# Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll - Most Americans wary of self-driving



## jocker12

*Two-thirds of Americans are uncomfortable about the idea of riding in self-driving cars*, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, underscoring one of many challenges for companies spending billions of dollars on the development of autonomous vehicles.

While 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car, poll data indicated that *most people were far more trusting of humans than robots and artificial intelligence under a variety of scenarios.*

The Reuters/Ipsos poll found a wide disparity of opinion by gender and age, with men generally more comfortable than women about using self-driving vehicles and millennials more comfortable than baby boomers. (tmsnrt.rs/2DD4h4W)










Among men, 38 percent said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car and 55 percent said they would not. Among women, only 16 percent said they would feel comfortable and 77 percent said they would not.

Among those skeptical of driverless cars was California resident Phoebe Barron. "*I don't want to be the first guinea pig*," she said in an interview.

Colorado resident Sonja Coy told Reuters she had a more positive view. Self-driving cars "are a great innovation and technology with a lot of potential," she said.

"However,* I'm concerned with how liability will fall in the case of accidents, where there are both self-driving and regular cars on the road*," Coy said.

Like most people, she said she had not yet ridden in a self-driving vehicle. Companies testing the vehicles in the United States and elsewhere have provided limited public access so far.

"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit.

Automotive and technology industry executives are pushing U.S. lawmakers to pass legislation that would loosen restrictions on testing and deploying self-driving cars. However, the legislation is currently stalled in the Senate.

In the meantime, companies from General Motors Co to Alphabet Inc's Waymo are planning to deploy the first wave of self-driving vehicles over the next three years.

Industry officials and analysts have said providing convincing reassurances about safety is an urgent task for advocates of autonomous vehicle technology.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted in mid-January and collected responses from 2,592 adults.

Other recent surveys have also highlighted widespread doubts among U.S. consumers about self-driving cars, in the absence of any direct experience with them.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...driving-cars-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1FI034


----------



## Oscar Levant

jocker12 said:


> *Two-thirds of Americans are uncomfortable about the idea of riding in self-driving cars*, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, underscoring one of many challenges for companies spending billions of dollars on the development of autonomous vehicles.
> 
> While 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car, poll data indicated that *most people were far more trusting of humans than robots and artificial intelligence under a variety of scenarios.*
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll found a wide disparity of opinion by gender and age, with men generally more comfortable than women about using self-driving vehicles and millennials more comfortable than baby boomers. (tmsnrt.rs/2DD4h4W)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Among men, 38 percent said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car and 55 percent said they would not. Among women, only 16 percent said they would feel comfortable and 77 percent said they would not.
> 
> Among those skeptical of driverless cars was California resident Phoebe Barron. "*I don't want to be the first guinea pig*," she said in an interview.
> 
> Colorado resident Sonja Coy told Reuters she had a more positive view. Self-driving cars "are a great innovation and technology with a lot of potential," she said.
> 
> "However,* I'm concerned with how liability will fall in the case of accidents, where there are both self-driving and regular cars on the road*," Coy said.
> 
> Like most people, she said she had not yet ridden in a self-driving vehicle. Companies testing the vehicles in the United States and elsewhere have provided limited public access so far.
> 
> "We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit.
> 
> Automotive and technology industry executives are pushing U.S. lawmakers to pass legislation that would loosen restrictions on testing and deploying self-driving cars. However, the legislation is currently stalled in the Senate.
> 
> In the meantime, companies from General Motors Co to Alphabet Inc's Waymo are planning to deploy the first wave of self-driving vehicles over the next three years.
> 
> Industry officials and analysts have said providing convincing reassurances about safety is an urgent task for advocates of autonomous vehicle technology.
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted in mid-January and collected responses from 2,592 adults.
> 
> Other recent surveys have also highlighted widespread doubts among U.S. consumers about self-driving cars, in the absence of any direct experience with them.
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...driving-cars-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1FI034


with those numbers, they have their work cut out for them. Doesn't look like it's going to happen "right around the corner"


----------



## jocker12

Oscar Levant said:


> with those numbers, they have their work cut out for them. Doesn't look like it's going to happen "right around the corner"


It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


----------



## Oscar Levant

jocker12 said:


> It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


that's just it, it's all talk, and bluster, so when these things really come, people are not going to like the experience much, because without a driver, a rider is ENCUMBERED MORE, not less. So they better be a helluva lot cheaper, which I sincerely doubt. They might at first, but they must turn a profit, or the whole endeavor is a boondoggle. Methinks it will be a collosal boondoggle.


----------



## RamzFanz

jocker12 said:


> While 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car, poll data indicated that *most people were far more trusting of humans than robots and artificial intelligence under a variety of scenarios.*


I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...

27%!

That's HUGE and going up!

Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?

If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.

According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.

You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?

61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.



Oscar Levant said:


> with those numbers, they have their work cut out for them. Doesn't look like it's going to happen "right around the corner"


See above.


----------



## Oscar Levant

RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


The real truth about the viability of SDCs insofar as rideshares, hasn't been established. Until they roll these things out in big numbers, get rid of the driver, we just don't know. So far, SDCs do have a driver, though he or she isn't touching the wheel that much. Without a driver, and the dynamic drastically shifts. In fact, without a driver, a rideshare rider is encumbered more, not less, on rides. so, the grand question is, "will they be so much cheaper that riders won't mind the extra encumbrance that inevitably be placed upon them?" Who knows, we're not there yet. Not that I know of, anyway.


----------



## RamzFanz

Oscar Levant said:


> The real truth about the viability of SDCs insofar as rideshares, hasn't been established. Until they roll these things out in big numbers, get rid of the driver, we just don't know. So far, SDCs do have a driver, though he or she isn't touching the wheel that much. Without a driver, and the dynamic drastically shifts. In fact, without a driver, a rideshare rider is encumbered more, not less, on rides. so, the grand question is, "will they be so much cheaper that riders won't mind the extra encumbrance that inevitably be placed upon them?" Who knows, we're not there yet. Not that I know of, anyway.


Not that you know of?

You didn't hear Waymo launched in Oct, 2017, with live rides, live roads, real passengers, no driver? It was kind of a big deal.

You lost me on the encumbrances. Browsing the net, watching a video, or getting a head start on your work day on the way to work is an encumbrance? And here I thought driving in rush hour traffic was an encumbrance.


----------



## Oscar Levant

RamzFanz said:


> Not that you know of?
> 
> You didn't hear Waymo launched in Oct, 2017, with live rides, live roads, real passengers, no driver? It was kind of a big deal.
> 
> You lost me on the encumbrances. Browsing the net, watching a video, or getting a head start on your work day on the way to work is an encumbrance? And here I thought driving in rush hour traffic was an encumbrance.


the point is about rideshares. Without a driver, and more input from the rider will be required, not always, but often enough. There will be times when the SDC will need more input from you, interfacing with a computer screen more when before you just talked to a driver, that's what I mean.



RamzFanz said:


> Not that you know of?
> 
> You didn't hear Waymo launched in Oct, 2017, with live rides, live roads, real passengers, no driver? It was kind of a big deal.
> 
> You lost me on the encumbrances. Browsing the net, watching a video, or getting a head start on your work day on the way to work is an encumbrance? And here I thought driving in rush hour traffic was an encumbrance.


Are you talking about this? :

"_But Waymo is still a long way from being able to bring its fully driverless cars from the protected, highly scripted scenarios of its test facility to the wild, unpredictable open roads._"

https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/31/16579180/waymo-self-driving-test-facility-castle-google

Which goes to my original point, exactly.


----------



## jocker12

RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


27% îs huge after tens of billions spent on PR and and 10 years of development and testing? Hahahaha....


----------



## RamzFanz

Oscar Levant said:


> the point is about rideshares. Without a driver, and more input from the rider will be required, not always, but often enough. There will be times when the SDC will need more input from you, interfacing with a computer screen more when before you just talked to a driver, that's what I mean.


I would much rather change routes on a touchscreen than politely deal with a driver with his own agenda, bias, and personality.

Me: Take me here.

Car: Yes sir.



Oscar Levant said:


> Are you talking about this? :
> 
> "_But Waymo is still a long way from being able to bring its fully driverless cars from the protected, highly scripted scenarios of its test facility to the wild, unpredictable open roads._"
> 
> https://www.theverge.com/2017/10/31/16579180/waymo-self-driving-test-facility-castle-google
> 
> Which goes to my original point, exactly.


No, I'm not. They went live on live roads, no driver, no remote control, live passengers, in Oct 2017. The reporter was unaware they were already live, it wasn't announced until November, and really had no idea what he was talking about. He did say it was a smooth ride and he felt completely safe though.

By the way, their test facility isn't scripted. Another miss by the reporter.



jocker12 said:


> 27% îs huge after tens of billions spent on PR and and 10 years of development and testing? Hahahaha....


67,500,000 adult customers ready to jump in a SDC in the US alone? Another 135,000,000 in the US alone sitting on the fence waiting to see?

Any company would KILL for those numbers.

Worldwide, that's $3.78 TRILLION in revenue for just the early adapters. $10.5 TRILLION if you look at the fence sitters.

Wake up.

This is about money. Massive amounts of money. Unthinkable money. The equivalent of 75% of the entire US GDP is out there for the taking. Jesus dude, think. You're talking billions and 10 years?! What?!

Let me make this simple:

A trillion is 1,000 billions. The market is 14 trillion annually. What would you invest to get just 5% of that market?

3%?

1%?

This is where the naysayers fail. They just can't grasp what they are looking at. By the way, that's TNC only. That doesn't count trucking or delivery. Trucking is even bigger.

Do you know what stops a runaway freight train? Nothing.

Do you know what stops a worldwide race to a $14T market? Nothing.


----------



## heynow321

ramz sounds like every dumbass in 2000 spewing pie in the sky predictions about how tech is going to change everything. they were wrong then. they will be wrong now as they always are.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis

Oscar Levant said:


> The real truth about the viability of SDCs insofar as rideshares, hasn't been established. Until they roll these things out in big numbers, get rid of the driver, we just don't know. So far, SDCs do have a driver, though he or she isn't touching the wheel that much. Without a driver, and the dynamic drastically shifts. In fact, without a driver, a rideshare rider is encumbered more, not less, on rides. so, the grand question is, "will they be so much cheaper that riders won't mind the extra encumbrance that inevitably be placed upon them?" Who knows, we're not there yet. Not that I know of, anyway.


If uber can't make money charging $5 a ride with OUR cars, how much cheaper could they possibly be?

Remember how uber tried to say it was all on the driver when that 6 year old was killed? They settled that lawsuit. How expensive will it be for them when the first kid is mowed down by a SDC? And how quickly will politicians back away when that happens?



RamzFanz said:


> I would much rather change routes on a touchscreen than politely deal with a driver with his own agenda, bias, and personality.
> 
> Me: Take me here.
> 
> Car: Yes sir.


That will work nicely for the 7% of my pax who are sober.


----------



## Oscar Levant

RamzFanz said:


> I would much rather change routes on a touchscreen than politely deal with a driver with his own agenda, bias, and personality.
> 
> Me: Take me here.
> 
> Car: Yes sir.


This always goes back to a basic point I make. What you are describing is more of a generation thing,
where the young, who grew up with techie stuff, are more likely to welcome it, than older generations who did not.

It's like this, why are there no robot bartenders? Well, it's simple, you can't talk to a robot bartender.

No, some don't want to, but enough do that replacing bartenders with robots will never happen.

But, it's not a perfect comparison to rideshares, but it does illustrate that for robots to totally take over,
the 40 year old and up crowd will have go die out completely, becuase for many of us, we prefer the humanity of a live driver.

Another thing, I talked to a rider yesterday, who was in I think Pittsburg?-- where she rode in a SDC, she said the thing was dumb, when it arrived, it passed her several times going around the block, when she was in the city, and a local theatre broke, people everywhere, the car freaked out and the driver-on-standby had to take the wheel.

It's still a long ways off from dealing with all the random s-hit that life will toss at it.

When these things are released EVERYWHERE into the wild, then talk to me.



> No, I'm not. They went live on live roads, no driver, no remote control, live passengers, in Oct 2017. The reporter was unaware they were already live, it wasn't announced until November, and really had no idea what he was talking about. He did say it was a smooth ride and he felt completely safe though.
> 
> By the way, their test facility isn't scripted. Another miss by the reporter.
> 
> 67,500,000 adult customers ready to jump in a SDC in the US alone? Another 135,000,000 in the US alone sitting on the fence waiting to see?
> 
> Any company would KILL for those numbers.
> 
> Worldwide, that's $3.78 TRILLION in revenue for just the early adapters. $10.5 TRILLION if you look at the fence sitters.
> 
> Wake up.
> 
> This is about money. Massive amounts of money. Unthinkable money. The equivalent of 75% of the entire US GDP is out there for the taking. Jesus dude, think. You're talking billions and 10 years?! What?!
> 
> Let me make this simple:
> 
> A trillion is 1,000 billions. The market is 14 trillion annually. What would you invest to get just 5% of that market?
> 
> 3%?
> 
> 1%?
> 
> This is where the naysayers fail. They just can't grasp what they are looking at. By the way, that's TNC only. That doesn't count trucking or delivery. Trucking is even bigger.
> 
> Do you know what stops a runaway freight train? Nothing.
> 
> Do you know what stops a worldwide race to a $14T market? Nothing.


Having been in business myself, despite the best laid intentions of mice and men, one thoing i know, real world costs are always a lot more than projections laid into spread sheets given to venture capitalists.

The rate that uber charges right now, even if there were no driver, the rate IS the break even point. Maybe just above it, but not by much. If Uber had to own the entire fleet of 400,000 cars, there is no way in hell the rides would be a cheap as they are now. I'm actually, in point of fact, breaking even or close to it. All I"m doing is converting he equity in my car to cash, daily , and working 10 hours to do it. That's what is happening.

And the whole point of an SDC is to lower the rates, which are already pretty cheap. how much cheaper are they going to be? The Cars-To-Go here in SD, they didn't have drivers, you would walk up to one, use your member card, and you would be billed 40 cents per mile, and those things went out of business and smart cars are a lot cheaper to maintain than most cars.

If they are safer, maybe that's it, but I don't think it will overcome perceptions. A few deaths in those things, and like a drop of black ink dropped into a gallon of water, it turns black, not light grey.

Yellow Cab, with a rate twice that of Uber, could not earn a profit, and they converted to a cooperative, transfering the burden of overhead to the driver. When you subtract the amount paid to drivers, you have more than what Uber is currently charging, and note, Palmeiri ( the owner ) had 2 million deposited with the Insurance commission, Yellow was self insured, so they didn't even have to buy insurance, and they still went belly up.

Yellow in L.A went belly up in the 80s, and same for Checker, all of them went belly up.

I can't see any way in hell that UBer is going to charge less than it is now, driver or no driver, for when they own teh cars, the burden of overhead will shift to Uber, and that's going to be a lot more than they can possibly imagine. Oh, when brand new cars, things will look great, they always due for new cabs, but as time moves on, the cars get worn down, and break down more and more, more and more down time, and the costs will eat them alive. Think about the costs of wharehousing 200,000 vehicles, world wide, the technitions, admin staff, maintenance staff, etc etc? you think this is going to be cheap? You think the current rate is going to be cheaper than it is now? If it isn't, then what is the point? Uber is in for a rude awakening. It's run by techie guys living in ivory white towers who have no experience in the dog eat dog world of the transportation business. They will fold, eventually, it will all be one huge boondoggle, and the only ones left standing will be, you guessed it, the tried and true taxi cooperative.

If the rates are not cheaper than they are now, and they won't be, what is the point?



jocker12 said:


> It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


Yes, it's all on the "try to" right? Still no one has succeeded in toto. I tell the pr0-robot crowd, talk to me when they have replaced drivers completely. The wild is a lot different, than in controlled areas where they are now.


----------



## tomatopaste

jocker12 said:


> *Two-thirds of Americans are uncomfortable about the idea of riding in self-driving cars*, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, underscoring one of many challenges for companies spending billions of dollars on the development of autonomous vehicles.
> 
> While 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car, poll data indicated that *most people were far more trusting of humans than robots and artificial intelligence under a variety of scenarios.*
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll found a wide disparity of opinion by gender and age, with men generally more comfortable than women about using self-driving vehicles and millennials more comfortable than baby boomers. (tmsnrt.rs/2DD4h4W)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Among men, 38 percent said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car and 55 percent said they would not. Among women, only 16 percent said they would feel comfortable and 77 percent said they would not.
> 
> Among those skeptical of driverless cars was California resident Phoebe Barron. "*I don't want to be the first guinea pig*," she said in an interview.
> 
> Colorado resident Sonja Coy told Reuters she had a more positive view. Self-driving cars "are a great innovation and technology with a lot of potential," she said.
> 
> "However,* I'm concerned with how liability will fall in the case of accidents, where there are both self-driving and regular cars on the road*," Coy said.
> 
> Like most people, she said she had not yet ridden in a self-driving vehicle. Companies testing the vehicles in the United States and elsewhere have provided limited public access so far.
> 
> "We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit.
> 
> Automotive and technology industry executives are pushing U.S. lawmakers to pass legislation that would loosen restrictions on testing and deploying self-driving cars. However, the legislation is currently stalled in the Senate.
> 
> In the meantime, companies from General Motors Co to Alphabet Inc's Waymo are planning to deploy the first wave of self-driving vehicles over the next three years.
> 
> Industry officials and analysts have said providing convincing reassurances about safety is an urgent task for advocates of autonomous vehicle technology.
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted in mid-January and collected responses from 2,592 adults.
> 
> Other recent surveys have also highlighted widespread doubts among U.S. consumers about self-driving cars, in the absence of any direct experience with them.
> 
> Americans are less fearful of self-driving cars than they were a year ago, according to a new AAA study.
> http://www.thedrive.com/tech/17854/...ss-afraid-of-self-driving-cars-aaa-study-says


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


They have to force it. They have no choice. They spent so much money on it that they have to just do it even if it will be a total failure.

That's also why they hire pr guys like tomatopaste who scream how successful it's going to be.

I'm just here to watch the train wreck


----------



## iheartuber

Oscar Levant said:


> that's just it, it's all talk, and bluster, so when these things really come, people are not going to like the experience much, because without a driver, a rider is ENCUMBERED MORE, not less. So they better be a helluva lot cheaper, which I sincerely doubt. They might at first, but they must turn a profit, or the whole endeavor is a boondoggle. Methinks it will be a collosal boondoggle.


I said the same thing over and over again and the pr guys said I was nuts. They were paid to say that....



RamzFanz said:


> You didn't hear Waymo launched in Oct, 2017, with live rides, live roads, real passengers, no driver? It was kind of a big deal.


You're right RamzFanz

To the 2 dozen people who use the service it IS a big deal


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> They have to force it. They have no choice.


They are testing because that technology is for sale. The first clients are intended to be the car manufacturers. Every single technology company, and Waymo is the best example, has no car building unit, so in case they will prove their product is worth it, they have 2 options - to buy as many cars as they need for a car sharing service, or sell/partner to/with a car manufacturer in order to have that technology on the cars.

If development goes too slow and if they can't create a perfect system, despite their testing results, they need to close down the shop because this insanity it will start to swallow more and more billions. As we know, in business world, you allocate a budget projecting the profits will exceed initial budget and existing costs to keep that project going. They are already 10 years into this, in other words 10 years of continuous spending and no real benefits.

