Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events
Topic:  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services

Topic:  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
Author
Message
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 861

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 4:42:40 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
You'd have enormous numbers of cars on the road during rush hours, then a fraction of that number during alternate hours. That's where the need for parking becomes a legitimate question. Other questions that spring to mind:
What about need for occasional transport of material, stuff that would either over-stuff a sedan, or require a pickup truck? Need to buy an 8-foot 2x4 from Home Depot? Call Uber!
What about unscheduled needs to make an additional stop? How would that impact the tight scheduling to make this system function? Need a gallon of milk? Better have that scheduled early!
What about an unscheduled change of course that is dictated by the passenger? Will the system allow for that kind of deviation? How would that impact the scheduling system? Want to drive by the high school to see if the sprinklers are working on the football field? That will require a one-day notice with your Uber service.
What happens when a car breaks down? How is it cleared from the roadway? How quickly does that happen? How is the passenger re-scheduled? Is there a long delay? Uber tire loses 4 psi of pressure? Safety system shuts down vehicle. Passenger waits additional 90 minutes to get to work so that a back-up vehicle can finish the route, thereby avoiding the extreme danger of traveling on under-inflated tires.
As for paying for this, I assume it would ultimately become a function of the state and/or federal government. Passengers would be assessed a per mile fee. We would be promised it would be a net cost savings, but it wouldn't. It would cost more, and there would be no ownership of anything--no opportunity to recoup costs.

#georgeorwell


Are these really the issues you're raising as insurmountable?

In order:

1. Again, you don't need to park cars that aren't in use. Why can't they just stay on the roads? And again, the cars that do need to be stored create no issue. Because there are exponentially fewer of them to store than there are currently. I mean, we have garages now. And parking lots. You realize that, right? That's where you put them. The better question is what do you do with all of the unneeded parking lots and garages?

2. To solve the need for occasional transport of materials you. . .order a vehicle large enough to transport said materials. I, ummm, do that already. I'm honestly sort of stumped by the question. Do you really think that Google, Uber, Apple, Tesla, Ford, BMW, Audi and everybody else dumping billions of dollars into this haven't thought about transporting goods? Or to put it another way, do you not think that revenue from the shipping industry is something they're eying with this technology?

3. To solve the need for an additional stop you. . .tell the car you need to make an additional stop. Hit the "additional stop" button, input the address. Now all you need to worry about is whether or not your car can hold all of that milk. (see #2 for answer)

4. How much scheduling notice do you give Uber now? 1 day? Or none at all? What's different about the driverless arrangement. Do you think that Uber/Google/Lyft/Tesla aren't going to be able to adequately predict the demand in the market? Why?

5. Nothing you're raising about cars breaking down is any different than the current system we have in place when a car breaks down. All of the questions you're asking are just as relevant to manually operated vehicles as they are to autonomous ones. Your car breaking down sucks and causes issues for you, regardless of who is driving it.

6. Good point about the cost. Anytime you can proactively blame the government for price gouging a system being fully developed by private companies, and you clearly lack even a rudimentary knowledge of said system, you gotta do it, right?



Oh, sorry. I didn't agree with you. I bet that really chaps your tender ass.



What chaps my tender ass is when people argue against the mere idea of progress because they're terrified of change.



No. You're offended by people raising valid questions. No one is saying this is impossible or that it will "never happen." NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. HELLOOOO? Are you in there?

The question is, in what manner will something like this happen. Where? To what scale? How will it impact society? How will society bend to accept it?

Some of us believe the transition will be slower than others. That, apparently, gets your panties all bunched up and chaffing.


You're welcome to raise valid points any time. You haven't yet.

A sampling of actual valid points:

1. How do you replace the jobs that will be lost by the removal of truck drivers, taxi drivers, etc.

2. What happens to the insurance industry? Inevitably there will be job loss there as well, as individual insurance won't be necessary and large companies like Google, Lyft, Google, etc. will be handling transportation.

3. How do you train autonomous vehicles to be "ethical"? Say, for instance, a car has to swerve left or right. And on the right is a crowd of pedestrians and on the left is a Mack Truck. How do you train the autonomous vehicle to make the right decision in that instance?

But you're right, the real issue that needs addressing is that you might remember you forgot to buy milk. This conversation IS about how close this is to happening, how it will impact society, and how/when this will happen. Those were the points I was addressing when you piped in to say "no, it won't happen anytime soon, I sometimes need to make two stops."

