Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll never forget when I got an "estimate" of 25 bucks in Dallas WITH surge being noted and then it magically doubled. I double checked afterwards and indeed the surge pricing was applied properly. I'm not sure how the original estimate was so low. Now with surge pricing I know it's such a gamble. A few friends and I decided to walk back from the bars (almost an hour walk) because we weren't sure how expensive it was going to be. Knowing up front within a few bucks would be so much better.
Sure. It will be decades before we get to that point. But it will make less and less sense to drive yourself before then. Just like it is still legal to ride your horse many places but very few people do.
A horse? You mean something that not only takes 20 times as long, but also has no climate control, storage space, or ability to carry more than maybe two people? Great comparison there. Although, not quite as bad as the person who said driverless cars and elevators were direct parallels.
Anyway, until said driverless car can back up to my garage door on cue so that I can load my equipment into it, then drive me to any location I need (not just ones it is programmed navigate) , to the correct door, and park in a way that I can unload said equipment out, then they will not be of much use to me. Until they are able to make immediate changes in destination and follow passenger commands such as "slow down" or "stop here" or "OH! Turn into this neighborhood!", drive down roads that are not yet in the database, or traverse unmarked and varied terrains, then they will not be of much use to me. Until I can specify what type of vehicle I need and have it arrive at the time I need it (provided we're talking about no more direct ownership), and do errands on my way to work, then they will not be of much use to me.
In a previous thread, you noted that only .0001% of cases would not be able to be done by a self-driving car. So, if only half of driving-age people made one trip each day, that would mean that only 121 trips per day across the entire US were not able to be solved by a driverless vehicle. Now, let's assume that every driver-age person makes four trips per day. Your number would total 973 trips. Do you believe there are fewer than 1000 trips across the entire US each day that are not easily defined and require more than an automated vehicle?
At least it will be decades and I can be dead by then!
A horse? You mean something that not only takes 20 times as long, but also has no climate control, storage space, or ability to carry more than maybe two people? Great comparison there. Although, not quite as bad as the person who said driverless cars and elevators were direct parallels.
Yep. A more expensive, less comfortable, less convenient, and less flexible transportation option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas1
Anyway, until said driverless car can back up to my garage door on cue so that I can load my equipment into it, then drive me to any location I need (not just ones it is programmed navigate) , to the correct door, and park in a way that I can unload said equipment out, then they will not be of much use to me. Until they are able to make immediate changes in destination and follow passenger commands such as "slow down" or "stop here" or "OH! Turn into this neighborhood!", drive down roads that are not yet in the database, or traverse unmarked and varied terrains, then they will not be of much use to me. Until I can specify what type of vehicle I need and have it arrive at the time I need it (provided we're talking about no more direct ownership), and do errands on my way to work, then they will not be of much use to me.
You can yell at the car all you want but for safety you will only get to set the destination and an emergency stop button. Human control is the main liability.
In a previous thread, you noted that only .0001% of cases would not be able to be done by a self-driving car. So, if only half of driving-age people made one trip each day, that would mean that only 121 trips per day across the entire US were not able to be solved by a driverless vehicle. Now, let's assume that every driver-age person makes four trips per day. Your number would total 973 trips. Do you believe there are fewer than 1000 trips across the entire US each day that are not easily defined and require more than an automated vehicle?
Yes. I am sure there will be way more manual trips than that. But "require" them? No.
A horse? You mean something that not only takes 20 times as long, but also has no climate control, storage space, or ability to carry more than maybe two people? Great comparison there. Although, not quite as bad as the person who said driverless cars and elevators were direct parallels.
Anyway, until said driverless car can back up to my garage door on cue so that I can load my equipment into it, then drive me to any location I need (not just ones it is programmed navigate) , to the correct door, and park in a way that I can unload said equipment out, then they will not be of much use to me. Until they are able to make immediate changes in destination and follow passenger commands such as "slow down" or "stop here" or "OH! Turn into this neighborhood!", drive down roads that are not yet in the database, or traverse unmarked and varied terrains, then they will not be of much use to me. Until I can specify what type of vehicle I need and have it arrive at the time I need it (provided we're talking about no more direct ownership), and do errands on my way to work, then they will not be of much use to me.
In a previous thread, you noted that only .0001% of cases would not be able to be done by a self-driving car. So, if only half of driving-age people made one trip each day, that would mean that only 121 trips per day across the entire US were not able to be solved by a driverless vehicle. Now, let's assume that every driver-age person makes four trips per day. Your number would total 973 trips. Do you believe there are fewer than 1000 trips across the entire US each day that are not easily defined and require more than an automated vehicle?
At least it will be decades and I can be dead by then!
excellent. even more details that make the future of mainstream driverless cars (like no steering wheel cars) even further out.
