe any time soon will be duplicated in a self-driving car.

Though futuristic optimism is great for currying public support, the actual promises of AI at a business level are always much less vague and much more sinister. As Ullman pointed out,

You have to get money from investors and venture capitalists, and the pitch has to be, "This will make a lot of money, and it will change the world&#8230;" [They] never specify if for better or for worse. I see disruption as a large increase of inequality. It's a way to throw the little guy out of business and make some very small group of people very wealthy. The jobs that are created, those people are being taken advantage of. They are stand-ins for Uber to replace them with self-driving cars. They're experiments actually working themselves into unemployment."

It's easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems. But eventually the self-driving wheel turns and we realize we don't have as much command to reduce the whole complex world to a set of yes or no answers, let alone predictions, and our grossest capitalistic dreams are thwarted yet again, but not without a cost.

https://theoutline.com/post/5964/the-self-driving-car-that-will-never-arrive


----------



## goneubering

LOL

People are bad at walking??

Hahaha!!!!


----------



## jocker12

goneubering said:


> LOL
> 
> People are bad at walking??
> 
> Hahaha!!!!


Think of all those investors getting back to the developers, asking for their money to be returned.... Hahahaha....


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> *Waymo continues to trickle out tentative optimism to cooperative outlets that are iterations of "any day now,"*


I would say The Tomato, I mean London Tube, speaks with "*tentative optimism" *.

Haha,,, just kidding, Love you Tomato!



jocker12 said:


> Think of all those investors getting back to the developers, asking for their money to be returned.... Hahahaha....


The thing that everyone needs to understand here is these SDC-loving guys make the same exact pitch to investors that they're making here on UP:

"SDCs are already here, world domination is "days away", the numbers show "potential profitability" off the charts, etc etc blah blah blah"

The difference is, those investors are stupid enough to not only believe them but hand out tons of money.

The people on this board, yes, UBER DRIVERS, are smart enough to see right through that.

My only question is, what happens to the Tomato when the investors finally see the light? and believe me, they always do.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> I would say The Tomato, I mean London Tube, speaks with "*tentative optimism" *but he's such an A-hole that he cancels himself out.
> 
> Haha,,, just kidding, Love you Tomato!


Do you understand how pathetic, scared, and desperate an individual could be to create some user accounts for the same forum and have a conversation with himself and like his own comments only because his coworkers seen him getting spanked on UP and now everybody knows how big of a failure he is?


----------



## goneubering

jocker12 said:


> Do you understand how pathetic, scared, and desperate an individual could be to create some user accounts for the same forum and have a conversation with himself and like his own comments only because his coworkers seen him getting spanked on UP and now everybody knows how big of a failure he is?
> 
> View attachment 253466


Now I almost feel sorry for him.


----------



## iheartuber

Back in the day, according to the "boss" who went by the name of "Monica" the research their firm was doing was dependent on replies- any replies at all. Also according to Monica, when they tried to post plain basic posts they got ZERO replies. But, when the Tomato started going off like an A-hole to people, that's when people replied, so they let him be the A-hole that he's good at being because it got what they wanted/needed: replies.

Only thing is, I don't think they bargained for replies that call them out, poke holes in their entire business plan, and show them to be fools.


----------



## jocker12

goneubering said:


> Now I almost feel sorry for him.


Hahaha...



iheartuber said:


> Only thing is, I don't think they bargained for replies that call them out, poke holes in their entire business plan, and show them to be fools.


Teenage short sight called MYOPIA worries you too much. They simply got their minds blown by a stupidity....


----------



## London Tube

It's easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems. But eventually the self-driving wheel turns and we realize we don't have as much command to reduce the whole complex world to a set of yes or no answers, let alone predictions, and our grossest capitalistic dreams are thwarted yet again, but not without a cost.

https://theoutline.com/post/5964/the-self-driving-car-that-will-never-arrive[/QUOTE]

What's your exit strategy? I don't see a face saving exit other than maybe going back and editing all your posts. But that's gonna take a long time.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> It's easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems. But eventually the self-driving wheel turns and we realize we don't have as much command to reduce the whole complex world to a set of yes or no answers, let alone predictions, and our grossest capitalistic dreams are thwarted yet again, but not without a cost.
> 
> https://theoutline.com/post/5964/the-self-driving-car-that-will-never-arrive
> 
> What's your exit strategy? I don't see a face saving exit other than maybe going back and editing all your posts. But that's gonna take a long time.


Let me bottom line it for the folks following along:

SDCs will become as huge as the iPhone in either:

1. Very soon, like a few years soon- in which case the people that London Tube works for will get very rich, so OF COURSE he's going to say that's what's going to happen.

2. In Decades and decades- in which case it will have not one iota of meaning for anyone who is an uber driver today.

3. Never- in which case we all have a good laugh in our twilight years.

No one on this board can say with certainty which it will be. Only time will tell. So we wait, and we see.

The End.


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> It's easy to forget how quickly we can overextend technology, which is so good at solving some of our problems, into a good way of solving all of our problems. But eventually the self-driving wheel turns and we realize we don't have as much command to reduce the whole complex world to a set of yes or no answers, let alone predictions, and our grossest capitalistic dreams are thwarted yet again, but not without a cost.
> 
> https://theoutline.com/post/5964/the-self-driving-car-that-will-never-arrive


I guest this message was intended to be a question for me, and if not please disregard.

So.... you say you are worried about me? Hahahaha..... And I thought by choosing to post on Autonomous section of this forum you had something interesting to say about autonomy, computers, code, science, business, or companies involved. I guess I was right about you trolling.

Stop being scared and desperate. Self driving cars is a dream developed societies played with for the last 100 years and never happened. Every year, people see more UFOs than SDCs. How ironic is that?

Populating the galaxy will happen sooner than self driving cars will. But first we need to force people to read more books and go to school, and ban stupidity. Also fix the hunger problem and the clean water access problem for people on this planet. That's what people really need, not a new IPhone every year.

You can tell us about your plans though. Share some light please.


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> I guest this message was intended to be a question for me, and if not please disregard.
> 
> So.... you say you are worried about me? Hahahaha..... And I thought by choosing to post on Autonomous section of this forum you had something interesting to say about autonomy, computers, code, science, business, or companies involved. I guess I was right about you trolling.
> 
> Stop being scared and desperate. Self driving cars is a dream developed societies played with for the last 100 years and never happened. Every year, people see more UFOs than SDCs. How ironic is that?
> 
> Populating the galaxy will happen sooner than self driving cars will. But first we need to force people to read more books and go to school, and ban stupidity. Also fix the hunger problem and the clean water access problem for people on this planet. That's what people really need, not a new IPhone every year.
> 
> You can tell us about your plans though. Share some light please.


His plans are simple-

A group of greedy businessmen, who are not the sharpest people, somehow think SDCs being rolled out as a taxi service that will become bigger than Uber is a thing that is "right around the corner". If it actually is, they get rich. So yeah, they want it to happen.

These businessmen then go and hire a think tank to both analyze people's opinions and to try to change their minds. They stick London Tube (formerly known as "TomatoPaste") on the job. He does not change any minds. He only makes a fool of himself through his poor debate skills (which are really just bullying).

At this point, having wasted any possibility of using any kind of deception to make his case, London Tube has painted himself into a corner and when the reality plays itself out, his predictions will be proven wrong and then he will have nothing left to argue.

Who here was it that said he kinda feels bad for London Tube? I feel the same.


----------



## jocker12

The posted article is so clear from its beginning to its end that somebody at Mashable (or above) thought it needs a response. Here it is - https://mashable.com/2018/08/21/self-driving-cars-waymo-predictions/#o.irkufS0qq1


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> The posted article is so clear from its beginning to its end that somebody at Mashable (or above) thought it needs a response. Here it is - https://mashable.com/2018/08/21/self-driving-cars-waymo-predictions/#o.irkufS0qq1


This article says, basically, that SDCs will happen "eventually"

That's fine, except.... that's not what London Tube (aka "The Tomato") says.

He says they will literally be here within a year or two.

so.... yeah. whatever for that, right?


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> This article says, basically, that SDCs will happen "eventually"
> 
> That's fine, except.... that's not what London Tube (aka "The Tomato") says.
> 
> He says they will literally be here within a year or two.
> 
> so.... yeah. whatever for that, right?


The article says the self driving cars are already here "in many ways". Well they cannot avoid pedestrians or obstacles so they cannot be on the roads, but those AIs better don't waste a second and at least go online on UP and troll the forum a little.

Yes, they are here.... in many ways (many user accounts I should say). Desperate useless naive losers.

Hahahaha....


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> The article says the self driving cars are already here "in many ways". Well they cannot avoid pedestrians or obstacles so they cannot be on the roads, but those AIs better don't waste a second and at least go online on UP and troll the forum a little.
> 
> Yes, they are here.... in many ways (many user accounts I should say). Desperate useless naive losers.
> 
> Hahahaha....


SDC lovers are trying to make the idea of SDCs being "already here" and SDCs being "as big as the iphone" the same thing.

HARDLY!!


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> The posted article is so clear from its beginning to its end that somebody at Mashable (or above) thought it needs a response. Here it is - https://mashable.com/2018/08/21/self-driving-cars-waymo-predictions/#o.irkufS0qq1


I believe Mashable called the article ludicrous. Wait, that might have been me.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> SDC lovers are trying to make the idea of SDCs being "already here" and SDCs being "as big as the iphone" the same thing.
> 
> HARDLY!!


When you try to make that argument it is not about the iPhone but about a portable cellphone primary and an internet connected data portable device secondary, which in essence, is a smartphone.

And the smartphone was only possible because of the Digital Transmission and Safety Act of 2005 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Transition_and_Public_Safety_Act_of_2005

To me is simply funny how desperate the geeks are when the desperate ones should be the developers and the business people because they'll need to be held responsible for wasting all the investors money. Essentially, they've lied to the people that gave them huge amounts of money to play science like little children.


----------



## London Tube

London Tube said:


> I believe Mashable called the article ludicrous. Wait, that might have been me.


"Just like the naysayers of yore poo-pooing the rise of the internet, the self-driving skeptics are going to look silly as they desperately hold onto their human-controlled steering wheels."

This is true.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> "Just like the naysayers of yore poo-pooing the rise of the internet, the self-driving skeptics are going to look silly as they desperately hold onto their human-controlled steering wheels.".


London Tube is trying to make the idea of SDCs being "already here" and SDCs being "as big as the iphone" the same thing.

HARDLY!!



jocker12 said:


> When you try to make that argument it is not about the iPhone but about a portable cellphone primary and an internet connected data portable device secondary, which in essence, is a smartphone.
> 
> And the smartphone was only possible because of the Digital Transmission and Safety Act of 2005 - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Transition_and_Public_Safety_Act_of_2005
> 
> To me is simply funny how desperate the geeks are when the desperate ones should be the developers and the business people because they'll need to be held responsible for wasting all the investors money. Essentially, they've lied to the people that gave them huge amounts of money to play science like little children.


