Uber has no hope in this town

[bill_barilko]

But I could see future model where insurance is actually charged based on usage like an electricity bill. You have a base rate based on location and you get a charge based on km driven and can be penalized for speeding or unsafe driving....Now you want Robot yesterday so I doubt you share this concern but that level of intrusion is troubling to me.

Don't worry-autonomous vehicles will be here first.

[eyeball]

That's exactly the thing Bill. Driverless vehicles will eliminate the need to surveill for traffic offenders as well as eliminate the need for traffic laws, penalties, law enforcement and even insurance companies. In addition we won't need as many emergency response personnel or devote so many emergency ward resources to traffic accidents.

But why stop here when we can count on on reducing the numbers of vehicles on the road and resources needed to build them by utilizing vehicles 94% more than we do now? Most cars are used some 6% of the time they are owned. Otherwise they sit parked unused by their owners,

Say goodbye to car salesmen as we move to co-op vehicle ownership or rentable Uber/Google fleets, I mean c'mon, surely that should loosen the death grip of even the most hard-boiled cold-fingered driver.

Why some say driverless cars won't just change the way we commute, but the way we live.

It's that scary change thing again isn't it?

Edited January 7, 2016 by eyeball

[Boges]

But why stop here when we can count on on reducing the numbers of vehicles on the road and resources needed to build them by utilizing vehicles 94% more than we do now? Most cars are used some 6% of the time they are owned. Otherwise they sit parked unused by their owners,

That's because people use them to commute to work. Not everyone lives walking distance to a train line that goes directly to their place of work. The freedom of being able to go where you want and when is work that 94% waste of usage.

I know you have this grand view of the future where robots pick us up and take us wherever we want to go, but do you really need to derail every transportation related thread with your theories of how the future will work?

Edited January 7, 2016 by Boges

[GostHacked]

What's the problem, haven't people in Ottawa ever heard of free trade and deregulation?

Some people's kids...you clean em up, you dress em up, and you still can't take them out in public.

I am late replying, but this is a good point. The government talks about deregulation, but yet wants to regulate everything. The solution would be to lower the fees cabbies need to pay to operate and legislate Uber to comply with some regulations to match what cabbies need to go through.

I was going to use Uber on one occasion, I had to enable things on my phone, download the app, sign in to the Google App store just to download it, then enable all the tracking on the phone so the service would work. After 20-30 minutes of frustration with it, I end up calling a cab. It cost me more, but it was much less of a hassle.

Now what does Uber do with all that information/data/tracking?

[GostHacked]

That's exactly the thing Bill. Driverless vehicles will eliminate the need to surveill for traffic offenders as well as eliminate the need for traffic laws, penalties, law enforcement and even insurance companies. In addition we won't need as many emergency response personnel or devote so many emergency ward resources to traffic accidents.

I don't put that much trust into a single point of failure. What happens when the network has an issue and all these driverless cars cannot communicate with each other or the infrastructure? One glitch or a major hack on the network and you have a real big problem real fast.

As an example, yesterday Bing, Xbox Live, Office portals and other MS services were out for about an hour. Completely down. Putting that much trust in the cloud hoping that everything will be on all the time is laughable.

[Boges]

I am late replying, but this is a good point. The government talks about deregulation, but yet wants to regulate everything. The solution would be to lower the fees cabbies need to pay to operate and legislate Uber to comply with some regulations to match what cabbies need to go through.

I was going to use Uber on one occasion, I had to enable things on my phone, download the app, sign in to the Google App store just to download it, then enable all the tracking on the phone so the service would work. After 20-30 minutes of frustration with it, I end up calling a cab. It cost me more, but it was much less of a hassle.

Now what does Uber do with all that information/data/tracking?

Way to sounds like an old fuddie duddie. Uber may take a bit longer because you actually have to find your location on a map and the location you want to go to. It's not as easy as Jumping in and saying "Get me to X spot".

BUT!!!

You can monitor your route while you're in the car, you can review your driver and the transaction is automatic.

