# Driverless Cars



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

Where is the outrage from professional drivers about Google's role in shaping the future with autonomous cars? I've looked all over and I can't find any mention of drivers protesting or making any noise about this. I know a lot of Uber drivers don't consider themselves professional drivers, and that's cool too, but don't you like having the option to fall back on driving for a living when times get tough? Google's vision of the future is at odds with automakers, who see self driving cars as a threat to their business model of selling volumes of cars. There are plenty of opportunities for us to voice our opinion regarding the regulatory side of autonomous vehicles. I'm just surprised I haven't found anywhere on the internet where taxi drivers (or rideshare drivers) can come together and talk about this...


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

humandriver said:


> Where is the outrage from professional drivers about Google's role in shaping the future with autonomous cars? I've looked all over and I can't find any mention of drivers protesting or making any noise about this. I know a lot of Uber drivers don't consider themselves professional drivers, and that's cool too, but don't you like having the option to fall back on driving for a living when times get tough? Google's vision of the future is at odds with automakers, who see self driving cars as a threat to their business model of selling volumes of cars. There are plenty of opportunities for us to voice our opinion regarding the regulatory side of autonomous vehicles. I'm just surprised I haven't found anywhere on the internet where taxi drivers (or rideshare drivers) can come together and talk about this...


So...how would you propose stopping something like this?


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> So...how would you propose stopping something like this?


OP has a point, car manufacturers just going to roll over a let this happen without a fight,
if driverless cars becomes a reality, do you realize how many people will be out of work.


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

painfreepc said:


> OP has a point, car manufacturers just going roll over a let this happen without a fight,
> if driverless cars becomes a reality, do you realize how many people will be out of work.


What say do they have in this?


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

There is nothing to protest really. They are not taking our cars away from us. You will still be able to own a car in the future although the economics of it wont make a lot of scene to people who do not care about cars. And I am sure there will be plenty of people who would prefer to have a human driver (even when it is proved that the driver less car is safer). You cant protest progress. I mean you can try but it is pointless. I am sure factory workers protested against robots doing their tasks on the line. But Economics always win out. And humans are just too expensive.

And I think OP posted a link but I will repost this video. It is totally spot on.

Humans Need not Apply


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

You can't protest progress but you can argue for regulations that are more favorable.

And IMO I think if the resentment was loud enough and strong enough, google would dump their self driving car program. They've already had to pivot a few times, they may finally feel it isn't worth it. Thus MILLIONS of livelihoods would be saved.


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

Sure livelihoods would be saved but how many actual lives would be lost in the process. Humans driving cars kill many humans every year. I think there would be even more protest if google decided not to go forward with this life saving technology. 

What sort of regulation would you forsee? High taxes on driverless cars? Limits on the number of them? Should they help pay into unemployment funds?


----------



## UL Driver SF (Aug 29, 2014)

Walkersm said:


> Sure livelihoods would be saved but how many actual lives would be lost in the process. Humans driving cars kill many humans every year. I think there would be even more protest if google decided not to go forward with this life saving technology.
> 
> What sort of regulation would you forsee? High taxes on driverless cars? Limits on the number of them? Should they help pay into unemployment funds?


How do we know it will save lives? It hasn't been used in mass in the mix yet.


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

There are other technologies that could be used to save lives other than eliminating the driver.


----------



## where's the beef? (Sep 16, 2014)

I am willing to bet we'll have live bodies on Mars before we get rid of "the other dude" with Googlemobile...


----------



## UberCemetery (Sep 4, 2014)

The automobile manufacture's are also working on this technology. I will post an example.


----------



## UberCemetery (Sep 4, 2014)

*China's Baidu partners with BMW on driverless car research*

*http://www.pcworld.com/article/2684...ners-with-bmw-on-driverless-car-research.html*


----------



## Art (Jun 18, 2014)

That is Google's only interest in uber


----------



## UberCemetery (Sep 4, 2014)

*Driverless Cars Already? Audi Becomes First to Get Permits to Test Self-Driving Cars in California*

*http://www.latinpost.com/articles/2...i-becomes-first-permits-test-self-driving.htm*


----------



## UberCemetery (Sep 4, 2014)

*Nissan Announces Plans to Release Driverless Cars by 2020*

*http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/201...less-cars-by-2020/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0*


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

I am going to G**gle buggy whip manufacturers and ice wagon industries to see how they successfully fought the good war. I think they may have gotten many of their ideas from the canal diggers and lock tenders prior to rail.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

humandriver said:


> You can't protest progress but you can argue for regulations that are more favorable.
> 
> And IMO I think if the resentment was loud enough and strong enough, google would dump their self driving car program. They've already had to pivot a few times, they may finally feel it isn't worth it. Thus MILLIONS of livelihoods would be saved.