They will be long gone before the investors start wondering where their return on investment is.

Why do you think the Tomato changed his handle to London Tube?


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> I guest this message was intended to be a question for me, and if not please disregard.
> 
> So.... you say you are worried about me? Hahahaha..... And I thought by choosing to post on Autonomous section of this forum you had something interesting to say about autonomy, computers, code, science, business, or companies involved. I guess I was right about you trolling.
> 
> Stop being scared and desperate. Self driving cars is a dream developed societies played with for the last 100 years and never happened. Every year, people see more UFOs than SDCs. How ironic is that?
> 
> Populating the galaxy will happen sooner than self driving cars will. But first we need to force people to read more books and go to school, and ban stupidity. Also fix the hunger problem and the clean water access problem for people on this planet. That's what people really need, not a new IPhone every year.
> 
> You can tell us about your plans though. Share some light please.


Yes I am concerned how you're going to handle it when you can no longer post silly articles about how self driving cars are just a myth. I'm amazed you're still trying to peddle this nonsense.

_Waymo just doubled their warehouse space in Chandler. Is this all part of the big plot?_

Google Self-Driving Car Project, was using about 39,000 square feet of space in a warehouse district near Chandler Boulevard and 56th Street, but is building out an additional 29,000 square feet. The company also has begun storing vehicles at off-site locations so it can more quickly pick up riders from a larger territory.

* Not all rides are free*
The program continues to accept new applicants, but not all rides are free now, with Waymo testing pricing strategies ahead of the public launch of its ride service.

_If Waymo is now charging customers, it means they are already operating a commercial self driving taxi service in Phoenix._

When the public ride service launches, it will be limited to the portions of Chandler, Mesa, Tempe, Gilbert and Ahwatukee.

_So when they launch the full commercial version, within four months, they'll be operating in half the valley._

"Since starting the service, she's noticed the cars become more assertive when merging onto the interstate, more closely mimicking how a human might merge into traffic."

_Is "she" part of the big plot as well? In order for you to be right, that it's all just a big ruse, would mean thousands of people are all in on the ruse. You need to start thinking about an exit strategy, otherwise it's going to be very embarrassing for you. And that can't be healthy. _

https://eu.azcentral.com/story/mone...handler-before-ride-service-start/1046805002/


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> I'm amazed you're still trying to peddle this nonsense.


*I'M *amazed you haven't broken character!

You can't possibly believe that some sort of Will Smith movie turned real life is literally within reach in a couple years.

I mean, I get that's what your clients believe because it's what will make them rich (er)

And I get that you have to carry their water...

But you have not broken rank once.

That's impressive.

I guess you'll have to have some skills to fall back on....here's hoping your loyalty pays off for ya.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

London Tube said:


> Yes I am concerned how you're going to handle it when you can no longer post silly articles about how self driving cars are just a myth. I'm amazed you're still trying to peddle this nonsense.
> 
> _Waymo just doubled their warehouse space in Chandler. Is this all part of the big plot?_
> 
> Google Self-Driving Car Project, was using about 39,000 square feet of space in a warehouse district near Chandler Boulevard and 56th Street, but is building out an additional 29,000 square feet. The company also has begun storing vehicles at off-site locations so it can more quickly pick up riders from a larger territory.
> 
> * Not all rides are free*
> The program continues to accept new applicants, but not all rides are free now, with Waymo testing pricing strategies ahead of the public launch of its ride service.
> 
> _If Waymo is now charging customers, it means they are already operating a commercial self driving taxi service in Phoenix._
> 
> When the public ride service launches, it will be limited to the portions of Chandler, Mesa, Tempe, Gilbert and Ahwatukee.
> 
> _So when they launch the full commercial version, within four months, they'll be operating in half the valley._
> 
> "Since starting the service, she's noticed the cars become more assertive when merging onto the interstate, more closely mimicking how a human might merge into traffic."
> 
> _Is "she" part of the big plot as well? In order for you to be right, that it's all just a big ruse, would mean thousands of people are all in on the ruse. You need to start thinking about an exit strategy, otherwise it's going to be very embarrassing for you. And that can't be healthy. _
> 
> https://eu.azcentral.com/story/mone...handler-before-ride-service-start/1046805002/


as usual, none of these cars drive themselves

it's not "self driving" if it's not "self driving"



> adding that the company is testing various promotions and incentives before the public is able to hail a self-driving car from Waymo.


all these cars are are regular cars

they never drive anyone around and aren't self driving


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Why do you think the Tomato changed his handle to London Tube?


Lycopersicon esculentum (Tomato in latin), short esculentum, was compromised. Under that user account he made some relevant statements showing clear limitations. Problem was esculentum had become a pariah with no future.

But once a celebrity ("he is good at it" said Monica), always a celebrity.

So let's watch him dance for our entertainment -










He is awesome!



London Tube said:


> You need to start thinking about an exit strategy, otherwise it's going to be very embarrassing for you. And that can't be healthy.


Really? You KNOW what I need? And you also KNOW how is going to be? And you also KNOW that can't be healthy?

Is your real name Nostradamus, by any chance, or that's how your friends call you when they feed you soup for dinner? You know, when they visit you...












London Tube said:


> Is "she" part of the big plot as well?


Do you think the Uber SDC killed that woman because of a plot?
Or those Teslas hitting stationary obstacles is because of a plot as well?
Or developers struggling for the last 9 years to create a software that today is not even capable to properly label and classify an image of an articulated human as "pedestrian"is also because of a plot?
Or the same developers not being capable after 9 years to find the secret of writing a software capable to identify obstacles in the car's path is also because of a plot?
Or Uber investors, interested of having a high valued company for the public offering, but deciding to ask Uber to sell the self driving cars division (with soooo much potential), is also part of a plot?
Or companies running SDC testing (having cars with cameras facing forward, backwards, 360 degrees around the cars and inside the cars) not being able to provide or post a SIMPLE video (for their propaganda/advertisement benefit) showing a self driving car entering a highway, drive on the highway for 15 minutes and exit the highway, is also part of a plot?
Or this guy working for Google Brain saying - "*In fact we find that modern machine learning algorithms are wrong almost everywhere*", is also part of a plot?
Or Mary Cummings, a professor in the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering and director of Humans and Autonomy Laboratory and Duke Robotics, saying "I have been advocating for some time that these cars need vision tests. What I'm not advocating for is to put these cars on public streets and use the public as guinea pigs testing these technologies.", is also part of a plot?
Or Chris Urmson, former CTO on X, at Google's self driving cars team (2009 - 2016), main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software, currently CEO of Aurora Innovation, saying "*Replacing human-driven cars with fully autonomous vehicles will take 30 years or more",* is also part of a plot?
Or this guy








was also part of a plot?

Hahahahaha....

Even your captain is amused










Tell your friends with the soup I said Hi! I feel their pain! And you, keep dancing, Esculentum!!!!!


----------



## Chump Change Uber

jocker12 said:


> getting spanked on UP and now everybody knows how big of a failure he is?
> 
> View attachment 253466


The only one getting spanked on UP is you and your little circle of admirers. Seriously, dude I've seen PWND & I've seen PWND, but all you gotta do is login & you're PWND. SDCs are already running. Post all the TLDR you want, that won't stop them from running. Just them being here shows you're PWND.



London Tube said:


> What's your exit strategy? I don't see a face saving exit other than maybe going back and editing all your posts. But that's gonna take a long time.


People like him like to tell you it's snowing when it's 90 outside just to be argumentative

He's got no exit strategy.



jocker12 said:


> Self driving cars is a dream developed societies played with for the last 100 years and never happened.
> 
> But first we need to force people to read more books and go to school, and ban stupidity.
> 
> Also fix the hunger problem and the clean water access problem for people on this planet. That's what people really need, not a new IPhone every year.


Steam propulsion and airplanes were dreams Leonardo played with but eventually somebody made them practical. If you read books you'd know that. I guess we'll have to ban you, huh?

Fixing hunger and poor water quality doesn't pay big bucks. Inventing new Ifones does. This is why there will always be new Ifones, people will always be hungry and water will always be dirty.



iheartuber said:


> This article says, basically, that SDCs will happen "eventually"
> 
> That's fine, except.... that's not what London Tube (aka "The Tomato") says.
> 
> He says they will literally be here within a year or two.
> 
> so.... yeah. whatever for that, right?


They won't get here in a year or 2, but they'll get here soon enough.



jocker12 said:


> The article says the self driving cars are already here "in many ways". Well they cannot avoid pedestrians or obstacles
> 
> Desperate useless naive losers.
> 
> Hahahaha....


They can't avoid pedestrians or obstacles YET..

While it's good you can laugh at yourself, you should avoid calling yourself names, even if the names you call yourself are true.



iheartuber said:


> SDCs being "as big as the iphone" !!


They aren't as big as the Ifones YET.


----------



## jocker12

Chump Change Uber said:


> The only one getting spanked on UP is you and your little circle of admirers. Seriously, dude I've seen PWND & I've seen PWND, but all you gotta do is login & you're PWND. SDCs are already running. Post all the TLDR you want, that won't stop them from running. Just them being here shows you're PWND.
> 
> People like him like to tell you it's snowing when it's 90 outside just to be argumentative
> 
> He's got no exit strategy.
> 
> Steam propulsion and airplanes were dreams Leonardo played with but eventually somebody made them practical. If you read books you'd know that. I guess we'll have to ban you, huh?
> 
> Fixing hunger and poor water quality doesn't pay big bucks. Inventing new Ifones does. This is why there will always be new Ifones, people will always be hungry and water will always be dirty.
> 
> They won't get here in a year or 2, but they'll get here soon enough.
> 
> They can't avoid pedestrians or obstacles YET..
> 
> While it's good you can laugh at yourself, you should avoid calling yourself names, even if the names you call yourself are true.
> 
> They aren't as big as the Ifones YET.












Seriously... An account created a little over a month ago?

Keep dancing, Esculentum!



Chump Change Uber said:


> Fixing hunger and poor water quality doesn't pay big bucks.


We already knew you are a corporate shill! IT SAVES LIVES! (Shhhhhh... don't tell SDCs developers, because they say the same thing about their robots, and for the last 9 years they've spent fortunes for nothing. It's over. Shhhhhhh...).



Chump Change Uber said:


> He's got no exit strategy.


As a tiger in the jungle, you don't need an exit strategy. Your food needs it.












Chump Change Uber said:


> They can't avoid pedestrians or obstacles YET..
> 
> While it's good you can laugh at yourself, you should avoid calling yourself names, even if the names you call yourself are true.


I know it hurts. "Truth is always a bitter pill to swallow". More soup?

Which account are you gonna use next for more spanking?