I think in this day an age you really have to work to not have Google monitor you're every movement. The Google Maps App actually follows you everywhere you go. You can go into a part of the App and it'll tell you every address you were at, when you were driving or in a train and when you were at home at work. It always can tell where you've parked and sends you that information. It's a like a private investigator in your pocket. It even tracked me when I was in the US and had the phone in Airplane Mode.

I guess if you're paranoid about Big Brother, it's terrifying but most people find it really cool.

[GostHacked]

Way to sounds like an old fuddie duddie. Uber may take a bit longer because you actually have to find your location on a map and the location you want to go to. It's not as easy as Jumping in and saying "Get me to X spot".

Since I have only taken Uber once because a friend uses it, I am wondering on cost comparisons between a can and an uber ride of the same time/distance? How much savings is there?

[Boges]

Since I have only taken Uber once because a friend uses it, I am wondering on cost comparisons between a can and an uber ride of the same time/distance? How much savings is there?

I don't use cabs a lot so I can't comment. But people have said there's like a 30% savings. I think, even if the cost was the same, the idea that you don't have to tip or use cash or even a card you just get out of the car and get an e-mail receipt and it's done is so much easier and pleasant.

There's also the idea that the experience is better. Everyone has been in a cab with a guy on his phone that's not in good condition. I've never been in an Uber car where I didn't have a good experience with the driver. They were talkative and nice.

[eyeball]

I know you have this grand view of the future where robots pick us up and take us wherever we want to go, but do you really need to derail every transportation related thread with your theories of how the future will work?

You do realize Uber is investing heavily in the push for autonomous vehicles right?

I'm telling you how the present is working.

That's because people use them to commute to work. Not everyone lives walking distance to a train line that goes directly to their place of work. The freedom of being able to go where you want and when is work that 94% waste of usage

Exactly how will your freedom to go anywhere or when be taken away, by burdening you with the need to google up a car?

[Boges]

You do realize Uber is investing heavily in the push for autonomous vehicles right?

I'm telling you how the present is working.

Want to cite?

And even so it still doesn't mean people will have to give up their cars in my lifetime.

Exactly how will your freedom to go anywhere or when be taken away, by burdening you with the need to google up a car?

You'd need a base load of cars, most people are driving between like 6-10 am and 4-7pm. The rest of the time cars are sitting in a driveway or parking lot. This wouldn't change if you had to order one. I could easily see massive backlogs.

[eyeball]

Want to cite?

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/03/are-driverless-cars-the-future-of-uber

I'll show you how to google something.

And even so it still doesn't mean people will have to give up their cars in my lifetime.

They may have to give up public roads or be restricted to certain lanes.

You'd need a base load of cars, most people are driving between like 6-10 am and 4-7pm. The rest of the time cars are sitting in a driveway or parking lot. This wouldn't change if you had to order one. I could easily see massive backlogs.

Bus and subways are going driverless too.

Don't believe it? Just left click and highlight the sentence above then right click and hit Search and go.

[ReeferMadness]

And even so it still doesn't mean people will have to give up their cars in my lifetime.

No idea how long you expect your lifetime to be. But there are already vehicles that are capable of driving themselves in a limited capacity on public roads and completely autonomous vehicles on private roads. And there is a compelling business case to replace professional drivers. So, I would say that if you plan on living more than 20 years, you will find it increasingly expensive to do your own driving.

You'd need a base load of cars, most people are driving between like 6-10 am and 4-7pm. The rest of the time cars are sitting in a driveway or parking lot. This wouldn't change if you had to order one. I could easily see massive backlogs.

That's present day thinking, though there is a certain degree of correctness in what you say. Certainly, the number of cars on the road need to be sufficient for peak traffic but that doesn't mean that we need the same number of cars as today.

Not everyone drives to work at exactly the same time so there is a degree of potential reuse even in the core hours (say 7am - 9am and 4pm - 6pm). There is also greater potential for ride sharing (the automated cab could provide discounted rides to several people who have similar commutes).

Also, the transportation of the future may evolve as new technology allows greater flexibility. For example, there is a pilot project in Israel where independent monorail cars will take you to any point along their route. Like Uber, you arrange for a pickup with your smart phone.

[TimG]

But there are already vehicles that are capable of driving themselves in a limited capacity on public roads and completely autonomous vehicles on private roads. And there is a compelling business case to replace professional drivers.