Don't tie up your phone line, the McArthur Foundation should be calling with that grant any minute.


Last Edited: 9/14/2016 1:43:29 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
mid70sbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 343

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 7:41:55 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


Sorry, you're citing the the fact that people are imperfect operators that make stupid decisions that lead to deaths -- a whole lot of deaths, no less -- as a reason to continue letting people operate cars en masse?

Because theoretically we can probably get better at it if we do things we, as a species, have shown no inclination towards doing? You're willing to risk, and put other people at risk, of elderly drivers, texting drivers, drunk drivers, high drivers, straight up bad drivers, etc. when a much better alternative exists because "people should put their phones down while driving" and you don't want to wait 6 minutes for a car.

Cool.


If you think driverless cars will eliminate deaths on the roads you're living in a fantasy world. What about when a Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane approaches either the Gulf or the East Coast? Your supposedly adequate supply of vehicles will be overwhelmed and people would be in a state of panic with no transportation. And you speak of 30,000 traffic deaths a year? A hurricane can put millions at risk for injury or death. That's just one problem.

And I, and many others, will want to continue to drive as it is convenient. And no, I wouldn't want to wait 6 minutes for a ride. I've done enough work in both optimization and AI to know there are, and will be, limitations regardless of the approach.

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.

Last Edited: 9/13/2016 7:51:07 PM by mid70sbobcat

Back to Top
  
The Optimist
General User



Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: Akron (sleeper agent)
Post Count: 4,547

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 8:25:49 PM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.



No way.

I firmly believe that driverless cars WILL prove safer than humans and save A LOT of lives.

HOWEVER, I don't think that is the reason this happens. It is a nice fantasy world to believe saving lives would be enough, but ultimately the cash is what is going to drive this change.

Lets again shift this discussion back to college students. When I was at OU, I didn't have a car my first two years on campus. I did get a car that I basically used to drive to Walmart/Kroger my Jr/Sr yr for groceries. It wasn't necessary, but it was convenient. If the $ hadn't been available, I could have survived without it. Owning a car is not cheap. Beyond the price to buy the car itself, the maintenance and insurance isn't cheap. "Ride-sharing" makes sense from economic/fiscal standpoint. Why pay to own something you don't use all the time? The reason you own a car is so you have it WHEN you need it without issue. Uber/driverless cars are reliable enough that you have a car WHEN you need it.

Supply with driverless Uber raises to the point where you'd have enough cars floating around to meet demand. Yes, peak hours are a problem. How is that any different than right now? More ppl on the road now during rush hour than the rest of the day. Have those of you questioning this ever used Uber? There is "surge" pricing which causes you to pay a multiple during times of high demand. Still cheaper than paying for something sitting unused half the time...

I understand many folks are not comfortable with technology and fear this, but I'm amazed more people cannot understand why this will be huge. I'd imagine the mobile phone 20 years ago was similarly looked down on. This is happening.


I've seen crazier things happen.

Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 4,972

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 8:48:54 PM 
So changing the direction of the conversation, why does a student at OU need a car?
Back to Top
  
The Optimist
General User



Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: Akron (sleeper agent)
Post Count: 4,547

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 8:54:45 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
So changing the direction of the conversation, why does a student at OU need a car?


Outside of driving home on the weekend and driving to the store, the value of owning a car for your average college student in Athens is significantly lower than your average American.

Uber and driverless cars are going to roll into Athens in no time.


I've seen crazier things happen.

Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 4,972

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 8:55:05 PM 
And I forgot this. Why does the golf course have to pay parking services $2800 a year for the 12 spots in front of the clubhouse?
Back to Top
  
RSBobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 3,854

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/13/2016 10:13:46 PM 
If I can't PARK, I can't PARK man. If I'm hurt, I'm hurt. I mean simple as that. It ain't about that... I mean it's... It's not about that... At all. You know what I'm saying I mean... But it's...it's easy to, to talk about... It's easy to sum it up when you're just talking about PARKING. We're sitting in here, and I'm supposed to be the franchise player, and we in here talking about PARKING. I mean, listen, we're talking about PARKING, not a game, not a game, not a game, we talking about PARKING. Not a game. Not, not Not the game that I go out there and die for and play every game like it's my last. Not the game, but we're talking about PARKING, man. I mean, how silly is that? And we talking about PARKING. I know I supposed to be there. I know I'm supposed to lead by example... I know that... And I'm not.. I'm not shoving it aside, you know, like it don't mean anything. I know it's important, I do. I honestly do... But we're talking about PARKING man. What are we talking about? PARKING? We're talking about PARKING, man. [laughter from the media crowd] We're talking about PARKING. We're talking about PARKING. We ain't talking about the game. [more laughter] We're talking about PARKING, man. When you come to the arena, and you see me play, you see me play don't you? You've seen me give everything I've got, right? But we're talking about PARKING right now. We talking about PARKING...


