Before They Can Drive a Taxi, London's Cabbies Have To Commit the City To Memory in a Rigorous Test Called the Knowledge (cnet.com)

In their fight against Uber, London's taxi drivers claim a distinct advantage: They must forgo GPS and navigate the huge city entirely from memory. CNET: Put in place in 1865, the Knowledge exam requires cabbies to navigate between any two points in central London without following a map or GPS. It can take four years to learn the information and pass a series of stringent oral tests. It's a grueling process unmatched by any training taxi drivers have to face anywhere else, and it's the most arduous thing Pearson's [Editor's note: a driver; used as anecdote in the story] ever done. "My uncle was a cab driver and he encouraged me to give it a go," he said. "But I still didn't realize how hard it would be."

Despite the difficulty of mastering it, cabbies proudly defend the Knowledge as a critical part of their job, something technology can't replace. They say it sets them apart from ride-hailing services like Uber, whose drivers don't have to learn the Knowledge, and they believe it allows them to deliver a superior level of service. But ever since mapping apps arrived on phones and GPS-wielding Uber drivers exploded into London in 2012, the Knowledge has faced a volatile future. Should cabbies have to spend years of their life memorizing every inch of London when they can simply punch in a destination on a screen and be guided? Absolutely, say the drivers I spoke with.

Comments

Whoops

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see here, just take a left here, then right over there, oh wait! I forgot that bridge fell down a long time ago! Where is my GPS when I needed it.

Re:Whoops

[plopez]

I've done a fair amount of field work. GPS has always failed my when I needed it the most. Either non-existent routes, or unable to calibrate due too poor hits from satellites. Any place where the signal is blocked. This is why I always have a map back up and when in the field a compass as well.

how do we know this knowledge....

[jm007]

...will be used for good?

only useful for helping a customer? it would never be used to stretch a ride out to bump up the fare a bit, no?

just having the knowledge guarantees nothing.... a tool can cut both ways

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Barsteward]

there have been plenty of reports of sat nav taxis taking customers on a merry dance to get to the destination.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Taxi drivers are regulated in London, they invest a great deal of time and money in gaining The Knowledge so they can do the job, and part of that is being required to identify efficient routes. If an inspector takes a ride and the cabbie tries what you're suggesting then their career is in real danger. There aren't many people that stupid in the industry.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[plopez]

Or bettter yet, used to track marketing data. Then sold. How many people would you like to know you like strip clubs, retail MJ, or take a lot of trips to the liquor store? It could have job and insurance implication.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[rickb928]

Many a fare knows the way as well as the cabbie. Trying to stretch a ride will get you some outrage.

Now, lots of fares at Heathrow can be duped. That is why many cities legislate airport rides and regulate fees.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[CastrTroy]

But wouldn't it make more sense for the cab driver to use a computer to find the best route? The computer can know much more about the current traffic conditions and provide a much better route. The cab driver has to be smart enough to know when the computer is making a really bad error, but for the most part, the computer will probably come up with a really good result. You might end up with cab drivers who are better at being drivers or who are more courteous to the public rather than picking only people who can memorize a map of the city.

It's like requiring that programmers do all their coding in assembly, because in a few edge cases they can get a better result, while ignoring all the errors they will make in the majority of cases.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

But wouldn't it make more sense for the cab driver to use a computer to find the best route?

If a computer existed that was any good at doing that, then yes. But right now, they aren't even close. You are placing way too much faith in their ability to know current traffic conditions and adapt optimally to them.

This is a theory-vs-practice issue. In theory, all of these objections could be resolved. There's no inherent technical limitation that says you couldn't do the sort of thing I assume you're imagining here. But in practice, most in-car navigation systems are pretty awful in a city like London. In many cases, even if you don't know the back roads and detours, you really are better off just planning a sensible route in advance and sticking to it unless something obviously catastrophic has happened. And if you do know the roads the way a London cabbie does, you can adapt on the fly way better than any current navigation systems anyway.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[angel'o'sphere]

Standard GPS route finders don't even know about cap drivers shourt cuts, e.g. through pedestrian areas.
The way from my pub to my home is a 5 minutrs drive ...
I saw now close to ten different routes.
The slowest are the guys who need to type in the destination address into their 'navi'. Asking three times about the correct spelling ... we already would have been half way.
Mean while I don't give my address anymore but a drop off location 20 yards away.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Opportunist]

You don't know London, I get it. You don't care about the traffic conditions right now. You care about the traffic conditions in 5 minutes. And believe me, there can be a HUGE difference between those two things.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking as a non-driving Londoner who takes a fair few black cabs - most of them do have a sat-nav, but don't rely on it for navigation - it's generally used only for those realtime traffic updates (although those are still not usually speedy enough). They'll already know the route they're taking so it'll be given a quick spot check if there are any accidents.

Using satnav for navigation whilst driving in central london is an exercise in frustration if you're unfamiliar with the quirks. Narrow streets and tall buildings mean that the signal is frequently lost or will place you on the next street over, or under. You can always spot the uber drivers and other inexperienced minicab drivers who rely entirely on sat nav because they'll be driving a toyota prius and will have just tried to pull a U-turn, or took a left into a one-way street because they just missed their turning waiting for the sat nav to catch up and figured the next one would be fine. Not to say it can't be done, but it requires skill that all too many minicab drivers don't possess (too many people blindly do whatever the sat nav tells them even if it's obviously wrong).

There's a huge amount of local and time-of-day information that cabbies commit to daily memory as well; they'll have a mental map of which roads are closed or obstructed for roadworks, the time(s) at which Random Street is likely to be jammed solid, any big events that might be happening. Local radio and greasy spoons (where they talk to other cabbies) are full of this sort of information. Frequently cabbies will say "OK if I go via $route?" so as to tell you that a) they think the most direct route will be slower and b) to let you know they're thinking of taking an apparent diversion.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[tlhIngan]

But wouldn't it make more sense for the cab driver to use a computer to find the best route? The computer can know much more about the current traffic conditions and provide a much better route. The cab driver has to be smart enough to know when the computer is making a really bad error, but for the most part, the computer will probably come up with a really good result. You might end up with cab drivers who are better at being drivers or who are more courteous to the public rather than picking only people who can memorize a map of the city.

It's like requiring that programmers do all their coding in assembly, because in a few edge cases they can get a better result, while ignoring all the errors they will make in the majority of cases.

And the computer can make a goof. Worse yet, if you don't know, you can blindly trust the computer and have no clue when it fails. And it fails often, given the number of people who end up in the ocean or on some strange forest road because they were blindly following their GPS box and not thinking. You know, things like "why is it asking me to go off the end of this pier?" or "if I turn here, there's that body of water?" or even "This road looks much too small for my vehicle, or why am I on an strange unpaved road and why am I in a forest..?".

And yes, it has killed people

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

short cuts, e.g. through pedestrian areas.

So you're saying cabs are faster because they routinely break the law?

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

I can routinely beat my gps because I know how fast I can go, how long lights take, etc which my GPS never seems to be able to do. Heck my GPS can't even give me the most accurate ETA when I follow it perfectly.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[drinkypoo]

You don't know London, I get it. You don't care about the traffic conditions right now. You care about the traffic conditions in 5 minutes. And believe me, there can be a HUGE difference between those two things.

The computer should be better at that than a human, too.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[fluffernutter]

But traffic is like Go!

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Joey Vegetables]

Any place and time with nontrivial traffic, the most direct reasonable route, and the fastest reasonable route, tend to differ. I tend to know both (without GPS) for anyplace within about 25 miles of me. If I were a cabbie (or Uber driver) I'd let my fare know and let him or her choose.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, in NYC taxis often try to take me via the dead-congested Times Sq, even when there is an obviously much faster alternative. They are just hoping that I am a tourist. The worst downside for them is being screamed at.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[serviscope_minor]

The computer should be better at that than a human, too.

And we should all have free candy.

In both cases, however, "should" does not equate to "is".

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[kiminator]

In a busy city like London, it's typically pretty quick and easy to get a new fare, and short fares pay more per mile than long fares. So there isn't really any incentive to shortchange riders like this.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

It shouldn't be up to the entrenched interests and the politicians who support them to make this decision for you.

Take Uber if you want, or an established taxi service.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[jrumney]

London is home to a lot of foreigners too, so trying to dupe people at Heathrow isn't really a great idea for cab drivers. The M4 will almost always be the quickest route into the central city due to the dedicated bus and taxi lane, so there isn't much opportunity for straying onto non optimal routes, and anyone not going to the city centre is more likely to be a local that will catch you out. Whenever I've thought the taxi driver was taking me for a ride in London, a quick check of the map later showed that their route was actually more direct than the obvious main road route.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[serviscope_minor]

It shouldn't be up to the entrenched interests and the politicians who support them to make this decision for you.

Why shouldn't it be up to politicians? Uber has a profit incentive, not a London-should-work-well incentive.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Cederic]

No, there are frequently exemptions for licenced taxis.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that is not how it has worked out for me, in practice, in multiple cities. I've done a lot of long term travel for work, and I'm the type of person that puts the map away after a couple days. I didn't realize how many times I was unnecessarily burned by traffic until a coworker started looking up routes before going, even though I brushed off his offer to check on the phone. The phone map was well aware of the traffic, in both medium and large cities. The fact I know the alternate route didn't help much, as you save a lot more time avoiding the traffic instead of trying to get out of it once you see it in front of you.

Quite frequently, not using a phone doubled travel time (a lot of 20-30 minute trips that became hour long times due to traffic and accidents).

In a lot of areas, it is not hard for people to learn the routes, including many alternatives. Keeping up to date on irregular traffic conditions, especially when there are problems on the main route and some of the alternatives, is not something humans can easily do but phones easily can.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Computershack]

But wouldn't it make more sense for the cab driver to use a computer to find the best route? The computer can know much more about the current traffic conditions and provide a much better route.

Taxis are allowed to go down streets blocked to all traffic other than buses and use bus lanes that normal road users can't in much of the UK. Unless you had navigation software which took this into account its of little use in the main.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

And if you are drunk or obviously not familiar with London, how easy is it for them to take advantage despite the threat of incredibly rare inspectors, who aren't experts in subterfuge?
It really does happen. And quite a lot.

Black Cabs are legendary and mythical in equal measure.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Been in London since 1985. Have taken hundreds (thousands?) of Black cab journeys all over London for work. Never been ripped off once.

The black cabs are regulated as a monopoly. It is not worth their while to rip you off.

I also note that Uber regularly has issues with rip off routes.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I write software for traffic incidents specifically for London. I also live and work and drive and cycle in London. I have never yet found any computer sat nav as good as a black cab driver. They know the routes, they know the short cuts and they know the tricks, such as in a morning its often quicker to go south of the river along Vauxhall and then cross the river again northbound rather than trying to navigate Embankment.

The cabbies know these routes and the ways they can get around, they know the flow and ebb of the traffic that is London and adapt to it.

Since I know London reasonably well for a Londoner, I often try and pit myself against the cab driver if I take a black cab, to see if their routes match mine. Sometimes they go slightly off-piste, I ask them and they normally have a good reason, road works, a school is there and at that time of the day, there's loads of parents picking kids up etc etc. Sat navs know nothing of this sort of stuff.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

We're trying to do this, we have a database of every traffic incident in London for the last three years and are trying to predict issues and how long they take to clear. Its difficult as every incident is unique. We can now predict how long incidents take to clear at a specific location, the Blackwall Tunnel, with reasonable accuracy (to a sigma or two).