While this may be true it does not follow that they will be able to offer services that are cheaper than owning ones own car since they have to recover the cost of the vehicle, insurance, fuel (even if electricity) + plus the redundant capacity needed to provide the level of service that people demand. Personal automated or semi-automated vehicles will be just as popular and affordable as they are today.

For example, there is a pilot project in Israel where independent monorail cars will take you to any point along their route. Like Uber, you arrange for a pickup with your smart phone.

Fixed corridor transportation will always be limited to high density places because the cost of building the fixed link is expensive (especially in countries with excessive environmental reviews and a structures that allow NIMBYs to block projects). Personal vehicle transport will still be attractive to many.

[ReeferMadness]

While this may be true it does not follow that they will be able to offer services that are cheaper than owning ones own car since they have to recover the cost of the vehicle, insurance, fuel (even if electricity) + plus the redundant capacity needed to provide the level of service that people demand. Personal automated or semi-automated vehicles will be just as popular and affordable as they are today.

Cars sit unused about 95% of the time. That means that the depreciation cost of your car is roughly 20 times what it could optimally be. Even allowing for downtime due to traffic peaks and maintenance, these companies could probably still achieve a 3-5 times better utilization rate than private ownership. On top of that, companies that own fleets of cars can get much better pricing, lower rates for financing, less expensive repairs and lower insurance costs. Finally, lots of people spend hundreds of dollars every month for parking - money that would be instantly saved under this model.

It doesn't even end there. Right now, if you sink 40 grand into a pickup truck, you are stuck driving a 3 ton vehicle even when you're hauling nothing but yourself. Under a driverless model, you could have the type of vehicle you need when you need it.

The big auto manufacturers must be crapping themselves at the prospect of this type of model and I'm sure they will do everything they can to continue the private ownership model, as inefficient as it is. It remains to be seen whether people will be smart enough to not be sucked in.

Fixed corridor transportation will always be limited to high density places because the cost of building the fixed link is expensive (especially in countries with excessive environmental reviews and a structures that allow NIMBYs to block projects). Personal vehicle transport will still be attractive to many.

First of all, this will be a form of personal vehicle transport. Each car is independent. Second, this will actually be more efficient space-wise, than building roads. Third, this clearly is intended only for dense urban settings. However, it could be a cost-effective way of bridging the gap between the driverless taxis on the road and the need for additional peak time capacity.

[TimG]

Cars sit unused about 95% of the time. That means that the depreciation cost of your car is roughly 20 times what it could optimally be.

The cost of owning a fuel efficient low cost car for someone in Vancouver suburbs is about $6000-$8000 a year including fuel (20,000km per year), insurance, depreciation and maintenance. That works out to about $670/month worst case. A $25 taxi fare/ride that buys about 26 trips which would only meet about 40% of a daily commuter's transportation needs per month.

Any reductions in cost as a result of automated drivers or electric vehicles would also be available to individuals so the only possible saving comes from the labour component which is about 1/3 of a typical taxi fare. If you reduce the $25 fare to $16 to account for this you get 42 trips per month which still makes it more expensive than owning your own car. Personally, I think it is naive to assume that all of the savings would be passed onto customers because the taxi market in most cities is rigged and I can't see that changing anytime soon..

Now a lot of assumptions go into those numbers and someone who is not a daily car commuter would likely find taxis a better deal even at today's prices but a lot of people choose to pay for the vehicle anyway because they like having their own vehicle. As long as people feel the need to move to the suburbs to find affordable housing you should assume they will also want their own vehicle no matter what the price of taxis.

First of all, this will be a form of personal vehicle transport. Each car is independent. Second, this will actually be more efficient space-wise, than building roads. Third, this clearly is intended only for dense urban settings. However, it could be a cost-effective way of bridging the gap between the driverless taxis on the road and the need for additional peak time capacity.

People have to get from their homes to the 'fixed link'. This requires roads and cars. Once people have their cars they are less interested in shelling out even more to different modes of transport. More importantly, the visuals in the video don't show much but there is no way a single rail could transport as many people as a 4 lane highway. To duplicate the capacity and flexibility if highways you would need banks of rails side by side which would quickly consume as much space as any highway yet it would be useless for goods transportation.