RS Bobcat

Back to Top
  
Monroe Slavin
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Oxnard, CA
Post Count: 9,121

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 2:21:56 AM 
Generally a very excellent discussion here...even by those who have closed minds on.....other topics.


First, driverless cars are gonna happen.

Second, as the discussion shows, the brains behind this will think of many of the issues raised here and will by and large solve them. IF you were developing the system, you'd certainly spend millions of man hours on it--thereby thinking of all the issues raised here (and more) in a half hour discussion.

Jobs--yes, some traditional auto/transportation industry jobs will disappear (extinction) but the new industry will create new jobs. Just as always happens. (Old landline phone system operator jobs lost..replaced by cell phone industry, etc, etc).

One issue hinted at here: Cost shifting. Now, when/if you own a car and drive 100 miles a year or 20,000 miles a year, your costs are roughly the same. Same re cost of car, slight diffs re fuel, insurance, maintenance.

With a driverless, pay as you go system, costs will be much more closely aligned with usage.

Also, a system in which cars and their routes are automated should mean less pollution.

An offset: for safety or reasons of personal enjoyment, personal (non-automated) driving and auto ownership will probably still continue to exist in a reasonable size.






Where's the band?!
WHERE"S THE BAND?!


DesignspiritUSA.com
The Pets On The Go Collection of pet gear travel bags
The Holiday Tote Bigg Bagg Collection--over-sized, reversible, extra pockets; now love carrying packages as much as you love shopping!

Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 1,975

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 6:43:33 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
rpbobcat wrote:
I'm one of the "old guys" who enjoys driving and the freedom it provides.

Also nothing beats the rush a 400hp Acura gives going down the road.Without exceeding the speed limit of course.

One thing driverless vehicles will affect are "spur of the moment" trips,quick trips to a grocery store, etc.

All I can say, they can stop me from driving when they pry the steering wheel from my cold dead hand !


I can name something that beats the rush a 400hp Acura gives you going down the road:

30,000 fewer traffic deaths per anum.


Geez,no sense of humor here.

Getting back on topic.
There's an interesting Op-Ed piece in today's (9/14) The Record about driverless vehciles (sorry couldn't get it link).

Anyway it was written by Whitt Flora who it says used to write for the Columbus Dispatch.

The article goes into the challenges that have to be addressed to have widespread use of drvierless vehicles.

As far the location of "the button" for shutting down a drvierless system.

I don't know where that one would be.But, as I said before ,the Federal Government has shut down the entire GPS system that Land Surveyors use.That was done with no notice and no way get information for how long they were keeping it shut down.




Last Edited: 9/14/2016 6:57:06 AM by rpbobcat

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 1,682

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 8:16:45 AM 
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up. Or, imagine you're watching your daughter play soccer. Oops! the game goes into overtime. All parents will need to turn their attention to their phones and make sure Uber is aware of the delay. In a few minutes, the taxi-stand in front of Soddy Daisy High School will be unprecedented!

What do you do if you need to tow your boat or camper or motorcycle or paper mache bust of Che Guevara? You call for the Super Uber Mover!

What if you have an oversize, Donald Trump-ish, obnoxious triple-axle cigarette boat? You call for the Super Duper Uber Mover!

Any of those vehicles are pre-programmed to back your boat into the water so you can enjoy your day on the river!
Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,608

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 8:43:44 AM 
I assume driverless vehicles will eventually put 6 million truck/bus/cab drivers out of work.

That's roughly 3% of tax payers in the US.

That alone is reason to ban them.

Before you get upset about banning them, you might be next. AI and robots are coming....

BEWARE !

(But seriously, 6 million jobs lost.... Why again?)




Last Edited: 9/14/2016 8:45:41 AM by Ohio69


Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 1,975

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 9:51:43 AM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up.


Even today,this is a big problem with existing mass transit.
When the new Metlife Stadium was built they provided a rail link.

It uses a 2 track "out and back " layout.(1 train on each track)

N.J.Transit encourages people to get to events by train.