However there are so many factors to take into account,
e.g.
On a high sprint tide (thats when the moon is full) the Thames is so high that sometimes the Woolwich ferry cannot run as the boats can't dock. This happens occasionally. If this happens AND it's raining, then there are significantly more accidents at the Blackwall Tunnel northbound, as traffic is diverted from the ferry to the Tunnel, the Blackwall Tunnel goes from three lanes to two lanes at the entrance of the tunnel, drivers get frustrated at the queues and try to nip into a gap, the roads are wet, they get it wrong and there's an accident. Each accident takes longer to clear in the wet weather than the dry weather. The queues go all the way back to the Woolwich flyover, a key intersection and that blogs traffic going to and from Greenwich. This in turn can block traffic going down the A2.

Most people haven't a clue about the roads in London, but they are a highly sensitive graph that the slightest issue causes ripples to extend for miles around.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[drinkypoo]

Most people haven't a clue about the roads in London, but they are a highly sensitive graph that the slightest issue causes ripples to extend for miles around.

I haven't been there, but I have a clue because a) I read and b) I watch TV. I know that only a portion of the streets in London make any sense at all, pretty much just the parts of the city that burned down in the great fire. I know that London is suffering from crippling traffic, and that once that happens, it becomes an incredibly chaotic system because of the baroque road patterns. It seems to me like what is needed is an actual understanding of these traffic patterns.

How would you get that, in a perfect system in which everyone was actually trying to help everyone else? From the cabbies. Since they have The Knowledge, they are the ideal people to train your system. Unfortunately, they won't want to participate in the demise of their own profession, so technology has to stagnate.

How do you actually get that? No idea, except a whole lot of time spent studying the system, which I presume is what you're doing now

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

The Machine Knows!!!

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, most politicians aren't working on a London-should-work-well incentive either (or insert any other jurisdiction)

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[hawk]

Mapquesrt has never tried to send me more than 1,700 miles out of my way on a cross-town trip. (asked for directions in San Jose, and they ended in Nebraska with "Enter United States".

Anyway, the merry way is sometimes better--right now in Las Vegas, in a rare round of regulating for passengers rather than the industry, the board is wrestling with modifications that would allow parallel routes to deal with congestion on the Strip, which causes huge tolls for waiting in traffic.

hawk

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

Most? Hard to say. A massive proportion? Probably. Politics in Britain isn't nearly as corrupt as it is in the US.

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[Anonymous Coward]

I know that only a portion of the streets in London make any sense at all, pretty much just the parts of the city that burned down in the great fire.

This is incorrect - after the Great Fire many plans were put in place to reorganise the City, but land owners relented and everything was rebuilt along exactly the same boundaries as before.

The City of London, compared to the whole of the region we consider to be London today, is a small area defined by the original City Wall; Ludgate in the west, Moorgate in the north and Aldgate in the east, bounded by the Thames to the south. These names and others reflect them being gates through the original City Wall. It was the bulk of this area (and just west along Fleet Street) that burnt down during the Great Fire.

You can see a map before the Great Fire here - compared to a modern map you'll find remarkably little change, the same roads are still present today (here's a map from 1700). The rest of the city grew up around this area after the Great Fire, but the core remained unchanged.

It would be interesting to compare the City of London to the rapidly growing founding US colonies, like say Boston or Plymouth MA around the same time - anyone have a map?

Re:how do we know this knowledge....

[RockDoctor]

But traffic is like Go!

What is your kyu rating? I just bet it's higher than mine.

Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[DogDude]

Driving while looking at a GPS is clearly more dangerous than driving without looking at a screen of some kind. I prefer to take taxis because they tend to know where they're going more than the fake-taxi people (Uber, Lyft).

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Nemyst]

That's why you have vocal instructions, a not recent at all innovation that allows you to keep your eyes on the road while still following GPS directions.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

Driving while looking at a GPS is clearly more dangerous than driving without looking at a screen of some kind. I prefer to take taxis because they tend to know where they're going more than the fake-taxi people (Uber, Lyft).

Distracted driving is dangerous, which is why the ultimate answer to all of this I'm-better-than-you bullshit is to replace the error-prone distracted meatsack sitting behind the wheel. Autonomous solutions will make these arguments look as outdated as an engineer arguing a sliderule over a calculator.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Anyone who's tried to navigate central London using a SatNav's audible instructions knows all too well that the instructions are frequently too early, too late, or just plain confused by unusual road layouts, resulting in ambiguous or misleading spoken instructions. I have reached a point on several occasions where I have completely turned off a navigation system in London because it was not only unhelpful but actively dangerous.

I am now firmly of the view that any in-car navigation devices with sound should be required by law to feature an immediately accessible, one-touch, instant-silence button. Better yet, they should be regulated, and if they don't pass basic tests of reliability and timeliness while following randomly chosen routes so they aren't distracting and dangerous, they should be banned from sale or use, with the same penalties as driving while on the phone. Many of these systems are overpriced junk anyway, and it's about time someone called them on it given the safety implications.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Autonomous solutions will make these arguments look as outdated as an engineer arguing a sliderule over a calculator.

Eventually, yes, but despite the hype, we are clearly still a long way from that level of technology today.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, try that with Waze and you'll miss all your turns.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[LynnwoodRooster]

Yes, automated, so those on motorcycles (or bicycles) get run over from the rear by those autonomous vehicles...

Re: Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

You've obviously never seen Chinese bank managers watching over a */GROUP/* of bank tellers, all using an abacus, and catching small errors any one of the tellers make- sometimes even catching simultaneous errors by different tellers.

Old tech isn't automatically bad tech, even if newer tech is "better."

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell me, how do you manage to check your mirrors while driving?

If you can safely check your mirrors while driving, you can also safely check the screen of your satnav. If you can't check your mirrors without risking an accident, then you fucking well shouldn't be driving.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

It's usually not the directions or how to get there that is the problem. It's usually the location of some small place, or the name of a side street you only would go once in a lifetime. Once you know the main route the rest is easy.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Cederic]

Hmm. Very different scenarios.

In my mirrors I'm focused on objects. Does one exist, and if so, what is its trajectory.

I don't try and read words, I don't have to count junctions, I don't have to differentiate between left or right, I don't have to actually focus.

So being able to safely check your mirrors has fuck all to do with whether you could check the screen of your satnav.

If you don't understand that..

then you fucking well shouldn't be driving.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, my first (of only 2) Uber ride was with a driver who missed 2 or 3 of the turns that the GPS told him to take. I had to REMIND HIM of one of them.

Re:Driving with a GPS is dangerous

[hawk]

More satisfying than a button would be inertial sensors allowing you to slap it silly . . . :)

hawk

Autonomous cars can't come soon enough

[Anonymous Coward]

It'll get rid of bullshit like this and taxi monopolies.

Autonomous Vehicles

[forkfail]

Autonomous vehicles will have no problem passing the Knowledge.

This problem will solve itself within a decade.

Re:Autonomous Vehicles

[Dread_ed]

Once a good portion of the vehicles on the road are networked and can share real time traffic data between them, then yes, this problem will solve itself.

This is also predicated on proper routing algorithms. In addition, I see a system that is ripe for inequity and abuse. Imagine "lower value" riders being diverted to slower routes to ensure "higher value" riders receive the quickest routing. "Traffic free" routes will be higher priced, etc. Not in Europe, most likely, but certainly in the US.

Re:Autonomous Vehicles

[Anonymous Coward]

Based on what exactly?

This is utter bollocks.

Re:Autonomous Vehicles

[hawk]

There are already private toll roads in some states which price by congestion and advertise real-time estimates of time savings.

hawk

Proof that they take their job seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

Or at least they did at one point. That's perhaps the biggest advantage from a customer's POV. BTW this is the same reason why employers look at the GPAs of new college grads.

Knowing the roads are marginally useful

[OricAtmos48K]

When there is a traffic jam and navigation programs stop being useful when the traffic feedback they receive from sensors start to be garbage, but that is it

Re:Knowing the roads are marginally useful

[Anonymous Coward]

Navs can be particularly useful in a traffic jam, since they can see a global view of routes to your destination that a driver can't see in front of them.

Firefighters do too

[Snotnose]

My son is a Fireman and 10 years ago decided he wanted to drive the truck. He had to be able to drive to any address in the city without using a map or navigation app. He spent a lot of time staring at the big map mounted on the wall.

Re:Firefighters do too

[fuzzywig]

Wannabe cabbies spend a lot of time (years in some cases), driving around London on a scooter/moped with a map on their knees learning the city.

There's actually detectable changes in the brain of cabbies who've trained for The Knowledge.

Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage. A human navigator can't see ahead for optimizing against current traffic patterns as can GPS. Plus, imagine all the other things they could have done with their time and effort besides memorizing obsolete information. No wonder this stupid crony industry is going bankrupt.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[plopez]

"A human navigator can't see ahead for optimizing against current traffic patterns as can GPS"

Really now? Anyone I have ever met knows things like, "If I don't leave in 15 minutes the 340 is going to be crowded, but I could take the 225. The 225 is longer but would end up being faster". And " since it is the holidays and there is a game that lets out soon, I'll take the 720, use high street, go through Clear Water subdivision, get on the 225 and miss the surge".

If a person is familiar with an ares, human usually wins.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage.

And yet, I've seen many reports/documentaries/reviews over the years that have objectively compared SatNavs with London cabbies, and the cabbies always win, sometimes by a comically wide margin.

Having tried to navigate central London using a top-of-the-range SatNav, including all the whizzy new real-time this and traffic report that, this result does not surprise me in the slightest. The route-planning algorithms aren't even close to the same standard as a proper London cabbie, and their real-time feeds are neither accurate enough nor fast enough to know when to stick with the main route and when to divert along the back streets.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Passenger gets into car: "I need to get to that hotel that's across the street from the hat store with the big red balls in front of the door."

Uber driver: search Google for 10 minutes trying to find that description, another 10 minutes trying to figure out his navigation app and another 5 trying to get his service app to confirm he's got the right passenger on board that his app says. Then they finally get going.

Cab driver: Oh yeah, that's McBannister's down on the South end. Here you go, mate. That'll be 3 quid.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Passenger gets into car...that'll be three quid.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[rickb928]

I know that after 3pm every 5 minutes I delay is another minute spent in traffic on the 101 Pima. After 4, it's a minute delay for every minute I waste getting out of work.

What I cannot know without real-time traffic data is that an accident has blocked it anywhere between Cactus and Thomas, or between the 202 and the 60. Those become huge delays. The radio traffic reports on the 10s give me stale info, usually only reporting a half hour after the accident is reported, and for two hours after it is cleared. And then I have to juggle whether to take the 17/10/60 or float to the reservation or take McDowell and Alma School. No amount of The Knowledge tells you that.

Phoenix traffic is interesting, mostly because it seems we should not have LA style rush hour, even if it is an order of magnitude less intense.

New York City cabbies have the same requirement, and the same problem, but London and NYC cabbies have a single advantage - generally, inner city traffic is less prone to accidents, but more prone to congestion. So knowing there is a UN event or the Knicks have an early game is more useful than knowing where the fender benders are, and time of day flow is predictable.

My commute sadly includes freeway, so when it gets just a little busier, and there is just a little more congestion, being in the fast lane gets you doing 50 in front of the kid from Flagstaff in his older pickup without ABS, and he can't help rear ending you when he looks down to figure out where the exit is on his map. He just didn't leave that extra 10 feet. Sad for the Corvette in front of you, but the officer assured me I would never hold my car against the impact, shoved back and off the brake pedal. My insurance still had to pay for exhaust tips and buffing out the bumper. He ruined my Saab with the working convertible top, and I hate him for it.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

"If a person is familiar with an ares, human usually wins."