The only output so far is artificially created hype, but the reality will hit them hard. In this kind of situations, consumers have a passive aggressive approach; they are curious, get inside the self driving product, and if there is something, anything, they don't like, they will get out, say "thank you" with a confused smile on their faces, and go away, never do that again. Every single self driving car developer will understand that the moment consumers will be required "to pay" for the service.

Scary enough, I've found a way how these companies could eliminate the drivers as competition to the self driving cars, and if that will happen, they will force the market into a loose loose situation.



iheartuber said:


> To the 2 dozen people who use the service it IS a big deal


I am sure, before they get inside the cars, they are conditioned to sign non disclosure agreements in order to keep details away from the general public knowledge. What I am not sure about, is if they have insurance coverage for the time they are passengers in those testing self driving cars.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> They have to force it. They have no choice. They spent so much money on it that they have to just do it even if it will be a total failure.
> 
> That's also why they hire pr guys like tomatopaste who scream how successful it's going to be.
> 
> I'm just here to watch the train wreck


Every major tech and auto company in the world is investing millions, and some, billions in self driving cars. The CEO of Waymo says: "we've moved from research and development to operations and deployment."

You have actual video of Waymo's self driving cars driving in real life traffic with no one in the driver's seat. The denial from the vaunted UP community is truly breathtaking. I think we may have reached the point where we need to consider bringing in some professional help.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Every major tech and auto company in the world is investing millions, and some, billions in self driving cars. The CEO of Waymo says: "we've moved from research and development to operations and deployment."
> 
> You have actual video of Waymo's self driving cars driving in real life traffic with no one in the driver's seat. The denial from the vaunted UP community is truly breathtaking. I think we may have reached the point where we need to consider bringing in some professional help.
> 
> View attachment 203804


We have all this and yet... I still stand by my April 30 timeline.

See you then

I'm "denying" because I gave several valid reasons, but if i am so off base that can be easily proven: just have this thing take off "within weeks" as you claim and that's all the proof you need that I am in "denial". But... if this thing doesn't happen "within weeks" then maybe I'm not in denial after all!


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> We have all this and yet... I still stand by my April 30 timeline.
> 
> See you then
> 
> I'm "denying" because I gave several valid reasons, but if i am so off base that can be easily proven: just have this thing take off "within weeks" as you claim and that's all the proof you need that I am in "denial". But... if this thing doesn't happen "within weeks" then maybe I'm not in denial after all!


I am willing to hold off on bringing in professionals, if you'll agree to take this short quiz.

http://www.anxietycentre.com/anxiety-tests/anxiety-disorder-test.shtml


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> I am willing to hold off on bringing in professionals, if you'll agree to take this short quiz.
> 
> http://www.anxietycentre.com/anxiety-tests/anxiety-disorder-test.shtml


 Wow you are really funny ha ha calling me crazy ha ha but here is a serious question: what happens if April 30 comes and goes and there have been no major developments in any of the cities that Waymo is operating in right now? At what point do I have to turn the tables and say that YOU are the crazy one?

No need to reply because I know in typical fashion you will simply post some sort of joke reply anyway. I'll just let the results speak for themselves come April 30


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Every major tech and auto company in the world is investing millions, and some, billions in self driving cars. The CEO of Waymo says: "we've moved from research and development to operations and deployment."
> 
> You have actual video of Waymo's self driving cars driving in real life traffic with no one in the driver's seat. The denial from the vaunted UP community is truly breathtaking. I think we may have reached the point where we need to consider bringing in some professional help.
> 
> View attachment 203804


I did some research and the results are embarrassing- for Waymo. And, for you tomatopaste

Waymo's SDC service is up and running in Phoenix, you are correct. It's a test program called "the Early Rider Program" in which a selected number of pax will ride the service free of charge in exchange for their feedback on how to fix the bugs.

You know how many people are in the program? 6. Not 600. Not 6000... but six. So let's be clear, Waymo is up and running in Phoenix and it's servicing all of six people. That in and of itself wouldn't be so bad but you keep implying that Waymo is going to jump from six pax to 600,000 pax in Phoenix "within weeks".

Again, you think that 599,994 people are all of a sudden going to start using Waymo's SDC taxi within weeks.

Um... yeah.


----------



## empresstabitha

The same people who are building self driving cars are the same people who get hacked successfully left and right. Lets say self driving cars were like Nudes in your phone. We all know how so many nudes have been hacked successfully. That's why they say if you don't want it to be seen then don't take one., because the security just isn't there.



RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


It was an Ipsos poll consisting of 2592 people, therefore not enough to make a valid assumption about how the whole of the US feels.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> You know how many people are in the program? 6.


Hahaha.... Grumpy, Happy, Sleepy, Sneezy, Dopey and Doc. I guess Bashful is missing because it was too difficult to convince.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I did some research and the results are embarrassing- for Waymo. And, for you tomatopaste
> 
> Waymo's SDC service is up and running in Phoenix, you are correct. It's a test program called "the Early Rider Program" in which a selected number of pax will ride the service free of charge in exchange for their feedback on how to fix the bugs.
> 
> You know how many people are in the program? 6. Not 600. Not 6000... but six. So let's be clear, Waymo is up and running in Phoenix and it's servicing all of six people. That in and of itself wouldn't be so bad but you keep implying that Waymo is going to jump from six pax to 600,000 pax in Phoenix "within weeks".
> 
> Again, you think that 599,994 people are all of a sudden going to start using Waymo's SDC taxi within weeks.
> 
> Um... yeah.


You're not very good at research


----------



## goneubering

iheartuber said:


> I did some research and the results are embarrassing- for Waymo. And, for you tomatopaste
> 
> Waymo's SDC service is up and running in Phoenix, you are correct. It's a test program called "the Early Rider Program" in which a selected number of pax will ride the service free of charge in exchange for their feedback on how to fix the bugs.
> 
> You know how many people are in the program? 6. Not 600. Not 6000... but six. So let's be clear, Waymo is up and running in Phoenix and it's servicing all of six people. That in and of itself wouldn't be so bad but you keep implying that Waymo is going to jump from six pax to 600,000 pax in Phoenix "within weeks".
> 
> Again, you think that 599,994 people are all of a sudden going to start using Waymo's SDC taxi within weeks.
> 
> Um... yeah.


Six??!!

LOL

How embarrassing. Then you have to add the humiliation of Waymo only being able to use Chryslers. It's not surprising they took the Google Cars name off this experiment.


----------



## tomatopaste

tomatopaste said:


> You're not very good at research


https://www.google.com/search?q=f+m...AhUN_mMKHS5IAb8Q_AUIESgB#imgrc=O-_DXDgvBd7EQM:



tomatopaste said:


> You're not very good at research


So far in this thread you've been embarrassingly wrong about level 5 self driving cars and Waymo's early rider program. Facts aren't that important to you, are they?


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Wow you are really funny ha ha calling me crazy ha ha but here is a serious question: what happens if April 30 comes and goes and there have been no major developments in any of the cities that Waymo is operating in right now? At what point do I have to turn the tables and say that YOU are the crazy one?
> 
> No need to reply because I know in typical fashion you will simply post some sort of joke reply anyway. I'll just let the results speak for themselves come April 30


Really? You're saying 5 and 12 are not even an issue? Really?!


----------



## Disgusted Driver

forget about rideshare for a moment. Self driving card will ultimately win. Some companies will go belly up but chances are that self driving cars will ultimately be safer particularly if most are self driving. They can start talking to each other and increasing through put on major arteries and conceivably provide am opening for ride share to offer car as a utility rather than a purchase. It will take a while but it will come. My opinion is that the folks who got in early will mostly overspend, some will go bankrupt but progress will march on. It will be in long haul rigs even sooner. There will be the occasional freak accident but 30k people die each year in car accidents and many more get injured. Those numbers will go down drastically because the cars will learn from their mistakes.


----------



## jocker12

Disgusted Driver said:


> forget about rideshare for a moment. Self driving card will ultimately win. Some companies will go belly up but chances are that self driving cars will ultimately be safer particularly if most are self driving. They can start talking to each other and increasing through put on major arteries and conceivably provide am opening for ride share to offer car as a utility rather than a purchase. It will take a while but it will come. My opinion is that the folks who got in early will mostly overspend, some will go bankrupt but progress will march on. It will be in long haul rigs even sooner. There will be the occasional freak accident but 30k people die each year in car accidents and many more get injured. Those numbers will go down drastically because the cars will learn from their mistakes.


You wrote 142 words containing 8 major errors, made 3 reasonable statements and a huge speculation. Thank you for your efforts!


----------



## Disgusted Driver

jocker12 said:


> You wrote 142 words containing 8 major errors, made 3 reasonable statements and a huge speculation. Thank you for your efforts!


Were you planning on breaking it down for me or was this just one meaningless post with 0 to back it up?


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Really? You're saying 5 and 12 are not even an issue? Really?!
> 
> View attachment 204375


And... right on cue, he replies with the joke as predicted.



tomatopaste said:


> https://www.google.com/search?q=f+m...AhUN_mMKHS5IAb8Q_AUIESgB#imgrc=O-_DXDgvBd7EQM:
> 
> So far in this thread you've been embarrassingly wrong about level 5 self driving cars and Waymo's early rider program. Facts aren't that important to you, are they?


You just say I'm wrong with no back up? Just because you say so?

Here's my back up (link below). Be sure to scroll down where it says "meet our riders" and it's just six people (3 couples).

Prove I'm wrong or else I'll just keep laughing at you.

https://waymo.com/apply/


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> And... right on cue, he replies with the joke as predicted.


hehehehehehehehe



iheartuber said:


> And... right on cue, he replies with the joke as predicted.
> 
> You just say I'm wrong with no back up? Just because you say so?
> 
> Here's my back up (link below). Be sure to scroll down where it says "meet our riders" and it's just six people (3 couples).
> 
> Prove I'm wrong or else I'll just keep laughing at you.
> 
> https://waymo.com/apply/


Oh lordy! Watch the video in the link. Candice and Ted have 4 kids. 2 plus 4 equals 6 all by themselves.

Also from your link: (and this is from a year ago)









So Waymo has 600 self driving mini vans in Phoenix and just ordered thousands more, just for Candice and Ted? Is that about right?


----------



## jocker12

Disgusted Driver said:


> Were you planning on breaking it down for me or was this just one meaningless post with 0 to back it up?


I don't need to back it up with anything if you will have the curiosity to read my last 6 months comments and posts on this section of the forum.

My meaningless post gives information about you using less than 18 words to express a fundamental error. That is an accomplishment few can achieve.

One thing to show you how disconnected you are from reality. All this self driving cars mumbo jumbo is done by corporations. There is insignificant to zero government or academic involvement in this so called "development". At some point in your "less than 18 words for an error" comment, you say "but progress will march on", and that shows us how clueless you are when it comes to corporate goals. Do you know the differences between profit and progress and what corporations are capable of to achieve their profits?

Reading your statement, one will be inclined to think you are a corporate shill, but I am not here to point fingers.

Question - how many Segways do you see around (if you know what I mean)?


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> hehehehehehehehe
> 
> Oh lordy! Watch the video in the link. Candice and Ted have 4 kids. 2 plus 4 equals 6 all by themselves.
> 
> Also from your link: (and this is from a year ago)
> 
> View attachment 204438
> 
> So Waymo has 600 self driving mini vans in Phoenix and just ordered thousands more, just for Candice and Ted? Is that about right?


Ok fair enough. It's not 6 pax it's 3600 (6 x 600 cars). Plus it might not even be that much! Using Waymo's own words they say "we MAY have UP
TO hundreds of riders this year". So it's anywhere from a "few hundred" to a 3600 if all cars were maxed out.

Either way that's still a very far cry from the millions of pax in LA or the hundreds of thousands of pax Uber has in Phoenix.

I guess you're using that "try to trip him up on a nit pick thing" argument device again.

Apart from me conceding that I was off on my numbers, my initial argument still stands which is as follows:

There is no way that Waymo ("No
Waymo") is going to jump from 3600 pax to hundreds of thousands or millions of pax in "a few weeks"

You will of course reply to that by either making a (dumb) joke or by simply flat out boasting that what you proclaim simply is going to happen. Whatever. I care not for your childish replies.

April 30 the proof will be in the pudding.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Ok fair enough. It's not 6 pax it's 3600 (6 x 600 cars). Plus it might not even be that much! Using Waymo's own words they say "we MAY have UP
> TO hundreds of riders this year". So it's anywhere from a "few hundred" to a 3600 if all cars were maxed out.
> 
> Either way that's still a very far cry from the millions of pax in LA or the hundreds of thousands of pax Uber has in Phoenix.
> 
> I guess you're using that "try to trip him up on a nit pick thing" argument device again.
> 
> Apart from me conceding that I was off on my numbers, my initial argument still stands which is as follows:
> 
> There is no way that Waymo ("No
> Waymo") is going to jump from 3600 pax to hundreds of thousands or millions of pax in "a few weeks"
> 
> You will of course reply to that by either making a (dumb) joke or by simply flat out boasting that what you proclaim simply is going to happen. Whatever. I care not for your childish replies.
> 
> April 30 the proof will be in the pudding.


So you're saying companies tend to have more customers after they actually launch the product than when they're in beta? Good to know.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> So you're saying companies tend to have more customers after they actually launch the product than when they'll in beta? Good to know.


What I'm saying is your claim that this is all going to take off "within weeks" is insane

And since you won't listen to reason the only way I can prove it to you is to wait, see it happen as I predict, and then show you

So we wait...


----------



## goneubering

iheartuber said:


> April 30 the proof will be in the pudding.


What happens on April 30?


----------



## iheartuber

goneubering said:


> What happens on April 30?


tomatopaste has claimed on numerous occasions that in "just a few weeks" Waymo will come out of beta test mode, into full mode and very very quickly soonafter the floodgates will open and public demand will be off the charts.

I called his bluff and set a date of April 30 which is a full TWELVE weeks away.

If by then tomato's bold predictions fall flat I would love to hear the excuse he comes up with


----------



## Disgusted Driver

jocker12 said:


> I don't need to back it up with anything if you will have the curiosity to read my last 6 months comments and posts on this section of the forum.
> 
> My meaningless post gives information about you using less than 18 words to express a fundamental error. That is an accomplishment few can achieve.
> 
> One thing to show you how disconnected you are from reality. All this self driving cars mumbo jumbo is done by corporations. There is insignificant to zero government or academic involvement in this so called "development". At some point in your "less than 18 words for an error" comment, you say "but progress will march on", and that shows us how clueless you are when it comes to corporate goals. Do you know the differences between profit and progress and what corporations are capable of to achieve their profits?
> 
> Reading your statement, one will be inclined to think you are a corporate shill, but I am not here to point fingers.
> 
> Question - how many Segways do you see around (if you know what I mean)?


No way I'm reading last 6 months of your posts. I see enough on this one thread. You have an opinion, I have an opinion. I happen to think mine is sounder but only history will tell. I have no doubt that there will be many companies that lose their shirts on this just like there were many companies that went down in flames renting DVD's via the mail. The fact that a survey finds people don't trust them, means little. I don't trust them now, you would have to pay me to try one on a closed track. Super markets, frozen food and a host of other things were met with initial resistance. The company that wins is not necessarily the first to market, it's the one that wins over consumers with a good value or convenience proposition. Segway's time came and went if it ever really came. They were too expensive from the start. Great idea, advanced the tech but I'm guessing they lost money on them. Now you can get a hoverboard for a few bucks and get most of what a Segway does. So what's the point. 
Govt. involvement in autonomous vehicles, how about DARPA? much of the early work was University grant funded and DARPA challenge. Now it's up to some company to figure out how to monetize it. Just like many ecommerce sites failed, many early entrants to the race will fail as well. But someone will get it right and it will get better. Again, my opinion based on my background and experience. No need to be snide and dismissive.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> tomatopaste has claimed on numerous occasions that in "just a few weeks" Waymo will come out of beta test mode, into full mode and very very quickly soonafter the floodgates will open and public demand will be off the charts.
> 
> I called his bluff and set a date of April 30 which is a full TWELVE weeks away.
> 
> If by then tomato's bold predictions fall flat I would love to hear the excuse he comes up with


No those are your words. My words are that Waymo is poised to launch their commercial self driving taxi service any minute now. When they do there will be more demand than Waymo has seats.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> No those are your words. My words are that Waymo is poised to launch their commercial self driving taxi service any minute now. When they do there will be more demand than Waymo has seats.


I think the demand will be about what the demand for the Segway is.

But I understand that you are being paid to say what you say.

Also- just a friendly reminder that the reason why I feel this way is due to numerous reasons that I've already listed at length.

As for our little "wager" of sorts- if April 30 comes and Waymo has not even launched yet (for whatever reason) i would love to hear the excuse.

If April 30 comes and Waymo does launch but the demand doesn't exactly set the world on fire- again I'd love to hear the excuse.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I think the demand will be about what the demand for the Segway is.
> 
> But I understand that you are being paid to say what you say.
> 
> Also- just a friendly reminder that the reason why I feel this way is due to numerous reasons that I've already listed at length.
> 
> As for our little "wager" of sorts- if April 30 comes and Waymo has not even launched yet (for whatever reason) i would love to hear the excuse.
> 
> If April 30 comes and Waymo does launch but the demand doesn't exactly set the world on fire- again I'd love to hear the excuse.


Your obsession with Segway is silly. Segway was amazing technology but solved zero transportation problems. Self driving cars solve every transportation problem.

Aw yes, the numerous reasons. Who could forget the vaunted numerous reasons. Waymo will launch long before April 30, so you should start planning to move the goal posts now.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Your obsession with Segway is silly. Segway was amazing technology but solved zero transportation problems. Self driving cars solve every transportation problem.
> 
> Aw yes, the numerous reasons. Who could forget the vaunted numerous reasons. Waymo will launch long before April 30, so you should start planning to move the goal posts now.


Haha! You're using that argument technique again: try to discredit what I'm saying in an attempt to make your own case. Example:

Talking about Segways so much is silly, therefore your argument is silly. (And YOU are silly!)

it's not silly to use the Segway as a real-world analogy to what you guys are doing with Waymo. The parallels are very similar. The Segway does solve transportation problems, it's just that people don't really want to transport themselves that way.

That said, the analogy only works if my opinion turns out to be right. For example, in your mind, SDCs are analogous to the iPhone not the Segway. (Actually, I really don't know what you honestly think; just what you are paid to say).

We will only be able to prove this argument one way or another with the passage of time, so wait we shall.

I see you have accepted my April 30 challenge, great. You are holding to that date which is good.

Let me remind everyone reading along to our saga that when April 30 comes Waymo has two very important goals to achieve in order for me to eat a crow sandwich:

1. They actually have to launch. No pushing back, no more bugs to work out, etc.

2. The public has to really (I mean REALLY) embrace it.

Two goals that any reasonable third party can agree are pretty steep.

You, however, on numerous occasions, have cockily proclaimed that these goals are "no problem"

hehe... ok kid, we will see about that...


----------



## jgiun1

Then what about the numbers when the public will just be able to buy a car with self driving options for $20,000....I'll be that guy


----------



## Cableguynoe

jgiun1 said:


> Then what about the numbers when the public will just be able to buy a car with self driving options for $20,000....I'll be that guy


I can't wait until I can hop in my car drunk and get home legally(for once)


----------



## jgiun1

Cableguynoe said:


> I can't wait until I can hop in my car drunk and get home legally(for once)


Seriously, I'll drive all night picking up the 2/3 of Americans that don't like self driving, then pack the car and let it drive me 150 miles to a lake cottage while I sleep on the way.