Hi HumanDriver, welcome aboard.

I'll try and dig up some of my prior posts about driverless cars, upset a couple of folk.

But before they become a reality (Google says 2018, traditional manufacturers say 2024) perhaps we can prepare ourselves with a little training.

Find the next tidal wave, stand in front of it and stop it. If you can do that you'll be able to stop Driverless cars


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Hi HumanDriver, welcome aboard.
> 
> I'll try and dig up some of my prior posts about driverless cars, upset a couple of folk.
> 
> ...


We have never had a tech tidal wave like this in the history of technology,
we are talking about placing are lives in the hands of a machine with no human override.

*Skynet, here we come*


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

Well the NHTSA has the final say over whether or not truly self driven cars are allowed on the road. Its up to drivers to come together as a sign of solidarity. Politicians and bureaucrats respond to voters if they show up. Otherwise Google will buy them out, they're already spending millions lobbying their interests...


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Hi HumanDriver, welcome aboard.
> 
> I'll try and dig up some of my prior posts about driverless cars, upset a couple of folk.
> 
> ...


It isn't necessarily a tidal wave, while the big car manufacturers are developing 'autonomous vehicles' their primary focus and interest is keeping a driver as part of the program. They still need to sell cars.


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

frndthDuvel said:


> I am going to G**gle buggy whip manufacturers and ice wagon industries to see how they successfully fought the good war. I think they may have gotten many of their ideas from the canal diggers and lock tenders prior to rail.


Who's side are you on?


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

The HBO series Silicon Valley has a hilarious driverless car bit. 
I know I have commented on driverless cars in my infancy here, More so about the WHEN than the IF.


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

I think the 'when' could be much further in the future if Google dropped their program. This sudden rush of interest in the transportation business baffles me. Why would Google want to bother with such a dirty grind. Even without the drivers, you got flat tires, fender benders, washing the car, electrical failures etc. So many liabilities for a low margin industry.


----------



## Walkersm (Apr 15, 2014)

UL Driver SF said:


> How do we know it will save lives? It hasn't been used in mass in the mix yet.


All it has to be is a little better than humans and it will save lives. And lets face it we suck.
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...-miles-can-now-avoid-cyclists-stop-for-trains


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

humandriver said:


> There are other technologies that could be used to save lives other than eliminating the driver.


Here's a post I put up back in June I think.

You are right, they won't be rolled out very far into the countryside as their role to begin with would be mainly in high density population areas.

There may be accidents and glitches but They will also design redundancies to mitigate the severity of those glitches.

Before long the operators and designers of these driverless cars will be able to very easily quantify their safety record against human operated cars. Once that evolutionary measurement is breached that a driverless car goes for more kilometres between accidents then development and acceptance will accelerate.

Yes There is a whole generation of people who will not entertain the idea of riding in a driverless car.

how often have you had youngsters in your car who have not taken any notice or showed any concern with the traffic or the routes or the way you were driving whilst taking them to their destination. WE ARE ALREADY BEING TREATED LIKE ROBOTS. ROBOTS WHO DO A GOOD JOB PROVIDE A SMOOTH DRIVE AND FUSS FREE OUTCOME.

it's these riders with their heads buried in their smartphones that will be the market of the future. They do not want to own car as they are connected to social media and that is far more important. Driving keeps them away from interacting by social media.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

humandriver said:


> I think the 'when' could be much further in the future if Google dropped their program. This sudden rush of interest in the transportation business baffles me. Why would Google want to bother with such a dirty grind. Even without the drivers, you got flat tires, fender benders, washing the car, electrical failures etc. So many liabilities for a low margin industry.


Taking the driver out of the equation increases margins.

Huge Mining trucks worth millions of dollars each are lumbering around open-cut mines around Australia without drivers. These drivers and their unions fought hard for great pay and conditions. After being paid to train and a 3 month probationary period mining truck operators where pulling 110k-150k p/a WITH superannuation, 6-8wks holidays a year and free flights in and out of the more remote mines.

Those jobs are GONE, and more rolling stock on private leasehold, in and out of mines, on private railtracks are being converted to driverless vehicles every year.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

humandriver said:


> It isn't necessarily a tidal wave, while the big car manufacturers are developing 'autonomous vehicles' their primary focus and interest is keeping a driver as part of the program. They still need to sell cars.


That may be the the current priority - we see the ads all the time, the slick city exec takes his SUV up a mountain, the sporty unshaven hipster drives his BMW past a group of ogling girls heading for a switchback road. The Soccer Mum in her Jeep full of well behaved admiring lads.