Only if that human is psychic.

  "If I don't leave in 15 minutes the 340 is going to be crowded, but I could take the 225. The 225 is longer but would end up being faster"

Except there was a wreck on the 225, which my GPS with traffic info shows me, but a non- psychic human could not know about, so I'm gonna be two hours late for dinner, honey.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[rickb928]

Generally the routing algorithms suffer the most when the routes have to take curved roads, have multiple speed changes, and are limited by bridges and other obstructions. Rectilinear road layouts are very forgiving.

So London, San Diego, and Boston are routing nightmares, New York less so, and Phoenix pretty simple. LA in the middle. Kuala Lumpur is unforgivable.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

guessing you have not had gps fail because you are beside talll buildings.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[pr0fessor]

Psychic powers are not required you may not know about accidents and traffic issues without your gps but cabbies have a dispatch and scanners that can give them that info.

GPS works until it doesn't having something to fall back on isn't a bad idea.

   

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Cro Magnon]

I've had 3 experiences with GPS. On 2 occasions, I was trying to find a place I was semi-familiar with, didn't like the route it said, and the route I took turned out to be shorter. The 3rd time was with a friend trying to find somewhere he hadn't been in years. The GPS glitched several times, sending him down several wrong streets before he finally followed his gut and found the place.

Humans 3, GPS 0!

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

It's also a case of knowing the nature of the road.

As an obvious example, I'd estimate that my current SatNav shows an incorrect speed limit on at least 20% of roads I travel on (percentage by distance) in cities. This frequently leads to directions that I know in my own city are terrible, and I can only assume from the odd routes it often suggests in other cities that it's not doing any better there.

Even on long-distance main roads, a SatNav might not understand that the reason traffic is slowing is because of an accident, and the extra 5 minutes of delays is going to be an extra 50 minutes or 2 hours or all night by the time it's cleared. If I'd followed SatNav directions on one recent journey, instead of recognising immediately that a delay increasing at a certain rate was almost certainly due to an accident closing the road entirely, then I'd have sat on a motorway with no exits for most of that night instead of getting to my destination just a few minutes later than planned.

All of these things could be done better by the automated tools in theory, but in practice they have a very, very long way to go before they can beat the judgement of a human driver who knows the roads in the area and has some means of getting warned of unexpected disruption on the main routes.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[pr0fessor]

Those cabbies have scanners, radios, and a dispatcher I wouldn't be surprised if they know about some accidents before emergency services. One sees the accident and radios it in and they all know to re-route accordingly, same with traffic. It's not like they are alone and have no information they just know the streets and businesses and don't need to use GPS.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[apoc.famine]

Seems like a(n illegally) good business model would be to slap some GPS trackers on the black cabs and use that data to feed the GPS algorithms.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Also true, though in the cases I've seen, the cabbies mostly won by a clear margin even without that benefit.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[ShanghaiBill]

I've had 3 experiences with GPS.

I have had more than 3 experiences with GPS so far TODAY. If you have really only used it 3 times in your life, you shouldn't be commenting on it.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

When was the last time you got in a cab and the driver checked his entire route with the dispatcher to make sure there were no accidents? Also, just because traffic was clear when you set off doesn't mean it still is when you're approaching that freeway onramp. A computerized traffic monitoring system will usually be more up to date than what a human can gather from scanners and dispatchers. Doesn't mean navigation systems are flawless, but getting better all the time and statistically they are superior to human experience.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[ShanghaiBill]

And yet, I've seen many reports/documentaries/reviews over the years that have objectively compared SatNavs with London cabbies, and the cabbies always win,

Citation please.

A quick Google search pulls up some anecdotes, but zero "reports" and no "documentaries".

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[jellomizer]

Not a failure in regulation, Just regulations that are being replaced by technology.
Being that GPS is used the the UK, using US infrastructure, while we have had good relations for about 200 years. It wouldn't make sense to put your infrastructure purely in the hands of a foreign power, no matter how friendly they are.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[backslashdot]

That sort of thing, predicting that a highway gets crowded at a certain time and choosing a different route is exactly the thing deep learning is good at.

If computers cant anticipate situations they would have failed in games like Chess and Go.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

The Knowledge is only required for black cabs, they do not have a dispatcher.

If you have a dispatcher then you're a minicab and the dispatch office will have considered the route and set the price before the driver even knows about the job. They aren't allowed to pick up passengers off the street.

This is a UK-centric article, and our taxis are licensed differently to yours in the US.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[drinkypoo]

Having tried to navigate central London using a top-of-the-range SatNav, including all the whizzy new real-time this and traffic report that, this result does not surprise me in the slightest. The route-planning algorithms aren't even close to the same standard as a proper London cabbie, and their real-time feeds are neither accurate enough nor fast enough to know when to stick with the main route and when to divert along the back streets.

Have you tried Waze?

The truth is that V2V is coming, and the automakers are actually building alliances that will let them share the V2V data, so Waze is going away (whether they know it or not) and that functionality is going to be offered by every vehicle's navigation system. Even vehicles without autonomy are going to carry V2V systems (Cadillac has started deploying them already, largely as a gimmick, but even so) and the available information on traffic conditions is going to be staggering. It will be obvious which routes to send drivers down. Waze's problem is that it only works well when lots of people use it, and including the equipment in the vehicles solves that problem completely.

The reason I ask if you've tried Waze, though, is that responding to traffic conditions in realtime is its whole job.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Im not trying to defend uber but thats not how it works at all. You input the destination on a mao BEFORE they even call a driver for you. Its your job as a grow ass adult to know where youâ(TM)re going.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[arth1]

When was the last time you got in a cab and the driver checked his entire route with the dispatcher to make sure there were no accidents?

When was the last time you were in a real black cab?
They get messages like "Lorry accident on Hampstead north of Drummond, south blocked, north slow".

GPS+phone systems are much slower to react, because they rely on the few cars that send bidirectional data, or officials to phone in when they close a road, which can take hours.

And GPS itself doesn't work well in big cities anyhow, due to tall buildings obstructing satellites.

I'd take a knowledgable driver at twice the price any day.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[fluffernutter]

If you need a GPS daily you need to have yourself committed. GPSes are very unreliable where I live. There are turns on major roads and highways that the one in my vehicle doesn't know about. Why? The turn has been there for 20 years! Google maps is usually OK but I need to handle my phone while driving for that, which I can get a ticket for. Maps isn't particularly good at guiding around traffic, so unless you check down your whole route you can still end up in trouble.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I don't know what you were searching for, but several searches I tried using terms like London, black cab and satnav turned up several of the older ones immediately. There was another one on TV much more recently that had the same outcome, but I'm afraid I can't remember which programme it was so it's hard to find that one.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[cayenne8]

Perhaps the "knowledge" test for cabbies needs to go away, rather than be a requirement for everyone, much like how in the US, the morse code requirements for radio licensing was done away with....

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Maps or Waze (usually better at guiding around traffic, etc) on your phone plus a cheap phone car mount is all you need to fix this. You don't need a dedicated in-car GPS that doesn't update your maps in 20 years.

Source: Every driver Cabbie or Uber/lyft in Seattle that I've found dependable. I've ridden with "old hats" that think they can do better without decent GPS that have been in the area 15+ years (or so they brag). Rarely are they as dependable/fast as even young (and probably relatively new to this city) uber/lyft drivers that know how to use Maps or Waze. That's my experience, over the last 4ish years living in Seattle.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[RhettLivingston]

The route algorithms mostly obey speed laws and avoid neighborhoods and roads that aren't really meant for thru-traffic.

If everyone were to use and obey them, I'd bet the traffic congestion would be reduced and everyone would get places faster. Lots of people taking creative routes trying to get there just a little faster increases the friction in the system and slows the overall system down.

Instead of having them memorize maps, they should ban creative routing altogether and make them stick to planned routes to reduce congestion.

And this will not be an argument against self-driven cars. In that case, the map is being learned by the driver.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[vux984]

"You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage"

You'd have to be delusional not to think this is an advantage.

Driving by GPS is fine for areas you don't know. But you drive a LOT more intelligently and safer in areas you DO KNOW.

You know complicated left/right/left maneuvers and which lane to be in at each step, often in cases faster than the GPS has time to update the display after your last manueover and recite the instructions for the next one.

"Take the 3rd exit from the round about which is itself another round about that you take the 2nd exit from"... stuff like that.

GPS will get you there, but KNOWING a city makes a huge difference.

"A human navigator can't see ahead for optimizing against current traffic patterns as can GPS"

This is true, human + GPS can be even better than human alone. I don't think anyone disputes that GPS is useful. I often run routes through a GPS, to see what it thinks and where it sees traffic issues etc. Sometimes it proposes better routes than I would have taken.. sometimes it proposes making a left turn across 4 lanes of rush hour traffic at an uncontrolled intersection to save 0.2 km a situation I could spend 20 minutes waiting for a break to get through assuming the guy making a right behind me didn't rage-kill me for attempting a left there. (Although that same route would be fine at 9pm.)

I've also had GPS take me down a residential street past an elementary school with roundabouts and speedbumps to avoid making a right turn at an efficient controlled intersection on the main street at a traffic light that takes about the same amount of time but is slightly longer and is heavier traffic (due to being the main street)... in that case its suggested route would 'work' but its still a stupid route.

A human navigator also tends to be able to deal with detours and closed roads and lane closures etc much better than GPS can. I don't think its arguable that having the knowledge plus GPS is the best option.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anne Thwacks]

That's my experience, over the last 4ish years living in Seattle.

It may come as news to you, mate, but London is not in Seattle. There is no law against balack cab drivers having a GPS, or even two or three. But they need to be able to find every single one of a vast number of landmarks, and the quickest way between them, when the GPS is not working (I have had it claim I was doing 700 MPH over Marylebone, while I would be happy to even to 7MPH).

The black cab is a premium service with quality control and price to match. If you want a newly arrived immigrant driver with barely any English, who has no idea how to get around, you can have that. Its called a minicab, and is cheaper. If you want to forgo the quality control bit completely, there is Uber.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[LynnwoodRooster]

I used Lyft just last night, here in San Francisco. Not only could GPS not locate me accurately (it had me across the street and 7 addresses up, this is on Polk at California), but the driver's car drifted around too... GPS doesn't work really well in all environments. Or when the weather gets really bad...

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Darinbob]

The drives can use GPS, they just have to pass the test without it.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[LynnwoodRooster]

Coming back from Las Vegas over Thanksgiving weekend, the 15 was backed up for hours. We went through Pahrump and saved a few hours. But then coming into Baker, Google said to use Well Road to avoid the main road. I started to head that way - but Well Road is literally a washed-out stream. As I was about to turn onto it - I noticed a car, about 100 yards down the road, nose-down in a ditch that bisected the "road". I guess if you had a jacked-up 4x4 then Well Road could be navigable, but in the Ford Mustang, it is a definite no-go. Google was happy to recommend it as a viable, time-saving alternative though!

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[stephanruby]

And yet, I've seen many reports/documentaries/reviews over the years that have objectively compared SatNavs with London cabbies, and the cabbies always win, sometimes by a comically wide margin.

And yet, that's not how real people use cabbies. Many of us need to be taken across Central London, not just within Central London (which is the only knowledge they're actually tested on).