----------



## uberdriverfornow

jocker12 said:


> Seriously... An account created a little over a month ago?
> 
> Keep dancing, Esculentum!
> 
> We already knew you are a corporate shill! IT SAVES LIVES! (Shhhhhh... don't tell SDCs developers, because they say the same thing about their robots, and for the last 9 years they've spent fortunes for nothing. It's over. Shhhhhhh...).
> 
> As a tiger in the jungle, you don't need an exit strategy. Your food needs it.
> 
> View attachment 253955
> 
> 
> I know it hurts. "Truth is always a bitter pill to swallow". More soup?
> 
> Which account are you gonna use next for more spanking?


This one might be Ramz. Haven't seen him around in a while.


----------



## goneubering

uberdriverfornow said:


> This one might be Ramz. Haven't seen him around in a while.


Ramz seemed much more realistic than the Tomato. He might have quit posting when he realized how weak the sdc situation is.


----------



## iheartuber

Chump Change Uber said:


> SDCs are already running. Post all the TLDR you want, that won't stop them from running.
> They aren't as big as the Ifones YET.


There's a huge difference between SDCs running and SDCs being as big as the iPhone.

The Segway is already running. Do you think there would ever come a day when the Segway will be as big as the iPhone? No, right? And why is that? Because people don't really care about it. Same deal here.


----------



## London Tube

uberdriverfornow said:


> This one might be Ramz. Haven't seen him around in a while.


The obvious answer is to have everyone send in a headshot along with their social security number and a stool sample.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> The obvious answer is to have everyone send in a headshot along with their social security number and a stool sample.


Not necessary. All you have to do is analyze speech patterns, tone, and attitude expressed. It's not that hard really.


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> Lycopersicon esculentum (Tomato in latin), short esculentum, was compromised. Under that user account he made some relevant statements showing clear limitations. Problem was esculentum had become a pariah with no future.
> 
> But once a celebrity ("he is good at it" said Monica), always a celebrity.
> 
> So let's watch him dance for our entertainment -
> 
> View attachment 253927
> 
> 
> He is awesome!
> 
> Really? You KNOW what I need? And you also KNOW how is going to be? And you also KNOW that can't be healthy?
> 
> Is your real name Nostradamus, by any chance, or that's how your friends call you when they feed you soup for dinner? You know, when they visit you...
> 
> View attachment 253929
> 
> 
> Do you think the Uber SDC killed that woman because of a plot?
> Or those Teslas hitting stationary obstacles is because of a plot as well?
> Or developers struggling for the last 9 years to create a software that today is not even capable to properly label and classify an image of an articulated human as "pedestrian"is also because of a plot?
> Or the same developers not being capable after 9 years to find the secret of writing a software capable to identify obstacles in the car's path is also because of a plot?
> Or Uber investors, interested of having a high valued company for the public offering, but deciding to ask Uber to sell the self driving cars division (with soooo much potential), is also part of a plot?
> Or companies running SDC testing (having cars with cameras facing forward, backwards, 360 degrees around the cars and inside the cars) not being able to provide or post a SIMPLE video (for their propaganda/advertisement benefit) showing a self driving car entering a highway, drive on the highway for 15 minutes and exit the highway, is also part of a plot?
> Or this guy working for Google Brain saying - "*In fact we find that modern machine learning algorithms are wrong almost everywhere*", is also part of a plot?
> Or Mary Cummings, a professor in the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering and director of Humans and Autonomy Laboratory and Duke Robotics, saying "I have been advocating for some time that these cars need vision tests. What I'm not advocating for is to put these cars on public streets and use the public as guinea pigs testing these technologies.", is also part of a plot?
> Or Chris Urmson, former CTO on X, at Google's self driving cars team (2009 - 2016), main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software, currently CEO of Aurora Innovation, saying "*Replacing human-driven cars with fully autonomous vehicles will take 30 years or more",* is also part of a plot?
> Or this guy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> was also part of a plot?
> 
> Hahahahaha....
> 
> Even your captain is amused
> 
> View attachment 253934
> 
> 
> Tell your friends with the soup I said Hi! I feel their pain! And you, keep dancing, Esculentum!!!!!


Do you think the Uber SDC killed that woman because of a plot?
*No, the Uber SDC was not a SDC. The woman died because she made dumb decisions and because Uber cut corners.*

Or those Teslas hitting stationary obstacles is because of a plot as well?
*Teslas are not SDC's and Autopilot should not be allowed on the road.*

Or developers struggling for the last 9 years to create a software that today is not even capable to properly label and classify an image of an articulated human as "pedestrian"is also because of a plot?
*You're intentionally muddying the waters by conflating a truly autonomous level 4 self driving system with an auto assist level two system.*

Or the same developers not being capable after 9 years to find the secret of writing a software capable to identify obstacles in the car's path is also because of a plot?
*Again you're intentionally misleading people by saying all self driving systems and all self driving companies are the same.*

Or Uber investors, interested of having a high valued company for the public offering, but deciding to ask Uber to sell the self driving cars division (with soooo much potential), is also part of a plot?
*What does this have to do with the price of rice in China? *

Or companies running SDC testing (having cars with cameras facing forward, backwards, 360 degrees around the cars and inside the cars) not being able to provide or post a SIMPLE video (for their propaganda/advertisement benefit) showing a self driving car entering a highway, drive on the highway for 15 minutes and exit the highway, is also part of a plot?
*This is basically what all naysayers are clinging to. Since Waymo has chosen not to post your requested video it must mean self driving cars are a ruse.*

Or this guy working for Google Brain saying - "*In fact we find that modern machine learning algorithms are wrong almost everywhere*", is also part of a plot?
*You're taking it out of context. Modern machine learning is a valuable tool used to speed the learning curve of self driving systems, but the self driving system doing the driving is not using machine learning while driving.*

Or Mary Cummings, a professor in the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering and director of Humans and Autonomy Laboratory and Duke Robotics, saying "I have been advocating for some time that these cars need vision tests. What I'm not advocating for is to put these cars on public streets and use the public as guinea pigs testing these technologies.", is also part of a plot?
*I agree with Mary that self driving systems should have to pass a driving test before being allowed on the road. If you asked Mary if she has a problem with Waymo being on the road, she would say no.*

Or Chris Urmson, former CTO on X, at Google's self driving cars team (2009 - 2016), main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software, currently CEO of Aurora Innovation, saying "*Replacing human-driven cars with fully autonomous vehicles will take 30 years or more",* is also part of a plot?
*Again you're taking someone out of context to try to prove your worldview. Did he mean it will take 30 years before self driving cars are ready? No. Did he mean it will take 30 years before all current cars are off the road? Yes. Do you know this? Yes. Are you intentionally trying to mislead people? Yes.*

Or this guy
*This guy, former head of FCA, was the guy (before his death) supplying Waymo with their Chrysler Pacifica minivans. This guy is also the same guy that worked out a deal with Waymo to be the first car company to sell level four self driving cars to the public in two years. So when he said: don't believe the fluff; he was referring to the fluff coming from Tesla and Uber, wasn't he?*

Pretty amazing just how truly weak the naysayers arguments are when they put them on paper.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> Pretty amazing just how truly weak the naysayers arguments are when they put them on paper.


Your only argument against the naysayers is that, well, a bunch of people say SDCs are going to be as big as the iPhone very soon so it must be true

Sad.

Sad Tomato


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> Do you think the Uber SDC killed that woman because of a plot?
> *No, the Uber SDC was not a SDC. The woman died because she made dumb decisions and because Uber cut corners.*
> 
> Or those Teslas hitting stationary obstacles is because of a plot as well?
> *Teslas are not SDC's and Autopilot should not be allowed on the road.*
> 
> Or developers struggling for the last 9 years to create a software that today is not even capable to properly label and classify an image of an articulated human as "pedestrian"is also because of a plot?
> *You're intentionally muddying the waters by conflating a truly autonomous level 4 self driving system with an auto assist level two system.*
> 
> Or the same developers not being capable after 9 years to find the secret of writing a software capable to identify obstacles in the car's path is also because of a plot?
> *Again you're intentionally misleading people by saying all self driving systems and all self driving companies are the same.*
> 
> Or Uber investors, interested of having a high valued company for the public offering, but deciding to ask Uber to sell the self driving cars division (with soooo much potential), is also part of a plot?
> *What does this have to do with the price of rice in China? *
> 
> Or companies running SDC testing (having cars with cameras facing forward, backwards, 360 degrees around the cars and inside the cars) not being able to provide or post a SIMPLE video (for their propaganda/advertisement benefit) showing a self driving car entering a highway, drive on the highway for 15 minutes and exit the highway, is also part of a plot?
> *This is basically what all naysayers are clinging to. Since Waymo has chosen not to post your requested video it must mean self driving cars are a ruse.*
> 
> Or this guy working for Google Brain saying - "*In fact we find that modern machine learning algorithms are wrong almost everywhere*", is also part of a plot?
> *You're taking it out of context. Modern machine learning is a valuable tool used to speed the learning curve of self driving systems, but the self driving system doing the driving is not using machine learning while driving.*
> 
> Or Mary Cummings, a professor in the Duke University Pratt School of Engineering and director of Humans and Autonomy Laboratory and Duke Robotics, saying "I have been advocating for some time that these cars need vision tests. What I'm not advocating for is to put these cars on public streets and use the public as guinea pigs testing these technologies.", is also part of a plot?
> *I agree with Mary that self driving systems should have to pass a driving test before being allowed on the road. If you asked Mary if she has a problem with Waymo being on the road, she would say no.*
> 
> Or Chris Urmson, former CTO on X, at Google's self driving cars team (2009 - 2016), main engineer who built the code running Google's autonomous software, currently CEO of Aurora Innovation, saying "*Replacing human-driven cars with fully autonomous vehicles will take 30 years or more",* is also part of a plot?
> *Again you're taking someone out of context to try to prove your worldview. Did he mean it will take 30 years before self driving cars are ready? No. Did he mean it will take 30 years before all current cars are off the road? Yes. Do you know this? Yes. Are you intentionally trying to mislead people? Yes.*
> 
> Or this guy
> *This guy, former head of FCA, was the guy (before his death) supplying Waymo with their Chrysler Pacifica minivans. This guy is also the same guy that worked out a deal with Waymo to be the first car company to sell level four self driving cars to the public in two years. So when he said: don't believe the fluff; he was referring to the fluff coming from Tesla and Uber, wasn't he?*
> 
> Pretty amazing just how truly weak the naysayers arguments are when they put them on paper.


Before addressing every point (even if I already know you're not going to get through every piece of info because is a little too much) let's make 2 things clear,

First - you miss to address the main question posted every single time. After implying I base my statements on a "crazy" plot (and ask if that soccer mom could be part of the same plot) you conveniently ignore my question.