That will be overtaken by the "ride" and what a driverless car allows the occupants to get up to if they dont have to drive. Front seats that spin and face the rear to engage all riders productively or a game of freeway footsies. Huge flat screens that allow great viewing experience.

It will be EASY to market.


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

humandriver said:


> Who's side are you on?


Mine. I have been self employed for over 30 years. Shit happens.
I also think the acceptance regulatory and by the consumer is still long enough away that anybody worried could go back to school, or learn a trade. Me? Not worth the investment.


----------



## mp775 (Jun 26, 2014)

The when is supposed to be next year in Milton Keynes, UK[url="http://, although I don't see any press about it since last fall. Any of our British members have any more info?

There is already a driverless bus in service in Singapore. Driverless technology was successfully tested on a New York City bus in 2008, although without passengers"], although I don't see any press about it since last fall. Any of our British members have any more info?

There is already a driverless bus in service in Singapore. Driverless technology was successfully tested on a New York City bus in 2008, although without passengers.[/url]


----------



## driveLA (Aug 15, 2014)

Travis been binging on the drugs at the employee parties too much if he thinks he's going to revolutionize every single part of transportation/car culture 

The dude invented a nifty app any other tech geek could have invented in his mother's basement 

The guy is not likeable. He's not jesus. He's not even Steve Jobs. 

His business model is garbage. He will be the MySpace of the app ride market. Uber will go out of style and somebody else will come along and do what Facebook has done. 

Remain relevant.


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

Sydney Uber said:


> Taking the driver out of the equation increases margins.
> 
> Huge Mining trucks worth millions of dollars each are lumbering around open-cut mines around Australia without drivers. These drivers and their unions fought hard for great pay and conditions. After being paid to train and a 3 month probationary period mining truck operators where pulling 110k-150k p/a WITH superannuation, 6-8wks holidays a year and free flights in and out of the more remote mines.
> 
> Those jobs are GONE, and more rolling stock on private leasehold, in and out of mines, on private railtracks are being converted to driverless vehicles every year.


That's ****ed up. It's pure greed.


----------



## humandriver (Sep 16, 2014)

I won't waste my time trying to 'rally the troops' if everyone thinks it's hopeless and doesn't care. Enjoy obsolescence.


----------



## Sydney Uber (Apr 15, 2014)

humandriver said:


> I won't waste my time trying to 'rally the troops' if everyone thinks it's hopeless and doesn't care. Enjoy obsolescence.


Humandriver, the issue of driverless cars is confronting and one that is already upon us.The great challenge for many will be where do we re-deploy our labour?

society needs to find a way to provide work and Vocations for the many millions of people displaced by this new technology but will be rolled out.

As a professional driver for the last 27 years I've made use of new technologies in my industry over the years. For me the challenge will be how to make use of new technologies in the future or re-invent my business to cope with competitive change.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*GOOGLE PASSED ITS NEVADA DRIVING TEST WITH FLYING COLORS--AND CONTROL OF THE ROAD CONDITIONS*

http://m.fastcompany.com/3035995/fa...-with-flying-colors-and-control-of-the-road-c


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

For a driverless car to work, a programmer has to think of every possible contingency and program for it, and there are just too many variables
in a car, in traffic, NO WAY! 

I suppose they'll eventually have pilot-less airlines, but you wont catch me flying in one.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> For a driverless car to work, a programmer has to think of every possible contingency and program for it, and there are just too many variables
> in a car, in traffic, NO WAY!
> 
> I suppose they'll eventually have pilot-less airlines, but you wont catch me flying in one.


Most flights now are pilotless, pilots only take over in an emergency or to take off and land. A driverless car went from Palo Alto to Las Vegas CES a couple weeks ago.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Audi's driverless car heading from Bay Area to Las Vegas for CES ...

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...MQFjAG&usg=AFQjCNGvkJ6kwYoup_89d9t_lNDbx0OPvw


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Most flights now are pilotless, pilots only take over in an emergency or to take off and land. A driverless car went from Palo Alto to Las Vegas CES a couple weeks ago.


You missed the point. Sure, I realize there is Autopilot. But a pilot is always there, "just in case".

Its' all about that "just in case". No pilot, Im' not flyin'.

What if pregnant woman's water breaks, or a passenger has an emergency?

Too many what ifs, a human needs to be there.

Not everyone goes from A - B. Maybe he or she wants to swing by a few clubs, scope them out, and choose. If it is a robot, it means talking to a robot.

Do you like talking to robots? they seem to be lacking a certain something, you know, like HUMANITY? Like when you answer phones, and the machine gives you choices that only the programmer decide you might ask , but the question you want answered is not being asked, and your last option is only to hang up.

