# Waymo launced self driving cars in Arizona because it's a red state. Fewer commies.



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

It was January 2015 and the Phoenix area was about to host the Super Bowl. Mr. Ducey learned that a local regulator was planning a sting on Lyft and Uber drivers to shut down the ride-hailing services for operating illegally. Mr. Ducey, a Republican who was the former chief executive of the ice cream chain Cold Stone Creamery, was furious.

If the state had a slogan, he added, it would include the words "open for business.

Mr. Ducey fired the regulator who hatched the idea of going after ride-hailing drivers and shut down the entire agency, the Department of Weights and Measures. By April 2015, Arizona had legalized ride-sharing.

"We are in the Wild West phase of autonomous vehicles, where companies are looking for the state with the least amount of sheriffing going on," said Henry Jasny, senior vice president at Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (← commies), a nonprofit based in Washington.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/11/technology/arizona-tech-industry-favorite-self-driving-hub.html


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Tomato is trolling now??!!


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

goneubering said:


> Tomato is trolling now??!!


Whaaaaaaaaaat? I didn't write the article. The NY Times wrote the article.


----------



## Tysmith95 (Jan 30, 2017)

Arizona is a state with some of the most predictable weather and well signed roads. That's why Waymo launched there, it's a fairly easy place to implement self driving cars. It's also mostly suburban, you don't have to deal with as much inner city traffic madness that you do in other places.

It is a lot easier to implement a self driving car in Phoenix then it is in a place like Boston, where a good bit of roads have no lines painted and the weather is much more unpredictable.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> Whaaaaaaaaaat? I didn't write the article. The NY Times wrote the article.


Did you add the part about fewer Commies??!!


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

Tysmith95 said:


> Arizona is a state with some of the most predictable weather and well signed roads. That's why Waymo launched there, it's a fairly easy place to implement self driving cars. It's also mostly suburban, you don't have to deal with as much inner city traffic madness that you do in other places.
> 
> It is a lot easier to implement a self driving car in Phoenix then it is in a place like Boston, where a good bit of roads have no lines painted and the weather is much more unpredictable.


Agreed. The U.S. landed on the Earth's moon, big deal. Anyone can land on the Earth's moon. Try landing on one of Jupiter's moons.



goneubering said:


> Did you add the part about fewer Commies??!!


I enhanced the article.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> I enhanced the article.


No you didn't. You highlighted the people who want highway and auto safety by calling them out as Commies. Very poor form.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

goneubering said:


> No you didn't. You highlighted the people who want highway and auto safety by calling them out as Commies. Very poor form.


They're a bunch of big government ralph nader type weenies that want to regulate anything and everything. They want to mandate that everyone go pee before they get in the car even if they don't have to pee.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> They're a bunch of big government ralph nader type weenies that want to regulate anything and everything. They want to mandate that everyone go pee before they get in the car even if they don't have to pee.


There you go again. You lose more credibility each time you post.


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

tomatopaste said:


> They're a bunch of big government ralph nader type weenies that want to regulate anything and everything. They want to mandate that everyone go pee before they get in the car even if they don't have to pee.


So you agree that the government should NOT prohibit or restrict human driven vehicles in the future, correct? And that private landowners are free to prohibit autonomous vehicles on commercial properties?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

goneubering said:


> There you go again. You lose more credibility each time you post.


That's disconcerting. I need to reevaluate my life.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

tomatopaste said:


> They're a bunch of big government ralph nader type weenies that want to regulate anything and everything. They want to mandate that everyone go pee before they get in the car even if they don't have to pee.


In my years of debating with people, going back to the days of bulletin boards, usenet, etc., I've noticed one constant: that those who feel the need to use weasel words, loaded phrases, ad hominems, etc., are those whose arguments are weak or nonexistent.

I once asked a republican, who told me he was for "small government". I asked him about what kind of policies
would result in "small government"? He named a bunch, and the interesting thing was, each and every idea given
was some variant of poor and/or middle class getting less, and rich people getting more and super rich people even more than that, so, in essence, "small government" in right wing practice, we get government smaller by transferring wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich, who don't need it. Brilliant. But the fun doesn't stop there.

Trump has been deregulating, such as the one where he repealed a law that required mining companies to not 
dump their toxic waste in streams. Now they can do it with impunity. He also reversed the requirement of broadband providers to get permission from customers to collect and use their online information., not to mention repeal of a regulation designed to keep guns out of the hands of certain mentally disabled people, and of course, now we cannot sue financial firms when they screw us, we can only settle disputes via "arbitration" (ie., a shill is now the "judge" ) and corporations now love the fact that they can commit labor violations with little or no pain for doing so, since in a sharp break with the past, Trump's labor department has stopped publicizing fines against companies, and on and on and on. All of these things ( and I'm just scratching the surface here of what they are doing ) are supposed to help make America great again. Go figure.