----------



## iheartuber

jgiun1 said:


> Then what about the numbers when the public will just be able to buy a car with self driving options for $20,000....I'll be that guy


If I understand this correctly, the people who make SDCs need more road experience before they can start selling an SDC that you can buy for yourself at the local dealership

Hence, the foray into the SDC taxi biz.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Haha! You're using that argument technique again: try to discredit what I'm saying in an attempt to make your own case. Example:
> 
> Talking about Segways so much is silly, therefore your argument is silly. (And YOU are silly!)
> 
> it's not silly to use the Segway as a real-world analogy to what you guys are doing with Waymo. The parallels are very similar. The Segway does solve transportation problems, it's just that people don't really want to transport themselves that way.
> 
> That said, the analogy only works if my opinion turns out to be right. For example, in your mind, SDCs are analogous to the iPhone not the Segway. (Actually, I really don't know what you honestly think; just what you are paid to say).
> 
> We will only be able to prove this argument one way or another with the passage of time, so wait we shall.
> 
> I see you have accepted my April 30 challenge, great. You are holding to that date which is good.
> 
> Let me remind everyone reading along to our saga that when April 30 comes Waymo has two very important goals to achieve in order for me to eat a crow sandwich:
> 
> 1. They actually have to launch. No pushing back, no more bugs to work out, etc.
> 
> 2. The public has to really (I mean REALLY) embrace it.
> 
> Two goals that any reasonable third party can agree are pretty steep.
> 
> You, however, on numerous occasions, have cockily proclaimed that these goals are "no problem"
> 
> hehe... ok kid, we will see about that...


So hundreds of pax are already being driven around Phoenix in Waymo self driving mini vans, with no one in the driver's seat, yet it's going to take ten years for Waymo to figure out how to run their credit cards. Is that your argument?


----------



## Cableguynoe

tomatopaste said:


> The denial from the vaunted UP community is truly breathtaking.
> 
> View attachment 203804





tomatopaste said:


> So hundreds of pax are already being driven around Phoenix in Waymo self driving mini vans, with no one in the driver's seat, yet it's going to take ten years for Waymo to figure out how to run their credit cards. Is that your argument?


I don't understand the obsession with convincing this community.
People are always in denial about new technology until they see it.

This isn't just about self driving cars.

It's just the way it is.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> So hundreds of pax are already being driven around Phoenix in Waymo self driving mini vans, with no one in the driver's seat, yet it's going to take ten years for Waymo to figure out how to run their credit cards. Is that your argument?


My argument is that going from hundreds to hundreds of thousands of pax (an increase by 1000x) does not happen overnight. Especially considering that the current pax in the Waymo beta program are probably getting free rides in exchange for their input. Ask pax to spend money and it's a whole new ballgame

Also, whether Waymo can even successfully run this kind of business is a whole other issue.


----------



## jgiun1

iheartuber said:


> If I understand this correctly, the people who make SDCs need more road experience before they can start selling an SDC that you can buy for yourself at the local dealership
> 
> Hence, the foray into the SDC taxi biz.


True, but I'll never take public transportation around anywhere, never did, never will....bus-taxi-uber......even if it costs more in the future, I'll own my own car.


----------



## jgiun1

UberBeamer said:


> They think we're shaking in our boots because our jobs will be automated away. Ha! I'm shaking in my boots how other drivers are going to treat these rolling appliances on the highway. They're only too happy to cut off little old grandmas now. Think how they'll act around autonomous vehicles. It will be a free for all. A game... how many SDCs can you get to freeze up in a day.


Or hackers playing games.....ask Sony about the four months in advance promise to hack them statement on a Facebook page they couldn't stop.. Lol


----------



## iheartuber

UberBeamer said:


> They think we're shaking in our boots because our jobs will be automated away. Ha! I'm shaking in my boots how other drivers are going to treat these rolling appliances on the highway. They're only too happy to cut off little old grandmas now. Think how they'll act around autonomous vehicles. It will be a free for all. A game... how many SDCs can you get to freeze up in a day.


You touch on something here that is at the crux of determining whether an SDC taxi service will or will not be successful:

Let the thing go live and it's very possible to blow up and be a disaster for these reasons you state and many others.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> the current pax in the Waymo beta program are probably getting free rides in exchange for their input.


Every pax could carry a fish, a cactus, a small dog or a cat that needs to submit feedback because it counts as a legit rider (that's how Waymo get's a double digit number of people to try their pathetic robots).

Also, allowing free or cheap service will attract cheap customers happy to move their belongings...


----------



## Disgusted Driver

This is not something that is going to take off overnight. There will need to be refinements and enhancements as designers better understand how humans will use and misuse these products not to mention coding in new or freak environmental hazards as they are uncovered by someone going splat.

On the consumer side, for every technology there is an adoption curve. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations for an understanding of why everyone won't jump on this at the same time.


----------



## iheartuber

Disgusted Driver said:


> This is not something that is going to take off overnight. There will need to be refinements and enhancements as designers better understand how humans will use and misuse these products not to mention coding in new or freak environmental hazards as they are uncovered by someone going splat.
> 
> On the consumer side, for every technology there is an adoption curve. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations for an understanding of why everyone won't jump on this at the same time.


But... but... but...

tomatopaste SAYS it will take off overnight and gosh darn it, we all know how smart he is!!


----------



## tomatopaste

Cableguynoe said:


> I don't understand the obsession with convincing this community.
> People are always in denial about new technology until they see it.
> 
> This isn't just about self driving cars.
> 
> It's just the way it is.


Seems like a pretty good use of this forum. Most on here say self driving cars will never happen. I'm telling them they're already here, so hopefully some on here will make more informed and better decisions.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Seems like a pretty good use of this forum. Most on here say self driving cars will never happen. I'm telling them they're already here, so hopefully some on here will make more informed and better decisions.


And I'm here to shine a light on the corporate PR hype.

Are SDCs already here? Sure.

But being here and being big enough here to be a threat to established transportation options like taxis and Uber (or even car ownership) are two totally different things.

(You very cleverly try to use a PR push full of smoke and mirrors to imply that just because Waymo has an early rider program in Phoenix right now that means being as big as Uber is "within weeks of happening"-- come on now!!)

For a host of reasons I've already stated it will take 10, 20, 30 years or more (or never) for SDCs to get to that point.

You, of course, disagree. And the only way to prove it to you is to wait and then after some time has passed see what's what. So that's where you and I are in this debate.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> My argument is that going from hundreds to hundreds of thousands of pax (an increase by 1000x) does not happen overnight. Especially considering that the current pax in the Waymo beta program are probably getting free rides in exchange for their input. Ask pax to spend money and it's a whole new ballgame
> 
> Also, whether Waymo can even successfully run this kind of business is a whole other issue.


Waymo just ordered thousands more self driving Chrysler Pacifica mini vans. How many thousands of self driving mini vans does Waymo need in Phoenix to replace every Phoenix Uber driver?

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/0...lf-driving-cars-orders-thousands-of-minivans/


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Waymo just ordered thousands more self driving Chrysler Pacifica mini vans. How many thousands of self driving mini vans does Waymo need in Phoenix to replace every Phoenix Uber driver?
> 
> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/0...lf-driving-cars-orders-thousands-of-minivans/


Uh, better check and make sure you got customers first buddy. Whoops!

#business101


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Uh, better check and make sure you got customers first buddy. Whoops!
> 
> #business101


UFO's sightings are not as rare as self driving cars so.... UFO's are here! Hahahaha...

Would have been a lot cheaper and effective to build a permanent human colony on the moon instead of burning billions for this stupidity.


----------



## dirtylee

Machines are gonna make us into the new horses. 

High unemployment & extreme wealth inequality is deadly for civilization.


----------



## 1.5xorbust

The general public wasn’t jumping on commercial airliners when they first started flying and now look at the airline industry. The real leap of faith will be when people start traveling on self flying airplanes with no human pilot onboard.


----------



## SlimShady

2/3 of America never thought they would order a car from an app, get a perfect stranger as a driver either. Now they want drivers to pick up their kids from school. 
Statistics change. We are doomed. You are delusional. But hey, whatever makes you feel safe and secure. Ps...u ain't.



1.5xorbust said:


> The general public wasn't jumping on commercial airliners when they first started flying and now look at the airline industry. The real leap of faith will be when people start traveling on self flying airplanes with no human pilot onboard.


The pilot is eye candy for the general public. AI has been piloting aircraft for the last decade. That's why you hear of pilots being intoxicated. They are bored.


----------



## RaleighNick

RamzFanz said:


> I would much rather change routes on a touchscreen than politely deal with a driver with his own agenda, bias, and personality.
> 
> Me: Take me here.
> 
> Car: Yes sir.
> 
> No, I'm not. They went live on live roads, no driver, no remote control, live passengers, in Oct 2017. The reporter was unaware they were already live, it wasn't announced until November, and really had no idea what he was talking about. He did say it was a smooth ride and he felt completely safe though.
> 
> By the way, their test facility isn't scripted. Another miss by the reporter.
> 
> 67,500,000 adult customers ready to jump in a SDC in the US alone? Another 135,000,000 in the US alone sitting on the fence waiting to see?
> 
> Any company would KILL for those numbers.
> 
> Worldwide, that's $3.78 TRILLION in revenue for just the early adapters. $10.5 TRILLION if you look at the fence sitters.
> 
> Wake up.
> 
> This is about money. Massive amounts of money. Unthinkable money. The equivalent of 75% of the entire US GDP is out there for the taking. Jesus dude, think. You're talking billions and 10 years?! What?!
> 
> Let me make this simple:
> 
> A trillion is 1,000 billions. The market is 14 trillion annually. What would you invest to get just 5% of that market?
> 
> 3%?
> 
> 1%?
> 
> This is where the naysayers fail. They just can't grasp what they are looking at. By the way, that's TNC only. That doesn't count trucking or delivery. Trucking is even bigger.
> 
> Do you know what stops a runaway freight train? Nothing.
> 
> Do you know what stops a worldwide race to a $14T market? Nothing.


I think what you are sort of missing is that TNCs would have to cover the vehicle costs themselves. They are not profitable even when us saps are footing the bill, how do you think they will be with self-driving cars?


----------



## tohunt4me

C


jocker12 said:


> *Two-thirds of Americans are uncomfortable about the idea of riding in self-driving cars*, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll, underscoring one of many challenges for companies spending billions of dollars on the development of autonomous vehicles.
> 
> While 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car, poll data indicated that *most people were far more trusting of humans than robots and artificial intelligence under a variety of scenarios.*
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll found a wide disparity of opinion by gender and age, with men generally more comfortable than women about using self-driving vehicles and millennials more comfortable than baby boomers. (tmsnrt.rs/2DD4h4W)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Among men, 38 percent said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car and 55 percent said they would not. Among women, only 16 percent said they would feel comfortable and 77 percent said they would not.
> 
> Among those skeptical of driverless cars was California resident Phoebe Barron. "*I don't want to be the first guinea pig*," she said in an interview.
> 
> Colorado resident Sonja Coy told Reuters she had a more positive view. Self-driving cars "are a great innovation and technology with a lot of potential," she said.
> 
> "However,* I'm concerned with how liability will fall in the case of accidents, where there are both self-driving and regular cars on the road*," Coy said.
> 
> Like most people, she said she had not yet ridden in a self-driving vehicle. Companies testing the vehicles in the United States and elsewhere have provided limited public access so far.
> 
> "We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit.
> 
> Automotive and technology industry executives are pushing U.S. lawmakers to pass legislation that would loosen restrictions on testing and deploying self-driving cars. However, the legislation is currently stalled in the Senate.
> 
> In the meantime, companies from General Motors Co to Alphabet Inc's Waymo are planning to deploy the first wave of self-driving vehicles over the next three years.
> 
> Industry officials and analysts have said providing convincing reassurances about safety is an urgent task for advocates of autonomous vehicle technology.
> 
> The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted in mid-January and collected responses from 2,592 adults.
> 
> Other recent surveys have also highlighted widespread doubts among U.S. consumers about self-driving cars, in the absence of any direct experience with them.
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...driving-cars-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1FI034


CORPORATIONS

Exactly as our Government which they OWN

HAVE NO CLUE OR CARE OF WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT !



jocker12 said:


> It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


Down with EVIL TRANSHUMANIST CORPORATE GLOBALIST SATANISTS !

FREE WILL !



RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


Drone



iheartuber said:


> They have to force it. They have no choice. They spent so much money on it that they have to just do it even if it will be a total failure.
> 
> That's also why they hire pr guys like tomatopaste who scream how successful it's going to be.
> 
> I'm just here to watch the train wreck


Agenda 21 " Sustainable development"
Goal of eliminating " Personal Vehicle Ownership".

Stand up for your Freedom.



tomatopaste said:


> Every major tech and auto company in the world is investing millions, and some, billions in self driving cars. The CEO of Waymo says: "we've moved from research and development to operations and deployment."
> 
> You have actual video of Waymo's self driving cars driving in real life traffic with no one in the driver's seat. The denial from the vaunted UP community is truly breathtaking. I think we may have reached the point where we need to consider bringing in some professional help.
> 
> View attachment 203804


Less Appetizing than Genetically Modified Foods.



Disgusted Driver said:


> forget about rideshare for a moment. Self driving card will ultimately win. Some companies will go belly up but chances are that self driving cars will ultimately be safer particularly if most are self driving. They can start talking to each other and increasing through put on major arteries and conceivably provide am opening for ride share to offer car as a utility rather than a purchase. It will take a while but it will come. My opinion is that the folks who got in early will mostly overspend, some will go bankrupt but progress will march on. It will be in long haul rigs even sooner. There will be the occasional freak accident but 30k people die each year in car accidents and many more get injured. Those numbers will go down drastically because the cars will learn from their mistakes.


Communist China will Rule the World


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Haha! You're using that argument technique again: try to discredit what I'm saying in an attempt to make your own case. Example:
> 
> Talking about Segways so much is silly, therefore your argument is silly. (And YOU are silly!)


Technique? Pa-lease. I point out that self driving cars are already here, therefore I'm a PR agent of Waymo. Calling your argument silly, was me being gracious.



tohunt4me said:


> Goal of eliminating " Personal Vehicle Ownership".
> 
> Stand up for your Freedom.


Bring back the horse and buggy!


----------



## tohunt4me

tomatopaste said:


> Technique? Pa-lease. I point out that self driving cars are already here, therefore I'm a PR agent of Waymo. Calling your argument silly, was me being gracious.


The Transhumanists " Sunny Day" that you rejoice at
Will Not be shining on your side of the street.

You are a Traitor to all Biological Life Forms !


----------



## tomatopaste

tohunt4me said:


> CORPORATIONS
> 
> Exactly as our Government which they OWN
> 
> HAVE NO CLUE OR CARE OF WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT !


This is a non statement. Everybody sucks is a sad way to go through life.


----------



## tohunt4me

Your Messiah will Slay you.


----------



## tomatopaste

tohunt4me said:


> The Transhumanists " Sunny Day" that you rejoice at
> Will Not be shining on your side of the street.
> 
> You are a Traitor to all Biological Life Forms !


Please list all the technological advancements we need to eliminate so your life has meaning.


----------



## tohunt4me

tomatopaste said:


> Please list all the technological advancements we need to eliminate so your life has meaning.


1.) eliminate cameras on every corner
2.) eliminate " Stingray" spying equipment.
3.) eliminate N.S.A. SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS.
4.) eliminate Navstar car monitoring, spying and data collection.
5.) eliminate Corporate Media Collusion.
( " News" should not be Ministry of Information Psy Op programming with Commercials !)

Do you have a few weeks ?
I havent got to infrared spy satelittes peering through your roof . .

Stassi Germany NEVER DREAMED oF DOING WHAT AMERICA DOES NOW !

Yet YOU BEG FOR MORE !

( support the A.C.L.U. )

This is a Path i will Willingly go down for you. Will you Pay Attention to what is Pointed Out ?


----------



## tomatopaste

tohunt4me said:


> Your Messiah will Slay you.





tohunt4me said:


> Your Messiah will Slay you.


You do see the irony in using modern technology to ***** about modern technology, right?



tohunt4me said:


> 1.) eliminate cameras on every corner
> 2.) eliminate " Stingray" spying equipment.
> 3.) eliminate N.S.A. SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS.
> 4.) eliminate Navstar car monitoring, spying and data collection.
> 5.) eliminate Corporate Media Collusion.
> ( " News" should not be Ministry of Information Psy Op programming with Commercials !)
> 
> Do you have a few weeks ?
> I havent got to infrared spy satelittes peering through your roof . .
> 
> Stassi Germany NEVER DREAMED oF DOING WHAT AMERICA DOES NOW !
> 
> Yet YOU BEG FOR MORE !
> 
> ( support the A.C.L.U. )
> 
> This is a Path i will Willingly go down for you. Will you Pay Attention to what is Pointed Out ?


The ACLU. The ACLU are a bunch of effing communists.


----------



## tohunt4me

dirtylee said:


> Machines are gonna make us into the new horses.
> 
> High unemployment & extreme wealth inequality is deadly for civilization.


Transhumanist Globalists will
Eliminate you like Cattle in a drought.​


tomatopaste said:


> You do see the irony in using modern technology to ***** about modern technology, right?
> 
> The ACLU. The ACLU are a bunch of effing communists.


For Demanding the Constitution be abided by all, even Fascists !?

I dont SEE SENATORS STANDING UP FOR OUR RIGHTS !

Senators are " out to Lunch" with Corporate Lobbyists.

Far too often
Our " Lawmakers" must be Challenged.
The A.C.L.U. REMINDS THEM.

The A.C.L.U is a Good Watch Dog.
Feed it well
( A.C.L.U. ferrets out Bad Government. Even AFTER it is elected)


----------



## tomatopaste

tohunt4me said:


> Transhumanist Globalists will
> Eliminate you like Cattle in a drought.​
> For Demanding the Constitution be abided by all, even Fascists !?
> 
> I dont SEE SENATORS STANDING UP FOR OUR RIGHTS !
> 
> Senators are " out to Lunch" with Corporate Lobbyists.
> 
> Far too often
> Our " Lawmakers" must be Challenged.
> The A.C.L.U. REMINDS THEM.
> 
> The A.C.L.U is a Good Watch Dog.
> Feed it well
> ( A.C.L.U. ferrets out Bad Government. Even AFTER it is elected)


Oh bull crap. They are the guardian of the far-left progressive agenda. If you carry a gun they won't have anything to do with you. If you're a baker that doesn't want to bake a cake for a same sex couple, the ACLU won't have anything to do with you.


----------



## Saltyoldman

RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


One healthy lawsuit or an accident involving a school bus away from being shut right down. Remember a couple years ago when amazon wanted to deliver packages with drones? What happened to that idea. Too many things can go wrong. As far as ride share goes, the rates will go sky high for the pax


----------



## ShinyAndChrome

Not terribly interested in what most americans think of a new technology. Most americans are hopelessly ill-informed and uninformed on a multitude of issues, as study after study proves. Their opinion on most matters is worse less than nothing.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Oh bull crap. They are the guardian of the far-left progressive agenda. If you carry a gun they won't have anything to do with you. If you're a baker that doesn't want to bake a cake for a same sex couple, the ACLU won't have anything to do with you.


If you bake cakes and a gay couple asked you to bake a cake and you said no that's discrimination and it's illegal. No way should that Baker have the right to do that.