So, do you think a crazy plot kept all the companies and developers from putting their primitive robots in dealerships or on rideshare platforms for the last 9 years? If NO, we know you are not good at BSitting, or if YES, I'll order more soup for you, because you'll need it. (See how you put yourself in a corner, only by trying to be smart and ignore the reality? - if you get puzzled by this you just proved my point)

And second - do you really think you can get away with an account created only 10 days ago?

http://i.imgur.com/ec1owQt.jpg









I'll wait for your comment before moving on with the answers.


----------



## London Tube

iheartuber said:


> Your only argument against the naysayers is that, well, a bunch of people say SDCs are going to be as big as the iPhone very soon so it must be true
> 
> Sad.
> 
> Sad Tomato


My arguments are:

Waymo has driven 8 million self driving miles on everyday roads. 9 million any day now.

Waymo has spent billions on the tech and is only increasing their spending leading up to the commercial launch this year.

Third party professionals whose job it is to analyse public companies give Waymo a valuation of 100 billion to almost 200 billion. And they show their work how they arrived at those numbers.

https://markets.businessinsider.com...-than-before-morgan-stanley-2018-8-1027439248

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/22/waymo-prepares-for-first-paid-autonomous-taxi-service/

Kalanick realizing self driving cars are an existential threat. "So if that's happening, what would happen if we weren't a part of that future? If we weren't part of the autonomy thing? Then the future passes us by basically, in a very expeditious and efficient way,"

http://uk.businessinsider.com/travi...n-self-driving-cars-future-driver-jobs-2016-8

Every major tech company and every major auto maker trying to keep up with Waymo.

400 early riders saying it works and getting better everyday.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> My arguments are:
> 
> Waymo has driven 8 million self driving miles on everyday roads. 9 million any day now.
> 
> Waymo has spent billions on the tech and is only increasing their spending leading up to the commercial launch this year.
> 
> Third party professionals whose job it is to analyse public companies give Waymo a valuation of 100 billion to almost 200 billion. And they show their work how they arrived at those numbers.
> 
> https://markets.businessinsider.com...-than-before-morgan-stanley-2018-8-1027439248
> 
> https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/22/waymo-prepares-for-first-paid-autonomous-taxi-service/
> 
> Kalanick realizing self driving cars are an existential threat. "So if that's happening, what would happen if we weren't a part of that future? If we weren't part of the autonomy thing? Then the future passes us by basically, in a very expeditious and efficient way,"
> 
> http://uk.businessinsider.com/travi...n-self-driving-cars-future-driver-jobs-2016-8
> 
> Every major tech company and every major auto maker trying to keep up with Waymo.
> 
> 400 early riders saying it works and getting better everyday.


None of that proves an SDC taxi service can ever become as big as the iPhone.

You give a lot of arguments but none of them prove the meat of the matter which is- if you start an SDC taxi service will it ever become as big as the iPhone? Because that's what it's going to have to do if it wants to compete with what uber already has.

That's like saying: I like beets, my mom likes beets, everyone I know likes beets so these are all arguments for why there should be beets served in a huge fast food chain like McDonalds.


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> First - you miss to address the main question posted every single time.


My apologies. Please list the main questions I failed to address.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> My apologies. Please list the main questions I failed to address.


Sir, no one cares if an SDC taxi service exists and it's not as big as uber.

Even your clients don't care. Because becoming that big is what they want and if it doesn't or can't get there they would be very pissed indeed.

All your nonsense proves zero that society is on its way to making robots the new uber. You're not going to make that happen by convincing a couple hundred uber drivers on UP.

You are going to have to convince a couple HUNDRED MILLION people of the GENERAL PUBLIC.

If I were you I'd get cracking.


----------



## goneubering

iheartuber said:


> Sir, no one cares if an SDC taxi service exists and it's not as big as uber.
> 
> Even your clients don't care. Because becoming that big is what they want and if it doesn't or can't get there they would be very pissed indeed.
> 
> All your nonsense proves zero that society is on its way to making robots the new uber. You're not going to make that happen by convincing a couple hundred uber drivers on UP.
> 
> You are going to have to convince a couple HUNDRED MILLION people of the GENERAL PUBLIC.
> 
> If I were you I'd get cracking.


That's exactly why he's not employed by any sdc company. This is not the forum to convince investors. He just posts amusingly wild speculation to see if anyone will bite.


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> My apologies. Please list the main questions I failed to address.


See comment above at 7.19 UP time.

We will go step by step, but first answer those 2 questions first, please.


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> So, do you think a crazy plot kept all the companies and developers from putting their primitive robots in dealerships or on rideshare platforms for the last 9 years?


No. Nine years ago Google was just starting on self driving tech.



jocker12 said:


> And second - do you really think you can get away with an account created only 10 days ago?


Does it matter? "London tube is the Tomato." No wait, transporter007 is the Tomato. No wait, that new account could be the Tomato but it also might be Ramz. No wait, that kobayashi guy is the Tomato, or he could be Ramz. I'm so confused.

First of all, the Tomato says he's from the west. But London Tube is from London. So London Tube can't be the Tomato. Oh wait, London is in the west. What if the Tomato works in London and New York? Crap, what if Ramz, transporter and Kobayashi are all the same guy? Crap wait, what if Ramz and transporter are both robots controlled by the Tomato and Kobayashi? Crap, I need a nap.


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> No. Nine years ago Google was just starting on self driving tech.
> 
> Does it matter? "London tube is the Tomato." No wait, transporter007 is the Tomato. No wait, that new account could be the Tomato but it also might be Ramz. No wait, that kobayashi guy is the Tomato, or he could be Ramz. I'm so confused.
> 
> First of all, the Tomato says he's from the west. But London Tube is from London. So London Tube can't be the Tomato. Oh wait, London is in the west. What if the Tomato works in London and New York? Crap, what if Ramz, transporter and Kobayashi are all the same guy? Crap wait, what if Ramz and transporter are both robots controlled by the Tomato and Kobayashi? Crap, I need a nap.


The Tomato works for a think tank hired by a bunch of real estate developers.

I believe transporter007 is one of those developers by the way he talks.

I think what happened was they asked the Tomato "So what's going on in the chat rooms?" and the Tomato said "man this iHeartuber guy keeps slapping me around" and they went "c'mon you mean to tell me an UBER DRIVER slapped you around?" And he was like "you have no idea" so the real estate guy says "ok let me get in there and see for myself". So the handle Transporter007 was born.

Then the Tomato just became too toxic so he changed his name to London Tube

And here we are


----------



## London Tube

iheartuber said:


> The Tomato works for a think tank hired by a bunch of real estate developers.
> 
> I believe transporter007 is one of those developers by the way he talks.
> 
> I think what happened was they asked the Tomato "So what's going on in the chat rooms?" and the Tomato said "man this iHeartuber guy keeps slapping me around" and they went "c'mon you mean to tell me an UBER DRIVER slapped you around?" And he was like "you have no idea" so the real estate guy says "ok let me get in there and see for myself". So the handle Transporter007 was born.
> 
> Then the Tomato just became too toxic so he changed his name to London Tube
> 
> And here we are


What about KobayashiMaru? What's he, chopped liver?


----------



## iheartuber

London Tube said:


> What about KobayashiMaru? What's he, chopped liver?


He, like RamzFanz is just a regular guy who just so happens to REALLY like robots. Hey man, everybody's got their hobbies.


----------



## Chump Change Uber

jocker12 said:


> Seriously... An account created a little over a month ago?
> 
> Keep dancing, Esculentum!
> 
> We already knew you are a corporate shill!
> 
> As a tiger in the jungle
> 
> PI know it hurts. "Truth is always a bitter pill to swallow". More soup?
> 
> Which account are you gonna use next for more spanking?


You got a problem with a new account? Did you forget your account was new once? What's it to ya'?

You're the one's dancing for your sidekicks, pathicus. Not me dancing.

Since you've already admitted this is a new acct. How do you know anything about me except I don't agree with you?

The closest you'll ever get to being a tiger is Sylvester getting bopped on the head by Granny's umbrella.

It's too bitter for you to swallow since you gag on it every time you run into it.

I only have this account so it's the one I'll use to watch you get spanked again and again, but I'll probably get bored pretty fast. In fact , you're beyond spanked, you're so totally owned the only reason you haven't been rented out yet is nobody wants a used naysayer.



goneubering said:


> Ramz seemed much more realistic than the Tomato. .


Whoever he is, he probably got bored trying to discuss adult
matters with somebody whose last accomplishment was the 8th grade bully who beat up the nerdy bookworm band kid who had glasses thick as coke bottles.



iheartuber said:


> There's a huge difference between SDCs running and SDCs being as big as the iPhone.


Since you're obviously a public school graf just like the guy whose sidekick you are, it's no surprise you didn't read what I said since they don't teach reading comprehension in public school anymore.

I said SDCs aren't fully operational. , everyday normal YET.

Give it time, they'll get here soon enough.



iheartuber said:


> Not necessary. All you have to do is analyze speech patterns, tone, and attitude expressed. It's not that hard really.


You've obviously failed & so has the leader of your little schoolyard gang.


----------



## goneubering

Cranky new sock puppets are so totally convincing.


----------



## iheartuber

Chump Change Uber said:


> I said SDCs aren't fully operational. , everyday normal YET.
> 
> Give it time, they'll get here soon enough.


What timeframe do you give for "soon enough"?

The Tomato says 1-2 years because he has to because he works in the biz.

But you seem like a normal uber driver with no ties to the SDC biz

What tineframe do you imagine?

Me, I say decades


----------



## Chump Change Uber

iheartuber said:


> What timeframe do you give for "soon enough"?
> 
> But you seem like a normal uber driver with no ties to the SDC biz
> 
> What tineframe do you imagine?
> 
> Me, I say decades


Decades are probably too long but at the same time anybody who thinks they'll be everywhere tomorrow is drinking too much Uber Koolaid. Uber wishes they'd be everywhere tomorrow, but that's one thing even Uber can't buy.

You'd be right that I have no connection to SDCs. I don't even like the idea. I do a couple of different kinds of Uber. One of the last things the SDCs will replace is the accessable vans. It's one reason why I have one.


----------



## iheartuber

Chump Change Uber said:


> Decades are probably too long but at the same time anybody who thinks they'll be everywhere tomorrow is drinking too much Uber Koolaid. Uber wishes they'd be everywhere tomorrow, but that's one thing even Uber can't buy.
> 
> You'd be right that I have no connection to SDCs. I don't even like the idea. I do a couple of different kinds of Uber. One of the last things the SDCs will replace is the accessable vans. It's one reason why I have one.


Actually, even more than uber is the super secret deep state underground of real estate developers. If all cars were abolished, no one owned a car and every ride was in a robo taxi, every time Tom Cushman puts up a high rise he won't have to put mandatory parking spaces in the building and the space he would save- oh boy! The money will just pour in.

So even more than uber is the cabal of real estate developers who want this out there yesterday.

