Author Topic: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars  (Read 335 times)

Offline SGOS (OP)

Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« on: December 15, 2016, 06:01:01 AM »
I don't need a license to drive my own car either, but I get one anyway.

https://www.cnet.com/news/uber-we-dont-need-a-permit-for-self-driving-cars/

Quote
A self-driving Uber ran a red light in downtown San Francisco on Wednesday morning, just hours after the company's launch. A dashboard camera video, captured by Luxor Cab taxi, shows the self-driving Uber Volvo SUV zooming through the light long after it turned red. Similar incidents have been reported throughout the city today, according to the San Francisco Examiner.

Luxor Cab confirmed to CNET it recorded the video. An Uber spokesperson said in an email that the incident was due to human error. "This vehicle was not part of the pilot and was not carrying customers," the spokesperson said. "The driver involved has been suspended while we continue to investigate."...

Actually, this was not human error.  The self driving car ran a red light.  Yes, there was a human in the car in case of a malfunction, but the car malfunctioned.  The human may have been reading the paper or nursing a hangover.  Who knows?  But the car was suppose to recognize a red light.  It didn't.

Quote
Uber's launch of self-driving cars in California without a permit isn't the first time the company has sallied forth without government permission. The company didn't seek permission when it launched its ride-hailing service in San Francisco in 2010.

Four months after its rollout, Uber was hit with a "cease and desist" letter from the California Public Utility Commission and the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. The same thing happened when the company launched its carpool service UberPool in 2014.

"We don't have to beg for forgiveness because we are legal," Uber CEO Travis Kalanick told the Wall Street Journal in 2013 during an interview about the cease-and-desist letters. "There's been so much corruption and so much cronyism in the taxi industry and so much regulatory capture that if you ask for permission up front for something that's already legal, you'll never get it."

As of this writing, Uber's autonomous vehicles are still cruising San Francisco's streets, despite the threats from the DMV. With self-driving cars, Uber appears to continue its modus operandi of dealing with regulators after the fact.

Just get the permit.  Really.  Get a permit.  They're not asking for a bribe, just an application.

Offline Baruch

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2016, 06:16:41 AM »
Wahaha ... were are your AIs now ... kiss my ass Seri and Cortana!

Uber and other state subsidized techno-utopians and destructive capitalist operations ... aren't your savior.
שלום

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2016, 06:35:47 AM »
This technology is so far from ready. Pushing it into the market is a series of disasters waiting to happen.

We have nothing approaching genuine AI. What we have is a complicated system of technology being able to recognize a specific, programmed stimulus and generate a pre-programmed reaction. There is no judgment going on here. This means that these self driving cars are only as good as their ability to recognize stimuli and frankly even that technology is NOT GOOD ENOUGH to be parsing all the information that our brains sift through during a drive.

Driver's display judgment. That is what keeps the roads safe. These self driving cars are incapable of judgment, which makes them 2 ton self-steering projectiles which is only ok if you intend for it to eventually slam into something and explode, not safely deliver its cargo.
And on the wings of a dream so far beyond reality
All alone in desperation now the time has come
Lost inside you\'ll never find, lost within my own mind
Day after day this misery must go on

Offline SGOS (OP)

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2016, 07:13:52 AM »
Driver's display judgment. That is what keeps the roads safe. These self driving cars are incapable of judgment, which makes them 2 ton self-steering projectiles which is only ok if you intend for it to eventually slam into something and explode, not safely deliver its cargo.