This is not that I begrudge London cabbies for being more knowledgeable in general and for having lower turnover. I think that's great! But I also think they should drop the attitude and carry an internet capable phone with Google Waze or Google Maps on it. After all, their A-to-Z guide can only take them so far. That guide doesn't even contain business names. And it doesn't know about traffic conditions or special events either.

Having tried to navigate central London using a top-of-the-range SatNav, including all the whizzy new real-time this and traffic report that, this result does not surprise me in the slightest.

And that's your mistake right there.

Saying that you used a "top-of-the-range SatNav" instead of Google Maps or Google Waze proves to us that you're already out of touch with the state of the art mapping technology. Either that or that tells us that you're a truck driver and that you need a non-Google SatNav system only because your truck/caravan is oversized and you don't want the top part of your truck to run into a bridge (which is fine also, but it's also a different use case than having to use cabbies or Uber).

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[nospam007]

"If a person is familiar with an ares, human usually wins."

No. My navigator knows _all_ that, it knows all the distance differences up to an inch and doesn't have to guess and also all the accidents that just happened all over the city, all the planned and unplanned works happening just now, the buildings on fire blocking traffic and, thanks to Google, at what speed all the cars on the road are driving _right_ _now_.

Your poor man's version of Cosmo Kramer just can't compete.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Joey Vegetables]

Maybe in Manhattan. Not the outer boroughs. There is no excess capacity, so any unusual delay due to construction or accidents, the loss of even a single lane on a highway or major artery, can cause gridlock miles away. And even on Manhattan, there are constant wrecks on the GWB, in the tunnels, the FDR, and other freeways/parkways. A problem on the outbound roads like the LIRR or NJ Turnpike or any other, even many miles from Manhattan, can gridlock Manhattan also. I've seen all of the above, on weekends (since that's about the only time I'm ever in or near the city). A good driver really needs to know this stuff, in real time, even in Manhattan.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Aristos Mazer]

So why not have a bank of Knowledge Holders back at headquarters who are plotting routes in real time? The cabbies in the field wouldn't know the difference between a computer generated route and a human generated route. You don't need every cabbie to have the Knowledge to make it available widely.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Archangel Michael]

I use my GPS all the time. Most of the time it just works, so much so that in the odd times it doesn't work, I'm shocked.

However, there was this one time I was on the Freeway when the GPS told me to get off the freeway and take a side street, where I normally would just stay on the road. However, I took the advice, and it routed me around a brand new accident, using side streets. The detour took less than 4 minutes, and routed me around stopped traffic.

I'm not even sure how it figured the route around the accident so quickly.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[reboot246]

A few years ago I was headed to a job and I already knew the way there, but I was using my Garmin to give me some idea of the ETA. Approaching an intersection where I knew I was going to be turning left, Garmin told me to "take a right and make a u-turn". Some people would blindly follow such directions, but a human who has been that way before would know better.

To this day Garmin wants me to take a dead-end dirt road to come home from Guntersville, Alabama. What's up with that?

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Obfuscant]

The reason I ask if you've tried Waze, though, is that responding to traffic conditions in realtime is its whole job.

The data Waze uses comes from drivers. There is a certain irony in the situation where a driver who has just been entering the location of a traffic stop is then stopped by the same officer and ticketed for using a mobile electronic device while driving, which is quite possible in states with new, draconian distracted driving laws.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Obfuscant]

The route algorithms mostly obey speed laws and avoid neighborhoods and roads that aren't really meant for thru-traffic.

Algorithms don't obey speed laws. They may base their routing on them. There are increasing numbers of stories about neighborhoods that are being inundated by rush-hour traffic being routed off the throughways and through their residential areas because the routing algorithm sees that as a faster path.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Obfuscant]

Being that GPS is used the the UK, using US infrastructure,

Glosnass, comrade. Much better. Is taking you same place, half the rubles, and you get a shot of vodka to go with it.

As they say, in Russia, Glosnass uses you!

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

If you need a GPS daily you need to have yourself committed. GPSes are very unreliable where I live. There are turns on major roads and highways that the one in my vehicle doesn't know about. Why? The turn has been there for 20 years! Google maps is usually OK but I need to handle my phone while driving for that, which I can get a ticket for. Maps isn't particularly good at guiding around traffic, so unless you check down your whole route you can still end up in trouble.

Sounds like you need a better vehicle then.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Google Maps or Waze (usually better at guiding around traffic, etc) on your phone plus a cheap phone car mount is all you need to fix this.

Not always. I usually use Waze to/from work, but the important question is always "where to exit from IH10 onto the frontage road" or "where to get on from the frontage road". Waze (probably the GPS) is completely inept at figuring out if I'm on the freeway or on the access road. Which means it can't tell if OTHER users are on the freeway or access road. Which means it's giving me information based on what it THINKS other drivers are doing, not what they're really doing.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know what you were searching for, but several searches I tried using terms like London, black cab and satnav turned up several of the older ones immediately. There was another one on TV much more recently that had the same outcome, but I'm afraid I can't remember which programme it was so it's hard to find that one.

"Not uh!! I can't prove it too you, but I really did find the holy grail. I found it in the 90s(back when holy grails were everywhere), and I just found it a few minutes ago(thus proving that they are still not rare)"!

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[q_e_t]

Mostly GPS devices are fine now, but I have had one send me into a farmyard, the wrong way down a one way street, and try to send me down a river. My main criticism of many is they don't tell you which lane you need to be in until after the chance to be in it.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

I have found the exact opposite. The route algorithms take me down neighborhood roads lined with parked cars on both sides, presumably because the speed limit is exactly the same as the "real" parallel street but the "traffic" is "zero".

I have been taken down roads that clearly the algorithm sent EVERYONE down, resulting in an ultimate drive time longer than the "estimate" for the new route and the estimate for the original route.

I have also been taken across one lane bridges covered in river mud/rock (due to flooding) and various other complete crap routes that some sports cars wouldn't even be able to navigate at all.

The problem with algorithms is that they really don't capture the true nature of a given road, especially quirks that are learned like "you can never make the next XYZ left hand turn if ABC just happened but if you go straight you will be able to make the next left". The quirks can save 20% on short trips (e.x. a 10 min trip that avoids a 2 minute stoplight wait) Maybe some day the algorithms will learn this but even if they did, I don't know if humans can react that fast if they don't know the condition and are waiting to make the decision.

Cabbies can learn all sorts of "minor" optimizations that have huge overall time impacts because they are about managing TURNING rather than managing being on the road with shortest HYPOTHETICAL [distance/current traffic speed].

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[_Sharp'r_]

Yeah, this reminds me of arguments about online vs. local sales tax. Why not argue for removing the local sales tax in order to compete better, rather than arguing for taxing the online purchases?

Because some group of people get paid as a result. "The knowledge" is just another example of a group of people trying to limit their competition with artificial legal barriers. But hey, we're making some progress. Just think, soon people in Arizona may be legally able to wash or blow dry someone's hair without spending $12,000 and 1,000 hours in school to get a license from the State in order to reduce competition for licensed hair stylists.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

We've tried using Google Maps on my wife's phone while I'm driving, plenty of times. It's just as bad in inner cities as the built-in things or the standalone satnavs like TomTom.

Also, why do so many people apparently believe London cabbies somehow can't use all the same technologies as everyone else, in addition to their expert knowledge of the central area? It's not as if they're mutually exclusive.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[phantomfive]

I appreciate your optimism for GPS, but there is a place in Oakland where Google maps will tell you to drive over the edge of an overpass. This is a funny clip but it's happened.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

I literally just posted search terms that work. If you can't manage to put those into Google and then follow the obviously named links on the first results page to the obvious video sites, I'm afraid no-one can help you.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

I can tell from looking in the cabs while on my bicycle all the black cabs have Satnavs fitted.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Working out intricate routes through back streets where you might be turning every few metres to get clear of the main flow of traffic is tricky enough at the best of times. Trying to do it with satnav instructions is all but impossible, because the directions are so often mistimed or ambiguous. Trying to do it with someone back at base somehow reading directions or otherwise feeding the information to your vehicle seems like the worst of all worlds.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[RhettLivingston]

I use Google's app everywhere I go even if it is a route I travel almost every day just because I don't know what accidents may have occurred. I live in a metro area with complex roads (not well planned) and have never had it take me via a non-mainstream route with the exception of mapping me around a few accidents. It is also nice to know my ETA. I find the initial ETA of a 30-minute city ride is accurate to about plus or minus a minute almost all of the time. I'm not sure if it has adjusted to me or if I'm just that average in the way I drive.

I have noted that it often optimizes my route for right-hand turns (no waiting at the light) and sometimes routes me in a fashion that avoids a heavy traffic spotlight, especially if a jam is forecast due to the time of day. Of course, the capabilities of these apps are heavily related to how many people are using the app at the moment - as every user is also a traffic sensor.

As I understand it, other apps such as Waze have the type of routing you've described (going through neighborhoods to save a minute) as a feature. I would never use that. It is too aggressive. I have no desire to be responsible for killing some kid playing in the road in front of his home.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Which is kind of the point of the advantage that black cabs have

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[RhettLivingston]

Algorithms don't obey speed laws. They may base their routing on them.

Exactly. What I meant is that they don't guide you to straight and clear 30mph roads where people using their app are doing 50mph when a legal 40mph route is available. Google's algorithms do have access to the actual speed limits (and the app displays them in some areas) as opposed to just the data collected from the speed of users running their apps.

There are increasing numbers of stories about neighborhoods that are being inundated by rush-hour traffic being routed off the throughways and through their residential areas because the routing algorithm sees that as a faster path.

I've never had that happen with Google. Now, if you're using something like Waze, that overly aggressive routing is their trademark. I don't use Waze because of that. I have no desire to chance hitting a child playing in the street to save a few minutes of driving. This isn't a problem in the technology. It is a choice made by a company for profit. Many drivers make the same bad choices.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Three times using something is probably not a representative sample, and GPS generally over-states how long it will take to get places in my experience.

I only use GPS when I'm going somewhere I'm not super familiar with, but because of the nature of my job that's a handful of times a week. When I'm setting off from home it always sends me by the same technically shorter but slower road to the freeway; I've timed it a dozen times to make sure I'm right, and I reckon ignoring it takes about 5 minutes off my journey. Conversely, it has used shortcuts and back lanes that I didn't know existed to avoid traffic, and has definitely saved me time stuck in tailbacks by flagging them up when they are far enough ahead to reroute around them.

I've done hundreds (maybe thousands?) of GPS-assisted trips, and whilst it's no substitute for actual local knowledge it does as good a job as most people, and saves a ton of time finding a particular address, especially in rural areas where zip codes aren't very useful. Clearly some people put too much faith in them (there's a particular farm near me that has trucks get stuck regularly, despite posting MASSIVE WARNINGS all over the place), and I worry about people who rely on them for their commute, but they are a useful tool for me.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Space]

Voice activated reporting fixes this. The newest versions of Waze respond to this: "Ok Waze, report police on the other side"

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[LynnwoodRooster]

Oh, Guntersville? You can't get THERE from here. You can get there from THERE, and you can get there from here, but you can't get THERE from here. Or something like that...:)

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[ShanghaiBill]

If you need a GPS daily you need to have yourself committed.

I use it every time I drive. Even if it is a known route, I can still use it to check for traffic congestion.

GPSes are very unreliable where I live.