Oh, I could step down to your level, and call you a bunch of names, there are plenty available, but, it's not who I am.


----------



## LEO2112 (Jul 23, 2016)

Oscar Levant said:


> In my years of debating with people, going back to the days of bulletin boards, usenet, etc., I've noticed one constant: that those who feel the need to use weasel words, loaded phrases, ad hominems, etc., are those whose arguments are weak or nonexistent.
> 
> I once asked a republican, who told me he was for "small government". I asked him about what kind of policies
> would result in "small government"? He named a bunch, and the interesting thing was, each and every idea given
> ...


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

WeirdBob said:


> So you agree that the government should NOT prohibit or restrict human driven vehicles in the future, correct? And that private landowners are free to prohibit autonomous vehicles on commercial properties?





Oscar Levant said:


> In my years of debating with people, going back to the days of bulletin boards, usenet, etc., I've noticed one constant: that those who feel the need to use weasel words, loaded phrases, ad hominems, etc., are those whose arguments are weak or nonexistent.
> 
> I once asked a republican, who told me he was for "small government". I asked him about what kind of policies
> would result in "small government"? He named a bunch, and the interesting thing was, each and every idea given
> ...


Trump is a lifelong Democrat, not a big Trump fan, though he is much better than Obama or Hillary. Obama was a freakin' disaster. A huge crony capitalist that loved flushing tax payer money down the toilet on boondoggles like Solyndra and paying off his insurance company buddies for his commie Obamacare. Life is a lot more fun down here. Stop sticking your nose in the air and come join the party.



goneubering said:


> Did you add the part about fewer Commies??!!


I agree one hundred percent with the Arizona governor's hands off approach. We don't need to regulate Uber and Lyft more, we need to regulate the taxi industry less. Yes, I have huge issues with Uber and Uber's business model, but more government regulation is not the answer.

My main issue with Uber is they're dishonest. They exploit drivers that allow themselves to be exploited, but in the end the driver allowed himself to be exploited. Uber's business model is fraudulent and unsustainable. However Governor Ducey's hands off approach to self driving cars will help hasten the day the corrupt government controlled taxi industry meets its demise. And that's a good thing.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

Oscar Levant said:


> In my years of debating with people, going back to the days of bulletin boards, usenet, etc., I've noticed one constant: that those who feel the need to use weasel words, loaded phrases, ad hominems, etc., are those whose arguments are weak or nonexistent.
> 
> I once asked a republican, who told me he was for "small government". I asked him about what kind of policies
> would result in "small government"? He named a bunch, and the interesting thing was, each and every idea given
> ...


Of course the Tomato's arguments are weak. His entire argument is: it's gonna happen the way I say. Why? Because I said so.

All of us are just guessing but the UP community brings business experience insight and insight into human nature.

All the Tomato brings to his side are the regurgitated reports that he gets in his meetings.



tomatopaste said:


> My main issue with Uber is they're dishonest. They exploit drivers that allow themselves to be exploited, but in the end the driver allowed himself to be exploited.
> .


Uber is not a perfect situation but if you adapt you can make it work for you. If you can't, well, sorry pal all the best to you and no hard feelings.

Besides, why do you care about if drivers are exploited or not? Maybe YOU'RE the real "Commie" you've been talking about.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> Of course the Tomato's arguments are weak. His entire argument is: it's gonna happen the way I say. Why? Because I said so.
> 
> All of us are just guessing but the UP community brings business experience insight and insight into human nature.
> 
> ...


I think a first class company should let their "contractors" know what to expect, instead of intentionally misleading them with a 180 days of smoke and mirrors. Drivers in Phoenix went out and bought SUV's to do Uber and Uber made them believe this was a good business decision. Uber knew it was not. Drivers in Phoenix will soon want to sue Uber and Uber will say: yeah, tell it to the hand.



iheartuber said:


> Of course the Tomato's arguments are weak. His entire argument is: it's gonna happen the way I say. Why? Because I said so.
> 
> All of us are just guessing but the UP community brings business experience insight and insight into human nature.
> 
> ...


So what's your issue? I'm telling drivers what's going to happen, they can listen or they can ignore it. Up til now the "UP community" has not has to answer for anything they've said on this forum. That's no longer the case. S is starting to hit the fan. People that made decisions based on "UP community's" prognostications are starting to suffer the consequences.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> So what's your issue? .