As for uber, they really don't know what they want.turning uber from all human to all robot drivers sounds good on paper but when you dig deeper it starts to unravel.

Their whole business plan is they don't own any cars and they assume zero responsibility. If they had robo cars that whole thing flips.

But one thing you probably haven't thought of is the only way robo taxis can truly work is if driving were banned. Yeah right! Try taking away freedoms in this country and see how far you get. Go to a communist country like China with that stuff.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

iheartuber said:


> Actually, even more than uber is the super secret deep state underground of real estate developers. If all cars were abolished, no one owned a car and every ride was in a robo taxi, every time Tom Cushman puts up a high rise he won't have to put mandatory parking spaces in the building and the space he would save- oh boy! The money will just pour in.
> 
> Their whole business plan is they don't own any cars and they assume zero responsibility. If they had robo cars that whole thing flips.
> 
> But one thing you probably haven't thought of is the only way robo taxis can truly work is if driving were banned.
> 
> Try taking away freedoms in this country and see how far you get.


Here it is Douglas and Norman Jamal/Douglas Development that build all of that stuff. If they did not have to worry about parking spaces, they could sell even more overpriced condominiums in their buildings. I do apologise for being redundant: In The Capital of Your Nation, every condominium unit is way overpriced . But then, anything is "worth" what someone will pay for it, *Correctamundo?
*
I would not expect that Uber would own the self-drivers. I would expect that someone or something else would own them and F*ub*a*r* would contract with them. It is better not to own the vehicles. I was once an official of a cab company that usually did not own any vehicles or it owned, at most, a few. The majority were owner-operators; about one third were rental and owned by guys who had large fleets. Not owning vehicles kept the liability down and also made for fewer assets for those who sued us to seize. The last people who sued that company when I was an official of it were very surprised when they saw what they would get if they went to trial: a bunch of beat up office and radio equipment and however many bars of soap and rolls of paper towels and toilet paper happened to be on premises, at the time. We kept the bank balances low, as well.

I do not know if that would be necessary, but, we all are aware that T. Kalanick did state for the record that he wanted all privately owned vehicles banned. That is so that everyone would have to use Uber and pay him. He would then parcel out to the owners of the self-driving fleets their pittances. He did not state the latter, of course, but, we all know how he does business. Khosrowshahi is no better; in fact, the argument could be made that he is worse.

The governments have taken away more than a few of our freedoms, as it is. There are certain elements in our society that want to take away even more. To be sure, I will give up my DeSoto when they pry my cold, dead fingers from the steering wheel (the top will be down, so they will not have to open the door). There will be a few others, but, the lemmings that are out there these days will simply sit there and let them do it as they continue to play with their electronic toys. [Short for "Richard"] Gregory used to say that the government and the CIA were using narcotics to distract people. He was simply incorrect about the KIND of narcotic. In the 1960s, -70s , -80sm Ol' Brother Greg had no conception of these electronic "narcotics". They used to call it a "Crackberry" for a reason.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

goneubering said:


> Ramz seemed much more realistic than the Tomato. He might have quit posting when he realized how weak the sdc situation is.


i meant the chump change guy

while tomato has a lot of new aliases, i dont think chump change is tomato


----------



## iheartuber

Another Uber Driver said:


> Here it is Douglas and Norman Jamal/Douglas Development that build all of that stuff. If they did not have to worry about parking spaces, they could sell even more overpriced condominiums in their buildings. I do apologise for being redundant: In The Capital of Your Nation, every condominium unit is way overpriced . But then, anything is "worth" what someone will pay for it, *Correctamundo?
> *
> I would not expect that Uber would own the self-drivers. I would expect that someone or something else would own them and F*ub*a*r* would contract with them. It is better not to own the vehicles. I was once an official of a cab company that usually did not own any vehicles or it owned, at most, a few. The majority were owner-operators; about one third were rental and owned by guys who had large fleets. Not owning vehicles kept the liability down and also made for fewer assets for those who sued us to seize. The last people who sued that company when I was an official of it were very surprised when they saw what they would get if they went to trial: a bunch of beat up office and radio equipment and however many bars of soap and rolls of paper towels and toilet paper happened to be on premises, at the time. We kept the bank balances low, as well.
> 
> I do not know if that would be necessary, but, we all are aware that T. Kalanick did state for the record that he wanted all privately owned vehicles banned. That is so that everyone would have to use Uber and pay him. He would then parcel out to the owners of the self-driving fleets their pittances. He did not state the latter, of course, but, we all know how he does business. Khosrowshahi is no better; in fact, the argument could be made that he is worse.
> 
> The governments have taken away more than a few of our freedoms, as it is. There are certain elements in our society that want to take away even more. To be sure, I will give up my DeSoto when they pry my cold, dead fingers from the steering wheel (the top will be down, so they will not have to open the door). There will be a few others, but, the lemmings that are out there these days will simply sit there and let them do it as they continue to play with their electronic toys. [Short for "Richard"] Gregory used to say that the government and the CIA were using narcotics to distract people. He was simply incorrect about the KIND of narcotic. In the 1960s, -70s , -80sm Ol' Brother Greg had no conception of these electronic "narcotics". They used to call it a "Crackberry" for a reason.


I have no doubt that TK had egotistical dreams of controlling all transportation with a fleet of evil robots but he couldn't even keep his own ceo position let alone orchestrate all that.

I'm not even sure if it would have happened anyway. The world does not revolve around TK.



uberdriverfornow said:


> i meant the chump change guy
> 
> while tomato has a lot of new aliases, i dont think chump change is tomato


Chump change is the jersey version of RamzFanz


----------



## Another Uber Driver

iheartuber said:


> . The world does not revolve around TK.
> 
> Chump change is the jersey version of RamzFanz


...............and if you try to tell him that, he will keep interrupting you and not let you get in a word edgewise. I have seen him in action more than once. He has testified before the D.C. City Council. I am surprised that he was not held in contempt of it for the way that he treated those councilmembers. .............................but, while you are discussing "Chump Change", our local politicians can be bought for just that.

That guy you are discussing has put up a few posts on our Boards, so I do not think that he is from Jersey, although one thing about The Capital of Your Nation is that everyone is from somewhere else. If you go to Nationals games, half of the people in the park are cheering for the visiting team. The Nationals drew the American East for interleague, this year, and yes, I had my RED SOX jersey and cap for all three games.

As for that guy from St. Louis, we disagree on many things. We do agree that the self-drivers will be here, but we do not agree on when. He is of the "sooner" school, while I am of the "later" school; much later, but not as late as you are.


----------



## iheartuber

Another Uber Driver said:


> ...............and if you try to tell him that, he will keep interrupting you and not let you get in a word edgewise. I have seen him in action more than once. He has testified before the D.C. City Council. I am surprised that he was not held in contempt of it for the way that he treated those councilmembers. .............................but, while you are discussing "Chump Change", our local politicians can be bought for just that.
> 
> That guy you are discussing has put up a few posts on our Boards, so I do not think that he is from Jersey, although one thing about The Capital of Your Nation is that everyone is from somewhere else. If you go to Nationals games, half of the people in the park are cheering for the visiting team. The Nationals drew the American East for interleague, this year, and yes, I had my RED SOX jersey and cap for all three games.
> 
> As for that guy from St. Louis, we disagree on many things. We do agree that the self-drivers will be here, but we do not agree on when. He is of the "sooner" school, while I am of the "later" school; much later, but not as late as you are.


The reason why I'm on the "very late" school is because 2 things:

1. As it is, most people have a car and just use rideshare to go out drinking or to the airport. That's pretty much it. That being the case I don't see cars getting dumped and all transpo being rideshare - be it human or robot drivers

2. In order to maximize a robo taxi device you'd have to pretty much eliminate all human drivers. And that's not gonna happen.

3. (Bonus)- the business plan for running a robo fleet is in the toilet.

You can make a robo taxi that works. But there are other, bigger, issues in our society that would make it impossible.


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> Does it matter?


I see you are setting a new encouraging tone, but still answering with a question (even if you think is rhetorical) makes me think "respect" is not your norm. Your 10 day account screams of trolling, throw away type of thing. Even asking if it matters instead of giving an answer and move on to the real topics, looks childishly suspicious.

Please, do not forget you were the one, with this less than 10 days account (at that time), to insult the entire forum, willing to get reactions


London Tube said:


> when you pay with peanuts, you get monkeys


So, please do not play the defensive game with me either, because your comments show some surprising nastiness.

I will reformulate the question (even if I was not intended do put more questions marks in front of you) and give you the option to make it clear - Have you ever had or do you currently have a different user account on this forum? I make it simple for you.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

iheartuber said:


> The reason why I'm on the "very late" school:
> 
> 1. As it is, most people have a car and just use rideshare to go out drinking or to the airport. That's pretty much it.


........perhaps in Los Angeles, but not in The Capital of Your Nation. People here use cabs or TNCs all the time and for purposes other than drinking or the airport. Make no mistake about it, people do use both here for drinking and the airport, but they also use it for everyday stuff. The lobbyists use it to go back and forth between K Street and Capitol Hill. One of the reasons that the cabs are doing better at surviving here is because people are used to using them. People here hail cabs all the time. I know some guys who used to hack in Los Angeles, and they told me that people there rarely hailed cabs; either you called one or went to a stand and got one.

Here, you could call one, as well. In the suburbs, in most cases, if you wanted to get one, you had to call one. In the City you always could (and still can) hail one. In fact, fewer than ten per cent of the cabs here used to do dispatch. Those numbers have gone up since Uber/Lyft.

Uber and Lyft could raise their rates here to two-dollars-fifty the mile and people STILL would use the service. They could fiddle with the U-Pool/Shared rates to keep them low while doing a little better by the drivers and they could keep the bus riders, that way.

On top of that, our METRO is showing the effects of deferred maintenance. Now, they are having to close down whole sections of it while they fix the problems. This has made it totally unreliable. _*Youdda' thunk they'd uh lurnt sumpthin'*_ from the Northeast railroads that engaged in those practices between the mid 1950s and mid-1960s. By the late 1960s, most of the railroads in the Northeast were a wreck. Someone even bought a United Technologies Turbotrain to run between Boston and New York. The problem was that over large sections of that track, the track was in such bad state due to deferred maintenance that this super fast train (and all of the other trains on that line) were restricted to fifteen to twenty five miles per hour.

.....but, I stray....................

People here do need rides for things other than airports and drinking. In fact, until Uber showed up, Washington was the only major North American city where the people who live here used cabs regullarly.



London Tube said:


> No wait, transporter007 is the Tomato.


Experience and occurrences totally unrelated to the topic at hand or even these particular Boards suggest that this guy _*ain't no tuh-may-turr*_.

I will have to leave it at that, as I am not at liberty to discuss it further.