YOUR GPS is unreliable. It is silly to generalize that to every GPS in your area.

Call your car dealer. They can update your in-dash GPS database and software (usually for a small fee).

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[ShanghaiBill]

I literally just posted search terms that work.

Bullcrap. You are lying. Or perhaps your really are stupid enough to waste time repeatedly claiming something is "obvious" when it would be far simpler to POST A LINK.

So cite your sources or STFU.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[kenai_alpenglow]

Ironic, since Google owns (or at least has a close relationship) w Waze.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Cederic]

Holy fuck are you utterly incapable of using an internet search engine?

Sure, most of the results are of badly executed tests - different routes, different times of day - but it didn't exactly take long to find this one:
https://www.newscientist.com/a...

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Welcome to 1998

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither of you apparently realize that two people use tge same search terms on the same search engine, on two different computers, at the same time, can, and usually do have different results.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Sources using exactly the search terms I gave you before

There are literally three different comparisons mentioned on just the first couple of pages, dating from 2006, 2013, and 2017. In the two directly comparable races (travelling between the same destinations and starting at the same time) the taxi was significantly faster. The third appears to have been comparing the journeys starting at different times, so not a fair test, but the taxi still apparently beat the Uber despite the latter having the advantage in start time.

More sources

The first hit there is a study comparing several different London journeys over a period of days, with the taxi also being significantly faster than the Uber on average.

No doubt someone somewhere has run an experiment that had the opposite outcome, but the overall the Knowledge is looking favourable even in recent comparisons.

If you really want to have an intelligent and informative discussion, maybe consider using less swearing and negativity, and more following up on the information people gave you. Not everyone is wasting their time posting stuff they made up on the Internet and lying to you for no apparent reason.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[alok_naik]

From your link: They also had the advantage of being able to use bus lanes (which Ubers canâ(TM)t), but they regularly took more complex routes, utilising side streets to save time. So do we know how much of the difference was due to being able to use bus lanes?

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Cederic]

No, although I think private hire cars can use them too so that would be a fair comparison to make.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

So you failed to update your GPS or bought shitty maps or you use a shitty GPS provider that doesn't update their maps.... but yet, you blame all GPS software for your shitty choices.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[ShanghaiBill]

Sources using exactly the search terms I gave you before

The first page of results has one link that is actually a comparison: Uber vs London cab, and it says the OPPOSITE of what you claim: Uber+GPS was faster.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Herkum01]

There is usually a requirement of some sort to prevent people from doing something like this

For everyone who complains about regulations, or legal barriers there is always a moron out there prepared to screw it up.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[VeryFluffyBunny]

The Knowledge is not imposed on taxi drivers. You only have to take it if you want to be a black cab driver. London still has its medieval road layout (See this map: https://maproom.net/wp-content... ) which is difficult to navigate, to say the least. Inexperienced drivers can get lost for hours trying to navigate their way -- Take a wrong turn and you end up on a road out of central London and have to take a long route to get back in. Londoners know that if they get into a black cab, they'll get to their destination in the quickest time possible. In my experience of travelling around central London, black cabs usually turn out to be cheaper than other taxis because they're quicker which is why they're so successful. If I have to take a taxi, black cabs are the only choice as far as I'm concerned.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[MrDoh!]

Aye, saw the programme a cabbie ranting how bad the GPS tools were, how there was certain spots they'd see people doing u-turns because the satnav had told them to for some reason. And how if you ask to get to a certain pub, the gps drops you on the wrong side of the dual carriage way, because the road was built through the car park and the pub is on the 'wrong' side of where the co-ords were.
Watching the program at the time, it was all "yeah, but that can all be fixed, eventually people giving feedback will get that fixed". And now I use Google Maps (for ETA mostly) now and then, and there's a spot on the highway near the airport it tells me to get off at the junction and rejoin the same highway. And doesn't appear to know you can't go across, you have to take a right, go down a block, u-turn, then swing across fast to get to the turn lane, and I've posted 'this needed to be fixed' for... I don't know how many years, and it's still there. For no reason, it'll try and get me to leave the highway and then get back on.

But on a long slog across London? yeah, a black cab driver, who's driven for even a short amount of time, it's scary their awareness. They use GPS AND dispatch for updates, swirving around as needed, and knowing when to push it a bit more to make sure they're ahead of a footy game emptying "course, 10 mins to go, if they've not equalised by now, the fans will be leaving/rioting as this was important" whilst also pontificating about how it's all the immigrants fault, and this wouldn't have happened under Thatcher, and wish the whole of London had a congestion charge as something's gotta change here mate, it can't keep going on like this, and my uncle fought in the war for this you know, and he'd not have put up with it, and.. "20 goto 10 and throw in more racist comments"

Eventually? yeah, they'll be beaten by something, or they'll continue to use that device plus their knowledge, but for now, that 4 years + constant driving is going to take some beating.

As an aside, the amount of black cab drivers who win these TV general knowledge quiz shows is scary. That training/mind that's suitable for sucking up the routes appears well versed in sucking up all sorts of facts.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

My first experience with GPS nav was with a TomTom in Germany, going to a place about an hour outside the city. I'd never driven in Germany before, but the directions were flawless. I love my paper maps still, but that day changed my thinking.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Computershack]

Seems like a(n illegally) good business model would be to slap some GPS trackers on the black cabs and use that data to feed the GPS algorithms.

Pretty much every Android phone with Google Maps installed already does this. It is why Google Maps has very good live traffic.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Computershack]

Bus lanes save a fair bit and in many places in London allow you to go up an entire street which is blocked off completely to normal road users with the route the normal users having to take being a few times longer and a whole lot slower. That is why "The Knowledge" is invaluable in London and why Satnav loses out every time.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Computershack]

Waze can't beat a London taxi driver because Waze will not route you down bus only lanes and streets which a taxi can also use.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Computershack]

The cabbies in the field wouldn't know the difference between a computer generated route and a human generated route. You don't need every cabbie to have the Knowledge to make it available widely.

They would know instantly they came to a set of traffic lights which said that only buses can go straight forwards and everyone else has to turn right and the route told them to turn right instead of continuing straight forward down the far faster and shorter bus route they are legally allowed to use.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[SuricouRaven]

Europe doesn't want to depend on the US, so they built Galileo. Russia doesn't want to depend on either, so they built GLONASS. China, likewise, is building BeiDou. There are now three operating sat-sav systems operated by three politically independent countries (or, for Galileo, consortium of countries), and another under construction. Most phones support at least two of the three, and high-end phones all three of them.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Ed Avis]

I have been in a London taxi where the driver had Google Maps open -- not, he explained, to navigate the route, but to show where traffic congestion was.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[drinkypoo]

Waze can't beat a London taxi driver because Waze will not route you down bus only lanes and streets which a taxi can also use.

It's difficult to beat protectionism.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[_Sharp'r_]

You actually think we need to force everyone who styles hair to spend $12,000 on 1,000 hours of classes in order to reduce the the amount of burnt hair from curlers? It's not that complicated.

How about if a hair stylist burns people's hair, people just grow the hair back out and tell their friends to stop using that particular hair stylist? Seems like a much smaller waste of time and money.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[PingPongBoy]

"A human navigator can't see ahead for optimizing against current traffic patterns as can GPS"

Really now? Anyone I have ever met knows things like, "If I don't leave in 15 minutes the 340 is going to be crowded, but I could take the 225. The 225 is longer but would end up being faster". And " since it is the holidays and there is a game that lets out soon, I'll take the 720, use high street, go through Clear Water subdivision, get on the 225 and miss the surge".

If a person is familiar with an ares, human usually wins.

Relax. A lawn chair and a bunch of drones or helium balloons, you're all set.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[PingPongBoy]

You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage.

And yet, I've seen many reports/documentaries/reviews over the years that have objectively compared SatNavs with London cabbies, and the cabbies always win, sometimes by a comically wide margin.

Having tried to navigate central London using a top-of-the-range SatNav, including all the whizzy new real-time this and traffic report that, this result does not surprise me in the slightest. The route-planning algorithms aren't even close to the same standard as a proper London cabbie, and their real-time feeds are neither accurate enough nor fast enough to know when to stick with the main route and when to divert along the back streets.

But in this tale of human intellect, why would a smart person who can do a job like this want to do it?

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

No, it doesn't. That one was the loaded test, and it also doesn't present its timings very clearly, but if you read it carefully (particularly the conclusion, which mentions this explicitly) the taxi is said to be faster than the Uber.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Ditto with fake medicine for life threatening conditions. The invisible hand of the market will sort it out after a few kids die from each fly by night operation.

Incidentally. I may be selling million dollar lifetime guarantee insurance policies, available for a short period only for a discount to $100. No medical checks needed!

(policy holder assets may be spent in Vegas and win lose or draw not ever reimbursing you.)

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

You may be on a non-existent copyright trap street, including for making proof of map data infringement. Try an open source one if available.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[mjwx]

"A human navigator can't see ahead for optimizing against current traffic patterns as can GPS"

Really now? Anyone I have ever met knows things like, "If I don't leave in 15 minutes the 340 is going to be crowded, but I could take the 225. The 225 is longer but would end up being faster". And " since it is the holidays and there is a game that lets out soon, I'll take the 720, use high street, go through Clear Water subdivision, get on the 225 and miss the surge".

If a person is familiar with an ares, human usually wins.

This, My car's GPS (which allegedly received live traffic updates) regularly tries to send me down the M3 eastbound in the morning despite it being well and truly blocked and the A30 is much faster (Google, which is much better sends me down the A30). Even Google can be wrong though.

Locals will know established traffic patterns and the best way to avoid them. Roads that aren't marked or used, little used short cuts and long cuts (sometimes taking a few miles extra to go around the problem is a lot faster, a lot of the time its better than negotiating a one way system).

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[DarthVain]

Been around much longer than GPS, still have paper maps in my car. Been using GPS since it became available. Work in GIS so really have had more experience in the field with this sort of thing before it was really all that commercially available.

My observation at least so far as current technology goes is that GPS is really good at getting you someplace you haven't been before or do not know the way. It is also sometimes nice to have on just so you don't miss your important exist if you don't happen to be paying attention. However, for the most part it will take you VIA the most main route, which is a good thing, but usually not always the fastest or most optimal. A human "knowledgeable" of the area/route will do a better job, I have no doubt about that.

Two recent plus/minus anecdotes on GPS.

The minus is that GPS, is only so good as the data it consumes, which comes from a variety of sources. This is way taking a main route for GPS is often a safer bet, as it can't always account for changes, particularly with old route. That said in this particular instance, rather than take the route I normally take, I let the GPS guide my way blindly, which turned out to be a mistake. It was winter, and the roads got more rural, and worse, until I was eventually on what amounts to a cottage road, which terminated to an entrance to a forest road. For those that don't know what a forest road is, in summer it might be good for ATV's, trucks and offroad type SUV's at best.... In winter it wouldn't be plowed, and would be suitable for a snowmobile and that's about it. After listening to my girlfriend yell at me for a good 45min, I had to backtrack about another 30min to find another way out of where I was. In this case that road was in the GPS and classified as a highway. It was obviously bad data, as in no way shape or form was it ever a highway.

