Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#111

Post by pYQAJ6Zm » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:47 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #88

amelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that the next user would just tap a button on their smartphone saying that the car is dirty, upon which the car drives back to a service center and the user receives a new car (not the same car).

The problem with this is, as a rider, I personally would not want to have to be constantly expecting a dirty car. If one out of every 3 cars has vomit or syringes in it or feces, I would personally stick with a service that has human drivers at the wheel.

Maybe this would self-regulate. If someone is the kind of person that would make a mess on an autonomous car ride, maybe after calling the service again and having to wait for a replacement due to someone else’s carelessness, their attitude would change.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#112

Post by darawk » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:49 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #13

How is this going to combat people who make a mess inside the vehicle after going 100 percent without human drivers/test engineers? If it picks up a drunk person at 3 AM who then throws up inside the car, is it vomit-aware and knows it needs a cleaning before picking up the next passenger?

Once you solve self-driving, I imagine mess detection is rather trivial :).

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#113

Post by jonknee » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:50 PM UTC

samfisher83 wrote: post #95

vivekd wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, Uber and Lyft CEOs both said they envision a future where we don't own cars and just call self driving taxi services via app when we need them. They both envision this happening in less than a decade. This seems to be coming true, millennials have the lowest rate of car ownership and it seems to be the best explanation for why both companies are willing to bleed money to expand market-share as quickly a possible…

Why not use trains or buses. Thousands of cars compared to a single train seems inefficient.

The age old last mile problem. I don't think anyone is suggesting getting rid of mass transit and in fact self driving cars could be the best thing ever happen to mass transit (no need to park at the train station if coming from the suburbs).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile_(transportation)

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#114

Post by thomyorkie » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:50 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #88

amelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that the next user would just tap a button on their smartphone saying that the car is dirty, upon which the car drives back to a service center and the user receives a new car (not the same car).

The problem with this is, as a rider, I personally would not want to have to be constantly expecting a dirty car. If one out of every 3 cars has vomit or syringes in it or feces, I would personally stick with a service that has human drivers at the wheel.

Sure if one out of every three had vomit, syringes, or feces it would be a huge problem. One out of three seems incredibly unlikely and off by at least a couple of orders of magnitude.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#115

Post by ImSkeptical » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:52 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #88

amelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that the next user would just tap a button on their smartphone saying that the car is dirty, upon which the car drives back to a service center and the user receives a new car (not the same car).

The problem with this is, as a rider, I personally would not want to have to be constantly expecting a dirty car. If one out of every 3 cars has vomit or syringes in it or feces, I would personally stick with a service that has human drivers at the wheel.

This seems solvable. As a rider, you have the option to select "This car is too dirty to ride" or "This car needs cleaning."

If you indicate it is too dirty to ride, the car reports for cleaning. If the cleaners agree with your assessment then your ride is free, paid for by the person responsible for the mess, who would also pay for the cleaning. If the cleaners don't agree, then you pay for the cleaning and your own ride. If you indicate that the car is dirty but want to ride it regardless, then the car could just check in for cleaning after your ride at no expense to you.

If you don't want to send the car away, perhaps you have an urgent appointment, you could just ride the messy car and have it cleaned after your ride. If adding a few extra minutes to your trip isn't a big deal, then the reward of having it be free may compensate you for the inconvenience.

A system like this would provide an incentive for customers to report dirty cars (saving money on their ride) and to leave cars clean (avoid paying for car cleaning). Those incentives are hopefully at least as strong as the incentives in place now.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#116

Post by jonknee » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:52 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #88

amelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine that the next user would just tap a button on their smartphone saying that the car is dirty, upon which the car drives back to a service center and the user receives a new car (not the same car).

The problem with this is, as a rider, I personally would not want to have to be constantly expecting a dirty car. If one out of every 3 cars has vomit or syringes in it or feces, I would personally stick with a service that has human drivers at the wheel.

Zipcar and Reach Now don't seem to have an issue with this, I would be surprised if it's any different when you don't have to the move the steering wheel yourself. If they can make a car that drives itself they can surely figure out a way to keep it clean.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#117

Post by jonknee » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:53 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #27

bandrami wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What keeps people from doing that on subways now? Nothing but the social contract, and so subways are generally somewhat dirtier than cabs, but still get you from point A to point B.

The difference is you have much more privacy in an Uber vehicle. Someone about to make a mess in the subway might be more inclined to wait until they get off vs a private vehicle with just them in there.

How do you have more privacy in an Uber vehicle that knows your identity, everything about your trip and can bill you for any damage? You're anonymous on most transit.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#118

Post by sankyo » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:53 PM UTC

I ride a motorcycle in SF daily and frequently "split lanes". I saw one of the Ubers all decked out with spinning radar and wondered how it would react as I passed through at 10-15mph. There was a person at the steering wheel, I am not sure who was in control. Thankfully it was uneventful. I thought the car might brake or veer away from me.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#119

Post by kbenson » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:54 PM UTC

hackalaugh wrote: post #93

hackerboos wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd be nice if we could get to the point where my self-driving car is earning cash as a taxi whilst I'm doing my 9-5.

Seems potentially unlikely that a consumer could own and (auto-)operate a self-driving vehicle at a rate competitive with Uber & Lyft (or whatever corp.), who could purchase in bulk and have their cars operate for significantly less.

On the other hand, I imagine there will be lots of locations where Uber and Lyft won't serve with their own fleet, either because it's too small, or because it's too sparse. Having a program, or a separate competitor, that allowed people to submit their own vehicles and do their own upkeep might help those areas get served. Then again, those areas might be geographically small enough that you don't need a car (depending on weather). Who know, maybe there's a long tail there which is hard for the big players to capitalize on completely, given they need fleet servicing facilities if they are running their own cars.

Re: Uber’s self-driving cars start picking up passengers in San Francisco

#120

Post by throwaway76543 » Wed, Dec 14, 2016, 5:55 PM UTC

koenigdavidmj wrote: post #110

fullshark wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They require preplanning, adherence to scheduling, take more time, and may not take you exactly where you want to go.

Then add more trains until you don't need to look at a schedule anymore (every fifteen minutes at the absolute worst). EDIT: Punctuation

Adding more smaller trains without a fixed schedule over a broader area is exactly what they're doing. These smaller unscheduled trains are called "cars."

Running empty high capacity vehicles over a really large number of routes is immensely wasteful, much more wasteful than on-demand vehicles.