NO way are driverless cars going to be a viable idea in the taxi biz.


----------



## painfreepc (Jul 17, 2014)

observer said:


> Most flights now are pilotless, pilots only take over in an emergency or to take off and land. A driverless car went from Palo Alto to Las Vegas CES a couple weeks ago.


Yes and some are saying the pilot's can't handle the new computerized airlines in an emergency and that may be the reason for the resent crashes.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> You missed the point. Sure, I realize there is Autopilot. But a pilot is always there, "just in case".
> 
> Its' all about that "just in case". No pilot, Im' not flyin'.
> 
> ...


One of the reasons the airliner crashed at SFO a couple years ago was because pilots over corrected for airplane computer.

http://cir.ca/news/sfo-crash-landing-1

Driverless cars will be here sooner rather than later. They will deliver your pizzas, packages, kids to school, you to work and back etc..

I don't like the idea either but it will happen.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

painfreepc said:


> Yes and some are saying the pilot's can't handle the new computerized airlines in an emergency and that may be the reason for the resent crashes.


Yupp, we have grown very reliant on technology. Heck, I don't even know ANYONES phone number anymore, except my own. I can see where driverless cars make sense but I still don't feel comfortable with it. I want to be in control, not some machine, even if it is safer.

Google driverless car passes 700,000 accident free miles.
http://mobile.extremetech.com/latest/221318-googles-self-driving-car-passes-700000-accident-free-miles-can-now-avoid-cyclists-stop-at-railroad-crossings?origref=https://www.google.com/


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

Seems driverless cars would work better for personal use

In the livery business, lot a liablity. From passengers simply talking to the driver in relation to the destination(which can change at anytime since the customer is paying)
and of course, vandalism...


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> One of the reasons the airliner crashed at SFO a couple years ago was because pilots over corrected for airplane computer.
> 
> http://cir.ca/news/sfo-crash-landing-1
> 
> ...


With no doubt far more limited application than you realize, and certainly not with "kids to school" or in any application where unprogrammed for contingencies will seriously harm someone. Would you, as a parent, allow your kid to ride in a driverless car? 
I like people, and so do a lot of other people like people.

The Moller Skycar has already pretty much proven a viable driverless flying car, computer controlled via computer virtual highways in the sky. 
The tech is there, has been for some time now, and all the needs is a huge company to take it over. No takers, and I wonder why.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Yupp, we have grown very reliant on technology. Heck, I don't even know ANYONES phone number anymore, except my own. I can see where driverless cars make sense but I still don't feel comfortable with it. I want to be in control, not some machine, even if it is safer.
> 
> Google driverless car passes 700,000 accident free miles.
> http://mobile.extremetech.com/latest/221318-googles-self-driving-car-passes-700000-accident-free-miles-can-now-avoid-cyclists-stop-at-railroad-crossings?origref=https://www.google.com/


Yes, but riders want someone to talk to, and I can think of an infinite number of things riders need to talk to the driver about.
I had a customer ask me if I had some water, or a napkin, a mint, or, "oh, we need to make a quick pitstop" or any number of a thousand things they might say to a driver ( you are going to force riders to talk to a computer? How many computers have you talked to and didn't get fustrated ?)

And what about taking little old lady's groceries to her doorstep at her home ?
What about parking to pick someone up where there is no parking, in front of offices downtown ( is the progammer going to create an illegal programming instruction, where a cabbie would eyeball the terrain, and quietly, quickly, double park for a few moments ? )

The contingencies where human interaction reigns is vast, the more I ponder this.

Just because a machine can get from a - b, doesn't mean it's going to find favor with riders.

I won't ride in them, I don't care if they are frickin' perfect in every way. I need a human to pour me a drink, and when I'm drunk, I need a human to take me home, and that is that. end of conversation. I'm willing to bet most people feel the same way.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> With no doubt far more limited application than you realize, and certainly not with "kids to school" or in any application where unprogrammed for contingencies will seriously harm someone. Would you, as a parent, allow your kid to ride in a driverless car?
> I like people, and so do a lot of other people like people.
> 
> The Moller Skycar has already pretty much proven a viable driverless flying car, computer controlled via computer virtual highways in the sky.
> The tech is there, has been for some time now, and all the needs is a huge company to take it over. No takers, and I wonder why.


I didn't know Moller had finally gotten his idea to work. I read about him in Popular Mechanics when I was a kid. He's actually one of the reasons I began to get my pilots license back in the day.

I agree, nothing can or should replace human interaction. We have a hard enough time getting along as it is.

But, hey it's not going to be up to me.


----------