To the plus, I was on a rather long road trip, which unrelated to GPS started out rocky where my battery died within the first 2 hours and required a tow truck to service station, turning what might have been a 12 hour drive into a 14 hour drive. Which should have been a 10 hour drive, but on the main highway, to which there is little way around there was a massive accident shutting it down for many exits. What was interesting is that my GPS was aware of this, and got me off the highway on rural back roads before I got stuck in traffic. One thing that was funny about the experience was there was a convoy of like 8 or 10 of us all on the same back roads to which none of us had any right to be on normally, so I knew that every single one of those cars were also using a GPS. When we came out the other side, we still got stuck in traffic but only because the small rural cottage road couldn't handle the overflow. I recall a police officer chatting with me as he stopped me to let some people off the highway exit I was passing to get around. Apparently some people had been stuck for 3+ hours, so at least in this case my GPS certainly did well. I had never had a GPS do that before, it just piped up about a large delay ahead and if I wanted to detour around it, I was unsure about it, but was curious so said what the hell lets try it, glad i did.

Anyway GPS has it's pros and cons, and it has certainly gotten better over the years, and I suspect it will continue to do so. However I think things like the algorithms, interface, and routing is largely mature, it is more about the data, it being complete and kept up to date which is the continual challenge. Crowd sourcing the data collection maybe with a pinch of AI is likely the future. If you recall the inception of Apple Maps and how that initially went, it really is all about the fundamental data.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Aristos Mazer]

Why wouldn't the human Knowledge routers or the computer mapping program know that fact? If you're just using off-the-shelf Google Maps, sure, you have that problem, but that seems like a pretty easy objection to overcome.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

The system that beat Kasparov did not use deep learning. It bruteforce calculated 10+ moves ahead and evaluated the positions using relatively simple logic.

Deep learning had nothing to do wi it. Modern chess games may use deep learning since it is probably more efficient in terms of memory and CPU utilization, but it was not historically relevant.

And a deep learning algorithm is only as good as its training. If you know anything at all about deep learning, you should understand that. So a traffic analysis system will need continuos updates to deal with new patterns as roads and businesses/houses change.

Re:Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Draconian?

Every safety study has pretty much put phone use on par with drunk driving.

Contrary to your opinion, the facts paint those laws as reasonable---assuming you agree that drunk driving laws are reasonable, of course.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you should spend your time more productively rather than thinking about stupid shit like traffic and let the Uber guy handle it.

Sheesh.... if you have to face traffic like that everyday you must be one sad dude...

SAD

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Thing is, cutting hair and driving cars is easy. Given an unregulated market, the competition will be intense. That competition can buy you as a consumer lower prices - but only so much lower. Owning a car and having to eat, for instance, puts a floor on how cheap taxi fares can get. And as competition heats up, so do the incentives to cheat, rip people off, and worse. If there's one taxi driver who cheats on his taxes (or who has a deal to provide kidneys to the Mafia) he can offer lower fares, he can outcompete all the ones who don't have such arrangements. The costs of policing, ensuring that competitors fight fair, rises as competition becomes more intense.

Occupational licensing in low-skill work is a way to buy something else than slightly lower prices with all that competition potential. Such as quality, as defined by the licensing requirements. Even if that quality is dubious, at least it stops the collapse/costly policing requirements associated with free for all competition.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Hair stylist licensing standards are more about sanitation procedures to prevent the spread of disease via vectors such as head lice.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[_Sharp'r_]

So head lice is such a health threat that a hair stylist license requires more time and training than a paramedic's license?

Sorry, any random Mom can pick up on head lice on someone's head.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Brockmire]

When Google put me onto a 4 lane one way highway that was at least 3 months old and nearly killed me, I said fuck google. It was something like 14 months after the bridge was in that Google was updated. For a long time, my truck appeared to be swimming across the river for km's. The GPS I own has free lifetime map updates and had the changes on the next quarterly update. Also, voice recognition isn't as good as Google Now, but my GPS doesn't need Internet to work. The only thing about my GPS is the touch screen is getting worse and slow to recalculate if I missed a turn.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Search engines do not give everyone the same results, they may vary depending on your location, settings, and search history.

Re: Stupid government regulation fail

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes why cant they be trained continuously. But that aside, the training data on traffic patterns already exists in the historical record. Yes there are some rare situations it would fail, but then humans fail too.

Accidents?

[Anonymous Coward]

How many accidents do you avoid by just *knowing* what you're doing instead of fighting an acting-up and badly written GPS app?

I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know how taxis are in London, but in the US, I'd rather take an Uber any day. The cars are newer and cleaner, there is no odor in the cars, and the drivers are generally younger and more hygienic. Your average Yellow cab driver never looks clean or particularly healthy. I could care less if the driver is using a GPS.

Re:I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[Anonymous Coward]

Black cabs in London are nothing like Yellow Taxis in the USA. The drivers are typically knowledgable and professional, and their cabs are generally spin 'n' span.

Re:I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[Barsteward]

The black cab is the benchmark to beat here in london.

Re:I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[Anonymous Coward]

Yellow cabs are yellow for a reason... to hide the piss and sweat stains.

Re:I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[quonset]

Your average Yellow cab driver never looks clean or particularly healthy.

Neither do neckbeard programmers, yet we're supposed to entrust our lives and finances to them writing software.

Re:I'd rather use Uber/Lyft

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

They're also surprisingly manoeuvrable, able to take passengers in wheelchairs, spacious enough for significant amounts of luggage, etc.

Barriers to entry rigorously defended

[Anonymous Coward]

by those who have successfully scaled it.

Re:Barriers to entry rigorously defended

[Anonymous Coward]

yep, just like any professional society that licenses or certifies.

Personal Experience

[tsqr]

I was in London last year, and used Uber extensively. Most of the time it worked out fine, but there were a few spectacular failures. In particular, a ride to Kensington Palace dropped us off at a point that was more than a half hour's walk from the Palace. As we walked, we passed an intersection that was only a few hundred yards from the Palace entrance. I'm pretty sure a real cab driver would have dropped us at the closest point.

Re:Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

I was using Lyft to get back and forth from my hotel to the convention center in Orlando. One driver was so reliant on using the GPS for nav, we ended up at a high school parking lot instead of the convention center. The security guard said that this was not an uncommon occurrence.

Re:Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

Sat Nav is a wonderful thing when it works. The time I ended up at a gated country estate instead of a Premier Inn reminded me that technology, though wonderful, still has limitations. In this case the limitation was the fact that I'd entered the wrong post code but I still blamed Google. They should know where I want to go!

They know everything else.

Re:Personal Experience

[Quimo]

The time my GPS unit asked me to take a left turn off a bridge reminded me that we still need to pay attention.

Re:Personal Experience

[serviscope_minor]

I was in London last year, and used Uber extensively.

You'd probably be better off using citymapper or some equivalent to be honest and doing a mix of walking and public transport.

It's what us locals do innit.

Re:Personal Experience

[Kierthos]

My GPS is about three years old, and I haven't downloaded any new map packs for it yet, but it still has issues with some of the one-way streets here. And these are streets that have been one-way streets for decades.

But nope, "turn right here", where I very clearly can't, unless I feel like turning into oncoming traffic.

Re:Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

We get many people directed onto a road that's kind of a short cut (fun road in summer) when traffic gets bad on Hwy 50. But it's closed in winter - not plowed or patrolled past a point with a big sign saying so. When somebody calls for a tow in that part of the road in winter, they've almost always been relying on GPS blindly.

Re:Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

The time my gps took me to a street with an identical name in the same city as the one I wanted to be at reminded me that fuck city planners who use the same street name multiple times in a single city.

Re:Personal Experience

[tsqr]

As I said, Uber worked fine most of the time. On previous visits to London, we used public transport and walking, and that worked fine most of the time as well. None of the less than optimal experiences detracted from the visits -- London is a marvellous city to visit, no matter your mode of transportation.

Re: Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously have never been to Atlanta, Georgia.

Re:Personal Experience

[Anonymous Coward]

Citymapper also problems. It doesn't know the quickest way from East Croydon to Greenwich on public transport. Tried it yesterday and it wanted to go via London Bridge or Brockley.

The quickest way is a train from East Croydon to New Cross Gate and a 53 bus. Google Maps finds that route, but not Citymapper.

Re:Personal Experience

[mjwx]

I was in London last year, and used Uber extensively.

You'd probably be better off using citymapper or some equivalent to be honest and doing a mix of walking and public transport.

It's what us locals do innit.

Google Maps is pretty damn good at navigating London's public transport network.

Seriously, trying to get through London by car is a royal PITA... and I say that as a dedicated petrol head (who lives outside of London for just that reason).

Sure, I'd say the same

[johannesg]

If it were my livelyhood and I already put in the effort, I'd see that as an excellent way to keep out competitors. But you'd be batshit insane to actually _want_ to learn all that crap if you were just starting out, considering how much the city has grown since 1865, and how easy GPS (possibly with live updates on road conditions) makes things nowadays...

Re:Sure, I'd say the same

[djinn6]

... you'd be batshit insane to actually _want_ to learn all that crap if you were just starting out, considering how much the city has grown since 1865

Eventually it will be impossible. Look at Shanghai, it's 3 times the size of London by population and 4 times the area, with constant construction that makes whatever you learned a year ago completely obsolete. If your Shanghai cabbie doesn't have a GPS, get ready to give them turn-by-turn directions.

Re:Sure, I'd say the same

[LynnwoodRooster]

I spend quite a bit of time in Shanghai - I lived there for 6 years, and I have family there. I was just there last week. Used cabs several time, just told them the name of the business or the cross streets I wanted and we got there, no issues. No GPS, no nav needed... As impressive as London cabbies are, Shanghai cabbies (especially those with 3+ stars) are a whole different league!

Re:Sure, I'd say the same

[Anonymous Coward]

with constant construction that makes whatever you learned a year ago completely obsolete

Sadly I know enough regions were google maps is at least two years out of date and it doesn't seem to deal well with roads blocked for construction either. Worst case I had it constantly tried to route me through the same intersection, even when I already was on the other side of town trying the way out that wasn't blocked. Someone limited to GPS is going to suck when he can't think of any alternatives routes by himself.

Re:Uber doesn't do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Black cab drivers have to learn the knowledge often committing up to 3 years driving around London to learn streets and locations.

Uber drivers use a nav...

Aren't you just restating what the summary said?

They say it sets them apart from ride-hailing services like Uber, whose drivers don't have to learn the Knowledge, and they believe it allows them to deliver a superior level of service. But ever since mapping apps arrived on phones and GPS-wielding Uber drivers exploded into London

Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[MindPrison]

There was a documentary about this on TV, not sure what channel, but I saw it just a few days ago, about how the size of the actually grew on those learning to sharpen their memory like this. Scans where taken before and after, and the results where quite astonishing.

I kinda believe it too, I got a job at a huge corporation, where I was set to do an almost seemingly impossible task - namely learn 25K pages of information about their infrastructure so I could properly map and redirect requests to where it was needed + solve IT solution tasks on the spot if possible instead of redirecting, the answer where all in these 25K pages. At first it was like, I'm never ever gonna be able to do this, after a month I was - I can't believe I can actually remember this much, now I actually believe it can be done, I still have to console the 25K pages manual - but it's rarer and rarer, and my problem solving rate is up to 96% correct now.

What's even more interesting, is that this job has had a profound effect on my private life as well. I've done much more to clean up my life, making sure important things like personal pension, insurance, savings, purchases are done correctly instead of wasting it on "oh, I don't care". My gaming life is amazing in comparison to before, I've reached levels I couldn't even dream of later.

So there's something to this!

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[MindPrison]

...I really need that 1 minute edit button in here.

Insert "Hippocampus" between the and actually (about how the size of the hippocampus actually grew....)