----------



## tomatopaste

Saltyoldman said:


> One healthy lawsuit or an accident involving a school bus away from being shut right down. Remember a couple years ago when amazon wanted to deliver packages with drones? What happened to that idea. Too many things can go wrong. As far as ride share goes, the rates will go sky high for the pax


Waymo has over 4 million self driving miles without causing an accident. They've been driving since October with no one even in the driver's seat in Phoenix. Not so much as a fender bender. Guess there's always hope though.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Waymo has over 4 million self driving miles without causing an accident. They've been driving since October with no one even in the driver's seat in Phoenix. Not so much as a fender bender. Guess there's always hope though.


4 good truck drivers have over 4 million miles of driving experience.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> If you bake cakes and a gay couple asked you to bake a cake and you said no that's discrimination and it's illegal. No way should that Baker have the right to do that.


Go into Harlem and demand the baker bake you a KKK cake. See how far you get.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Go into Harlem and demand the baker bake you a KKK cake. See how far you get.


You wanna know how far I'll get? As far as the Supreme Court


----------



## Saltyoldman

tomatopaste said:


> Go into Harlem and demand the baker bake you a KKK cake. See how far you get.


You forgot the rest of the song

As fast as you can.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> 4 good truck drivers have over 4 million miles of driving experience.


Oh lordy, we're back to this again. If a human driven vehicle causes an accident every x amount of miles and the self driving vehicle causes zero accidents, who is the company going to have drive their vehicles? If the human driver costs the company x amount of dollars per mile and the self driving vehicle costs the company zero, who is the company going to have operate their vehicles?


----------



## Saltyoldman

tomatopaste said:


> Oh lordy, we're back to this again. If a human driven vehicle causes an accident every x amount of miles and the self driving vehicle causes zero accidents, who is the company going to have drive their vehicles? If the human driver costs the company x amount of dollars per mile and the self driving vehicle costs the company zero, who is the company going to have operate their vehicles?


If the company is going to pay x for the vehicle,fuel,tires,maintenance,insurance,brakeshow much is that 5$ ride going to cost the pax?


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Oh lordy, we're back to this again. If a human driven vehicle causes an accident every x amount of miles and the self driving vehicle causes zero accidents, who is the company going to have drive their vehicles? If the human driver costs the company x amount of dollars per mile and the self driving vehicle costs the company zero, who is the company going to have operate their vehicles?


But are those 4 million miles street miles or computer simulated miles? (The human drivers are all street miles)

Reason I ask is there are much more variables (aka reasons for a crash) in real life vs computer simulation.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> You wanna know how far I'll get? As far as the Supreme Court


Any gay couple that forces a baker to bake a cake doesn't care about the cake, they're just being a-holes and making a political statement. And of course religious liberty has to be subservient to lefty weenie-ness.


----------



## iheartuber

Saltyoldman said:


> If the company is going to pay x for the vehicle,fuel,tires,maintenance,insurance,brakeshow much is that 5$ ride going to cost the pax?


Human drivers get paid
Robots do not (well, software and hardware updates cost but I won't split hairs)

One huge accident where the company that owns the robot drivers has to pay a huge settlement and that wipes out any "savings" they made by not having human drivers

If there are no accidents fear not- there will be some other huge expense the "experts" never planned for


----------



## Saltyoldman

iheartuber said:


> Human drivers get paid
> Robots do not (well, software and hardware updates cost but I won't split hairs)
> 
> One huge accident where the company that owns the robot drivers has to pay a huge settlement and that wipes out any "savings" they made by not having human drivers
> 
> If there are no accidents fear not- there will be some other huge expense the "experts" never planned for


Exactly


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> But are those 4 million miles street miles or computer simulated miles? (The human drivers are all street miles)
> 
> Reason I ask is there are much more variables (aka reasons for a crash) in real life vs computer simulation.





iheartuber said:


> But are those 4 million miles street miles or computer simulated miles? (The human drivers are all street miles)
> 
> Reason I ask is there are much more variables (aka reasons for a crash) in real life vs computer simulation.


4 plus million miles on everyday roads. Plus billion of miles on the simulator.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Any gay couple that forces a baker to bake a cake doesn't care about the cake, they're just being a-holes and making a political statement. And of course religious liberty has to be subservient to lefty weenie-ness.


I guess those freedom riders in the 60s who forced buses to stop discrimination against people of color were a-holes too?



tomatopaste said:


> 4 plus million miles on everyday roads. Plus billion of miles on the simulator.


Wow. I'm sooooooo impressed


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Human drivers get paid
> Robots do not (well, software and hardware updates cost but I won't split hairs)
> 
> One huge accident where the company that owns the robot drivers has to pay a huge settlement and that wipes out any "savings" they made by not having human drivers
> 
> If there are no accidents fear not- there will be some other huge expense the "experts" never planned for


So far Waymo, the company that owns the robots, has had to pay zero dollars in over 4 million miles cause it caused zero accidents. I guess there's always hope though.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> So far Waymo, the company that owns the robots, has had to pay zero dollars in over 4 million miles cause it caused zero accidents. I guess there's always hope though.


Haha! Oh man kids today..

"Gee there were no accidents in the last few years so that means there will never be any accidents (or unexpected expenses) ever!"


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I guess those freedom riders in the 60s who forced buses to stop discrimination against people of color were a-holes too?


No, just the shitheads that force bakers to bake them a cake against the baker's religious beliefs. For every one baker that doesn't want to be involved in a gay wedding due to religious beliefs there are 500 happy to do so. Guess which one the shitheads demand bake them a cake.



iheartuber said:


> Haha! Oh man kids today..
> 
> "Gee there were no accidents in the last few years so that means there will never be any accidents (or unexpected expenses) ever!"


It means the cost to insure the self driving vehicle will be infinitesimal.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> No, just the shitheads that force bakers to bake them a cake against the baker's religious beliefs. For every one baker that doesn't want to be involved in a gay wedding due to religious beliefs there are 500 happy to do so. Guess which one the shitheads demand bake them a cake.


I don't know any religion that condones hatred against who a person is. "But the Bible says you can't be gay" GTFOH!!! the Bible also says it's ok to own slaves. Use your common sense!

Anyway, for these reasons I call BS on anyone claiming that being anti gay wedding is "covered" by their religious beliefs.



tomatopaste said:


> It means the cost to insure the self driving vehicle will be infinitesimal.


Oh boy. You really think the costs of everything will be infinitesimal? Youth is wasted on the young


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I don't know any religion that condones hatred against who a person is. "But the Bible says you can't be gay" GTFOH the Bible also says it's ok to own slaves. Use your common sense!
> 
> Anyway, for these reasons I call BS on anyone claiming being anti gay wedding is "covered" by their religious beliefs.


Who said anything about hate? Go to a Muslim bakery and tell them they have to bake a gay wedding cake, see how far you get. This is where lefties get themselves into a bind, who's a bigger victim, Muslims or gays?


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Who said anything about hate? Go to a Muslim bakery and tell them they have to bake a gay wedding cake, see how far you get. This is where lefties get themselves into a bind, who's a bigger victim, Muslims or gays?


So you're a pro-robot, anti-human right winger?


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> So you're a pro-robot, anti-human right winger?


Yes


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Yes


Robots? What could go wrong?


----------



## RamzFanz

RaleighNick said:


> I think what you are sort of missing is that TNCs would have to cover the vehicle costs themselves. They are not profitable even when us saps are footing the bill, how do you think they will be with self-driving cars?


You foot the bill? Are you saying you provide a service for less than it costs? You should stop that.



Saltyoldman said:


> One healthy lawsuit or an accident involving a school bus away from being shut right down. Remember a couple years ago when amazon wanted to deliver packages with drones? What happened to that idea. Too many things can go wrong. As far as ride share goes, the rates will go sky high for the pax


Uhhh, no.

We have liability laws. We have liability precedent. Cars kill over a million people every year and we still have cars. Airplanes kill hundreds a year and we still have airplanes.

Why do people assume SDCs have to be perfect to exist? Despite their stellar track record in even the earliest phases?

Kill less, cause less injuries, cause less debilitating injuries, get better insurance rates, and be promoted as a safer way to travel.

Tesla is preparing to include insurance in the cost of the car. Not saying I agree with Tesla's path, but even at that rate of liability, they know how little it will cost.

Question:

You're putting your child on a school bus. Would you put said child on a human driven one where the fatality rate is .005% or a SDC where it's .0005%?

Yes, I remember when Amazon announced they were working on drone delivery. I also know they are still working on drone delivery. Why hasn't it happened? Battery power. But it's coming. There is 100% no doubt delivery will be automated as battery power increases. Maybe not drones, there's not a huge push for drones, but there is a MASSIVE push for automated delivery.

Rideshare costs, as well as delivery, is about to plummet. So is all transportation of goods and even raw materials. Your cost of living is about to plummet. But so are jobs.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> You foot the bill? Are you saying you provide a service for less than it costs? You should stop that.
> .


Hello, that's exactly what 96% of Uber drivers do.

It goes like this: the Uber marketing arm tricks thousands of new drivers a week into thinking they can make good money. After about 2 months when they see they are losing money, they quit. Not everyone, but at 96% it's just about everyone.


----------



## RamzFanz

45


iheartuber said:


> Hello, that's exactly what 96% of Uber drivers do.
> 
> It goes like this: the Uber marketing arm tricks thousands of new drivers a week into thinking they can make good money. After about 2 months when they see they are losing money, they quit. Not everyone, but at 96% it's just about everyone.


LOL!

Dude!

96% of drivers provide a service for less than it costs?!

WHAT?!

Are you saying 96% of Uber drivers are complete idiots?

I mean, I drove 2.5 hours today and made $76 (plus $6 cash and possibly some app tips). Did I lose money? Were my vehicle costs not paid for plus a profit? Did Uber not already profit? Am I in the tiny minority? Do you even read the available forums?


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> 45
> 
> LOL!
> 
> Dude!
> 
> 96% of drivers provide a service for less than it costs?!
> 
> WHAT?!
> 
> Are you saying 96% of Uber drivers are complete idiots?
> 
> I mean, I drove 2.5 hours today and made $76 (plus $6 cash and possibly some app tips). Did I lose money? Were my vehicle costs not paid for plus a profit? Did Uber not already profit? Am I in the tiny minority? Do you even read the available forums?


They do it for anywhere from a few weeks to 2 months and then when the math hits them in the face they quit. Yeah that's about how it works at uber

If you are a driver that does not lose money you are absolutely in the tiny minority


----------



## Saltyoldman

RamzFanz said:


> You foot the bill? Are you saying you provide a service for less than it costs? You should stop that.
> 
> Uhhh, no.
> 
> We have liability laws. We have liability precedent. Cars kill over a million people every year and we still have cars. Airplanes kill hundreds a year and we still have airplanes.
> 
> Why do people assume SDCs have to be perfect to exist? Despite their stellar track record in even the earliest phases?
> 
> Kill less, cause less injuries, cause less debilitating injuries, get better insurance rates, and be promoted as a safer way to travel.
> 
> Tesla is preparing to include insurance in the cost of the car. Not saying I agree with Tesla's path, but even at that rate of liability, they know how little it will cost.
> 
> Question:
> 
> You're putting your child on a school bus. Would you put said child on a human driven one where the fatality rate is .005% or a SDC where it's .0005%?
> 
> Yes, I remember when Amazon announced they were working on drone delivery. I also know they are still working on drone delivery. Why hasn't it happened? Battery power. But it's coming. There is 100% no doubt delivery will be automated as battery power increases. Maybe not drones, there's not a huge push for drones, but there is a MASSIVE push for automated delivery.
> 
> Rideshare costs, as well as delivery, is about to plummet. So is all transportation of goods and even raw materials. Your cost of living is about to plummet. But so are jobs.


I drive my kids to school. Tesla gigafactory is failing and the automated cars that deliver things around the plant crash all the time. Panasonic can make the batteries but Tesla can't even meet ten percent of their goal for a month. Obviously everything is going to plummet with this moron puppet in the White House, doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure this out. Plus you can get a lot more money out of Uber than progressive or geico


----------



## RaleighNick

There are no tips for driverless cars. Cheap fares are supplemented with bonuses that comes from VC capital. TNCs are losing billions in cash by not having to pay for vehicle costs and you think they can suddenly make money by absorbing those costs? Wake up.


----------



## Saltyoldman

RaleighNick said:


> There are no tips for driverless cars. Cheap fares are supplemented with bonuses that comes from VC capital. TNCs are losing billions in cash by not having to pay for vehicle costs and you think they can suddenly make money by absorbing those costs? Wake up.


Yes there is way too many factors that can go wrong with driverless ride share. I mean think about how stupid pax are. Are they going to walk up to the car and say are you my Uber? I have said it before on here, think about what they try to do when we are in the car what are they gonna do with no one in the car. Sex drugs bodily fluids and vandalism. All on Uber's dime. Plus how are the pax going to be able to make false claims to get free rides? It is not going to work.


----------



## tohunt4me

iheartuber said:


> 4 good truck drivers have over 4 million miles of driving experience.


And better stories..


----------



## El Janitor

jocker12 said:


> It's funny how, despite the numbers, companies keep pushing to force the robots on the roads. At CES some companies revealed their plans for "delivery" shuttles showing how they are ready to improvise around consumers reluctance to use them as passengers. They ignore the fact that those robots will potentially alienate regular traffic by going very slowly and customers, forced to go down to the street to pick up their delivery, instead of having a person coming to their door.


 Robots don't require health benefits, paid vacations, overtime, or any kind of pension after retirement. Plus there is no robot union. It's a corporations wet dream come true. Think about all the jobs that were lost to robots in the 80's and on in the automobile manufacturing industry. Fire Fred, and 10 other people, invest in machines that work faster and can run 24/7. When they break you only need a technician or two to fix it. 
Did the price of automobiles go up or down since then?

The only problem here is when a robot with wheels gets stuck in a loop it may crash into you pin you against, say the railing of a large suspension bridge and repeatedly back up and then run into you over and over again, while nudging you and your family over the side. Why? Oh because machines are stupid they do things like: "execute line of code 44, then stop. So when they glitch, say oh I don't know the RAM goes bad, or it gets a short somewhere, or a transistor creeps out on a logic board. It then says;" Execute line 44, execute line 44, execute line 44," until a technician turns it off and tries to find the problem. Instead of a person who would be able to think and say, " Oh crap, I hit that car, I had better pull over and get my insurance ready.


----------



## iheartuber

El Janitor said:


> Robots don't require health benefits, paid vacations, overtime, or any kind of pension after retirement. Plus there is no robot union. It's a corporations wet dream come true. Think about all the jobs that were lost to robots in the 80's and on in the automobile manufacturing industry. Fire Fred, and 10 other people, invest in machines that work faster and can run 24/7. When they break you only need a technician or two to fix it.
> Did the price of automobiles go up or down since then?
> 
> The only problem here is when a robot with wheels gets stuck in a loop it may crash into you pin you against, say the railing of a large suspension bridge and repeatedly back up and then run into you over and over again, while nudging you and your family over the side. Why? Oh because machines are stupid they do things like: "execute line of code 44, then stop. So when they glitch, say oh I don't know the RAM goes bad, or it gets a short somewhere, or a transistor creeps out on a logic board. It then says;" Execute line 44, execute line 44, execute line 44," until a technician turns it off and tries to find the problem. Instead of a person who would be able to think and say, " Oh crap, I hit that car, I had better pull over and get my insurance ready.


Replacing human drivers with robots is a corporation's wet dream on paper. In reality they better darn well plan for every possible expense because as Uber works right now, that responsibility falls to the driver.

One of the reasons why all these drivers on UP are predicting an SDC trainwreck is because THEY have day to day experience with the expenses involved in running a transpo/taxi biz and these corporate geeks getting hard for robots do not.

The safety issue, as you point out, is just one of the many other reasons.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Replacing human drivers with robots is a corporation's wet dream on paper. In reality they better darn well plan for every possible expense because as Uber works right now, that responsibility falls to the driver.
> 
> One of the reasons why all these drivers on UP are predicting an SDC trainwreck is because THEY have day to day experience with the expenses involved in running a transpo/taxi biz and these corporate geeks getting hard for robots do not.
> 
> The safety issue, as you point out, is just one of the many other reasons.


You can spend all day coming up with things that "could" happen at 70 mph per hour that would kill everyone in the car.

The wheels could fall off
The steering wheel could fall off
The engine could explode
And yet these things don't happen. Why? because companies would go out of business if they did. Self driving car companies have been testing self driving systems for almost ten years to make sure none of your list of horribles happen. And they've succeeded. How do we know this? because they've never, let me repeat, NEVER! caused an accident in the million and millions of miles driven on everyday roads. I guess there's still hope though.

I think a better explanation for the vaunted UP community's prediction of a SDC train wreck can be explained with the results from this simple quiz.

http://www.anxietycentre.com/anxiety-tests/anxiety-disorder-test.shtml


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> You can spend all day coming up with things that "could" happen at 70 mph per hour that would kill everyone in the car.
> 
> The wheels could fall off
> The steering wheel could fall off
> The engine could explode
> And yet these things don't happen. Why? because companies would go out of business if they did. Self driving car companies have been testing self driving systems for almost ten years to make sure none of your list horribles happen. And they've succeeded. How do we know this? because they've never, let me repeat, NEVER! caused an accident in the million and millions of miles driven on everyday roads. I guess there's still hope though.
> 
> I think a better explanation for the vaunted UP community's prediction of a SDC train wreck can be explained with the results from this simple quiz.
> 
> http://www.anxietycentre.com/anxiety-tests/anxiety-disorder-test.shtml


It doesn't matter if a SDC car causes an accident or not. What matters is if an accident happens- and there have been many. Google them.

I grow tired of the same answers you give. Just wait til April 30.

I'll just wait until the proof is in the pudding because the proof is certainly not in your boastful proclaimations.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> It doesn't matter if a SDC car causes an accident or not. What matters is if an accident happens- and there have been many. Google them.
> 
> I grow tired of the same answers you give. Just wait til April 30.
> 
> I'll just wait until the proof is in the pudding because the proof is certainly not in your boastful proclaimations.


It doesn't matter who causes the accident? State Farm would love to hear your reasoning I'm sure.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> It doesn't matter who causes the accident? State Farm would love to hear your reasoning I'm sure.


You are trying to pivot the conversation onto other tangents.

I care little for these tangents. I'm more interested in the main question which is as follows:

Will Waymo actually launch a fully functioning SDC taxi service and will it rival Uber? (And how quickly?)

You keep saying yes yes yes and "within weeks" but I have very reasonable reasons why I think no. The only way to find out which of us is right is to wait. So we wait. I set the deadline as April 30. Let's see what's what.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I grow tired of the same answers you give. Just wait til April 30.


Well, yeaaaaah. It's always more fun for the slapper than the slapee


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Well, yeaaaaah. It's always more fun for the slapper than the slapee


At least I don't have to run my replies by the legal Dept.... LOL


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> You are trying to pivot the conversation onto other tangents.
> 
> I care little for these tangents. I'm more interested in the main question which is as follows:
> 
> Will Waymo actually launch a fully functioning SDC taxi service and will it rival Uber? (And how quickly?)
> 
> You keep saying yes yes yes and "within weeks" but I have very reasonable reasons why I think no. The only way to find out which of us is right is to wait. So we wait. I set the deadline as April 30. Let's see what's what.