You have no proof that what you say will happen just like I have no proof that what I say will actually happen.

However, I bring business experience to the table and I say things like "you know, from a business standpoint that doesn't add up" I also bring my knowledge of human nature to the table and I say things like "you know I know how people tick and I don't think it's going to go down quite that way"

You, however, have zero business experience and almost no life experience



tomatopaste said:


> S is starting to hit the fan. People that made decisionses.


Nothing has or will ever hit the fan until IF the day should ever come where a) more people choose to ride in an SDC taxi than an uber and b) the SDC taxi business is able to successfully handle everything it will have to in order to actually stay in business. There's no proof that it won't happen, but it IS a BIG "if" and a lot of variables to tear it down.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> You have no proof that what you say will happen just like I have no proof that what I say will actually happen.
> 
> However, I bring business experience to the table and I say things like "you know, from a business standpoint that doesn't add up" I also bring my knowledge of human nature to the table and I say things like "you know I know how people tick and I don't think it's going to go down quite that way"
> 
> You, however, have zero business experience and almost no life experience


You have no idea what I have or don't have other than the idiotic personas you make up in your head. You keep touting this great business experience that turns out to be worth zero. According to you there's absolutely no way to know what's going to happen, you just have to stand in the middle of the road and get run over.



iheartuber said:


> IF the day should ever come where a) more people choose to ride in an SDC taxi than an uber and b) the SDC taxi business is able to successfully handle everything it will have to in order to actually stay in business


Anyone still taking the "UP community" seriously should be committed.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> You have no idea what I have or don't have other than the idiotic personas you make up in your head. You keep touting this great business experience that turns out to be worth zero. According to you there's absolutely no way to know what's going to happen, you just have to stand in the middle of the road and get run over.


 You come off as an idiot in his 20s just barely out of college who has never run a business let alone had any significant business experience. If you are not any of that then you do a poor job of representing yourself.

As for the "false personas"- I simply googled all the Think Tanks working in the SDC space, looked at the list of employees and found the one that sounded closest to you which is Greg Rogers.

Maybe you're not really Greg Rogers but you will always be to me. Especially with this lost look on his (your) face. When I look at this picture of Greg, your words just make sense:












tomatopaste said:


> Anyone still taking the "UP community" seriously should be committed.


The UP Community give you reasonable doubts about your ideas and your reply is "they're all crazy, pay no mind to them"

That's the worst way to argue your point.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> You have no idea what I have or don't have other than the idiotic personas you make up in your head. You keep touting this great business experience that turns out to be worth zero. According to you there's absolutely no way to know what's going to happen, you just have to stand in the middle of the road and get run over.
> 
> Anyone still taking the "UP community" seriously should be committed.


These so-called idiotic personas are based on what we read in your posts.



tomatopaste said:


> I think a first class company should let their "contractors" know what to expect, instead of intentionally misleading them with a 180 days of smoke and mirrors. Drivers in Phoenix went out and bought SUV's to do Uber and Uber made them believe this was a good business decision. Uber knew it was not. Drivers in Phoenix will soon want to sue Uber and Uber will say: yeah, tell it to the hand.
> 
> So what's your issue? I'm telling drivers what's going to happen, they can listen or they can ignore it. Up til now the "UP community" has not has to answer for anything they've said on this forum. That's no longer the case. S is starting to hit the fan. People that made decisions based on "UP community's" prognostications are starting to suffer the consequences.


Are you a bitter Uber driver??



tomatopaste said:


> Uber's business model is fraudulent and unsustainable.
> 
> However Governor Ducey's hands off approach to self driving cars will help hasten the day the corrupt government controlled taxi industry meets its demise. And that's a good thing.


Now we're getting to the root of your anger.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

goneubering said:


> These so-called idiotic personas are based on what we read in your posts.
> 
> Are you a bitter Uber driver??
> 
> Now we're getting to the root of your anger.


Please enlighten us on how losing 3 billion dollars a year, before self driving taxis, is sustainable after self driving taxis hit the road


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

tomatopaste said:


> Please enlighten us on how losing 3 billion dollars a year, before self driving taxis, is sustainable after self driving taxis hit the road


Check Amazon's track record. That might give you a clue.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

Tomato is worried about Commies stopping Waymo so here's the story of Two Cows.


SOCIALISM: You have two cows. State takes one and gives it to someone else.

COMMUNISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and gives you milk.

FASCISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and sells you milk.

NAZISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and shoots you.

BUREAUCRACY: You have two cows. State takes both of them, kills one and spills the milk in system of sewage.

CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.


----------