----------



## jocker12

jocker12 said:


> The posted article is so clear from its beginning to its end that somebody at Mashable (or above) thought it needs a response. Here it is - https://mashable.com/2018/08/21/self-driving-cars-waymo-predictions/#o.irkufS0qq1


The author, Sasha Lekach, that calls herself " a journalist", just redacted and changed the initially posted title of this funny article from "Don't believe the naysayers: Self driving cars are already here in many ways" to "Driverless cars haven't arrived instantaneously, but they're well on their way". I guess she got her own spanking too and she just realized she is not into that kind of stuff, YET.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

jocker12 said:


> The author, Sasha Lekach, that calls herself " a journalist", just redacted and changed the initially posted title of this funny article from "Don't believe the naysayers: Self driving cars are already here in many ways" to "Driverless cars haven't arrived instantaneously, but they're well on their way". I guess she got her own spanking too and she just realized she is not into that kind of stuff, YET.


omg it's so funny when you click on the first link it shows the original title, which then changes to the new title

looks like the Freemasons that own and control the world behind the scenes got to her

you don't go against the official narrative


----------



## jocker12

uberdriverfornow said:


> omg it's so funny when you click on the first link it shows the original title, which then changes to the new title
> 
> looks like the Freemasons that own and control the world behind the scenes got to her
> 
> you don't go against the official narrative


That's why we need to copy paste the entire articles on forums, because the obedient media outlets will remove the stories or alter them to fit the initially ignored or later changed narrative.


----------



## uberdriverfornow

in her defense she didn't technically go against the official narrative but simply tweaking it without referring to it being tweaked by saying "updated" is really just against any official journalism protocol


----------



## jocker12

uberdriverfornow said:


> in her defense she didn't technically go against the official narrative but simply tweaking it without referring to it being tweaked by saying "updated" is really just against any official journalism protocol


Yes. The article stays the same, but the title sounded like trolling (intended to annoy readers with different opinions than the author), and she got spanked for it. If she gets more spanking, she might start liking it though. She has POTENTIAL.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

jocker12 said:


> The author, Sasha Lekach, that calls herself " a journalist", just redacted and changed the initially posted title of this funny article I guess she got her own spanking too





uberdriverfornow said:


> looks like the Freemasons that own and control the world behind the scenes got to her
> you don't go against the official narrative





jocker12 said:


> the obedient media outlets will remove the stories or alter them to fit the initially ignored or later changed narrative.





uberdriverfornow said:


> official narrative


Three letters: *M. I. T.*


----------



## HotUberMess

jocker12 said:


> Seriously... An account created a little over a month ago?
> 
> Keep dancing, Esculentum!
> 
> We already knew you are a corporate shill! IT SAVES LIVES! (Shhhhhh... don't tell SDCs developers, because they say the same thing about their robots, and for the last 9 years they've spent fortunes for nothing. It's over. Shhhhhhh...).
> 
> As a tiger in the jungle, you don't need an exit strategy. Your food needs it.
> 
> View attachment 253955
> 
> 
> I know it hurts. "Truth is always a bitter pill to swallow". More soup?
> 
> Which account are you gonna use next for more spanking?


Do a search in the forum for the user's name>they only comment on SDC threads = SHILL ACCOUNT

Don't forget when you see members engaging with SHILL ACCOUNTS let them know it's a SHILL and how to search and determine for themselves that it's a SHILL.


----------



## jocker12

Another Uber Driver said:


> Three letters: *M. I. T.*


Hahahaha.... Poking the sleeping beast....

https://www.media.mit.edu/groups/future-storytelling/projects/

Programmable Synthetic Hallucinations - We are creating consumer-grade appliances and authoring methodologies that will allow hallucinatory phenomena to be programmed and utilized for information display and narrative storytelling.


----------



## HotUberMess

iheartuber said:


> The reason why I'm on the "very late" school is because 2 things:
> 
> 1. As it is, most people have a car and just use rideshare to go out drinking or to the airport. That's pretty much it. That being the case I don't see cars getting dumped and all transpo being rideshare - be it human or robot drivers
> 
> 2. In order to maximize a robo taxi device you'd have to pretty much eliminate all human drivers. And that's not gonna happen.
> 
> 3. (Bonus)- the business plan for running a robo fleet is in the toilet.
> 
> You can make a robo taxi that works. But there are other, bigger, issues in our society that would make it impossible.


There's almost no point, the car has to have a human anyway and robo tech costs more than the pennies Uber drivers are paid.

Someday, they will probably make elevated tracks and have robo taxis ride on those.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

HotUberMess said:


> Do a search in the forum for the user's name>they only comment on SDC threads = SHILL ACCOUNT


This guy has posted a few comments on the Washington Boards. In addition, he has posted a few comments on other Boards. He only has three or four on the Autonomous Boards.



HotUberMess said:


> Someday, they will probably make elevated tracks and have robo taxis ride on those.


Is there not a monorail somewhere that has no one at the controls?


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> I see you are setting a new encouraging tone, but still answering with a question (even if you think is rhetorical) makes me think "respect" is not your norm. Your 10 day account screams of trolling, throw away type of thing. Even asking if it matters instead of giving an answer and move on to the real topics, looks childishly suspicious.
> 
> Please, do not forget you were the one, with this less than 10 days account (at that time), to insult the entire forum, willing to get reactions
> 
> So, please do not play the defensive game with me either, because your comments show some surprising nastiness.
> 
> I will reformulate the question (even if I was not intended do put more questions marks in front of you) and give you the option to make it clear - Have you ever had or do you currently have a different user account on this forum? I make it simple for you.


No. This is the only account I have ever had. I've read posts on here for years but never created an account. Are you part of the UP police department?


----------



## Another Uber Driver

London Tube said:


> Are you part of the UP police department?


I am, and, we do check for duplicate accounts. They are against the rules of this forum.


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> Please, do not forget you were the one, with this less than 10 days account (at that time), to insult the entire forum,


Yeah, I did do that didn't I. My apologies. Let me rephrase it - if you pay with peanuts you get a lesser caliber of employee/contractor than you would otherwise.



jocker12 said:


> So, please do not play the defensive game with me either, because your comments show some surprising nastiness.


I swear to God I had an old girlfriend that used those same exact words.



Another Uber Driver said:


> I am, and, we do check for duplicate accounts. They are against the rules of this forum.


I am an upstanding citizen, officer.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

London Tube said:


> I am an upstanding citizen, officer*occifer*.


FIFY


----------



## goneubering

Another Uber Driver said:


> Is there not a monorail somewhere that has no one at the controls?


Yea. Orlando airport.


----------



## goneubering

Another Uber Driver said:


> ........perhaps in Los Angeles, but not in The Capital of Your Nation. People here use cabs or TNCs all the time and for purposes other than drinking or the airport. Make no mistake about it, people do use both here for drinking and the airport, but they also use it for everyday stuff. The lobbyists use it to go back and forth between K Street and Capitol Hill. One of the reasons that the cabs are doing better at surviving here is because people are used to using them. People here hail cabs all the time. I know some guys who used to hack in Los Angeles, and they told me that people there rarely hailed cabs; either you called one or went to a stand and got one.
> 
> Here, you could call one, as well. In the suburbs, in most cases, if you wanted to get one, you had to call one. In the City you always could (and still can) hail one. In fact, fewer than ten per cent of the cabs here used to do dispatch. Those numbers have gone up since Uber/Lyft.
> 
> Uber and Lyft could raise their rates here to two-dollars-fifty the mile and people STILL would use the service. They could fiddle with the U-Pool/Shared rates to keep them low while doing a little better by the drivers and they could keep the bus riders, that way.
> 
> On top of that, our METRO is showing the effects of deferred maintenance. Now, they are having to close down whole sections of it while they fix the problems. This has made it totally unreliable. _*Youdda' thunk they'd uh lurnt sumpthin'*_ from the Northeast railroads that engaged in those practices between the mid 1950s and mid-1960s. By the late 1960s, most of the railroads in the Northeast were a wreck. Someone even bought a United Technologies Turbotrain to run between Boston and New York. The problem was that over large sections of that track, the track was in such bad state due to deferred maintenance that this super fast train (and all of the other trains on that line) were restricted to fifteen to twenty five miles per hour.
> 
> .....but, I stray....................
> 
> People here do need rides for things other than airports and drinking. In fact, until Uber showed up, Washington was the only major North American city where the people who live here used cabs regullarly.
> 
> Experience and occurrences totally unrelated to the topic at hand or even these particular Boards suggest that this guy _*ain't no tuh-may-turr*_.
> 
> I will have to leave it at that, as I am not at liberty to discuss it further.


I don't care if he's the Tomato or just another rude poster. I put them all on Ignore.


----------



## London Tube

goneubering said:


> I don't care if he's the Tomato or just another rude poster. I put them all on Ignore.


you wouldn't dare



HotUberMess said:


> There's almost no point, the car has to have a human anyway and robo tech costs more than the pennies Uber drivers are paid.
> 
> Someday, they will probably make elevated tracks and have robo taxis ride on those.


SDC's do not need to have a human and the cost eventually will be 8 times less than an Uber. That's the whole point.


----------



## iheartuber

Another Uber Driver said:


> I am, and, we do check for duplicate accounts. They are against the rules of this forum.


Sir, if you look at posts by TomatoPaste and compare the language style to posts by London Tube youll see it's the same person


----------



## London Tube

iheartuber said:


> Sir, if you look at posts by TomatoPaste and compare the language style to posts by London Tube youll see it's the same person


UP police department night shift


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Sir, if you look at posts by TomatoPaste and compare the language style to posts by London Tube youll see it's the same person


When I put him on Ignore, back in December, Tomato said the same thing -


London Tube said:


> you wouldn't dare


Now we can move on a little.



London Tube said:


> if you pay with peanuts you get a lesser caliber of employee/contractor than you would otherwise.


This is wrong. You try to have a clever comeback, but cab drivers (at least where I live) are worse. This is also one of the reasons riders like rideshare much better than taxi cabs - because of the better human element.
Your


London Tube said:


> My apologies.


will suffice.



London Tube said:


> I swear to God I had an old girlfriend that used those same exact words





London Tube said:


> I am an upstanding citizen, officer.


Something you need to understand very well in life is that, if you give sarcasm, you'll receive more sarcasm. So drop it.

So,


London Tube said:


> No, the Uber SDC was not a SDC. The woman died because she made dumb decisions and because Uber cut corners.


The NTSB preliminary report of the accident states on page 2 (of 4)










Now, assuming you comment based on information you are getting from a source, can you show us here your SOURCE, saying "Uber SDC was not a SDC"? And if you say was not a SDC, what was then?

No matter what the victim was doing or how was she walking on that road, the software failed to identify her as an obstacle to be avoided.

If Uber cut corners, every singe company involved in self driving cars development is cutting corners. - https://uberpeople.net/threads/fata...positives-all-the-competitors-havetoo.258965/

Now I am waiting for your comment and see if we can move on, keep discussing on this or get to the next. Make sure you read everything and have a legit source to provide.