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Also "consult" not "console"

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[Jahoda]

There was a documentary about this on TV, not sure what channel, but I saw it just a few days ago, about how

Looks to me like you are referring to this documentary on National Geographic

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[MindPrison]

Could be, your link wasn't available in my country, but the title and description seemed right. And it was probably licensed to one of our national / public channels.

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[Anonymous Coward]

"...not sure what channel, but I saw it just a few days ago...... sharpen their memory like this...."

delicious, the irony.

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[fahrbot-bot]

Insert "Hippocampus" between the and actually (about how the size of the hippocampus actually grew....)

I'd be careful about inserting this anywhere. Hippocampus are very territorial and are among the most dangerous animals in the world as they are highly aggressive and unpredictable -- especially the bigger ones.

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Likely one of these two.

There was a BBC edition of Modern Times on The Knowledge back in 1996 (non-UK users would need a VPN to access via iplayer, couldn't find a torrent sorry):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/...

There's a Channel 4 documentary from last year about it too, magnet link below:
magnet:?xt=urn:btih:0259f92036d1d951a3d46bccaaf83d7033f655b4&dn=Ch4.The.Knowledge.The.Worlds.Toughest.Taxi.Test.720p.HDTV.x264.AAC.MVGroup.org.mkv&tr=http%3a//www.mvgroup.org%3a2710/announce

Both are well worth a watch both for an explanation of what The Knowledge is and how London's black cabs differ from most other taxi services.

Re:Believe it or not, it sharpens you up!

[Anonymous Coward]

where were
console consult

Black cabs all the way

[hsqueak]

Anyone who's ever used a London cabby will value the brevity of the journey when you ask for a recommended hotel near a certain landmark/street, or if you're in a rush to get to a meeting in an obscure area and there's a traffic jam on the normal route. It's shocking how little local knowledge can be required elsewhere.

This is not news.

[dinfinity]

This has been the case since 1865.

Re:This is not news.

[Anonymous Coward]

This has been the case since 1865.

so is what you're saying, so what's the problem

Re:This is not news.

[Anonymous Coward]

So the only thing surprising about it ending up on Slashdot is that it isn't from a link to something on medium.com ?

"How to you get from here to Heathrow?"

[magusxxx]

Driver: Well, first you take a right on...

Sherlock: Wrong, next.

Great idea

[circularWaffle]

Except for the fact that GPS apps show us current status on traffic jams and accident sites. Committing directions to memory doesn't really help in this way. So, I don't know that I'd call this an, "advantage".

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

Except for the fact that GPS apps show us current status on traffic jams and accident sites. Committing directions to memory doesn't really help in this way. So, I don't know that I'd call this an, "advantage".

so in your version of reality, all of the taxis become useless when GPS goes down

Re:Great idea

[DontBeAMoran]

It's an advantage if you're looking to lose your job to new technology.

However, using "The Knowledge" (eh) in combination with a smartphone should make them better than Uber drivers.

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

And a GPS app has no way to give you directions to a description (not an address) of the location. Tourists or other visitor don't necessarily have the street and number for their destination, but rather know it "looks like this".

Re:Great idea

[circularWaffle]

Yes, I'm saying that all taxis might as well just crash into a wall if GPS goes down. Because they're useless without it, entirely. And since you're so quick to jump on wild conclusions, let me just add that I'm being purely sarcastic.

Re:Great idea

[circularWaffle]

To everyone who seems to be only looking for an argument because of this comment: Slow your role, read my comment over again, and realize something. I'm not saying GPS is the do-all-say-all to everything. I'm saying that disabling yourself to use GPS while driving for a living is just illogical. Know the area you work/drive. That's taking the extra (or correct, rather) mile. Great, awesome, sounds like an advantage. But saying, "fuck maps and GPS, I KNOW EVERYTHING IN MY MIND" while everyone else who knows the area AND has a GPS to keep track of traffic volumes and all that just sounds like a gimmicky setback.

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

To everyone who seems to be only looking for an argument

that would be YOU, arguing with theoretical people who only exist in your addled brain

Re:Great idea

[circularWaffle]

Sounds good. Have fun with that

Re:Great idea

[drinkypoo]

And a GPS app has no way to give you directions to a description (not an address) of the location.

Nonsense. It's called Google. They certainly aren't exposing all of the metadata they've created to the public. If they don't already know which buildings are which color and what's across the street from them, it's mostly a matter of burning processor time since they have all the data they need to find that out in their databases already. Maybe you can't search for buildings that way with google yet, but it's only a matter of time. And of course, if someone has blogged about such and such being across the street from this and that, then you can google for that information.

Re:Great idea

[nojayuk]

A while back I passed an American couple staring at their phone, a few metres from where I live. I asked what they were looking for. They mentioned the name of a pub/restaurant which was on their Google Maps display.

"Oh, that pub. They demolished it a couple of years ago to put in a tram line." I pointed at the ongoing construction works they were standing next to.

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenStreetMap is often a little more up to date than Google when it comes to business and other locations of interest. At least in areas where there are people interested in updating it.

monopoly

[supernova87a]

Well, in this case the depth of knowledge is not a safety issue, as it might be in someone's fireman example above. At most, it provides customers with a sense of confidence that their driver knows where they're going -- which some people value more, some people less.

I would say, let customers decide whether this knowledge is worth it by giving them the choice. Otherwise, it's a barrier to entry to a restricted group of drivers so that they enjoy a monopoly and the power to price their taxi services accordingly.

Re:monopoly

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Well, in this case the depth of knowledge is not a safety issue, as it might be in someone's fireman example above.

That's debatable. Bad instructions from a navigation system can be horribly distracting, and you get plenty of bad instructions from every nav system I've ever tried while driving in London.

Otherwise, it's a barrier to entry to a restricted group of drivers so that they enjoy a monopoly and the power to price their taxi services accordingly.

Taxi fares in London are on a meter and regulated by law.

Re: monopoly

[Anonymous Coward]

That choice exists today. You can book a minicab, Uber or black cab. Different fares, different features, and you have free choice as a consumer.

"My uncle was a cab driver..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh. That must be Bob. Bob's your uncle.

To quote The Simpsons

[DontBeAMoran]

Teacher: Are you telling me you memorized that fact when anyone with a cell phone can find it out in 30 seconds?
Martin Prince: I-I I've crammed my head full of garbage!
Teacher: Yes, you have.

Re:To quote The Simpsons

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Looking up all facts on the Internet has never backfired! No misinformation out there.

Re:To quote The Simpsons

[Computershack]

Teacher: Are you telling me you memorized that fact when anyone with a cell phone can find it out in 30 seconds? Martin Prince: I-I I've crammed my head full of garbage! Teacher: Yes, you have.

How to spot someone with actual knowledge of something and someone who doesn't is to see who can filter out all the bullshit completely wrong returns in a Google search. As for googling stuff, if I hire you for the job you claim to be qualified and experienced in I don't expect you to be searching the internet to do stuff you've told me you can do. In many places I've worked if you did that you'd be fired for incompetence. They don't want employees who waste time having to search for stuff they should know.

Re:Uber doesn't do this

[Cajun Hell]

Black cab drivers have to learn the knowledge often committing up to 3 years driving around London to learn streets and locations.

Aren't you just restating what the summary said?

Not quite, because the summary didn't have this "black cab drivers" trick for those unfamiliar with London, causing a brief impression that something racist was going on. He added some brilliant confusion. It was master-quality misdirection and the least we could do is applaud.

Applicant filter

[g01d4]

There's the notion that passing the test signals an ability roughly correlated with character and intelligence that provides a first pass filter for applicants. Whether greater emphasis on this notion is still worth the premium is certainly debatable.

Re:Uber doesn't do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Racism, racism....oh....you mean the black cabs.

At the hands of a professional

[Anonymous Coward]

Hopping in a cab in London, for *decades* has been one of the last bastions of relaxation in a busy itinerary, knowing you were in the hands of a professional. Truly.

I wish we could clone about 1000 of them, along with the former version of the black London Cab and drop them by chute all over San Francisco. Oh, the humanity.

Re:At the hands of a professional

[TechyImmigrant]

Hopping in a cab in London, for *decades* has been one of the last bastions of relaxation in a busy itinerary, knowing you were in the hands of a professional. Truly.

I wish we could clone about 1000 of them, along with the former version of the black London Cab and drop them by chute all over San Francisco. Oh, the humanity.

I have found black cab drivers in London to be dishonest and/or rude about 50% of the time and always expensive. They also stick to the busy and high paying points in London leaving other areas devoid of taxis when you need one. Opening up the app before you leave and getting a non rude, follow-the-gps driver is much, much more pleasant.

And privacy?

[plopez]

Do you want the whole world to know your spending habits? Who you associate with? Etc. If you use Uber/Lyft etc. and the surveillance state will love you.

Scenario: you stop off at a restaurant to pick up some take out. 15 minutes after you leave a bomb goes off. Of course if you did nothing wrong you have nothing wrong to worry about. Right?

Re:And privacy?

[bluegutang]

This is London. The surveillance cameras on every street corner already have a picture of you entering and leaving the restaurant.

Ha,ha,ha

[Anonymous Coward]

We use the abacus as it took us years to master it. 4 years of memorizing the routes gives what percent more accurate routes than a GPS based app? Keep in mind GPS based apps will continue to improve.

ask the people.

[houghi]

Yes,it might be nice to be able to say "that chineese restaurant next to the flowershop across the church" and have the cabby jnow where it is, but in all my life I had an address when I took a taxi.

What I like is the cars themselves, made specially as a taxi, not just a car where you sit inthe back. Much easier to get in and out of. THAT is service I like to pay for. Bit like first and second class in a plane.

Re:Uber doesn't do this

[Anonymous Coward]

Drivers of black cabs vs cab drivers who are black.

Human GPS

[jetkust]

Last time I rode a cab the guy seemed to have no knowledge of the city whatsoever and I had to give him specific directions the entire way down to what lanes to drive in. He basically used me as his GPS.

Re:Human GPS

[Anonymous Coward]

Recalculating!

Headline Broken

[loslosbaby]

....its... The Knowledge

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Matter of tine

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, transportation worked ARE going to lose their jobs, along side many other automatable industries. But fuck it, as unsure as the future is (and always has and will be) let's just roll with the punches.
We have come this far through sometimes blind and increasingly more acute progress...
And I guarantee, there will be some growing pains. But, we'll deal with and get through it.
Maybe a little shaper and brighter in the other side.

Bollocks ...

[angel'o'sphere]

It's a grueling process unmatched by any training taxi drivers have to face anywhere else,
It id the same in every european city I know about ...
OTOH London is particular big.

Re:Bollocks ...

[LynnwoodRooster]

Not to mention Shanghai as well, if you want to get at least a single star on your license...

Yes

[Murdoch5]

In any other job, you have to carry the qualifications of that job. If I'm a software developer, I have to know and understand the languages which I work with, in great detail, if I don't, then I'm really just a script kiddy, taking code off stack overflow. Why would or should the taxi industry be any different?

Re:Yes

[marquisdepolis]

If you don't understand why software development and taxi industry should be any different, I think we might be talking in different languages altogether.

Re:Yes

[Murdoch5]

They're different only in the skill set required.

The knowledge is an ancient tradition.

[Anonymous Coward]

Any black cab driver who is hard up for coin will know full well the benefits of taking a route that appears to be short but actually makes you stop at more lights and get stuck in traffic more.