Good idea for "coming", when arrival times are staggered.
Not so great when events like the Super Bowl or concerts let out and most people leave at the same time.

After the Super Bowl people waited for several hours to get on trains.

The lines for driverless Ubers,in the same situation,especially in areas with no mass transit would make several hours look like nothing.




Back to Top
  
The Optimist
General User



Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: Akron (sleeper agent)
Post Count: 4,547

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 10:58:32 AM 
rpbobcat wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up.


Even today,this is a big problem with existing mass transit.
When the new Metlife Stadium was built they provided a rail link.



Even today, this is a big problem period. Forget mass transit, try leaving any heavily attended event and the traffic sucks.

I don't understand what is so hard to grasp here... Yes, peak hours will require more driverless cars, just like how you need more cars on road during peak hours now.

More driverless cars still cheaper than more driver cars...


I've seen crazier things happen.

Back to Top
  
Andrew Ruck
General User



Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 2,817

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 11:03:51 AM 
Some of the concerns brought up are mind-boggling and a result of us simply not able to wrap our minds around how this would look. Many of the "problems" are just regurgitated problems of the current system that would actually be improved upon.

I think people will still be able to own there own vehicles if they so choose. I think it will end up like the land phone lines...some people keep them, many people get rid of them and they slowly fade away until the younger generation finds them laughably pointless.

Massive industries have been ripped to shreds by innovations for years, it happens and people are repurposed and life goes on. Ignoring technology that would increase the quality of life and overall efficiency just because some people would lose their jobs is ludicrous. And some of the job loss is recovered by job creation of a new industry. And the cost and time savings for many business and individuals can result in further investment and development which leads to job growth. The implementation would be slow and the economy would shoulder the job loss fine. It isn't like you snap your fingers and 3% of Americans lose their job.

Hauling boats, trailers, etc would be simple. Half of what you sarcastically said could absolutely be true. The idea that I can use a pickup truck with ease instead of trying to borrow one from a bunch of people is exciting to me. Removing these barriers will only help people and stimulate the economy in the long run.

Last Edited: 9/14/2016 11:04:41 AM by Andrew Ruck


Andrew Ruck

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 1,682

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 11:43:41 AM 
Andrew Ruck wrote:


Hauling boats, trailers, etc would be simple.


So how does it work?

Back to Top
  
The Optimist
General User



Member Since: 3/16/2007
Location: Akron (sleeper agent)
Post Count: 4,547

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 12:52:29 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Andrew Ruck wrote:


Hauling boats, trailers, etc would be simple.


So how does it work?



I'm by no means an expert in user interface, but I'd imagine there will be a little boat/trailer icon in the app that you could toggle ON if you have something to haul. Flipping that "switch" would ensure your Uber is beefy enough to tow your load. For those unfamiliar, they already offer different options between a car, sedan and SUV depending on size of party. Not hard to envision how they may expand this... In the early days, I'd imagine they might have you register your trailer to ensure compatibility, but I'd think within a few years most new trailers being sold might be marketed as compatible with Uber at time of purchase. Heck, at that time I'd imagine they would release some automatic "coupling" device to make the hookup easy.

Are you people seriously this inept with technology?


I've seen crazier things happen.

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 1,682

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 1:24:52 PM 
The Optimist wrote:

Are you people seriously this inept with technology?


Oh, please. Get over yourself. Are you seriously this inept with pulling a trailer. Are you aware of different ball sizes (1 7/8", 2", 2 5/16")? Are you aware of different trailer electrical connections (4-prong, 5-prong, 7-prong)? Are you aware of different trailer brake mechanics?

Are you aware of the different size vehicle it takes to pull these different kinds of loads? Are you aware that loading a trailer with, say, a lawn mower, first requires the trailer to be hitched to the vehicle?

Spare me your brilliance. Shed light on us little people.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 861

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 1:35:27 PM 
Ohio69 wrote:
I assume driverless vehicles will eventually put 6 million truck/bus/cab drivers out of work.

That's roughly 3% of tax payers in the US.

That alone is reason to ban them.

Before you get upset about banning them, you might be next. AI and robots are coming....

BEWARE !

(But seriously, 6 million jobs lost.... Why again?)



It's not quite as simple as this, though I agree that the jobs question is certainly an important one to consider.

First, there have been, throughout history, hundreds of examples of technological innovations that created less need for (or eliminated altogether) certain jobs. They also tend to create a lot of jobs -- and the jobs they create are almost always better paying. Look at what Uber's currently doing for Pittsburgh, for instance.