*Waymo is readying a ride-hailing service that could directly compete with Uber*

*https://qz.com/1208897/alphabets-wa...rizona-that-could-directly-compete-with-uber/*


The self-driving carmaker spun out of Google was approved on Jan. 24 to operate as a transportation network company (TNC) in Arizona, the state department of transportation told Quartz.



iheartuber said:


> At least I don't have to run my replies by the legal Dept.... LOL


Were you the the one whining about debate tactics? Yes, yes you were.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> *Waymo is readying a ride-hailing service that could directly compete with Uber*
> 
> *https://qz.com/1208897/alphabets-wa...rizona-that-could-directly-compete-with-uber/*
> 
> 
> The self-driving carmaker spun out of Google was approved on Jan. 24 to operate as a transportation network company (TNC) in Arizona, the state department of transportation told Quartz.
> 
> We're you the the one whining about debate tactics? Yes, yes you were.


1. You just keep saying the same things over and over again. Alright already, we get it!!
2. I was explaining debate tactics (some might call it "Mansplaining").. I was not "whining", but whatever...
3. Nothing has changed. You still made a prediction that can only be proved by seeing it happen. This qz.com article does not prove you are correct.


----------



## Sydney Uber

RamzFanz said:


> You foot the bill? Are you saying you provide a service for less than it costs? You should stop that.
> 
> Uhhh, no.
> 
> We have liability laws. We have liability precedent. Cars kill over a million people every year and we still have cars. Airplanes kill hundreds a year and we still have airplanes.
> 
> Why do people assume SDCs have to be perfect to exist? Despite their stellar track record in even the earliest phases?
> 
> Kill less, cause less injuries, cause less debilitating injuries, get better insurance rates, and be promoted as a safer way to travel.
> 
> Tesla is preparing to include insurance in the cost of the car. Not saying I agree with Tesla's path, but even at that rate of liability, they know how little it will cost.
> 
> Question:
> 
> You're putting your child on a school bus. Would you put said child on a human driven one where the fatality rate is .005% or a SDC where it's .0005%?
> 
> Yes, I remember when Amazon announced they were working on drone delivery. I also know they are still working on drone delivery. Why hasn't it happened? Battery power. But it's coming. There is 100% no doubt delivery will be automated as battery power increases. Maybe not drones, there's not a huge push for drones, but there is a MASSIVE push for automated delivery.
> 
> Rideshare costs, as well as delivery, is about to plummet. So is all transportation of goods and even raw materials. Your cost of living is about to plummet. But so are jobs.


Audi and Volvo have announced that its SD cars will all be covered by its own liability insurance for proven "technology failure".

https://www.bnlaw.com.au/export/Ins...f_its_autonomous_cars_are_involved_in_a_crash

People will slowly warm to SD cars, there will be hugely publicised failures, fueled by competing manufacturers (and Luddites).

But in time ALL vehicles will be SD in urban areas. Regulators will design laws that will only you to enter city zones if after you get out of your personal car, it's sub-contracted to a taxi service.

It will work whilst you work reducing your car registration and tax obligations, and reducing the total number of cars on the road due to higher fleet utilisation rates. The owner also gets a newer car sooner.


----------



## iheartuber

Sydney Uber said:


> Audi and Volvo have announced that its SD cars will all be covered by its own liability insurance for proven "technology failure".
> 
> https://www.bnlaw.com.au/export/Ins...f_its_autonomous_cars_are_involved_in_a_crash
> 
> People will slowly warm to SD cars, there will be hugely publicised failures, fueled by competing manufacturers (and Luddites).
> 
> But in time ALL vehicles will be SD in urban areas. Regulators will design laws that will only you to enter city zones if after you get out of your personal car, it's sub-contracted to a taxi service.
> 
> It will work whilst you work reducing your car registration and tax obligations, and reducing the total number of cars on the road due to higher fleet utilisation rates. The owner also gets a newer car sooner.


Slowly warming to SD is nothing like "it will happen within weeks"

Which is exactly what I've been saying all along


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> You can spend all day coming up with things that "could" happen at 70 mph per hour that would kill everyone in the car.
> 
> The wheels could fall off
> The steering wheel could fall off
> The engine could explode
> And yet these things don't happen. Why? because companies would go out of business if they did. Self driving car companies have been testing self driving systems for almost ten years to make sure none of your list of horribles happen. And they've succeeded. How do we know this? because they've never, let me repeat, NEVER! caused an accident in the million and millions of miles driven on everyday roads. I guess there's still hope though.
> 
> I think a better explanation for the vaunted UP community's prediction of a SDC train wreck can be explained with the results from this simple quiz.
> 
> http://www.anxietycentre.com/anxiety-tests/anxiety-disorder-test.shtml


Have you ever heard of, seen, or owned an iPhone that malfunctioned? Have you ever noticed that GPS gets things horribly wrong sometimes? How about a car computer, have you ever heard of one malfunctioning? How about auto pilot in a passenger jet? Do you know of any spacecraft that didn't quite make it through to its journeys end?

I think people have seen enough technology failures to have a healthy fear of a driver-less car. I have personally seen my GPS tell me to take a left hand turn that would have sent me through a guardrail and down a mountain! There have been many GPS errors but that one was, by far, the worst.

I believe the future holds the promise of safer travel. It might even be driverless cars. But for now, I don't believe for a minute, that we are even close to a decade or two away from achieving that goal.

People like having control of their situation. People NEED to have a certain amount of control. Driverless cars would not only take that control away but where's the fun if you can't race the guy pulling up next to you at the stoplight?


----------



## iheartuber

ImSkittles said:


> But for now, I don't believe for a minute, that we are even close to a decade or two away from achieving that goal.


Don't forget everyone that tomatopaste gtes paid to hype the Waymo taxi service. You may think we're a decade away, but if Waymo tells him to say it's "weeks away" then that's what the Tomato does.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Slowly warming to SD is nothing like "it will happen within weeks"
> 
> Which is exactly what I've been saying all along


The hell it is. This you on this thread 2 days ago:

"For a host of reasons I've already stated it will take 10, 20, 30 years or more (or never) for SDCs to get to that point."


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> The hell it is. This you on this thread 2 days ago:
> 
> "For a host of reasons I've already stated it will take 10, 20, 30 years or more (or never) for SDCs to get to that point."


you say tomato, i say tamah-to

Let's say it does take ten years for the Waymo Robot Taxi to reach Uber levels. Isn't that just like saying the public is "slowly warming" to it over a period of... 10 years? i think so, yes.

Thank you for your patronage


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> you say tomato, i say tamah-to
> 
> Let's say it does take ten years for the Waymo Robot Taxi to reach Uber levels. Isn't that just like saying the public is "slowly warming" to it over a period of... 10 years? i think so, yes.
> 
> Thank you for your patronage


Anyone that thinks they'll be driving for Uber in ten yrs should be eligible for a free lobotomy.


----------



## Eric75G

Oscar Levant said:


> The real truth about the viability of SDCs insofar as rideshares, hasn't been established. Until they roll these things out in big numbers, get rid of the driver, we just don't know. So far, SDCs do have a driver, though he or she isn't touching the wheel that much. Without a driver, and the dynamic drastically shifts. In fact, without a driver, a rideshare rider is encumbered more, not less, on rides. so, the grand question is, "will they be so much cheaper that riders won't mind the extra encumbrance that inevitably be placed upon them?" Who knows, we're not there yet. Not that I know of, anyway.


SDC'S won't have the "reflexes" to avoid an accident. I'd rather pay extra and take my chances on a live person who has the ability to think and react.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Anyone that thinks they'll be driving for Uber in ten yrs should be eligible for a free lobotomy.


Again, there are several reasons why I believe that a SDC taxi biz will not take off "within weeks"

Those reasons have nothing to do with whether I am or am not still driving for Uber in 10 years time. In fact I can't still be doing this in 10 months, let alone 10 years.

Thanks for your concern about me though.


----------



## Bevital

It's late night your Uber Pool ride shows up there are two very big, sinister looking dudes sitting in your driverless Uber. Are you really getting in?


----------



## Yam Digger

RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE


Meanwhile 73% said: "Hell no! I'm not getting in that thing." And guess what: That's an even HUGE-R number. Three times more in fact. And as the driverless accidents start happening, THAT number will climb up.


----------



## tomatopaste

Yam Digger said:


> Meanwhile 73% said: "Hell no! I'm not getting in that thing." And guess what: That's an even HUGE-R number. Three times more in fact. And as the driverless accidents start happening, THAT number will climb up.


When exactly are these driverless accidents scheduled to start happening? There hasn't been even 1 in over 4 million miles of driving. I guess there's still hope though.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> When exactly are these driverless accidents scheduled to start happening? There hasn't been even 1 in over 4 million miles of driving. I guess there's still hope though.


Not one accident he says.... oh yeah?

https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...-car-involved-crash-first-hour-first-day/amp/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...-that-crash-involving-ubers-self-driving-car/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/07/03/teslas-fatal-crash-implications

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/tech/google-driverless-car-involved-worst-8917388.amp


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Not one accident he says.... oh yeah?
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/www.tele...-car-involved-crash-first-hour-first-day/amp/
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa...-that-crash-involving-ubers-self-driving-car/
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/07/03/teslas-fatal-crash-implications
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/tech/google-driverless-car-involved-worst-8917388.amp


So you bring me examples of accidents caused by the human driver or level 2 auto assist systems. Pretty weak sauce iheart.


----------



## uberis80percentslavery

RamzFanz said:


> I like how you bolded the nonsense and not the important finding: 27 percent of respondents said they would feel comfortable riding in a self-driving car...
> 
> 27%!
> 
> That's HUGE and going up!
> 
> Or did you think 61,325,000 adult customers in the US alone wasn't enough for an emerging technology?
> 
> If those customers alone ride once per week for just $5, that's $16B annually.
> 
> According to polls that do more in-depth questioning, the "uncomfortable" people are mostly (~50% of total) fence sitters and not opposed to SDCs or riding in them, just wait and see people.
> 
> You should have highlighted *"We're talking about abstract things that many people have not experienced firsthand," said Jeremy Carlson, principal automotive analyst with IHS Markit." *because it was the most meaningful quote in the article. Wonder why you didn't?
> 
> 61,325,000 adult customers and almost none have even been in a SDC yet or experienced the safety, convenience, or comfort to spread the word. Pretty amazing, actually. The fence sitters will come in droves.
> 
> See above.


for $5? well a ride actually costs about $7 at the very minimum in 2018, i mean if you wash, vacuum, store, park, register, insure, maintain, fuel it, etc...

Thats negative billions for decades unless each ride is $20 minimum & $2 a mile lmao there goes their demographic

& thats in a current car at 7K or less these cars will cost a minimum 50K for least a decade

& if & when they do come shiiiiiiiiit why wouldn't i just buy my own? 50K add on or $300ish more a month on the lease and you can snort lines off hooker ass on the way to the show, or go to sleep in Chicago wake up in Miami Sold shiiiiit since we in fantasy land even better while im at the show ill send my own out to work for me & be back waiting soon as band leaves the stage, im sure these things also defy physics & things wont run into them, theyll magically hover with their avoidance technology, people will be banned from roads their tax dollars paid for, motorcycles go extinct, boats, 4wheelers, will tow themselves like transformers that will double as tiny homes if you buy the tint package, woohoo cant wait 3-5 years right?

or have every nose pick filmed because hey gotta bill for the snot wiped on the seat or condoms left on the floor, & since police have no more revenue to retrieve eye scanning for ad placement & warrant checks while stopping 3 seconds at stop signs and dont worry some cross walks will take a minute or 20.....

paintball orange cone gangs will form...

next generations women might still give up that kitty kat to men who dont own cars but no woman over 20 will or do they? idk ive owned a car since i was 16 because im an adult & like to venture outside my plantation, i mean zip code without permission, enough credits, electricity, a cell phone, internet, & an app to do so..

diff strokes i suppose


----------



## APettyJ

tomatopaste said:


> So you bring me examples of accidents caused by the human driver or level 2 auto assist systems. Pretty weak sauce iheart.


Point is, human drivers aren't going anywhere for some time. Some becsube they don't trust the tech, some because they like to drive, and some for a combination of reasons. As long as there are human drivers in large enough numbers SDV will always be inferior to professional and/or well-skilled drivers. SD-trucks will notnbe viable in urban markets due to hown unpredictably difficult it can be to deal with other drivers, many of whom have no business behind the wheel, are too cheap tonuse a rideshare and don't have the resources to purchase a new vehicle, let alone an expensive SDC.


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> Anyone that thinks they'll be driving for Uber in ten yrs should be eligible for a free lobotomy.


Maybe nobody on this forum will be driving for Uber in 10 years. Maybe Uber will no longer exist in 10 years. However, it's highly unlikely the reason will be because of self driving cars, LOL. There are still way too many kinks that need to be worked out and 10 years is not nearly long enough to work the kinks out.

Who is going to clean these cars out after somebody urinates or defecates in the car? What about passengers that just have really repulsive body odor that likes to linger and stick to the upholstery? How much is this going to cost the company?

What is going to stop the homeless guy, with a government money card, from ordering one of these cars and using it for his personal bedroom every night?

How long do you think it'll take for some rowdy teenagers to start vandalizing these cars?

Who do you think is going to help the passed out drunk to get out of the car when he arrives at his destination?

What do you think the media is going to say when one of these self driving cars goes to pick up somebody with a dead body in the backseat?

What do you suppose will happen when one of these cars are ordered for a 12-year-old child and the child molesters intercept these children before they get to the car? They could even molest the children inside the car with the simple covering of a hoodie!

The cars themselves may be a great innovation but you seem to be leaving out the human factor. Look at how self check out at the grocery store was supposed to take over all those jobs. Sure, there's a few self checkouts here and there but they are far from taking over!


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> They do it for anywhere from a few weeks to 2 months and then when the math hits them in the face they quit. Yeah that's about how it works at uber
> 
> If you are a driver that does not lose money you are absolutely in the tiny minority


Simply untrue.



Yam Digger said:


> Meanwhile 73% said: "Hell no! I'm not getting in that thing." And guess what: That's an even HUGE-R number. Three times more in fact. And as the driverless accidents start happening, THAT number will climb up.


No, they didn't. Of course, if you get your information here, a forum with a self interested bias against the reality of SDCs, I can understand why you think that.

MOST people in every poll I've read where there is an option say they are unsure. Sitting on the fence. NOT that they will never get in one.

27% is massive and far more than enough for many SDC fleets to thrive while other watch and see.



ImSkittles said:


> There are still way too many kinks that need to be worked out and 10 years is not nearly long enough to work the kinks out.


They've been in live service since May of 2016.



ImSkittles said:


> Who is going to clean these cars out after somebody urinates or defecates in the car?


Whoever wants the fees.



ImSkittles said:


> What about passengers that just have really repulsive body odor that likes to linger and stick to the upholstery?


Fees = Profit



ImSkittles said:


> How much is this going to cost the company?


Nothing. Fees = Profit



ImSkittles said:


> What is going to stop the homeless guy, with a government money card, from ordering one of these cars and using it for his personal bedroom every night?


The entity that owns it.



ImSkittles said:


> How long do you think it'll take for some rowdy teenagers to start vandalizing these cars?


How long do you think it will take to stop them with lawsuits and arrests?



ImSkittles said:


> Who do you think is going to help the passed out drunk to get out of the car when he arrives at his destination?


The entity that owns it. Fees = Profit



ImSkittles said:


> What do you think the media is going to say when one of these self driving cars goes to pick up somebody with a dead body in the backseat?


That someone died in a SDC? People have died in all modes of transportation and they still exist. Why don't people think these questions through?



ImSkittles said:


> What do you suppose will happen when one of these cars are ordered for a 12-year-old child and the child molesters intercept these children before they get to the car? They could even molest the children inside the car with the simple covering of a hoodie!


What's your point? That they would be more likely to get caught than almost anywhere else? Yes, they would be.



ImSkittles said:


> The cars themselves may be a great innovation but you seem to be leaving out the human factor.


Only in this forum do people think these questions aren't being asked and prepared for.



ImSkittles said:


> Look at how self check out at the grocery store was supposed to take over all those jobs. Sure, there's a few self checkouts here and there but they are far from taking over!


Quite the opposite. People are lazy and self checkout is a pain in the ass. SDCs are the opposite.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> So you bring me examples of accidents caused by the human driver or level 2 auto assist systems. Pretty weak sauce iheart.


I am rebutting your hype-y statements



RamzFanz said:


> Simply untrue.
> 
> No, they didn't. Of course, if you get your information here, a forum with a self interested bias against the reality of SDCs, I can understand why you think that.
> 
> MOST people in every poll I've read where there is an option say they are unsure. Sitting on the fence. NOT that they will never get in one.
> 
> 27% is massive and far more than enough for many SDC fleets to thrive while other watch and see.
> 
> They've been in live service since May of 2016.
> 
> Whoever wants the fees.
> 
> Fees = Profit
> 
> Nothing. Fees = Profit
> 
> The entity that owns it.
> 
> How long do you think it will take to stop them with lawsuits and arrests?
> 
> The entity that owns it. Fees = Profit
> 
> That someone died in a SDC? People have died in all modes of transportation and they still exist. Why don't people think these questions through?
> 
> What's your point? That they would be more likely to get caught than almost anywhere else? Yes, they would be.
> 
> Only in this forum do people think these questions aren't being asked and prepared for.
> 
> Quite the opposite. People are lazy and self checkout is a pain in the ass. SDCs are the opposite.


RamzFanz if you think there is a bias on this forum against SDC because the Uber drivers on this forum do not want to lose their jobs to a machine, then go to a totally different board and see what they think about SDC.

In fact- go to a mommy board. See what they think. All those moms. Are they concerned about safety? Are they ready to put themselves and their kids in a car driven by a robot?

Go there, see what they say and then let me know.


----------



## ImSkittles

RamzFanz said:


> Simply untrue.
> 
> No, they didn't. Of course, if you get your information here, a forum with a self interested bias against the reality of SDCs, I can understand why you think that.
> 
> MOST people in every poll I've read where there is an option say they are unsure. Sitting on the fence. NOT that they will never get in one.
> 
> 27% is massive and far more than enough for many SDC fleets to thrive while other watch and see.
> 
> They've been in live service since May of 2016.
> 
> Whoever wants the fees.
> 
> Fees = Profit
> 
> Nothing. Fees = Profit
> 
> The entity that owns it.
> 
> How long do you think it will take to stop them with lawsuits and arrests?
> 
> The entity that owns it. Fees = Profit
> 
> That someone died in a SDC? People have died in all modes of transportation and they still exist. Why don't people think these questions through?
> 
> What's your point? That they would be more likely to get caught than almost anywhere else? Yes, they would be.
> 
> Only in this forum do people think these questions aren't being asked and prepared for.
> 
> Quite the opposite. People are lazy and self checkout is a pain in the ass. SDCs are the opposite.


Wow, you just keep saying "fees" over and over again. You are assuming the company will know which passenger created the smell or the mess. You're also assuming vandals will be caught.  Then you're assuming a 14 year old vandal will actually be held responsible. Or maybe you think the ghetto parents will be held responsible, LMAO!

Besides, I only listed the obvious downfalls... let's not forget about flat tires, engine/electrical problems, GPS errors, ride jacking and so on.

The best you can some up with is "fees." Well, Uber drivers, hold onto your hats because you're going to have a job for a long time to come because autonomous cars are going to be more expensive than a cab!!!


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> I am rebutting your hype-y statements


Hype-y statements = statements that don't comport with the vaunted UP community's agreed upon and uniformed pile of crap positions.

Safety tip: refuting something with lies does not refute it.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Hype-y statements = statements that don't comport with the vaunted UP community's agreed upon and uniformed pile of crap positions.
> 
> Safety tip: refuting something with lies does not refute it.