Lastly, I think the concept is bogus because the don't show how the loading/unloading would take place. Chances are random entry and exits would simply reduce the effective speeds on these rails to less well less than a typical car.

Edited January 9, 2016 by TimG

[eyeball]

There will also be a lot of pressure from company owned fleets to scrap requirements that drivers be ready to take over in the event of a problem. I mean, it just completely defeats the whole purpose.

So...a car with a bar is really starting to look entirely feasible.

We'll still have to wait 125 years before we can toodle off on a craft pot tour though.

Edited January 9, 2016 by eyeball

[ReeferMadness]

The cost of owning a fuel efficient low cost car for someone in Vancouver suburbs is about $6000-$8000 a year including fuel (20,000km per year), insurance, depreciation and maintenance. That works out to about $670/month worst case. A $25 taxi fare/ride that buys about 26 trips which would only meet about 40% of a daily commuter's transportation needs per month.

That's the low end of the spectrum - what percentage of the population drive a small car? A lot of people out there are driving pickup trucks and SUV's.

Any reductions in cost as a result of automated drivers or electric vehicles would also be available to individuals so the only possible saving comes from the labour component which is about 1/3 of a typical taxi fare. If you reduce the $25 fare to $16 to account for this you get 42 trips per month which still makes it more expensive than owning your own car. Personally, I think it is naive to assume that all of the savings would be passed onto customers because the taxi market in most cities is rigged and I can't see that changing anytime soon.

It's the taxi drivers that are the source of a lot of regulation and it's the taxi drivers that are slowing companies like Uber from getting into the market. Once the drivers disappear, there will be no reason for quotas or a lot of the regulation, insurance and other overhead that makes cabs so expensive. Your 1/3 estimate is too low.

Now a lot of assumptions go into those numbers and someone who is not a daily car commuter would likely find taxis a better deal even at today's prices but a lot of people choose to pay for the vehicle anyway because they like having their own vehicle. As long as people feel the need to move to the suburbs to find affordable housing you should assume they will also want their own vehicle no matter what the price of taxis.

Maybe but that's a big if. Certainly the big auto makers hope like hell that you're right but you may not be. If driverless electric cars dropped prices the way I think they probably would, I'd give up my car - it wouldn't make sense to own one.

People have to get from their homes to the 'fixed link'. This requires roads and cars. Once people have their cars they are less interested in shelling out even more to different modes of transport. More importantly, the visuals in the video don't show much but there is no way a single rail could transport as many people as a 4 lane highway. To duplicate the capacity and flexibility if highways you would need banks of rails side by side which would quickly consume as much space as any highway yet it would be useless for goods transportation.

Lastly, I think the concept is bogus because the don't show how the loading/unloading would take place. Chances are random entry and exits would simply reduce the effective speeds on these rails to less well less than a typical car.

Your posts are based on the very latest in 1970's transportation concepts.

Google, Uber, the company that is paying for the Israel pilot - they're betting otherwise.

[ReeferMadness]

There will also be a lot of pressure from company owned fleets to scrap requirements that drivers be ready to take over in the event of a problem. I mean, it just completely defeats the whole purpose.

So...a car with a bar is really starting to look entirely feasible.

We'll still have to wait 125 years before we can toodle off on a craft pot tour though.

omg...

is it possible that your level of cynicism is actually.... INCREASING? Weren't you at level 11 already?

[TimG]

That's the low end of the spectrum - what percentage of the population drive a small car? A lot of people out there are driving pickup trucks and SUV's.

All that does is prove that cost is a minor factor for many people when it comes to transportation. For those people for which cost is a factor then they will buy the small eco-boxes which makes the numbers relevant.

It's the taxi drivers that are the source of a lot of regulation and it's the taxi drivers that are slowing companies like Uber from getting into the market. Once the drivers disappear, there will be no reason for quotas or a lot of the regulation, insurance and other overhead that makes cabs so expensive. Your 1/3 estimate is too low.

A typical taxi driver gets 2/3 the fare but pays for gas. I was guessing about the fraction that is gas. Does not change the math much because it is wrong to assume all the labour savings would be passed on.