I think you are right.  As things are right now, if you have to depend on a person to be in charge of correcting the car's malfunctions during operation, he still has to be as vigilant as a normal driver.  Why not have a driver who is fully responsible for the operation of the vehicle?  Oh wait!  That's not a driverless car.  The concept of human oversight is a two edged sword.  The purpose of a driverless car is to free up the driver from... Well driving, right?  So here's this guy sitting in the driver's seat while the car follows the rules 98% of the time.  It's hard to imagine him not letting his mind wander as the tedium of sitting there doing nothing starts to take it's toll.  Sometimes, accidents are avoided in a matter of seconds.  That requires hands on the wheel at all times and a foot that isn't keeping time to music coming from the radio.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 07:24:55 AM by SGOS »

Offline Baruch

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2016, 12:51:45 PM »
The biggest reason for autonomous vehicles, are autonomous semi-trucks.  And they are planning on even having them longer than just a main unit pulling one other unit ... but a whole train of them.  This is to prevent the Teamster's Union from polluting our vital juices ;-)  That and the cheap bastards decided that having Mexican drivers driving Mexican trucks ... is too expensive!
שלום

Offline SGOS (OP)

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #5 on: December 15, 2016, 02:54:36 PM »
they are planning on even having them longer than just a main unit pulling one other unit ... but a whole train of them.

They could run them on steel rails, and get them off the highways.

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #6 on: December 15, 2016, 03:35:46 PM »
They could run them on steel rails, and get them off the highways.
Yeah.  And we could have them haul a bunch of stuff behind them.  We could call it "the steel highway" or "the road that runs on rails."  Something like that.  It could definitely catch on.

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #7 on: December 15, 2016, 03:57:07 PM »
I think you are right.  As things are right now, if you have to depend on a person to be in charge of correcting the car's malfunctions during operation, he still has to be as vigilant as a normal driver.  Why not have a driver who is fully responsible for the operation of the vehicle?  Oh wait!  That's not a driverless car.
Well, assuming that we can't go from 100% driver to 100% driverless in one fell swoop, we're temporarily going to have go with a mix of both - which is dangerous for exactly the reason you pointed out.  A driver is lulled into a false sense of security and likely to be inattentive.  So when something goes wrong, there might be a delayed reaction, possibly with tragic consequences.

And also, of course they should need a license.  If you're going to be driving a car at all, you need to have license first.  You'll get no argument from me there.

But imho, the end goal of roads filled with automated automobiles is a laudable one.  Humans are notoriously accident-prone, as road fatality statistics show.  Driverless technologies would be a huge boon and should be pursued.

But I see lots of problems with this on the horizon - from an unwillingness to change to hacking/tampering to skewed perceptions.  I'd imagine that if a driverless car drove someone off a cliff, it'd be a national tragedy and the fallout might slow or even reverse adoption of driverless cars.  But if a drunk driver plows into a semi, killing 4, the local paper would have a blurb about it but it's otherwise a normal day in America.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 08:12:47 PM by Hydra009 »

Offline Baruch

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #8 on: December 15, 2016, 07:55:39 PM »
They could run them on steel rails, and get them off the highways.

Warren Buffett controls the railways ... and the other plutocrats hate him ;-)

Hackers have already taken control of Toyota cars, while still being driven by humans.

You will have accident free highways soon, because there won't be any powered vehicles, other than the animal kind, or pedestrians.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2016, 07:57:37 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline SGOS (OP)

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #9 on: December 16, 2016, 07:53:44 AM »

But imho, the end goal of roads filled with automated automobiles is a laudable one.  Humans are notoriously accident-prone, as road fatality statistics show.  Driverless technologies would be a huge boon and should be pursued.

I agree.  We will have to work out the bugs, keeping statistics as we go.  The system doesn't have to be perfect, but 90% better than what we are doing now would be a big leap forward.  If Uber thinks it should be allowed to run those things around in city traffic without permission, that's entirely irresponsible.  Down the road, driverless cars might be approved for safety, but Uber will be, and should be regulated closely. 

Another thing that occurred to me.  If a driverless car runs into a pedestrian, who pays the bill?  The car owner or the manufacturer?  I'm sure it will be the car owner, but I can see that being challenged in court a time or two, and there might even be an occasional legitimate circumstance to hold the manufacturer accountable.  There are probably some legal issues that need to be ironed out along with the technical.

Offline Baruch

Re: Uber Says They Don't Need a License to Operate Driverless Cars
« Reply #10 on: December 16, 2016, 12:54:09 PM »
Individuals won't own automated cars ... corporations will.  Sue them if you can.
שלום