My prediction is that "family cars" - not the Urban, quick transport cars - will be still be manually controlled (off grid) until you desire entry onto a major thoroughfare. Then you'll queue your car, the computer will take over and you'll be safely inserted into the automated traffic (on grid) until you reach your destination.
over time, more locations will be added to "the grid" so the necessity of manual control will diminish over time. Over that same time, culture, expectations, and behavior will also change so you wont expect your car to be backed into the most convenient location for your loading pleasure
For those Uberpool supporters. The facts and experience broken down perfectly from another driver. I deny all my UberPool request. So I don't deal with them anymore unless it's surging.
"This is my first time writing anything on this blog about Uber X or pool. I have been with Uber since February 2015 and I been reading the blogs on here for months. Since I am now a member I can voice how I feel because I have been holding it in for over a year. It is now time to be free LOL.
Let me get right into my issue. A couple weeks ago Uber started a promotion for the riders whereas uberpool is now more affordable than ever. I currently live in Buckhead and to take Uber pool from Buckhead to the airport is between $4.52-$5.50 for the rider.
I think this is unfair in the early morning between Monday-Friday 5am-9am because most people click on uber pool and are not getting matched with other uber pools because of the hours they are requesting pool. I believe this is ridiculous that I have to pick up riders only for an $11 payout to the airport. Since Uber is banned at the airport I cannot get any rides going towards home. This is me only making $7 once the gas is subtracted and driving a total of 36 miles for the $7 payout. This is unfair that Uber is forcing me to take these riders or my acceptance rate will be affected severely.
I am sorry, but my car isn’t a bus and its kind of weird having two distinctly individuals in my car with two types of personalities. All I am saying, I wish Uber cared more about the drivers. I have to deal with this job due to not being able to find another job. I just recently graduated from Georgia State University two months ago and its hard trying to find work at the moment so I tolerate Uber until I find something else, but I wish the company cared more about us as drivers. We are what make the business model grow. Without drivers there is NO UBER PERIOD!!! I just wish they would meet us in between. I spend more money in gas than what I am actually making on pools. Back in 2015 when I first started Uber I was making at least $600-$800 weekly with only 15-25 hours.
Now I am barely making ends meet with a total of $250-$500 weekly with putting in over 40 hours of work. I am only telling you this issue so that all of us can come together and fight for better pay. I don't have any issues with the riders on pool or Uber X because they don't know what goes on behind closed doors with the pay. If the company is going to discount pool which is nearly 43% cheaper than X then they should be taking less than 20% of my earnings. Its like Uber is discounting the fares, but still taking the same percentage which is paying me as a minimum wage job. I mean damn can we get some RESPECT. We are the reason why the company is a multi billion company.
It doesn't hurt to say that Uber X is way to cheap. I will drive someone 35 miles on X and my total payout would be $24-25. Now lets be realistic with gas subtracted I am only making $17.50. Gas is a total $7.50 and I will need three gallons to get the rider to the destination and to go back towards my direction of Buckhead. This is ludicrous $17.50 for a total of 70 miles. I am just tired of being tired. I can't wait until the day I find a job in my field which is law."
for some reason, the usual "voices of the worker" do not care about the Uber drivers. I dont know if it's b/c they USE and enjoy the cheap service so dont want to upset the apple cart or if they just dont realize how poorly paid the drivers are...
For those Uberpool supporters. The facts and experience broken down perfectly from another driver. I deny all my UberPool request. So I don't deal with them anymore unless it's surging.
That is your choice and I support you having that option. Prices will go up if there are not enough drivers.
However, UberPool is a more efficient option for both rider and driver. I have never had an issue getting a ride as an UberPool and expect I never will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domitian
for some reason, the usual "voices of the worker" do not care about the Uber drivers. I dont know if it's b/c they USE and enjoy the cheap service so dont want to upset the apple cart or if they just dont realize how poorly paid the drivers are...
If you are referencing unions or punitive government measures, you will find that will be as effective as they were for workers in the US auto industry which resulted in a lot of lost jobs.
The changes in the job market can be scary, but punitive actions against those creating jobs will only hurt everyone and accelerate the loss of jobs.
Even though this is a new technology and still in its most dangerous state with split control with humans, it is still safer than human drivers.
It won't be the last fatality, but this is the first one in 130 million auto pilot miles (not including the millions of fatality free miles done in Google's and other self driving cars).
Human drivers average a fatality about ever 70 million miles, so already about doubling the safety of human drivers is huge. And that will only improve.
Even though this is a new technology and still in its most dangerous state with split control with humans, it is still safer than human drivers.
It won't be the last fatality, but this is the first one in 130 million auto pilot miles (not including the millions of fatality free miles done in Google's and other self driving cars).
Human drivers average a fatality about ever 70 million miles, so already about doubling the safety of human drivers is huge. And that will only improve.
The stars are aligning; I agree with you.
If we took all the self driving car tests done up until now and put in human drivers, we'd have seen more fatalities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