If driverless electric cars dropped prices the way I think they probably would, I'd give up my car - it wouldn't make sense to own one.

Why would they drop prices? What trends are there to give you any reason to believe that the cut-throat competition which is required to bring down prices is likely to come to municipal taxis? Uber is disrupting the existing monopolies but eventually we will be left with Uber and two or three competitors in every city (if we are lucky).

Your posts are based on the very latest in 1970's transportation concepts.

My posts are based on an understanding of engineering which you clearly lack. Try asking yourself how people would get on or off of those rails? What happens to other cars travelling on the same rail when loading happens? At best you have a ramp that accelerates a pod to speed an slips it into an empty spot. That implies one could be waiting a lot time for an empty slot at busy times and that requires a minimum distance between cars. This, in turn, translates into a maximum speed and maximum throughput for any given rail. Then you have the same problem at junctions which could again result in long delays if the rail you want to switch to is busy. And while you are waiting every car behind you on the same rail would be stopped. Basically a large system based on this model is not remotely plausible. Edited January 9, 2016 by TimG

[eyeball]

omg...

is it possible that your level of cynicism is actually.... INCREASING? Weren't you at level 11 already?

I'm just playing the devil's advocate. That said I never underestimate the inability of governments to get out of the way society or conservative resistance to change. The two go together like peas and carrots.

[Boges]

Yeah because only Conservatives like to drive.

[ReeferMadness]

All that does is prove that cost is a minor factor for many people when it comes to transportation. For those people for which cost is a factor then they will buy the small eco-boxes which makes the numbers relevant.

A typical taxi driver gets 2/3 the fare but pays for gas. I was guessing about the fraction that is gas. Does not change the math much because it is wrong to assume all the labour savings would be passed on.

Why would they drop prices? What trends are there to give you any reason to believe that the cut-throat competition which is required to bring down prices is likely to come to municipal taxis? Uber is disrupting the existing monopolies but eventually we will be left with Uber and two or three competitors in every city (if we are lucky).

It's not just costs. It's costs plus convenience. Uber is not just a low cost cab company - it's a different business model. And once the cost of the driver disappears, it becomes a whole new game. People who own a self driving car but don't need it for a few hours could make extra money by leasing it to Uber for rides.

My posts are based on an understanding of engineering which you clearly lack. Try asking yourself how people would get on or off of those rails? What happens to other cars travelling on the same rail when loading happens? At best you have a ramp that accelerates a pod to speed an slips it into an empty spot. That implies one could be waiting a lot time for an empty slot at busy times and that requires a minimum distance between cars. This, in turn, translates into a maximum speed and maximum throughput for any given rail. Then you have the same problem at junctions which could again result in long delays if the rail you want to switch to is busy. And while you are waiting every car behind you on the same rail would be stopped. Basically a large system based on this model is not remotely plausible.

Ooooh. Pulling out your much superior engineering mind again, eh? Well, you should call those guys running the pilot right away because I'm sure they haven't thought of any of those things!! They could probably use your big brain to tell them what a bunch of morons they are.

[ReeferMadness]

Yeah because only Conservatives like to drive.

People are horrible drivers. They lack sufficient attention span, they don't make good assessments of risk, many of them lack the basic skills required to properly judge speed and distance. Many lack confidence. Some treat driving as just a self-controlled amusement ride.

Potentially a million deaths a year could be saved by self driving vehicles.

[eyeball]

Yeah because only Conservatives like to drive.

No, but nobody clings as stubbornly and tenaciously to the olde ways like conservatives.

[Boges]

People are horrible drivers. They lack sufficient attention span, they don't make good assessments of risk, many of them lack the basic skills required to properly judge speed and distance. Many lack confidence. Some treat driving as just a self-controlled amusement ride.

Potentially a million deaths a year could be saved by self driving vehicles.

If people want to. It would take some serious Agenda 21 like intervention to force this on the public.

The only way it would work is if people could buy cars with autonomous features and find that they prefer it. I'm sure people had reservations about automatic transmission at some point.

No way it would be feasible to make everyone go to this model right away.