PS off topic - I am curious now, and I am not asking for any additional information, but do you have a regular 9 to 5 job?


----------



## London Tube

jocker12 said:


> When I put him on Ignore, back in December, Tomato said the same thing -


Sounds like a job for MI5



jocker12 said:


> This is wrong. You try to have a clever comeback, but cab drivers (at least where I live) are worse. This is also one of the reasons riders like rideshare much better than taxi cabs - because of the better human element.


They quality of the drivers and of the cars has gone down substantially as Uber has cut driver pay



jocker12 said:


> If Uber cut corners, every singe company involved in self driving cars development is cutting corners.


That's just silly. One bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch. Especially when they are in separate bunches.


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> Sounds like a job for MI5
> 
> They quality of the drivers and of the cars has gone down substantially as Uber has cut driver pay
> 
> That's just silly. One bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch. Especially when they are in separate bunches.


I will beak this down for you - #1 - do you have a source saying that Uber car was not a SDC? ( what you say is only your personal opinion and means nothing from the professional investigation point of view - so please again, simple question for you).

By the way, drop the sarcasm because I am not sarcastic with you anymore.

Using jokes or sarcasm shows you want to deflect from the topic because you have no answer.

Please prove me wrong!!!!


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> I will beak this down for you - #1 - do you have a source saying that Uber car was not a SDC? ( what you say is only your personal opinion and means nothing from the professional investigation point of view - so please again, simple question for you).
> 
> By the way, drop the sarcasm because I am not sarcastic with you anymore.
> 
> Using jokes or sarcasm shows you want to deflect from the topic because you have no answer.
> 
> Please prove me wrong!!!!


Dude, he's the Tomato. It's very clear by the way they both talk

Isn't that clear to you?


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> I guest this message was intended to be a question for me, and if not please disregard.
> 
> So.... you say you are worried about me? Hahahaha..... And I thought by choosing to post on Autonomous section of this forum you had something interesting to say about autonomy, computers, code, science, business, or companies involved. I guess I was right about you trolling.
> 
> Stop being scared and desperate. Self driving cars is a dream developed societies played with for the last 100 years and never happened. Every year, people see more UFOs than SDCs. How ironic is that?
> 
> Populating the galaxy will happen sooner than self driving cars will. But first we need to force people to read more books and go to school, and ban stupidity. Also fix the hunger problem and the clean water access problem for people on this planet. That's what people really need, not a new IPhone every year.
> 
> You can tell us about your plans though. Share some light please.


Hi jocker12 and iheartuber thanks for the Thread & passion!

In one of the posted articles by London Tube there's this succinct summation of why SDC's are pushed along:

"It's a way to throw the little guy out of business and make some very small group of people very wealthy".

That is the root motivation behind all this by the big guys - GREED.

Me, I'm looking at retiring in 10 years, but see unfunded lifestyle needs. So getting a few SDC's to "work" for me may extend my involvement and returns from the business I established 23years ago.

jocker12 were you once involved in driver training?


----------



## jocker12

London Tube said:


> Depends on what the meaning of 'is' 'is'. Is Tesla a self driving car? No, it's a driver assist car.
> 
> Is Uber a self driving car? Technically, perhaps yes. In truth, no.
> 
> The key statistic: prior to last Sunday's fatal crash in Tempe, Arizona, Uber's self-driving cars in Arizona were "struggling" to go 13 miles between interventions by a safety driver-known as a disengagement.
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/0...-self-driving-car-program-years-behind-waymo/
> 
> I thought you worked the night shift?


Do you have a source saying that car was not a SDC, yes or no? Or is only your interpretation of the rumors in the media?

The NTSB preliminary report says "the vehicle was traveling on its second loop of the test route and* had been in computer control* since 9:39 p.m. (i.e., for the preceding 19 minutes)."

How do you call a car "in computer control"?

By the way, your quote 


London Tube said:


> The key statistic: prior to last Sunday's fatal crash in Tempe, Arizona, Uber's self-driving cars in Arizona were "struggling" to go 13 miles between interventions by a safety driver-known as a disengagement.


says "Uber's self-driving cars in Arizona", correct?


----------



## Another Uber Driver

jocker12 said:


> cab drivers *(at least where I live)* are worse. This is also one of the reasons riders like rideshare much better than taxi cabs - because of the better human element.


 (emphasis added)

It was that way here, initially, but for some time now, the UberX users have been making the same complaints about the X drivers that they used to make about the cabs; making them more frequently; are complaining more bitterly and are complaining more loudly. They always have complained that the UberX drivers do not know where they are going and are far too dependent on the GPS. Contrary to what the _*Boston Globe*_ would have anyone believe, the GPS is no substitute for what I know. Whether I am driving Uber Taxi or UberX that day, I tend to ignore the GPS, unless it is in a suburb with which I am not as familiar as I would like to be.

People here always kept using the cabs. The ruling factor in people's choices here is convenience, and, the cab is right there, just put up your hand.

In addition, Uber does offer taxis here (as it does in Boston, Chicago and Honolulu--in fact, in Honolulu, there are two different kinds of Uber Taxi). More and more Uber users are going to them. They like the convenience of Uber plus the benefits of the taxi. One thing that I do wish that Uber would do is make available the option to pay with Uber if the customer hails an Uber taxi. Curb and MyTaxi/Hail-O have had this option for some time.

The two prinicipal reasons that Uber took hold here were:

1. People could not get a taxi
2. The cab drivers balked at credit cards.

People are still telling me that the "human experience" is better in the cab. In fact, if I do decide to drive the UberX/Lyft car that day, people tell me that I am one of the more friendly Uber drivers that they have had, of late.



London Tube said:


> They quality of the drivers and of the cars has gone down substantially as Uber has cut driver pay


I have been hearing the same complaints about the Uber and Lyft drivers in the Capital of Your Nation for some time, now.



Sydney Uber said:


> That is the root motivation behind all this by the big guys - GREED.
> 
> Me, I'm looking at retiring in 10 years, but see unfunded lifestyle needs. So getting a few SDC's to "work" for me may extend my involvement and returns from the business I established 23years ago.


Due to that greed, you may not get that opportunity. At one point, T. Kalanick stated that Uber was not going to work with individual self-driver owners, it was going to work only with the "Big Guys". I do not see Khosrowshahi's wanting to do anything different.



iheartuber said:


> I'm gonna miss you when you're gone


----------



## jocker12

So if this is correct


Another Uber Driver said:


> People here always kept using the cabs. The ruling factor in people's choices here is convenience, and, the cab is right there, just put up your hand.


how is also this #1?


Another Uber Driver said:


> 1. People could not get a taxi


I know what you mean.

I think NY is the same, and still got hurt big time. I believe what you say, but cab companies that still exist had the presence to adapt, but is no way they will survive if rideshare continues to exist. It is Chinese water torture to them. The "bad" drivers/people will be bad no matter what you give them or where you put them, but the difference is (not a big one though) while rideshare offers a rating system to monitor behavior, taxicabs have none.


----------



## Another Uber Driver

jocker12 said:


> So if this is correct how is also this #1?
> 
> I know what you mean.
> 
> cab companies that still exist no way they will survive if rideshare continues to exist.
> 
> The "bad" drivers/people will be bad no matter what you give them or where you put them, but the difference is *(not a big one though)* while rideshare offers a rating system to monitor behavior, taxicabs have none.


 (emphasis added)

Perhaps my wording was not thorough or clear. There were, and still are, busy times when cabs were, and still are, hard to get. In addition, people here called cabs that did not always show up, even though the companies accepted the call. Despite their not always being able to get a cab, people continued, and still continue, to use them. One thing that you often see here, is someone's coming from a building, looking to see if there is a cab, if he sees one, he hails. If he does not see one, he opens an application, looks up from time to time as he is preparing an order. If he sees a cab, he hails. If he does not, he continues to prepare and submit his Uber order. If he sees a cab within the cancellation window, he hails. If the cab stops, he cancels the Uber order (whatever level of Uber that he did order). Perhaps I should have inserted *always* between "not" and "get".

The other thing that you have here is that people will open the Uber application, check X, Taxi, Black, then pick the closest. I got an Uber Taxi ping like that, to-day. I also got a couple of street hails where I "beat the Uber", to-day. Years back, we used to play "beat the bus". Now, it is "beat the Uber".

There are the advantages to the use of the application, but, let me avoid straying and chewing up bandwidth by going into it right this minute. It is a subject worthy of discussion, but, it may or may not be pertinent to the topic of the self-drivers.

It does seem that New York got hit harder than we did. Part of the reason is that we do not have medallions, here. In theory and on paper, the market entry is open, here. There are several "temporary" restrictions that have been "temporary" for some time, now. The cab companies may not survive in other parts of this country, but, in Boston, Chicago, New York and Washington, they will. Their numbers may be reduced, and, you might get more guys like me who keep two cars and pick one or the other to drive, depending.................but, survive the cabs will, in those places, at least.

The added emphasis is but one thing that is of import. Add to that Uber's/Lyft's rating system's being flawed. The high turnover also comes into play when you attempt to explain why there are so many obnoxos who drive TNC.


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> Hi jocker12 and iheartuber thanks for the Thread & passion!
> 
> In one of the posted articles by London Tube there's this succinct summation of why SDC's are pushed along:
> 
> "It's a way to throw the little guy out of business and make some very small group of people very wealthy".
> 
> That is the root motivation behind all this by the big guys - GREED.


Welcome back to the passion! Well, it looks like Waymo wants to move to China and when they'll hit the wall, at least they'll hit a "Great" one.... hahahaha.... The Chinese will cry rivers of tears (better theirs than ours) and Yangtze will flood again.










In order to revenge the cataclysm, Waymo will make a move to build flying saucers. It was written in the stars. Chinese 5 stars rating.



Sydney Uber said:


> Me, I'm looking at retiring in 10 years, but see unfunded lifestyle needs. So getting a few SDC's to "work" for me may extend my involvement and returns from the business I established 23years ago.


Keep that "S" close, 'cause she is charming. Hands on her wheel and feet on her pedals, "Don't believe the fluff!"



Sydney Uber said:


> jocker12 were you once involved in driver training?


No.


----------



## iheartuber

His source is Waymo.

Who’s in cahoots with his clients.

Have you ever even been to London, Tomato?

They call it the underground not the tube.


----------



## goneubering

Another Uber Driver said:


> I am, and, we do check for duplicate accounts. They are against the rules of this forum.


This forum has more sockpuppets per square inch than any other forum I've ever seen. I'm not complaining though because some of them are actually quite amusing.



Another Uber Driver said:


> He is of the "sooner" school, while I am of the "later" school; much later, but not as late as you are.


I was in the Sooner group initially but the more I learn about sdc hype the more I've been pushed into the *Later or Never group.*


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> That's one good-looking Dingo!
> 
> Welcome aboard!