And while the jobs are an important consideration, it seems that you're asking "why again" like there's no logical reason.

Think about the impact transportation and shipping has on the cost of goods and services. Think about the environmental impact of the trucking and shipping industries. Think about the death toll caused by automobile accidents. Every indication is that automation and artificial intelligence will drastically reduce all of those things.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 861

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 1:42:40 PM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


Sorry, you're citing the the fact that people are imperfect operators that make stupid decisions that lead to deaths -- a whole lot of deaths, no less -- as a reason to continue letting people operate cars en masse?

Because theoretically we can probably get better at it if we do things we, as a species, have shown no inclination towards doing? You're willing to risk, and put other people at risk, of elderly drivers, texting drivers, drunk drivers, high drivers, straight up bad drivers, etc. when a much better alternative exists because "people should put their phones down while driving" and you don't want to wait 6 minutes for a car.

Cool.


If you think driverless cars will eliminate deaths on the roads you're living in a fantasy world. What about when a Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane approaches either the Gulf or the East Coast? Your supposedly adequate supply of vehicles will be overwhelmed and people would be in a state of panic with no transportation. And you speak of 30,000 traffic deaths a year? A hurricane can put millions at risk for injury or death. That's just one problem.

And I, and many others, will want to continue to drive as it is convenient. And no, I wouldn't want to wait 6 minutes for a ride. I've done enough work in both optimization and AI to know there are, and will be, limitations regardless of the approach.

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.



So driverless cars won't be as safe as regular cars because of hurricanes? You don't think that contingency plans will be created around transportation in the event of natural disasters? That city and state and federal governments will completely shirk their responsibilities around keeping their citizens safe? What about the implementation of autonomous vehicles makes you assume that?

Somebody already addressed the cost, so I won't bother. But you're really grasping at straws here.

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 861

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 1:46:55 PM 
The Optimist wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.



No way.

I firmly believe that driverless cars WILL prove safer than humans and save A LOT of lives.

HOWEVER, I don't think that is the reason this happens. It is a nice fantasy world to believe saving lives would be enough, but ultimately the cash is what is going to drive this change.

Lets again shift this discussion back to college students. When I was at OU, I didn't have a car my first two years on campus. I did get a car that I basically used to drive to Walmart/Kroger my Jr/Sr yr for groceries. It wasn't necessary, but it was convenient. If the $ hadn't been available, I could have survived without it. Owning a car is not cheap. Beyond the price to buy the car itself, the maintenance and insurance isn't cheap. "Ride-sharing" makes sense from economic/fiscal standpoint. Why pay to own something you don't use all the time? The reason you own a car is so you have it WHEN you need it without issue. Uber/driverless cars are reliable enough that you have a car WHEN you need it.

Supply with driverless Uber raises to the point where you'd have enough cars floating around to meet demand. Yes, peak hours are a problem. How is that any different than right now? More ppl on the road now during rush hour than the rest of the day. Have those of you questioning this ever used Uber? There is "surge" pricing which causes you to pay a multiple during times of high demand. Still cheaper than paying for something sitting unused half the time...

I understand many folks are not comfortable with technology and fear this, but I'm amazed more people cannot understand why this will be huge. I'd imagine the mobile phone 20 years ago was similarly looked down on. This is happening.


Also important to note that autonomous vehicles will provide all sorts of ancillary cost savings as well. The cost of goods will decline substantially when a truck driver isn't paid to drive it for 25 hours.



Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,351

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 2:07:33 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up. Or, imagine you're watching your daughter play soccer. Oops! the game goes into overtime. All parents will need to turn their attention to their phones and make sure Uber is aware of the delay. In a few minutes, the taxi-stand in front of Soddy Daisy High School will be unprecedented!

What do you do if you need to tow your boat or camper or motorcycle or paper mache bust of Che Guevara? You call for the Super Uber Mover!

What if you have an oversize, Donald Trump-ish, obnoxious triple-axle cigarette boat? You call for the Super Duper Uber Mover!

Any of those vehicles are pre-programmed to back your boat into the water so you can enjoy your day on the river!


Geez, Rob, think it thru. By the time driverless cars are in vogue, we'll have federal legislation limiting crowds at college football games to no more than the total of driverless cars within a 30-mile radius of the stadium. See?



Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 861

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 2:16:06 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up. Or, imagine you're watching your daughter play soccer. Oops! the game goes into overtime. All parents will need to turn their attention to their phones and make sure Uber is aware of the delay. In a few minutes, the taxi-stand in front of Soddy Daisy High School will be unprecedented!

What do you do if you need to tow your boat or camper or motorcycle or paper mache bust of Che Guevara? You call for the Super Uber Mover!

What if you have an oversize, Donald Trump-ish, obnoxious triple-axle cigarette boat? You call for the Super Duper Uber Mover!

Any of those vehicles are pre-programmed to back your boat into the water so you can enjoy your day on the river!


Geez, Rob, think it thru. By the time driverless cars are in vogue, we'll have federal legislation limiting crowds at college football games to no more than the total of driverless cars within a 30-mile radius of the stadium. See?


It's hilarious to me how many conservatives in this thread are lining up against private enterprise. Hilarious, but not surprising.



Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 1,682

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 3:00:17 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
Imagine a world where, after 100,000 fans exit Neyland stadium, they wait in line for their Uber pick up. Or, imagine you're watching your daughter play soccer. Oops! the game goes into overtime. All parents will need to turn their attention to their phones and make sure Uber is aware of the delay. In a few minutes, the taxi-stand in front of Soddy Daisy High School will be unprecedented!

What do you do if you need to tow your boat or camper or motorcycle or paper mache bust of Che Guevara? You call for the Super Uber Mover!

What if you have an oversize, Donald Trump-ish, obnoxious triple-axle cigarette boat? You call for the Super Duper Uber Mover!

Any of those vehicles are pre-programmed to back your boat into the water so you can enjoy your day on the river!


Geez, Rob, think it thru. By the time driverless cars are in vogue, we'll have federal legislation limiting crowds at college football games to no more than the total of driverless cars within a 30-mile radius of the stadium. See?


LOL. Yes, I do see. If this happens in the next year or two, I better get some stuff sold. Might also need to buy a flat on Market Square in Knoxville.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 1,682

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 3:31:57 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
So changing the direction of the conversation, why does a student at OU need a car?


So he can get back to Tennessee!
Back to Top
  
mid70sbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 343

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Vedder shifts his fire onto parking services
   Posted: 9/14/2016 3:37:34 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:


If you think driverless cars will eliminate deaths on the roads you're living in a fantasy world. What about when a Category 3, 4 or 5 hurricane approaches either the Gulf or the East Coast? Your supposedly adequate supply of vehicles will be overwhelmed and people would be in a state of panic with no transportation. And you speak of 30,000 traffic deaths a year? A hurricane can put millions at risk for injury or death. That's just one problem.

And I, and many others, will want to continue to drive as it is convenient. And no, I wouldn't want to wait 6 minutes for a ride. I've done enough work in both optimization and AI to know there are, and will be, limitations regardless of the approach.

Last, owning a car may be a lot more affordable than being driven around by a driverless car.



So driverless cars won't be as safe as regular cars because of hurricanes? You don't think that contingency plans will be created around transportation in the event of natural disasters? That city and state and federal governments will completely shirk their responsibilities around keeping their citizens safe? What about the implementation of autonomous vehicles makes you assume that?

Somebody already addressed the cost, so I won't bother. But you're really grasping at straws here.



Wow! You don't get it. It's NOT about safety it's about supply and demand. Let's take Hurricane Hugo as an example in 1989. It was heading towards Hilton Head Island. So if we had driverless cars we then stockpile more in that area. But then WHOOPS ... it drifts a bit and hammers Charleston and nearby areas further up the coast.

Second, when they decide to do a mandatory evacuation that means NOW! People can't say "my driverless car won't be here for 2 days". Well, they could although they may become a statistic in that time.

No, cost was not addressed. Someone made some assumptions. Not all people drive $50K SUV's. And cars, driverless or otherwise, have operating costs. Take the hurricane example. Who pays for the vehicles to be sent to another place possibly hundreds of miles away? So no, owning would not be necessarily more expensive. Maybe for people who sit at home and travel a limited amount but not for those who are active, on the go and who CHOOSE to buy a cost (and fuel) efficient car.

I'll repeat ... my career was in Optimization and AI. I worked on some of the largest problems around. But you can have the last word ... driverless cars can not, and will not, be able to address all of the problems and constraints that exist. Not now and not in 20 years.



Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  51 - 75  of 289 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12    Next >
View Other 'General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



Copyright ©2019 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties