Live data from Hacker News

Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

techcrunch.com

131–140 of 249 posts

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#131
post #15

I want self-driving cars to happen as quickly as possible, but Uber seems like they were extremely reckless and negligent here. Why not apply for a permit and stay on the safe side? And with at least two reported incidents of these cars running red lights, it seems like driver training and attentiveness was lacking. If the software wasn't ready, fine, but you have to be aware of that and train your drivers to be 100%…

> Why not apply for a permit and stay on the safe side?

When did Uber obey the law? Why would they start now?

Edit: Apologies for my tone, but Uber has demonstrated quite a few times in the past that they don't have any respect for the law.

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#132
post #15

I want self-driving cars to happen as quickly as possible, but Uber seems like they were extremely reckless and negligent here. Why not apply for a permit and stay on the safe side? And with at least two reported incidents of these cars running red lights, it seems like driver training and attentiveness was lacking. If the software wasn't ready, fine, but you have to be aware of that and train your drivers to be 100%…

Uber seems like they were extremely reckless

YES. I live 10 feet away from the garage. I've noticed over the past few months that they've been ramping in typical startup fashion: hockey stick growth.

After reading about Lyft's CEO, a narrative of "nice guys finishing last", I started realizing how unscrupulous Uber is. Sadly, cut-throat businesses win.

I recently took an Uber ride, where the driver was an un-retired man in his 70s. He recently just abandoned his failing dry clean business. This one hits close to home for me, because my parents are approaching their 70s, holding on to a failing dry clean business, too. For me, hardworking people like this, with arguably bad business acumen, are counter example to the notion of "if you're poor, it's because you didn't work hard enough." Before the dry clean business, the Uber driver ran a deli business, but that was a failure, too. No doubt he possesses an entrepreneurial spirit, albeit he probably shouldn't. I can't fault him for not being smarter. He proceeded to tell me about his idea to create a website where people upload images of their face, at different angle, and can get a custom printed 3d figurine, that he would hand paint them. I didn't have the heart to tell him that as someone in the top 1% income bracket of 20-something year olds, who consistently blows money on expensive toys / gadgets / dinners, I would never spend $300 bucks on a custom painted figurine. See, he was an artist before coming to America. He said "I want to be an artist before I die. I was too busy making a living when I came to America".

Uber gave this man a job. That's good. But he's being paid near minimum wage. To achieve that, he has to work 12+ hour days to acquire the bonuses that Uber uses to incentivize their drivers to become addicted. These are the kinds of risk Uber induces on its drivers, customers, and other people on the road. The sad reality is, he's going to be displaced from this minimum wage job by automation, much earlier than people expect. Uber doesn't care. I'm not saying Uber or any private company MUST care. I'm just illustrating how a company's values permeates itself, and precipitates to individuals' livelihoods.

I recently read an article about the unit economics of Uber. It doesn't work out. Uber, in it's current form is based on leveraging free VC money to subsidize and incentivize somewhat artificial demand. It's predatory monopolistic tactics. They won't be able to live up to their unicorn IPO valuation hype. They NEED to expand into other domains. Recently, Uber acquired an A.I. startup, which I think is an indicator of this. Alternatively, they can fix the unit economics equation to be profitable. Autonomous vehicles is the purported answer. This VC and unicorn valuation environment, I believe, is resulting in this kind of hastiness, at the increased risk of human lives.

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#133
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And who is losing here exactly? Uh, pedestrians in crosswalks, apparently. I'd also add: 1) drivers who were lied to about their potential take home pay 2) customers who will have to eat 50% fare hikes once Uber gains monopoly power in order for them to ever become profitable. 3) employees who work under a CEO who lauds the company as "Boober" in honor of all the fringe benefits he gets for running it. 4) investors…

Isn't it a fun fact that throughout history, (barring the morally exceptional[0]) each human only ever chose to do things that were in their best interest. However, since humans existed, we have continually seen a consistent improvement[1] in the average human's life. [0] Funny thing about the morally exceptional: I can't think of any which continue to improve our current day-to-day lives. [1] Improvement is subjecti…

Regardimg [0]: The entire open source industy. Voluntary fire brigades. And so on.

I'm surprised you ignore all those so easily.

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#134
post #102
post #8

Uber is a company built on ignoring laws. Everything they did in the beginning was against some form of taxi or car hire regulation, in the name of disruption. (Regardless of what you think of the laws in question, they were still being broken in the eyes of most regulators) I don't know how I feel about that type of corporate philosophy (or Facebook's "move fast break things") in light of projects where people can a…

> in light of projects where people can actually get killed. Compared to what? Most states give out licenses to 16 year old kids with a few hours of driving school. Once you get a license you never get retested for vision or driving ability. There are very dangerous elderly drivers on the road and car accidents are the leading cause of death of 1-44 year olds. Some allowable risk has to be accepted in order to have p…

> Once you get a license you never get retested for vision or driving ability

If you are in California, you will occasionally be required to go to an office in-person for DL renewals where your vision will be tested as part of the process. Many insurance companies also incentivize older drivers taking "mature driver improvement" courses every few years as a refresher. Then of course there's things like traffic school if you are driving and receive a moving traffic violation. This seems straightforward...

Also, I might note this because I went through this process with my father... when your vision is bad enough to fail the DMV's criteria of 20/40 corrected vision with either or both eyes, they have a whole load of things they make you do. With my father he could theoretically hit the 20/40 vision requirement but made mistakes due to scarring from surgeries that blurred vision in only certain areas. He had to get documentation from his doctor as to what kind of driving he could potentially do (e.g. no night driving), got additional mirrors installed in the car, went through a special drive test (after he did his own refresher driving class voluntarily), and had a whole load of restrictions added to his already limited term license (e.g. he had to get a new license after only a couple of years, and every renewal would require a drive test). In the end, it was such a hassle despite zero functional issues driving that he ended up giving up his DL at the last renewal. If his vision had declined significantly from there, DMV would have immediately revoked the license and suspended his ability to receive a new one.

So, sure, seniors and teens alike cause a lot of accidents, but we're not exactly lacking on trying to reduce problems.

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#135

This is really worrying for Uber. It's supposedly burning 2 billion dollars a year. It doesn't own any fleet of vehicles or it's drivers. Neither is there a sustainable cost savings that doesn't involve lighting pile of cash on fire. It desperately needs driverless cars before Tesla and Google kills their business off. Now Uber has finally hit a regulatory wall which it won't be able to pay off. It's likely to hit mo…

It's not clear that Uber has hit a regulatory wall. The DMV wrote them a stern note, yes. Uber has received various scary-sounding threats of government sanction and has overcome them in the past (for example, at one point a German judge threatened to fine them 250k euros per car per day). They have often been successful in arguing their case or in going above or around uncooperative regulators. The California state…

Exactly. Uber is likely already following all of the permit requirements ($5 million insurance and experienced drivers) so they just need to apply for one. That assumes they don't challenge it in court based on the ambiguous language of the bill about what determines an autonomous vehicle, which sounds like their plan. They've demonstrated themselves to not be afraid of some bad press or the court room.

Hardly a major roadblock at the pre-market testing stage for such a big company already operating in Pittsburgh. They could easily shift testing to other people more welcoming states and countries in the meantime.

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then we are better off driving for real because `not driving, meaning not being in control, but being ready to take the helm at any time` must be more exhausting (because you have to focus on everything not under your control vs focus on everything that you don't have control minus what you actually control) and increase our reaction time (since some time will pass between the moment you notice you have to take the h…

Being ready to take the helm at any time is required by law, at this point. It applies to Google's test cars, to Tesla Autopilot, etc.

Are Google's / Waymo's vehicles not steering-wheel and pedal free? E.g., go to Waymo's own site here[1], scroll to "2015 World’s first fully self-driving ride on public roads", and watch the video: they give, if I'm not mistaken, a blind man a ride in a steering-wheel-free, pedals-free autonomous vehicle on public roads, in Texas. Now, granted, the original article is about the CA DMV, but I've seen vehicles that are indistinguishable from the prototype car in the video driving in Mountain View. Unless there's a model with steering wheels and pedals (it is hard to say from the outside), that would seem to imply that Google is testing fully autonomous cars in California. (Note that I'm not trying to imply that this is illegal: I'm not well-versed enough in the DMV's rules around autonomous vehicles to know if it requires "being ready to take the helm at any time" or not. I also did not realize, until Waymo's announcement recently, that they were so far along.)

[1]: https://waymo.com/journey/

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then we are better off driving for real because `not driving, meaning not being in control, but being ready to take the helm at any time` must be more exhausting (because you have to focus on everything not under your control vs focus on everything that you don't have control minus what you actually control) and increase our reaction time (since some time will pass between the moment you notice you have to take the h…

Being ready to take the helm at any time is required by law, at this point. It applies to Google's test cars, to Tesla Autopilot, etc.

[deleted]

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#138
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The data collection required for autonomous vehicles includes even very minor accidents. The idea is to collect data on what failed and why before somebody gets killed. Unlike regular accident data, all reports are public. This lets us see that Google's repeat problem is being rear-ended when their cars stop while entering an intersection because they detected cross-traffic. It also tells us that Cruise Automation hi…

So do you think the public wouldn't be able to inform themselves on which service or vehicle is safer before purchasing these cars without this data? Or that Google, Uber, Tesla, etc wouldn't already be taking these numbers very seriously and doing everything to minimize them? Or that the public wouldn't truly know the real safety of these vehicle as a whole vs human drivers.... without this mandatory test vehicle pe…

[deleted]

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#139
post #29
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Updated Uber statement: "This incident was due to human error. This is why we believe so much in making the roads safer by building self-driving Ubers. This vehicle was not part of the pilot and was not carrying customers. The driver involved has been suspended while we continue to investigate." https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/14/uber-looking-into-incident...

> This incident was due to human error. This is why we believe so much in making the roads safer by building self-driving Ubers. My new side project is a The Aristrocrats joke, except it ends with "The Gig Economy!"

And the classic monty python reference "those responsible have been sacked"

Re: Uber ordered to stop self-driving vehicle service in San Francisco

#140
post #19

Self-driving Uber car blows red signal at crosswalk in SF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CdJ4oae8f4

Updated Uber statement: "This incident was due to human error. This is why we believe so much in making the roads safer by building self-driving Ubers. This vehicle was not part of the pilot and was not carrying customers. The driver involved has been suspended while we continue to investigate." https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/14/uber-looking-into-incident...

Why would an employee/contractor be suspended for a minor traffic violation? Nobody was hurt. I'd rather they talk about taking steps to train the people and algorithms better
Post reply on HN