Yes, welcome, welcome!


----------



## Sydney Uber

jocker12 said:


> I will suggest, you, like a good "newbie" on this forums, to "say" something related to the topic of this section.
> 
> Coincidentally, your account is also 10 days old (to date). Have you seen that?


Hey Jocker! Not all folk are as old, grizzled, and as well-informed about wonderful forums as ourselves. In fact, you're just a young blow-in, whipper-snapper compared to some folk around here! 

Be a better Concierge and welcome new folk to our conference centre with many meeting rooms


----------



## jocker12

Sydney Uber said:


> Hey Jocker! Not all folk are as old, grizzled, and as well-informed about wonderful forums as ourselves. In fact, you're just a young blow-in, whipper-snapper compared to some folk around here!


I agree.



Sydney Uber said:


> Be a better Concierge and welcome new folk to our conference centre with many meeting rooms


Don't get me wrong, I want as many as possible. But, like I previously quoted "The truth is a bitter pill to swallow", and people have a shock when you tell them "progress" in corporate language, is plain greed in reality. The new journalism is obedience and that shapes characters in the wrong way. And then, the most millenials, instead of listening, have opinions about how we must be obedient, because (to give you an example) when they are driving and you tell them "Watch the lights!!!!", they think you are referring to the lights flashing on their smartphones screens. They simply don't understand what's around them.

Good to have you back!


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> View attachment 255175
> 
> 
> What! You don't enjoy a good ol' spanking? Often enhanced by the method that is employed.


We're supposed to be discussing the issues like adults here, not talking about "spanking"


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> We're supposed to be discussing the issues like adults here, not talking about "spanking"


This is what happens when you forget to lock the master bedroom door and your child opens the door on you in the middle of the night because your wife is begging out loud for more. The child thinks you are killing her, hahahaha.... Only to clarify for all the children on the forum - the wife is begging for more chocolate cake.

Hey Chump Change Uber, do you think the Uber car that killed Elaine Herzberg was a self driving car, or not?


----------



## Sydney Uber

iheartuber said:


> We're supposed to be discussing the issues like adults here, not talking about "spanking"


Killjoy!


----------



## iheartuber

Actually he had that catch phrase when he was posting as The Tomato but you say Tomato I say Tah mah toe

One of the debates on this board is about how an SDC taxi biz, no matter who is running it, (uber, Waymo, etc) will have logistical challenges.

Uber in general has its own set of logistical challenges but that’s a discussion for another board on UP.... LOL


----------



## goneubering

iheartuber said:


> As London Tube likes to say: you sure "slapped him around" there jocker12
> 
> Actually he had that catch phrase when he was posting as The Tomato but you say Tomato I say Tah mah toe
> 
> One of the debates on this board is about how an SDC taxi biz, no matter who is running it, (uber, Waymo, etc) will have logistical challenges.
> 
> Uber in general has its own set of logistical challenges but that's a discussion for another board on UP.... LOL


But did he say VAUNTED??!!


----------



## iheartuber

goneubering said:


> But did he say VAUNTED??!!


Omg.. that's another funny one

"The vaunted UP Community..."

LOL


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> As London Tube likes to say: you sure "slapped him around" there jocker12
> 
> Actually he had that catch phrase when he was posting as The Tomato but you say Tomato I say Tah mah toe
> 
> One of the debates on this board is about how an SDC taxi biz, no matter who is running it, (uber, Waymo, etc) will have logistical challenges.
> 
> Uber in general has its own set of logistical challenges but that's a discussion for another board on UP.... LOL


You are correct. There is more and we can fill another forum with it. Unfortunately, these enthusiasts don't know what is going on.


----------



## Lee239

jocker12 said:


> OBut then, per the Verge, "the vehicle decided it needed to brake 1.3 seconds before striking a pedestrian, but Uber had previously disabled the Volvo's automatic emergency braking system i


A person paying attention could have seen the person in time to swerve to the left or brake and lessen the impact and not cause death, but I doubt that a car going 50 MPH will do anything worthwhile in 1.3 seconds unless it can magically make it disappear. there are still the physics of stopping taking longer than that a car can't stop on a dime. The only way to get a car to stop instantly is to have it hit a wall and wreck itself.


----------



## iheartuber

Lee239 said:


> A person paying attention could have seen the person in time to swerve to the left or brake and lessen the impact and not cause death, but I doubt that a car going 50 MPH will do anything worthwhile in 1.3 seconds unless it can magically make it disappear. there are still the physics of stopping taking longer than that a car can't stop on a dime. The only way to get a car to stop instantly is to have it hit a wall and wreck itself.


I still have yet to find out if an SDC is able to slam on the brakes if necessary like a human can


----------



## goneubering

iheartuber said:


> I still have yet to find out if an SDC is able to slam on the brakes if necessary like a human can


That feature is disabled. Resolved!!


----------



## 25rides7daysaweek

jocker12 said:


> Optimism about self-driving cars has sustained a fever pitch for so many years, at this point, that some die-hard boosters of the concept would still insist it's an inevitability. Countless journalists who have experienced, with their own bodies and two eyes, a self-driving car journey, have declared it the inevitable future. These journeys have only taken place thus far on little obstacle courses that amount to little more than* a carnival ride*, or in at least one case, a road test where the car does fine by itself until it encounters any remotely challenging human-interaction scenario. At that point, the PR handler or engineer in the driver seat slickly takes over driving just for a split second, *hoping the journalist doesn't register that those split seconds are when the self-driving cars' abilities, or lack thereof, matter the most.*
> 
> But it hasn't been a great six months for self-driving vehicles. In March, a self-driving Uber car in Arizona killed a woman who was walking a bike across a street. Public relations messaging around the death first cast aspersions on the testing driver in the seat, saying he was a felon and then also maybe watching Hulu, and then on the victim, saying she was walking a bike across the street outside of a crosswalk, and how was a car AI to distinguish her as a thing it shouldn't hit? Final reports suggested the car's emergency braking system had been disabled by Uber itself, and that was the ultimate cause of the incident.
> 
> Laying the blame on a critical failure conveniently sidesteps the whole issue of whether a self-driving car can adequately identify a thing it shouldn't run into, which should be almost the entire point of a car that drives itself. But then, per the Verge, "the vehicle decided it needed to brake 1.3 seconds before striking a pedestrian, but Uber had previously disabled the Volvo's automatic emergency braking system in order to prevent erratic driving." Read: The car correctly identified a threat, but in a broken-clock-is-right-twice-a-day way, such that its threat identification reaction had become so annoying and frequent it was turned off.
> 
> Just last week, Uber released its Q2 financial reports showing a nearly billion-dollar loss, and a report from _The Information_ revealed the company is losing at least a million dollars per day on its self-driving car project alone. _Bloomberg_ reported its investors are pressuring the company, which is still struggling with profitability, to get rid of its self-driving car project to perhaps focus on making the dire economics of ridesharing even a little viable and, uh, maybe scooter rentals rather than split their efforts by trying to invent the self-driving wheel.
> 
> For its part, Google, the erstwhile self-driving industry leader, spun off its self-driving car department, Waymo, back in 2018. *Waymo continues to trickle out tentative optimism to cooperative outlets that are iterations of "any day now,"* and publications keep falling for it. (2016, _Wired_: "Google's Self Driving Car Company Is Finally Here." 2018, _Bloomberg_: "Waymo's Self Driving Cars are Near." Ok. Good to know the self-driving car can also drive itself in reverse.)
> 
> If that weren't enough, self-driving car engineers themselves seem to finally be growing frustrated enough with the whole endeavor that they are engaging in some wild reality-distortion-field tactics. They have begun to *blame the cars' lack of success on non-negotiable aspects of reality*. The problem is not that self-driving AI is bad at driving, their logic now goes; it's that people are bad at walking. The _Bloomberg_ report from Thursday detailing this tension included these devastating paragraphs:
> 
> With these timelines slipping, driverless proponents like Ng say there's one surefire shortcut to getting self-driving cars on the streets sooner: persuade pedestrians to behave less erratically. If they use crosswalks, where there are contextual clues-pavement markings and stop lights-the software is more likely to identify them. *But to others the very fact that Ng is suggesting such a thing is a sign that today's technology simply can't deliver self-driving cars as originally envisioned.* "The AI we would really need hasn't yet arrived," says Gary Marcus, a New York University professor of psychology who researches both human and artificial intelligence. He says Ng is "just redefining the goalposts to make the job easier," and that if the only way we can achieve safe self-driving cars is to completely segregate them from human drivers and pedestrians, we already had such technology: trains.
> 
> A conversation about self-driving cars is really a conversation about AI. AI as a concept has lately had even broader setbacks; IBM's Watson managed to win at Jeopardy but has proven a catastrophic failure at its much more noble ultimate goal of helping treat cancer with more success than human doctors. While we've made progress in the time since sci-fi went from pulp to high art, our reach continues to cyclically elude our grasp. Quite simply, it is both very hard and not good.
> 
> In her latest book _Life in Code_, Ellen Ullman, a four-decade veteran programmer and an integral figure in the early days of several different Silicon Valley companies, wrote extensively about the periodic waves of excitement around the potential of AI. She described watching AI "fail spectacularly in fulfilling its grand expectations" to understand humans equally as well as humans do back in the 70s and 80s.
> 
> In an interview around the launch of her book last summer, Ullman told me she did not believe self-driving cars were anywhere near where they needed to be to reach the aspirations of companies developing them:
> 
> Our intelligence comes from social existence. We call somebody smart who can look in our eye, and we can trade understanding. If you're on the highway, you can see far ahead. You could see far behind. If you're an experienced driver, there are many ways that you see a car as another person, in a way. You can read that car. Self-driving cars do proximity around your own vehicle, and don't really look very far ahead.* They're following rules like playing chess.* An experienced good driver has these capabilities that I don't believe any time soon will be duplicated in a self-driving car.
> 
> Though futuristic optimism is great for currying public support, the actual promises of AI at a business level are always much less vague and much more sinister. As Ullman pointed out,
> 
> You have to get money from investors and venture capitalists, and the pitch has to be, "This will make a lot of money, and it will change the world&#8230;" [They] never specify if for better or for worse. I see disruption as a large increase of inequality. It's a way to throw the little guy out of business and make some very small group of people very wealthy. The jobs that are created, those people are being taken advantage of. They are stand-ins for Uber to replace them with self-driving cars. They're experiments actually working themselves into unemployment."
> Https://theoutline.com/post/5964/the-self-driving-car-that-will-never-arrive


I think we will be flying around is our own cars like the jetsons before driverless cars have any real effect on most of the population....


----------



## Chump Change Uber

jocker12 said:


> Hey Chump Change Uber, do you think the Uber car that killed Elaine Herzberg was a self driving car, or not?


Why don't you ask somebody who cares?


----------