Hype- (noun) a half-truth or flat out lie said with the sole purpose of pushing the agenda of you or someone who pays you

In this case Waymo pays the Tomato

And I'm guessing it's not much because you get what you pay for.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Hype- (noun) a half-truth or flat out lie said with the sole purpose of pushing the agenda of you or someone who pays you
> 
> In this case Waymo pays the Tomato
> 
> And I'm guessing it's not much because you get what you pay for.


Has the "community" had any discussions on how you're going to spin Waymo's launch in Phoenix, and why it doesn't count? Obviously the fact that there's no snow tops the list. You can also point to the fact that there's no video of the mini vans popping a wheelie with at least 3 pax inside. That's as much as I going to help. The rest you'll have to come up with on your own.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Has the "community" had any discussions on how your going to spin Waymo's launch in Phoenix, and why it doesn't count? Obviously the fact that there's no snow tops the list. You can also point to the fact that there's no video of the mini vans popping a wheelie with at least 3 pax inside. That's as much as I going to help. The rest you'll have to come up with on your own.


OMG you are either really dumb or just a really good soldier for Waymo. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it's the latter.

You think that the minute Waymo launches the ridership is going to go through the roof overnight? It took 2-3 years for Uber to catch on and that was something people understood- human driver.

You think society can change their entire view that quickly?

I'll just let reality speak for itself


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> OMG you are either really dumb or just a really good soldier for Waymo. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it's the latter.
> 
> You think that the minute Waymo launches the ridership is going to go through the roof overnight? It took 2-3 years for Uber to catch on and that was something people understood- human driver.
> 
> You think society can change their entire view that quickly?
> 
> I'll just let reality speak for itself


You couldn't get your hands on the first iphone for months, you won't be able to get a seat in a Waymo either.



tomatopaste said:


> You couldn't get your hands on the first iphone for months, you won't be able to get a seat in a Waymo either.


I know I shouldn't pick on the slow kids, but the slow kids started it.


----------



## ÜberKraut

Interesting read:

https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-challenges/


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> You couldn't get your hands on the first iphone for months, you won't be able to get a seat in a Waymo either.
> 
> I know I shouldn't pick on the slow kids, but the slow kids started it.


Soooo.... you think this SDC taxi thing is gonna be on the same level of customer demand as the iPhone?

Riiiiiiight.

One more time- I cannot convince you, so I'll just wait for some time to pass and then simply ask you: so... where are the crowds of customers you were predicting?

I can't wait to hear how you'll reply.



ÜberKraut said:


> Interesting read:
> 
> https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-challenges/


This is almost exactly word for word what I've been saying all along.

The Tomato said I was crazy. Is Wired Magazine crazy too?


----------



## ImSkittles

ÜberKraut said:


> Interesting read:
> 
> https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-challenges/


FINALLY a post/article that tells the FACTS! This is the REALITY of the technology. I find it almost humorous that some people actually thought Uber would be run out of business soon because of SDCs, lol. I'm sticking with my original statement of one to two decades (if ever) before the SDC becomes halfway common.

It's just as likely something else entirely will come along and make SDCs nothing more than a failed dream.


----------



## tomatopaste

ImSkittles said:


> FINALLY a post/article that tells the FACTS! This is the REALITY of the technology. I find it almost humorous that some people actually thought Uber would be run out of business soon because of SDCs, lol. I'm sticking with my original statement of one to two decades (if ever) before the SDC becomes halfway common.
> 
> It's just as likely something else entirely will come along and make SDCs nothing more than a failed dream.


That article is borderline ******ed (r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d). Totally ignores the leaders in the pack, Waymo and GM. Waymo's launching a fully autonomous taxi service in Phoenix any minute now. But yeah, let's ignore that and spend an entire article on the also-rans whining about getting their asses handed to them.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> That article is borderline ******ed (r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d). Totally ignores the leaders in the pack, Waymo and GM. Waymo's launching a fulling autonomous taxi service in Phoenix any minute now. But yeah, let's ignore that and spend an entire article on the also-rans whining about getting their asses handed to them.


You have earned your paycheck for this week


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> That article is borderline ******ed (r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d). Totally ignores the leaders in the pack, Waymo and GM. Waymo's launching a fully autonomous taxi service in Phoenix any minute now. But yeah, let's ignore that and spend an entire article on the also-rans whining about getting their asses handed to them.


Wow really? Any minute now? Well I had better hurry up then and get to Walmart and grab some supplies (without having to stand in a line to pay, of course) for that space ship headed to Mars. I don't want to miss out on that first wave of explorers going to Mars! Do you have any idea what time I should expect my Waymo ride to show up? I sure would hate to miss my flight!


----------



## iheartuber

ImSkittles said:


> Wow really? Any minute now? Well I had better hurry up then and get to Walmart and grab some supplies (without having to stand in a line to pay, of course) for that space ship headed to Mars. I don't want to miss out on that first wave of explorers going to Mars! Do you have any idea what time I should expect my Waymo ride to show up? I sure would hate to miss my flight!


tomatopaste is overlooking a few things:

1. I'm sure it's in Waymo's plan to launch "any minute" but things get pushed back all the time. I'll believe it when I see it.

2. Even after Waymo launches, they still have to go from a few hundred passengers to thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands to get to uber levels. You think it's easy? What if they launch and there are crickets? Also, the few hundred passengers they have now ride for free as part of the early rider program. How many passengers will they get when people have to pay? How many of the few hundred they CURRENTLY have would still be passengers if they had to pay?


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> tomatopaste is overlooking a few things:
> 
> 1. I'm sure it's in Waymo's plan to launch "any minute" but things get pushed back all the time. I'll believe it when I see it.
> 
> 2. Even after Waymo launches, they still have to go from a few hundred passengers to thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands to get to uber levels. You think it's easy? What if they launch and there are crickets? Also, the few hundred passengers they have now ride for free as part of the early rider program. How many passengers will they get when people have to pay? How many of the few hundred they CURRENTLY have would still be passengers if they had to pay?


When is about Self Driving cars, you deal with people that behave like *cult members*, and the best analogy here is *Scientologists* behavior. They are convinced Ron Hubbard was a visionary, thetans are real, Dianetics is "The Bible", and XENU was "the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy" who 75 million years ago brought billions of his people to Earth (then known as "Teegeeack") in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes, and killed them with hydrogen bombs." FOR REAL.

Now, very few of these Scientologists are famous individuals, recruited for PR purposes, but the vast majority of them are simply lost individuals, willing to change their lives and save the entire world from destruction.

Going back to the Self Driving cars, the lie has almost the same impact as Scientology has. These individuals are going to be in COMPLETE denial, thinking the self driving technology has benefits and is good for the humanity, exactly how any cult members will think whatever their leaders told them, *is the truth and nothing but the truth*. In fact, that is only an alternate reality or a parallel universe if you wish, something based only on promises, speculations and lies.

Of course, cult members argument could be about people anchored in REALITY having actually the same messed up perceptions cult members are "accused" of having, but the main difference here is that while rational people refer only to reality (as harsh and imperfect as it is) as their main reference point and guideline, cult members are floating in diarrhea and BS while telling the world around them it smells like a garden of roses.

Please don't be surprised self driving cars enthusiasts like the 3D televisions and wear silly glasses nobody uses anymore, while watching "the amazing" autonomous cars technology on their tv's. They are still in that "technology rocks" state of mind that made the industry build those tv's in the first place, but abandon the whole thing when it realized the stupidity of it.


----------



## ImSkittles

iheartuber said:


> tomatopaste is overlooking a few things:
> 
> 1. I'm sure it's in Waymo's plan to launch "any minute" but things get pushed back all the time. I'll believe it when I see it.
> 
> 2. Even after Waymo launches, they still have to go from a few hundred passengers to thousands, tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands to get to uber levels. You think it's easy? What if they launch and there are crickets? Also, the few hundred passengers they have now ride for free as part of the early rider program. How many passengers will they get when people have to pay? How many of the few hundred they CURRENTLY have would still be passengers if they had to pay?


Exactly&#8230;

Tomatopaste seems to be under the impression that Waymo will be able to take over all ridesharing, any minute now, LOL. He is seriously delusional because he is failing to include the human factor into his equations.

Now, if there were a line of cars ready to roll out of the assembly line to replace all of the cars in a given city, then I would say fine, it would probably work quickly. But all the cars need to be self driving in order for it to go as quickly as tomatopaste seems to think.

Under the current model, I can't see the SDC's being very viable for at least a decade, if ever. Slamming into the back of a fire truck is not a good sign, LOL.


----------



## jocker12

ÜberKraut said:


> Interesting read:
> 
> https://www.wired.com/story/self-driving-cars-challenges/


Thank you for reposting what was already on this forum - https://uberpeople.net/threads/afte...s-enter-the-trough-of-disillusionment.229159/


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> When is about Self Driving cars, you deal with people that behave like *cult members*, and the best analogy here is *Scientologists* behavior. They are convinced Ron Hubbard was a visionary, thetans are real, Dianetics is "The Bible", and XENU was "the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy" who 75 million years ago brought billions of his people to Earth (then known as "Teegeeack") in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes, and killed them with hydrogen bombs." FOR REAL.
> 
> Now, very few of these Scientologists are famous individuals, recruited for PR purposes, but the vast majority of them are simply lost individuals, willing to change their lives and save the entire world from destruction.
> 
> Going back to the Self Driving cars, the lie has almost the same impact as Scientology has. These individuals are going to be in COMPLETE denial, thinking the self driving technology has benefits and is good for the humanity, exactly how any cult members will think whatever their leaders told them, *is the truth and nothing but the truth*. In fact, that is only an alternate reality or a parallel universe if you wish, something based only on promises, speculations and lies.
> 
> Of course, cult members argument could be about people anchored in REALITY having actually the same messed up perceptions cult members are "accused" of having, but the main difference here is that while rational people refer only to reality (as harsh and imperfect as it is) as their main reference point and guideline, cult members are floating in diarrhea and BS while telling the world around them it smells like a garden of roses.
> 
> Please don't be surprised self driving cars enthusiasts like the 3D televisions and wear silly glasses nobody uses anymore, while watching "the amazing" autonomous cars technology on their tv's. They are still in that "technology rocks" state of mind that made the industry build those tv's in the first place, but abandon the whole thing when it realized the stupidity of it.


RamzFanz is a cult member

tomatopaste is just a hired gun PR-type guy


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> What if they launch and there are crickets?


That you even hold this out as a possibility is mind boggling. There will be no reason to ever chose an Uber over a Waymo. Waymo will be:

cheaper
safer
more reliable. they won't cancel on you
brand new spacious vehicles, better than most Uber select.
you won't have to ride with a stranger
won't have to listen to iheartuber jocker12 or tohunt4me biotch about transhumanist crap.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> RamzFanz is a cult member
> 
> tomatopaste is just a hired gun PR-type guy


Do you remember Jim Jones and his followers?









"By 1977, Jonestown faced growing scrutiny for scarce supplies, armed guards, preaching-by-loudspeaker, and regular suicide drills. The following year, former members even asked the US government for help in ending the cult and regaining their families in Jonestown. The following year, *a California Congressman visited the cult* and offered safe passage for any defectors, *but he and 4 others were gunned down at their airstrip*. On November 18th, on Jones' orders, *over 900 remaining members committed the largest mass suicide in history*, drinking cyanide and Valium-laced Kool Aid at the Jonestown Massacre. Jones, meanwhile, shot himself among his closest followers - following them to death." - http://www.theoccultmuseum.com/7-dangerous-cult-leaders-in-modern-history/

Cult members have no common sense, and are ready to kill or die for their BS. In many ways is similar to terrorism.


----------



## Dinoberra

Most Americans are half illiterate with 4th grade comprehension levels. They'll love self driving cars more than they love Wal-Mart and sending their money overseas.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> That you even hold this out as a possibility is mind boggling. There will be no reason to ever chose an Uber over a Waymo. Waymo will be:
> 
> cheaper
> safer
> more reliable. they won't cancel on you
> brand new spacious vehicles, better than most Uber select.
> you won't have to ride with a stranger
> won't have to listen to iheartuber jocker12 or tohunt4me biotch about transhumanist crap.


Whatever you say buddy. That Kool Aid must be tasting goooood!



tomatopaste said:


> That you even hold this out as a possibility is mind boggling. There will be no reason to ever chose an Uber over a Waymo. Waymo will be:
> 
> cheaper
> safer
> more reliable. they won't cancel on you
> brand new spacious vehicles, better than most Uber select.
> you won't have to ride with a stranger
> won't have to listen to iheartuber jocker12 or tohunt4me biotch about transhumanist crap.


"More reliable"?

Pax: I'm here in a crowd of 20,000 getting out of a concert, where are you?

SDC: ......

"Brand new vehicles"?

Give it 3 months they will be beat to crap

"You won't have to ride with a stranger"?

They're all pool rides!!

"Won't cancel on you"

The only time I ever cancel on a pax is if they are either extremely late or if they have completely screwed up entering their correct location.

Whether it is a human or robot driver those are valid reasons for any passenger to be canceled upon.


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Whatever you say buddy. That Kool Aid must be tasting goooood!
> 
> "More reliable"?
> 
> Pax: I'm here in a crowd of 20,000 getting out of a concert, where are you?
> 
> SDC: beep beep...


I wanted to give you an idea where these people are coming from and what pragmatic and rational people have to deal with.

In addition to the fanatics, you have the confused individuals, that cannot accept yet how corporations work, their primary goals and how they create propaganda in order to mislead the general public. - Edit - here is a good example - U.S. taxpayers gave $400 Billion dollars to cable companies to provide the United States with Fiber Internet. The companies took the money and didn't do shit for the citizens with it. - entire book here - The Book of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal & Free the Net


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> I wanted to give you an idea where these people are coming from and what pragmatic and rational people have to deal with.
> 
> In addition to the fanatics, you have the confused individuals, that cannot accept yet how corporations work, their primary goals and how they create propaganda in order to mislead the general public.


tomatopaste knows exactly how corporations work- he cashes their checks every two weeks!


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Whatever you say buddy. That Kool Aid must be tasting goooood!
> 
> "More reliable"?
> 
> Pax: I'm here in a crowd of 20,000 getting out of a concert, where are you?
> 
> SDC: ......
> 
> "Brand new vehicles"?
> 
> Give it 3 months they will be beat to crap
> 
> "You won't have to ride with a stranger"?
> 
> They're all pool rides!!
> 
> "Won't cancel on you"
> 
> The only time I ever cancel on a pax is if they are either extremely late or if they have completely screwed up entering their correct location.
> 
> Whether it is a human or robot driver those are valid reasons for any passenger to be canceled upon.


Command center: You're in the red dress with your boobs hanging out, right?
Pax: Um, yeah, kinda.
Command center: I'm six inches from you.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Command center: You're in the red dress with your boobs hanging out, right?
> Pax: Um, yeah, kinda.
> Command center: I'm six inches from you.


More like:

Pax (drunk): where are you?
Command center: right in front of you.
Pax: where?

Continue for 5 min...


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> tomatopaste knows exactly how corporations work- he cashes their checks every two weeks!


iheartuber: "Yes Tomato slaps me around on here on a daily basis, but that's only cause Waymo is giving him all the answers."


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> iheartuber: "Yes Tomato slaps me around on here on a daily basis, but that's only cause Waymo is giving him all the answers."


That's actually correct, except for you/Waymo being right


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> More like:
> 
> Pax (drunk): where are you?
> Command center: right in front of you.
> Pax: where?
> 
> Continue for 5 min...


and?



ImSkittles said:


> Exactly&#8230;
> 
> Tomatopaste seems to be under the impression that Waymo will be able to take over all ridesharing, any minute now, LOL. He is seriously delusional because he is failing to include the human factor into his equations.
> 
> Now, if there were a line of cars ready to roll out of the assembly line to replace all of the cars in a given city, then I would say fine, it would probably work quickly. But all the cars need to be self driving in order for it to go as quickly as tomatopaste seems to think.
> 
> Under the current model, I can't see the SDC's being very viable for at least a decade, if ever. Slamming into the back of a fire truck is not a good sign, LOL.


LOL, a self driving car, LOL, has never, LOL, slammed, LOL, into, LOL, a fire truck. LOL.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> and?
> 
> LOL, a self driving car, LOL, has never, LOL, slammed, LOL, into, LOL, a fire truck. LOL.


You should work the phones in the service center. I wonder how long you will last?


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> and?
> 
> LOL, a self driving car, LOL, has never, LOL, slammed, LOL, into, LOL, a fire truck. LOL.


http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/23/technology/tesla-fire-truck-crash/index.html

Be careful of your wording. I know I was.


----------



## tomatopaste

ImSkittles said:


> http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/23/technology/tesla-fire-truck-crash/index.html
> 
> Be careful of your wording. I know I was.


No, you were very sloppy with your wording. Tesla Autopilot is level two, driver assist. A fully autonomous self driving car is level four and orders of magnitude more sophisticated and capable. Google early on realized driver assist would never work because the better driver assist became, the less reliable the human would be in an emergency.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> You should work the phones in the service center. I wonder how long you will last?


An hour and a half. Two max.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> An hour and a half. Two max.


Exactly. If YOU don't want to do all the bs things you have to do to run a taxi biz, what makes you think Waymo will want to?

You just made my point

(Customer service is part of the gig. Whether it's done face to face with a human driver or thru a cc camera and a call center for a robot driver it still has to get done)


----------



## Yam Digger

RamzFanz said:


> No, they didn't. Of course, if you get your information here, a forum with a self interested bias against the reality of SDCs, I can understand why you think that.





tomatopaste said:


> Hype-y statements = statements that don't comport with the vaunted UP community's agreed upon and uniformed pile of crap positions.
> 
> Safety tip: refuting something with lies does not refute it.


Moderators: Isn't there something in the forum rules against paid shills posting on the board? These two are clearly much more than just true believers. 


iheartuber said:


> OMG you are either really dumb or just a really good soldier for Waymo. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say it's the latter.


Agreed.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Exactly. If YOU don't want to do all the bs things you have to do to run a taxi biz, what makes you think Waymo will want to?
> 
> You just made my point
> 
> (Customer service is part of the gig. Whether it's done face to face with a human driver or thru a cc camera and a call center for a robot driver it still has to get done)


By the time we get to Sunday night you've pretty much used up all your brain cells for the week. Does the CEO of any company clean toilets?


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> No, you were very sloppy with your wording. Tesla Autopilot is level two, driver assist. A fully autonomous self driving car is level four and orders of magnitude more sophisticated and capable. Google early on realized driver assist would never work because the better driver assist became, the less reliable the human would be in an emergency.


"Slamming into the back of a fire truck is not a good sign."

I see you agree with that statement since you have no examples of slamming into a fire truck as being a "good" sign.  Although... your reading comprehension may be up for debate.


----------



## tomatopaste

Yam Digger said:


> Moderators: Isn't there something in the forum rules against paid shills posting on the board? These two are clearly much more than just true believers.


Oh lordy! Just when you think the IQ of your average Uber driver has hit rock bottom.



ImSkittles said:


> "Slamming into the back of a fire truck is not a good sign."
> 
> I see you agree with that statement since you have no examples of slamming into a fire truck as being a "good" sign.  Although... your reading comprehension may be up for debate.


Hell of a company you built, Travis.



Yam Digger said:


> Moderators: Isn't there something in the forum rules against paid shills posting on the board? These two are clearly much more than just true believers.


Mommmmmmmmm! Ramz and Tomato are giving me the sadz.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> By the time we get to Sunday night you've pretty much used up all your brain cells for the week. Does the CEO of any company clean toilets?


These tasks may be bs but they are important to the survival of the business. Indeed if you treat your customers like crap you won't have them very long

It's a false equivalency to equate customer service with cleaning toilets



Yam Digger said:


> Moderators: Isn't there something in the forum rules against paid shills posting on the board? .


Come on... shill or no shill we can't shut out the Tomato.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> These tasks may be bs but they are important to the survival of the business. Indeed if you treat your customers like crap you won't have them very long
> 
> It's a false equivalency to equate customer service with cleaning toilets


What does this even mean?
"Exactly. If YOU don't want to do all the bs things you have to do to run a taxi biz, what makes you think Waymo will want to?"​You hire people to write code, you hire people to clean toilets, you hire people to do accounting, you hire customer service agents.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> What does this even mean?
> "Exactly. If YOU don't want to do all the bs things you have to do to run a taxi biz, what makes you think Waymo will want to?"​You hire people to write code, you hire people to clean toilets, you hire people to do accounting, you hire customer service agents.


Your cavalier attitude does not give me confidence that either you or Waymo will truly put the kind of attention to detail required into running any kind of successful business.

That's what that means.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Your cavalier attitude does not give me confidence that either you or Waymo will truly put the kind of attention to detail required into running any kind of successful business.
> 
> That's what that means.


I'm sure Waymo is devastated to hear that.


----------



## transporter007

The population was also ONCE UPON A TIME uncomfortable with 1.the automobile
2. Electricity 3. Airplanes . Technology is linear. It will progress with or without you.


----------



## Yam Digger

iheartuber said:


> Come on... shill or no shill we can't shut out the Tomato.


Yeah, you're right. Everybody has the God given right to make a Royal Fool of themselves for the whole world to see.



tomatopaste said:


> Oh lordy! Just when you think the IQ of your average Uber driver has hit rock bottom.


The last IQ Test I did scored me at 130 which is the top 3%. If that's rock bottom, I totally want to see what genius Uber Driver looks like. Would probably but DaVinci, Newton and Einstein to shame.


----------



## tomatopaste

Yam Digger said:


> Yeah, you're right. Everybody has the God given right to make a Royal Fool of themselves for the whole world to see.
> 
> The last IQ Test I did scored me at 130 which is the top 3%. If that's rock bottom, I totally want to see what genius Uber Driver looks like. Would probably but DaVinci, Newton and Einstein to shame.


and yet you're not bright enough to see what's staring you right in the face.


----------



## tomatopaste

Yam Digger said:


> Yeah, you're right. Everybody has the God given right to make a Royal Fool of themselves for the whole world to see.


Digger: "I WANT THE TRUTH! unless of course, it will make me sad."


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> The population was also ONCE UPON A TIME uncomfortable with 1.the automobile
> 2. Electricity 3. Airplanes . Technology is linear. It will progress with or without you.


Do you know what "the tip of the iceberg" represents? The successful technologies.

Do you know what is hidden under the water? All the failed technologies.

Please, at least put "in my opinion" at the beginning of your childish comments to get away with your naivety.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> and yet you're not bright enough to see what's staring you right in the face.


What's staring us right in the face? You mean how within "weeks" robot taxis are going to be bigger than Jesus?

Tell you what buddy, let's just wait a few "weeks" and see how that turns out, mmmkay?



jocker12 said:


> Do you know what "the tip of the iceberg" represents? The successful technologies.
> 
> Do you know what is hidden under the water? All the failed technologies.
> 
> Please, at least put "in my opinion" at the beginning of your childish comments to get away with your naivety.


This guy actually agreed with your line of thinking and you rip on him? Not very nice.


----------



## Bevital

I've said this before but I don't think on this thread. Imagine you've ordered Uber pool, its shows up and two big scary dudes are already inside when the door opens to pick you up.


----------



## iheartuber

Bevital said:


> I've said this before but I don't think on this thread. Imagine you've ordered Uber pool, its shows up and two big scary dudes are already inside when the door opens to pick you up.


But would two big scary dudes ride with a robot driver though? The point is- if you're a robot lover you're a nerd, not scary.


----------



## tomatopaste

Bevital said:


> I've said this before but I don't think on this thread. Imagine you've ordered Uber pool, its shows up and two big scary dudes are already inside when the door opens to pick you up.


Pool will be an entire different experience with self driving cars. You will have your own cabin with your own door from the outside. You will never even see the other pax.


----------



## Bevital

tomatopaste said:


> Pool will be an entire different experience with self driving cars. You will have your own cabin with your own door from the outside. You will never even see the other pax.


Is this some type of new Uber secret vehicle that no one has heard about? Got a link to your info?


----------



## tomatopaste

Bevital said:


> Is this some type of new Uber secret vehicle that no one has heard about? Got a link to your info?


It won't be Uber. It'll be Waymo or GM or someone else. I doubt Uber survives long enough to launch a self driving car.


----------



## iheartuber

Bevital said:


> Is this some type of new Uber secret vehicle that no one has heard about? Got a link to your info?


tomatopaste this is a good question. Are these space-age cars with "private cabins" some sort of future fantasy?

Because the current Waymo pool vans being used in Phoenix as part of the early rider program just look like regular vans. No private compartments.

Look, see:


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> This guy actually agreed with your line of thinking and you rip on him? Not very nice


You don't want to defend that comment, trust me.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> tomatopaste this is a good question. Are these space-age cars with "private cabins" some sort of future fantasy?
> 
> Because the current Waymo pool vans being used in Phoenix as part of the early rider program just look like regular vans. No private compartments.
> 
> Look, see:
> 
> View attachment 206743


There will be many different types of vehicles depending on the application


----------



## iheartuber

jocker12 said:


> You don't want to defend that comment, trust me.


Oh sorry I thought u were the tomato



tomatopaste said:


> There will be many different types of vehicles depending on the application


Right, but when will they "be here"? Wait, don't tell me... "within weeks", right?


----------



## transporter007

These are the technologies that scared many people silly.

*1. Trains*
*When the Stockton-Darlington Railway opened in 1825, people feared the worst: the human body, surely, wasn't made to travel at incredible speeds of 30 miles per hour. People genuinely believed that going that quickly would kill you in gruesome ways, such as your body melting.*

*2. Telephones
In Sweden, preachers said the phone was the instrument of the devil, others feared that the lines were conduits for evil spirits. The invention of telesales would prove them right.*

*3. The Y2K bug

In the run-up to the year 2000 we were told that computers' reliance on two-digit year fields meant that when the new millennium dawned we'd be dodging falling aeroplanes, getting stuck in lifts and generally experiencing the kind of post-apocalyptic wasteland you get when The Guardian writes about Newcastle. In the end nothing happened, which either proves that the people who fought the Y2K bug did a fantastic job of saving the world or proves that the whole thing was a load of made-up old bollocks all along.*


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> *3. The Y2K bug*
> 
> *In the run-up to the year 2000 we were told that computers' reliance on two-digit year fields meant that when the new millennium dawned we'd be dodging falling aeroplanes, getting stuck in lifts and generally experiencing the kind of post-apocalyptic wasteland you get when The Guardian writes about Newcastle. In the end nothing happened, which either proves that the people who fought the Y2K bug did a fantastic job of saving the world or proves that the whole thing was a load of made-up old bollocks all along.*


I like when people like to *entertain other people with stupid comments*, thinking they have deep wisdom and sight. In your first comment on this thread, in those 3 days (you became a member of this forum just Monday on 19th and today is Wednesday the 21st), you posted "The population was also ONCE UPON A TIME uncomfortable with 1.the automobile 2. Electricity 3. Airplanes . Technology is linear. It will progress with or without you." and today you come back with Y2K example as.......... what? Technology? Innovation? Can you explain your *stupid posted words* and their reference to allegedly people being afraid of something this thread is about?

Speaking about all your examples, trains, telephones and the bug, make sure you mention you copied everything word by word from 12 technologies that scared the world senseless, By Gary Marshall May 18, 2014 (his examples number 1, 2 and 6). Now you can blame Gary for writing stupidities, but you decided to plagiarize a pathetic author just to make yourself look clever and now you look completely ridiculous.

At this point I am being soft on you, but if you decide to keep trolling, things might change.


----------



## transporter007

jocker12

*Technophobia* (from greek τέχνη technē, "art, skill, craft" and φόβος phobos, "fear" is the neonatal fear or dislike of advanced tech or "COMPLEX" devices, especially computers and autonomous vehicles. Although there are numerous interpretations of technophobia, they become more complex as technology CONTINUES to evolve. The term is generally used in the sense of an childish irrational fear, but others contend fears are justified. It is related to Cyberphobia and is the opposite of intelligence.


----------



## jocker12

transporter007 said:


> jocker12
> 
> *Technophobia* (from greek τέχνη technē, "art, skill, craft" and φόβος phobos, "fear" is the neonatal fear or dislike of advanced tech or "COMPLEX" devices, especially computers and autonomous vehicles. Although there are numerous interpretations of technophobia, they become more complex as technology CONTINUES to evolve. The term is generally used in the sense of an childish irrational fear, but others contend fears are justified. It is related to Cyberphobia and is the opposite of intelligence.


You're continuing to plagiarize (not showing where you are copying your words from or not using proper quotations) and use the top paragraph from - https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Technophobia&uid=1575, adding "autonomous vehicles" at the end of the first sentence.

Beside your previous stupidly comical comments, you introduce the term "phobia" which I don't think you are really prepared to discuss (as we can see, you are not prepared to explain your idiotic comments anyway, you only want to live with them, by them).

The term you need to look up, understand and partially fear is *trolling*.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> if you think there is a bias on this forum against SDC because the Uber drivers on this forum do not want to lose their jobs to a machine, then go to a totally different board and see what they think about SDC.


I do. Many forums. This is, by far, the most biased and most in denial. It's OK, I get the self preservation instinct but, in the end, denial won't help, it will hurt.



iheartuber said:


> In fact- go to a mommy board. See what they think. All those moms. Are they concerned about safety? Are they ready to put themselves and their kids in a car driven by a robot?


I'm a dad. If I see that SDCs are safer than human driven in substantial numbers, I will absolutely use SDCs for my children. So will most parents. Do you think they'll choose higher injury and death risks? I mean, sure, the parents that don't secure their children and smoke in the car with them will be idiots, but who else would put their kids at unnecessary risk?



ImSkittles said:


> Wow, you just keep saying "fees" over and over again. You are assuming the company will know which passenger created the smell or the mess. You're also assuming vandals will be caught.  Then you're assuming a 14 year old vandal will actually be held responsible. Or maybe you think the ghetto parents will be held responsible, LMAO!


Knowing who made the mess is simple. The car could detect changes to the interior in trillionths of a second by comparing before and after images and send suspected messes to a human to assess a fee where appropriate. Profit. Thinking this hasn't been considered is silly. They will either prepare for this issue or react to it, but either way, it will be a profit source and not a problem.

This same system could notify the passenger of forgotten items before they're two steps away from the car.



ImSkittles said:


> Besides, I only listed the obvious downfalls... let's not forget about flat tires, engine/electrical problems, GPS errors, ride jacking and so on.


The car doesn't need GPS and doesn't rely on it for navigation. They use internal maps so they don't need connectivity at all to operate.

Repair issues? Did you think this through? How about they call a replacement car and a repair truck? Would that work?

Ride jacking? What does that even mean? If you mean people forcing themselves into a car for a free ride, that's also easily solvable.



ImSkittles said:


> The best you can some up with is "fees." Well, Uber drivers, hold onto your hats because you're going to have a job for a long time to come because autonomous cars are going to be more expensive than a cab!!!


Yes, exactly. It will be very expensive to make messes or damage a car which is why that behavior will be stopped quickly. Same as it is now. Have you not noticed that passengers are aware of fees from puking and making messes? I have.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> I'm a dad. If I see that SDCs are safer than human driven in substantial numbers, I will absolutely use SDCs for my children. So will most parents. Do you think they'll choose higher injury and death risks? I mean, sure, the parents that don't secure their children and smoke in the car with them will be idiots, but who else would put their kids at unnecessary risk?
> .


The only place that says SDC's are safer than human drivers is on paper. There's still not enough practical real world data to make an informed decision.

But hey, if you wanna gamble on your kids and let em jump in a car that SEEMS like its safer, hey go ahead!

However... I can see by your choice of words that even as a die hard SDC lover, you're still not sold enough on SDCs really being safer than human drivers because in your exact words you say: "If I see that SDCs are safer than human driven in substantial numbers...." Key word: IF

I rest my case.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> The only place that says SDC's are safer than human drivers is on paper. There's still not enough practical real world data to make an informed decision.
> 
> But hey, if you wanna gamble on your kids and let em jump in a car that SEEMS like its safer, hey go ahead!
> 
> However... I can see by your choice of words that even as a die hard SDC lover, you're still not sold enough on SDCs really being safer than human drivers because in your exact words you say: "If I see that SDCs are safer than human driven in substantial numbers...." Key word: IF
> 
> I rest my case.


Yes, IF, and yes, there's not enough data for my confidence in regards to my children. That's just a matter of time though, just like most people.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Yes, IF, and yes, there's not enough data for my confidence in regards to my children. That's just a matter of time though, just like most people.


Well my brother, if YOU, The #1 unbiased unsolicited supporter of SDCs... even if YOU are saying "if", then that speaks volumes doesn't it?


----------



## heynow321

iheartuber said:


> Well my brother, if YOU, The #1 unbiased unsolicited supporter of SDCs... even if YOU are saying "if", then that speaks volumes doesn't it?


woah, did ramz learn how statistics work?! you taking a class at your local learning annex? When I've posted about the sample size of miles driven by SDC's being nowhere near large enough to draw statistical inferences about safety relative to human drivers you bloviated about BS simulator miles.


----------



## ImSkittles

RamzFanz said:


> Knowing who made the mess is simple. The car could detect changes to the interior in trillionths of a second by comparing before and after images and send suspected messes to a human to assess a fee where appropriate. Profit. Thinking this hasn't been considered is silly. They will either prepare for this issue or react to it, but either way, it will be a profit source and not a problem.
> 
> This same system could notify the passenger of forgotten items before they're two steps away from the car.
> 
> The car doesn't need GPS and doesn't rely on it for navigation. They use internal maps so they don't need connectivity at all to operate.
> 
> Repair issues? Did you think this through? How about they call a replacement car and a repair truck? Would that work?
> 
> Ride jacking? What does that even mean? If you mean people forcing themselves into a car for a free ride, that's also easily solvable.
> 
> Yes, exactly. It will be very expensive to make messes or damage a car which is why that behavior will be stopped quickly. Same as it is now. Have you not noticed that passengers are aware of fees from puking and making messes? I have.


Wow, you've described quite the fantasy car there. All of this by April of this year, lol.

You folks can blather on all you want but the reality of the SDC taking over bus, taxi, limo and Uber drivers jobs is 1-2 DECADES away, if ever!

Keep dreaming though... It's really the only thing you have since the car you describe is only found in your imagination.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> Well my brother, if YOU, The #1 unbiased unsolicited supporter of SDCs... even if YOU are saying "if", then that speaks volumes doesn't it?


What it says is that I am not who you and your jesters think I am.

Of course I'm saying if. However, if you and your clan are paying attention, the SDC effort is CRUSHING all expectations.

Did I say Elon Musk would definitely land rockets on autonomous barges? No.

Did I say he was getting closer and closer as naysayers laughed at his work? Yes.

SDCs are real. They exist. They are in service. Their advantages are only denied by the williningly ignorant or biased.

I am saying that I personally hold a higher standard for putting my child at risk. However, all data to date suggest a huge safety advantage and when that becomes universally accepted through transparency and live service reporting, we'll almost all switch. Baby steps, I heart, baby steps.


----------



## RamzFanz

ImSkittles said:


> Wow, you've described quite the fantasy car there. All of this by April of this year, lol.
> 
> You folks can blather on all you want but the reality of the SDC taking over bus, taxi, limo and Uber drivers jobs is 1-2 DECADES away, if ever!
> 
> Keep dreaming though... It's really the only thing you have since the car you describe is only found in your imagination.


You don't understand the technology.

That's not a slight, most people use technology every day they don't understand.

But what those people don't do is pretend it isn't doing what they can clearly see it is.

SDCs are working. The entire industrial world sees it. Just sit back and enjoy the benefits or go explore how they are, right now, doing what you think can't be done, and enjoy the learning experience.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> What it says is that I am not who you and your jesters think I am.
> 
> Of course I'm saying if. However, if you and your clan are paying attention, the SDC effort is CRUSHING all expectations.
> 
> Did I say Elon Musk would definitely land rockets on autonomous barges? No.
> 
> Did I say he was getting closer and closer as naysayers laughed at his work? Yes.
> 
> SDCs are real. They exist. They are in service. Their advantages are only denied by the williningly ignorant or biased.
> 
> I am saying that I personally hold a higher standard for putting my child at risk. However, all data to date suggest a huge safety advantage and when that becomes universally accepted through transparency and live service reporting, we'll almost all switch. Baby steps, I heart, baby steps.


Just so there's no confusion let me rephrase the discussion.

SDCs are real, they exist, and you can use them right now that's all
True and no one is denying that.

The question now is: are they going to become the Segway or the iPhone, meaning will they be available yet no one really uses them or will they be everywhere? And how long will it take?

For a variety of real, reasonable business and human psychological
Reasons I believe it will take a considerably long time for SDCs to become as ubiquitous as the iPhone. It is not because I fear losing my job to a robot that I feel this way.

So when you and I debate, please remember what we are actually debating. If you do then
Ok.


----------



## ImSkittles

RamzFanz said:


> You don't understand the technology.
> 
> That's not a slight, most people use technology every day they don't understand.
> 
> But what those people don't do is pretend it isn't doing what they can clearly see it is.
> 
> SDCs are working. The entire industrial world sees it. Just sit back and enjoy the benefits or go explore how they are, right now, doing what you think can't be done, and enjoy the learning experience.


 The technology that you speak of is not available yet. You spoke of cars that could detect changes with ultrasensitive sensors. Fantasy car.

Can a car self drive? Sure can. Are all the possible problems accounted for in the self driving car? Nope.

Details are going to take a while to iron out. You mentioned an internal mapping system as opposed to GPS. Why? Are you saying that the internal mapping system is absolutely perfect and can absolutely never never never make a mistake? This is hilarious to me.

A self driving car is going to have a lot of little details that will constantly need to be working. I see repairs being something significant in the early days of SDC's.

Vandalism will be something that will happen in the ghettos. It's just the nature of the ghetto. So are these cars going to be allowed to pick people up and drop them off in the ghetto? This thing you keep mentioning, "fees" isn't going to matter in the ghetto, LOL.

I see this whole thing taking 1 to 2 decades to iron out. The way I understand it, SDC's cannot even drive in bad weather yet. Sounds like a problem to me. Time will tell but I don't think bus, taxi, limo, or Uber drivers have anything to worry about in the near future.


----------



## iheartuber

ImSkittles said:


> The technology that you speak of is not available yet. You spoke of cars that could detect changes with ultrasensitive sensors. Fantasy car.
> 
> Can a car self drive? Sure can. Are all the possible problems accounted for in the self driving car? Nope.
> 
> Details are going to take a while to iron out. You mentioned an internal mapping system as opposed to GPS. Why? Are you saying that the internal mapping system is absolutely perfect and can absolutely never never never make a mistake? This is hilarious to me.
> 
> A self driving car is going to have a lot of little details that will constantly need to be working. I see repairs being something significant in the early days of SDC's.
> 
> Vandalism will be something that will happen in the ghettos. It's just the nature of the ghetto. So are these cars going to be allowed to pick people up and drop them off in the ghetto? This thing you keep mentioning, "fees" isn't going to matter in the ghetto, LOL.
> 
> I see this whole thing taking 1 to 2 decades to iron out. The way I understand it, SDC's cannot even drive in bad weather yet. Sounds like a problem to me. Time will tell but I don't think bus, taxi, limo, or Uber drivers have anything to worry about in the near future.


The technology RamzFanz speaks of is not yet invented and yet tomatopaste says we're "weeks away" from total SDC marketplace dominance.

Something doesn't add up


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> The technology RamzFanz speaks of is not yet invented and yet tomatopaste says we're "weeks away" from total SDC marketplace dominance.
> 
> Something doesn't add up


You keep trying to put words in my mouth as a way of moving the goalposts. Instead of just admitting you and the vaunted UP community were totally wrong about self driving cars, you make up shit like: well, Tomato said it would be able to pop a wheelie with 3 pax inside. You and Heynow should look into starting a goalpost moving company.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> You keep trying to put words in my mouth as a way of moving the goalposts. Instead of just admitting you and the vaunted UP community were totally wrong about self driving cars, you make up shit like: well, Tomato said it would be able to pop a wheelie with 3 pax inside. You and Heynow should look into starting a goalpost moving company.


If I'm putting words in your mouth I am doing so unintentionally.

Sometimes I do like to slap you around a bit, and I exaggerate some of the things you say to make a point but in all seriousness I am very clear on what you said. Just to recap, you did make a claim that "within weeks" the Waymo Phoenix launch is going to officially happen and then a very short time after that (also weeks), the customer enthusiasm for this service will go through the roof and it will seriously threaten uber's Business in Phoenix and soon after that, other cities.

So, if that is NOT what you ever said or meant to say, please set the record straight now.

I'll wait....

Oh and by the way, the "UP community" has said on numerous occasions (and by numerous people, including me) that SDCs becoming more than just a few test passengers filling out questionnaires and seriously taking over transportation is one or two decades away.

Are we wrong? No, because one or two decades have not passed yet. Only if SDCs hit their projections before then can anyone in the UP Community be wrong.

The trouble here is, you consider the future fantasy world rolling around in your head to be "fact".


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> If I'm putting words in your mouth I am doing so unintentionally.
> 
> Sometimes I do like to slap you around a bit, and I exaggerate some of the things you say to make a point but in all seriousness I am very clear on what you said. Just to recap, you did make a claim that "within weeks" the Waymo Phoenix launch is going to officially happen and then a very short time after that (also weeks), the customer enthusiasm for this service will go through the roof and it will seriously threaten uber's Business in Phoenix and soon after that, other cities.
> 
> So, if that is NOT what you ever said or meant to say, please set the record straight now.
> 
> I'll wait....
> 
> Oh and by the way, the "UP community" has said on numerous occasions (and by numerous people, including me) that SDCs becoming more than just a few test passengers filling out questionnaires and seriously taking over transportation is one or two decades away.
> 
> Are we wrong? No, because one or two decades have not passed yet. Only if SDCs hit their projections before then can anyone in the UP Community be wrong.
> 
> The trouble here is, you consider the future fantasy world rolling around in your head to be "fact".


I'm saying Waymo's commercial launch of their self driving taxi Service is immenent, minute to minute. There will be more demand than Waymo has seats.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> I'm saying Waymo's commercial launch of their self driving taxi Service is immenent, minute to minute. There will be more demand than Waymo has seats.


Waymo has 3600 seats. There will be demand for 3650...LOL

All kidding aside- in your opinion, how long til the average Phoenix Uber driver fears for his or her job? I need you to go on record with an exact date or at least an approximate since you say we're all "wrong" when we say decades.

Ok, so one or more decades is wrong, then what in your mind is right?

The "vaunted UP Community" would love to hear.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Waymo has 3600 seats. There will be demand for 3650...LOL
> 
> All kidding aside- in your opinion, how long til the average Phoenix Uber driver fears for his or her job? I need you to go on record with an exact date or at least an approximate since you say we're all "wrong" when we say decades.
> 
> Ok, so one or more decades is wrong, then what in your mind is right?
> 
> The "vaunted UP Community" would love to hear.


Demand will far exceed 3600. Phoenix Uber drivers will start feeling the effects the first month. When will the last Uber driver in Phoenix throw in the towel? I'd say a year, 2 max.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Demand will far exceed 3600. Phoenix Uber drivers will start feeling the effects the first month. When will the last Uber driver in Phoenix throw in the towel? I'd say a year, 2 max.


The first month... LOL
Uber Phoenix being completely wiped out in 2 years? Double LOL

These are deadlines that I wholeheartedly think are completely unrealistic and believe you me I will rub your nose in it when they come and go and what you say does not happen.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> The first month... LOL
> Uber Phoenix being completely wiped out in 2 years? Double LOL
> 
> These are deadlines that I wholeheartedly think are completely unrealistic and believe you me I will rub your nose in it when they come and go and what you say does not happen.


Why do people feel the need to add LOL? To me it's as if they feel their audience is not bright enough to come to their own conclusions



iheartuber said:


> The first month... LOL
> Uber Phoenix being completely wiped out in 2 years? Double LOL
> 
> These are deadlines that I wholeheartedly think are completely unrealistic and believe you me I will rub your nose in it when they come and go and what you say does not happen.


I on the other hand will be more Cristlike when everything turns out just like I said it would. "Lord forgive these simpletons for they're not that bright."


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Why do people feel the need to add LOL? To me it's as if they feel their audience is not bright enough to come to their own conclusions
> 
> I on the other hand will be more Cristlike when everything turns out just like I said it would. "Lord forgive these simpletons for they're not that bright."


Whatever man, you do it your way, I'll do it mine.

Yeah I LOL'd you and yeah that's because I think what you said is so batcrap crazy that I literally laughed.

Look, you got your opinion I got mine. Time will tell who's right.


----------



## ImSkittles

tomatopaste said:


> Demand will far exceed 3600. Phoenix Uber drivers will start feeling the effects the first month. When will the last Uber driver in Phoenix throw in the towel? I'd say a year, 2 max.


Now this is funny. I think I detect some backpedaling from tomatopaste. 

What happened to April being the deadline for all Uber drivers!? 

Now you're saying it's one or two years away, this is just too funny!


----------



## iheartuber

ImSkittles said:


> Now this is funny. I think I detect some backpedaling from tomatopaste.
> 
> What happened to April being the deadline for all Uber drivers!?
> 
> Now you're saying it's one or two years away, this is just too funny!


In all fairness to the Tomato, he did say one month after launch Uber drivers in Phoenix will feel the pinch, which I'll allow as proof that he was right- IF that happens! Because in order for that to happen that means Waymo actually has to launch in 30 days and then 30 days after that like clockwork they have to really be a force to be reckoned with.

Is the Segway a force to be reckoned with? Does Ford or GM say "ooh, we're losing sales to the Segway!"?

Exactly.


----------



## ImSkittles

iheartuber said:


> In all fairness to the Tomato, he did say one month after launch Uber drivers in Phoenix will feel the pinch, which I'll allow as proof that he was right- IF that happens! Because in order for that to happen that means Waymo actually has to launch in 30 days and then 30 days after that like clockwork they have to really be a force to be reckoned with.
> 
> Is the Segway a force to be reckoned with? Does Ford or GM say "ooh, we're losing sales to the Segway!"?
> 
> Exactly.


Okaaay, but you have to admit that's a far cry from one or two years!  It looks like he's trying to cover his backside, LOL.


----------



## iheartuber

ImSkittles said:


> Okaaay, but you have to admit that's a far cry from one or two years!  It looks like he's trying to cover his backside, LOL.


Anything short of 10 years isn't gonna happen for about a thousand different reasons, all of which the Tomato tried to act like were no big deal- until they cripple the business. Then we shall see what he has to say.


----------



## tomatopaste

ImSkittles said:


> Now this is funny. I think I detect some backpedaling from tomatopaste.
> 
> What happened to April being the deadline for all Uber drivers!?
> 
> Now you're saying it's one or two years away, this is just too funny!


April is Iheart's arbitrary date


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> April is Iheart's arbitrary date


You told me in late January that all of this will happen "in a few weeks" so I set a date that gave you TWELVE weeks

That's not enough time?


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> You told me in late January that all of this will happen "in a few weeks" so I set a date that gave you TWELVE weeks
> 
> That's not enough time?


Nobody cares about your arbitrary dates. This history books aren't going to have an asterisk next to self driving cars explaining how they revolutionized society, however they missed Iheart's deadline.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Nobody cares about your arbitrary dates. This history books aren't going to have an asterisk next to self driving cars explaining how they revolutionized society, however they missed Iheart's deadline.


Hey man, all I'm doing is going by YOUR words.

In late January I said Waymo's not going to get to a point where they challenge Uber for years. And then you said "it's gonna be weeks not years." So then I said "ok weeks? Well, let's check in after TWELVE weeks"

So here we are.

My deadline date is based on what YOU said, it's not arbitrary.

Now that that's settled, all we gotta do is wait for Waymo to actually launch in Phoenix and then one month after that Phoenix Uber drivers are gonna feel a pinch, according to you.

I suppose now you're saying that may not happen in twelve weeks... ok take your time man it's cool. I get it.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Hey man, all I'm doing is going by YOUR words.
> 
> In late January I said Waymo's not going to get to a point where they challenge Uber for years. And then you said "it's gonna be weeks not years." So then I said "ok weeks? Well, let's check in after TWELVE weeks"
> 
> So here we are.
> 
> My deadline date is based on what YOU said, it's not arbitrary.
> 
> Now that that's settled, all we gotta do is wait for Waymo to actually launch in Phoenix and then one month after that Phoenix Uber drivers are gonna feel a pinch, according to you.
> 
> I suppose now you're saying that may not happen in twelve weeks... ok take your time man it's cool. I get it.


Watch the video. When the narrator says: "it's time to take your first ride in one of our cars" do you think Waymo chose that verbiage on purpose? Well, they did. Waymo's commercial launch of self driving taxis in metro Phoenix is imminent.

https://www.engadget.com/2018/02/28/waymo-360-degree-vr-self-driving-car-demo/


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Watch the video. When the narrator says: "it's time to take your first ride in one of our cars" do you think Waymo chose that verbiage on purpose? Well, they did. Waymo's commercial launch of self driving taxis in metro Phoenix is imminent.
> 
> https://www.engadget.com/2018/02/28/waymo-360-degree-vr-self-driving-car-demo/
> View attachment 209141


This video made me LOL for many reasons:

1. It's completely boring
2. The cameras are kinda like Fish-eye cameras so it's a little hard to actually see
3. I noticed that the car is NOT the minivan-type car that will be the first ones in use but rather the super duper space age car you spoke of. That's cool bro. Just one question- when will THAT car be the one in use? Oh, right "weeks away". Ok
4. Speaking of Phoenix, can you tell me how many weeks "imminent" is to you? Asking for a friend.
5. If you noticed a certain snide, almost disrespectful and dismissal, tone- you're right! That was done on purpose.
6. There's probably more but I've slapped you around enough.


----------



## tomatopaste

iheartuber said:


> Anything short of 10 years isn't gonna happen for about a thousand different reasons


Like Iheart, this ain't gonna age well



iheartuber said:


> This video made me LOL for many reasons:
> 
> 1. It's completely boring
> 2. The cameras are kinda like Fish-eye cameras so it's a little hard to actually see
> 3. I noticed that the car is NOT the minivan-type car that will be the first ones in use but rather the super duper space age car you spoke of. That's cool bro. Just one question- when will THAT car be the one in use? Oh, right "weeks away". Ok
> 4. Speaking of Phoenix, can you tell me how many weeks "imminent" is to you? Asking for a friend.
> 5. If you noticed a certain snide, almost disrespectful and dismissal, tone- you're right! That was done on purpose.
> 6. There's probably more but I've slapped you around enough.


1. Don't worry, Spielberg's gonna do the next one along with some T&A.
2. When's the last time you had your eyes checked?
3. Nope. Same Chrysler Pacifica mini van as all the others. But hey, your Corolla is nice too.
4. Minute to minute.
5. Thanks for the paint-by-numbers clarification. Thought maybe you were just running low on Geritol.
6. You sure did.


----------



## iheartuber

tomatopaste said:


> Like Iheart, this ain't gonna age well
> 
> 1. Don't worry, Spielberg's gonna do the next one along with some T&A.
> 2. When's the last time you had your eyes checked?
> 3. Nope. Same Chrysler Pacifica mini van as all the others. But hey, your Corolla is nice too.
> 4. Minute to minute.
> 5. Thanks for the paint-by-numbers clarification. Thought maybe you were just running low on Geritol.
> 6. You sure did.


Ok let's recap. Launch in Phoenix is imminent. How long is that exactly? Well... Like all corporate toadies tomatopaste gives only vague answers. No problem. Just assume "soon". Maybe by summer, maybe earlier. We can't say. We don't know. Just.... soon. If summer does come and no launch we may have a problem but let's not worry about that right now.

Ok, next: after launch.... one month later... Phoenix Uber drivers will, according to the Tomato, feel a "pinch".
Ok, I eagerly await to see that happen too.

Well, let's see what happens....

(I think you, the reader of this post, already know how I feel about these predictions but for now I will not say another word. I'll just wait to see what's what come the summertime.)

Also.. something's wrong with my eyes? Have YOU seen the video? Look:










Also- the article says "Expect more "public education and awareness" advertising to follow"

If the Tomato were in charge of that the advertising would read:

Hey pax!

Are you still using Uber? If so, you are a LOSER!

Don't be a square, come ride in a robot taxi. That's the future!

If there's any reason why you won't use our service you're just DUMB.

Yours in Christ,
The Tomato


----------



## jocker12

iheartuber said:


> Ok let's recap. Launch in Phoenix is imminent. How long is that exactly? Well... Like all corporate toadies tomatopaste gives only vague answers. No problem. Just assume "soon". Maybe by summer, maybe earlier. We can't say. We don't know. Just.... soon. If summer does come and no launch we may have a problem but let's not worry about that right now.
> 
> Ok, next: after launch.... one month later... Phoenix Uber drivers will, according to the Tomato, feel a "pinch".
> Ok, I eagerly await to see that happen too.
> 
> Well, let's see what happens....
> 
> (I think you, the reader of this post, already know how I feel about these predictions but for now I will not say another word. I'll just wait to see what's what come the summertime.)
> 
> Also.. something's wrong with my eyes? Have YOU seen the video? Look:
> 
> View attachment 209219
> 
> 
> Also- the article says "Expect more "public education and awareness" advertising to follow"
> 
> If the Tomato were in charge of that the advertising would read:
> 
> Hey pax!
> 
> Are you still using Uber? If so, you are a LOSER!
> 
> Don't be a square, come ride in a robot taxi. That's the future!
> 
> If there's any reason why you won't use our service you're just DUMB.
> 
> Yours in Christ,
> The Tomato


Meanwhile Microsoft is very reluctant to engage in any type of research or development regarding self driving cars. Their only involvement is with AirSim (high fidelity simulator) and Azure (providing cloud services to Baidu in China). Nothing directly attached to the stupid hype.

Today, Esquire Magazine had Bill Gates worried - These Robots Are Going to Kill Us All.

Ohhhh.... And who is this Bill Gates "idiot" living in his poisonous bubble, to question the "bright" minds of Silicon Valley?


----------



## RamzFanz

ImSkittles said:


> Can a car self drive? Sure can. Are all the possible problems accounted for in the self driving car? Nope.


Nor will they ever be. Perfection isn't one of their goals.



ImSkittles said:


> Details are going to take a while to iron out. You mentioned an internal mapping system as opposed to GPS. Why? Are you saying that the internal mapping system is absolutely perfect and can absolutely never never never make a mistake? This is hilarious to me.


Nope. No perfection required.

The internal maps used by Waymo are extremely detailed and accurate and are updated fleetwide almost instantly when changes are detected. It's far more accurate than GPS and allows them to function independent of communication of any kind when needed.



ImSkittles said:


> Vandalism will be something that will happen in the ghettos. It's just the nature of the ghetto. So are these cars going to be allowed to pick people up and drop them off in the ghetto? This thing you keep mentioning, "fees" isn't going to matter in the ghetto, LOL.


Do people own cars in the Ghetto? And they can get insurance? If so, then vandalism is not as prevalent as you seem to think.

Fees don't matter to poor people? Or are you insinuating a SDC TNC company can't secure funds from individuals in a manner that protects them?



ImSkittles said:


> I see this whole thing taking 1 to 2 decades to iron out. The way I understand it, SDC's cannot even drive in bad weather yet. Sounds like a problem to me. Time will tell but I don't think bus, taxi, limo, or Uber drivers have anything to worry about in the near future.


SDCs are driving in varying weather conditions every day. Waymo is currently snow testing in Michigan and has been all winter. Other companies around the world are doing the same. Don't expect them to just rush in and try to do everything in a day. It will take some time but it IS happening right now.



iheartuber said:


> The question now is: are they going to become the Segway or the iPhone, meaning will they be available yet no one really uses them or will they be everywhere? And how long will it take?


Segways are a novelty. SDCs are an evolution of transportation with huge advantages just as the smartphone was.

The answer is obvious.



iheartuber said:


> For a variety of real, reasonable business and human psychological
> Reasons I believe it will take a considerably long time for SDCs to become as ubiquitous as the iPhone. It is not because I fear losing my job to a robot that I feel this way.


Two different subjects. The SDC will take a long time to become ubiquitous. Our jobs are at risk because they are coming for them first.

When most Uber drivers are no longer driving, it will be because the SDC TNC took the low hanging fruit, metropolitan areas, not because they opened everywhere.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Segways are a novelty. SDCs are an evolution of transportation with huge advantages just as the smartphone was.


When the Segway first came out, the manufacturers said it will revolutionize transportation. Now, 15 years later, they call it (well, YOU call it) a novelty.

15 years from now the same thing will happen to SDCs

Don't believe me? Ok, I'll see you in 15 years.


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> When the Segway first came out, the manufacturers said it will revolutionize transportation. Now, 15 years later, they call it (well, YOU call it) a novelty.
> 
> 15 years from now the same thing will happen to SDCs
> 
> Don't believe me? Ok, I'll see you in 15 years.


You're comparing the opinion of a single person or small group to that of massive worldwide existing auto and tech industries, investing hundreds of billions of dollars, and experts in many related fields. You are also comparing a new product with unknown usage to an improved product used everywhere all the time, like phones into smartphones.

I always looked at the segway as an expensive toy with limited uses and appeal.

We won't need 15 years. The market should be reliably predictable this year.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> You're comparing the opinion of a single person or small group to that of massive worldwide existing auto and tech industries, investing hundreds of billions of dollars, and experts in many related fields. You are also comparing a new product with unknown usage to an improved product used everywhere all the time, like phones into smartphones.
> 
> I always looked at the segway as an expensive toy with limited uses and appeal.
> 
> We won't need 15 years. The market should be reliably predictable this year.


And if in exactly one year from today not much has changed in the SDC world? Then what?


----------



## RamzFanz

iheartuber said:


> And if in exactly one year from today not much has changed in the SDC world? Then what?


Then you're in another dimension and should be seeking out a stable wormhole for the return trip.

27% of people already say they will use SDCs. There's zero chance 27% of people said they would use a segway for transportation.


----------



## iheartuber

RamzFanz said:


> Then you're in another dimension and should be seeking out a stable wormhole for the return trip.


No problem. I'll just check back with you in a year


----------