"cabbies proudly defend the Knowledge"

[Stonent1]

Of course anyone is going to claim they are absolutely indispensable when their livelihood is challenged. In the early 20th century, white-only unions lobbied for a minimum wage to shut out black construction workers who were willing to underbid the prevailing union wage.

Re:"cabbies proudly defend the Knowledge"

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! That's what I've been saying all along! Whitey and their Unions can't be trusted! Saying "everyone will benefit from setting the base pay for all jobs" is just a way to screw over everyone who doesn't have a job! You have to have a job to get a minimum wage, and that's not fair.

Wait, what was i saying?

Re:"cabbies proudly defend the Knowledge"

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course anyone is going to claim they are absolutely indispensable when their livelihood is challenged. In the early 20th century, white-only unions lobbied for a minimum wage to shut out black construction workers who were willing to underbid the prevailing union wage.

s/20th/21st/

Not news

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not news. It should be fairly common knowledge, even to those of us outside the UK.

Pretty sure all that memorization ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty sure all that memorization has squeezed out some parts of your brain that handle grammar, syntax, and notice errors.

THIS is the big problem with the insane job requirements that are currently foisted on most workers. You have so much to keep track of that you cannot possibly do a good job, and soon you cannot even do a competent one. Also you do not have the time to check your work, and soon even when you could take the time you are out of the habit of focusing on details.

Meanwhile Dunning-Kruger keeps on chugging.

Then it's "who could have possibly known ,,,"

Old News...

[Anonymous Coward]

Only took ./ 153 years to report on this one.

The quality of this site has gone to hell. It should really be filed in my "humor" bookmark folder than "news," along with CNN.

Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[Applehu Akbar]

The Knowledge was obviously a great idea in the London of 1865, when the only way to be a cabdriving professional wa to know every inch of the city. It's also great for screwing the passenger in more or less subtle ways. Given an intimate knowledge of city streets, you "take the passenger for a ride" without making even a long-term resident aware that this is what you're doing.

The psychology behind The Knowledge is exactly what kept Morse code in use as a hazing mechanism in ham radio for years after it had lost its operational usefulness. If I had to spend years learning The Knowledge or pounding a telegraph key, I'm going to make the young pups go through the same rite of passage.

Not only is GPS better at finding the way in today's expanded and changing city, but a ride service based on having drivers follow a GPS-computed route is fundamentally more honest. A displayed route is a matter of record that can be stored and audited later to fix blame for any chicanery by either the driver or the company. Since so many passengers have navigation apps of their own, they can in many cases whip out a phone and compare routes real time.

Re: Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[shilly]

Uberâ(TM)s app *routinely* picks long and slow routes in London. I frequently have to redirect the driver based on my own knowledge or Waze. And of course thereâ(TM)s absolutely zero transparency about fare calculations â" I have to trust that the fare was calculated the way it was promised to be calculated. Meters in black cabs are regulated by a third party, by contrast.

Re: Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[Applehu Akbar]

If Uber picks a bad route, you can call them on it with legally discoverable evidence of what route it laid out for the driver. If the driver did not drive the route specified by GPS, you have a legally discoverable record of where he actually went. Now try to get this kind of evidence out of a Yellow Cab company to whom you paid cash to a driver who did not spikka de English.

Re: Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[shilly]

1. This is an article about black cabs and London. Why would I try to get money out of yellow cabs? Black cabs are subject to mystery shopping exercises and a cabbie can lose their licence if they do what you suggest
2. Legally discoverable my fat ass. As if more than about three customers in the history of Uber has ever bothered trying to pursue that particular line. I mean, really.

Re: Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[Applehu Akbar]

Oh yes, it's the UK we're talking about. Only well-connected corporations have access to the legal system.

Re: Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[shilly]

That was probably the least effectual rejoinder I've seen on Slashdot so far.

Re:Hams clinging to code? Cheating cabdrivers?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you have to live here to experience it, but GPS really really isn't better at finding the way in London. Anyone who drives in London knows roads in their area to avoid and at what times, its a cabby's job to know all of the roads to avoid, at what times, and which one is near "the theatre that's showing Chicago tonight, oh but first can we stop off at this pub in the west end, I can't remember the name but I'm pretty sure it's a King's Something", because the test isn't just about routes, but also road names, place names, place descriptions, any number of things, as well as exactly how they all connect together. It takes a minimum of 3yrs to learn and if and when they pass, cabbies have to regularly check in with the PCO for re-testing their knowledge in order to keep their licenses.

They're heavily regulated in that their meters are regularly tested and inspected by a third party, ever cabbie is registered and the Public Carriage Office (under the Transport for London umbrella) takes complaints against cabbies very seriously. If you think a cab driver's taken you for a ride, literally and metaphorically, they'll be brought up and asked to explain and justify the route they took (since most black cabs these days are equipped with a GPS tracker of some sort for ease of dispatch through apps like Hail-O).

If there are doubts about the route or they're worried you might think they're taking the scenic route, drivers will often ask "Do you have a preferred route? Only that Street A will be quite busy this time of night and Road B has got roadworks, so if I go via C Avenue you should get there quicker". There are also regular "secret shoppers" whereupon inspectors in mufti will hail a random black cab and ask to be taken to X and will be marking the route as they go, as well as checking that the cab and its driver are clean and well presented.

A lot of us who live in london still think the above are important.

Black cabs, in my experience at least, are a long way from the wildly exaggerated albeit much-repeated stereotype of filthy US yellow taxi's reeking of bodily fluids with an incomprehensibly angry idiot immigrant at the wheel who wouldn't know the difference between madison avenue and madison wisconsin looking to take all your money by taking a detour via tokyo and I'm continually bemused by people on sites like slashdot judging black cabs by american standards despite seemingly having never ridden in one.

Funny thing is

[rsilvergun]

in 20 years self driving cars will make this an amusing footnote in history. Like the static snow effect on old TVs, floppy disc drives and leaded gasoline.

Re:Funny thing is

[Anonymous Coward]

And 100 years from now H. Sapiens will be a domesticated animal, kept around strictly for someone's amusement. Woof!

Re:Funny thing is

[gravewax]

20 years? that seems insanely optimistic. I doubt self driving cars will be prolific enough for any of this to be a historical for at least another 40 or 50 years.

Re:Funny thing is

[Anonymous Coward]

20 years? I think you need to do some basic maths. If every car from this day forward was manufactured as self driving it would take 20 years just for them to reach number parity to other cars on the road. The reality is even 40 years would be bloody hard to achieve and for standard cards to be an amusing footnote that will be more like 50-60 years at least, most likely longer.

Re:Uber doesn't do this

[Kohath]

Because it's anachronistic? Maybe they should be tested on driving teams of horses too.

That way only a few guys could qualify and cab fares can be bid up so only the very rich can afford to use a cab.

Color me skeptical

[OneHundredAndTen]

As someone who lived in London for a few years, and who took rides in London cabs in numerous occasions, this come across as a desperate attempt by the London cab lobby to delay the inevitable. Uber and Lyft is already pointing out that the official cab service is overpriced, and not all that good. But this is just the beginning, for it won't be too long now until autonomous cabs, far better at memorizing the city ways and plotting routes, will be taking over. The death knell for London cabbies has already rung. They will of course kick and scream before the bitter end, but they know their days are numbered.

Benefits beyond navigation

[Roger W Moore]

You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage.

Not at all. I would much rather be driven by someone who is proud of the job they do, who is committed enough that they are willing to spend the time to understand the layout of a large complex city and who also has the mental capacity to do so. The benefit of this test is not purely restricted to navigational know-how.

Regular customer here

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for what itâ(TM)s worth, much prefer black cabs to uber-like services. Wave your hand and name the place and enjoy fine comfort - beats fiddling with a phone, tiny on-screen keyboards and random, unvetted drivers and cars. Fees may be a bit higher but you pay for quality and convenience. And, to uberâ(TM)s credit, cabbies have become much kinder and friendlier these days.

Economic Pyramids

[Anonymous Coward]

Money goes to the point where the problem is solved. Competent taxi drivers are reducing the flow of money to upper levels of the pyramid, and as such are clearly rebelling against the economic dominance of international service and equipment providers and their owners. Life is full of these trade offs of trading brain power with money.

Just another way to justify the price

[Anonymous Coward]

Just like Governor Cuomo wants to add an inspection tax on Uber and Lyft drivers, it's really just a tax to raise revenue.

Brian 1.0 vs Wave

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd have to be delusional to think this is an advantage.

And yet, I've seen many reports/documentaries/reviews over the years that have objectively compared SatNavs with London cabbies, and the cabbies always win, sometimes by a comically wide margin.

But SatNavs are different than more modern Maps apps and Waze. The latter two have real-time traffic, whereas (traditional) SatNav often doesn't have congestion information.

Perhaps humans are still better, but I'd be interest to see a more recent comparison. Also: just because they win now, doesn't mean they will in the future. Homo sapeins are stuck with Brain 1.0, where as the apps get better every year.

Re:Brian 1.0 vs Wave

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Every major satnav brand has had products with real-time traffic information for years, at least in the UK where we're talking about.

I don't know why people keep bringing up apps, Google Maps and Waze, as if they're somehow in a different class to other in-car devices. They have no magic, and IME they're not particularly any better in the inner city areas that other systems don't handle well.

Re: Cabbies! Why try shut down Uber w/Advantange

[Anonymous Coward]

They are âwhiningâ(TM) because the playing field is not level. Itâ(TM)s not a fair competition. You have traditional cabs with stringent licensing and procedural requirements and you have uber cowboys ingoring all laws.

Itâ(TM)s the same as amazon vs small high street seller. Amazon avoids tax on a grand scale, enable VAT dodging by various dubious traders, so they can sell at 30% cheaper than a small high street seller paying his dues.

GPS isn't that great

[Anonymous Coward]

GPS is for the map reading challenged. It get's you there but that's it. I think knowing where your going and being familiar with a city is always better then simply following the little map or turn by turn directions. I myself would definitely use traditional cabs over a Uber or Lyft any day.

Superior?

[jbmartin6]

they believe it allows them to deliver a superior level of service.

Well what is the problem then? The market will reward them if this is a level of service customers value.

Forced Experience makes for a much better ride

[Anonymous Coward]

Forced Experience makes for a much better ride.
There is a big difference between having knowledge and having real experience, but everyone usually agrees that having a basic level of knowledge does improve the results.
But there is a price for this.
It keeps out the people with how-to-drive knowledge, just like medical schools around the world limit the number of people who can enter their programs every year. This prevents someone "looking for a job" from taking the time and effort that someone "looking for a career" would expend to learn everything.

But in situations like cabbies, the world has already spoken. Cheap is more important than knowledgeable. We see and experience failures all-the-time in taxis around the world. I've been dropped at the wrong place in many different cities. Usually having to get another taxi to get to the correct location.

Engineers don't count?

[RhettLivingston]

Do you not think that we don't bust our asses to create the best product we can for you? Millions of man-hours from people killing themselves with long hours have already gone into creating the self-driving systems that show promise for dramatically reducing traffic fatalities in another couple of decades and enabling many new industries. Millions more will be spent before the job is done.

Engineers don't drive Cabs

[Roger W Moore]

Nobody mentioned self-driving cars. This is about whether London cabbies should be replaced by anyone who can drive while operating a GPS. Come up with a working, usable self-driving car and yes, probably just about everyone who earns a living from driving will be out of a job. Until then we need human drivers.

Re:Engineers don't drive Cabs

[RhettLivingston]

And it focused on Uber which is going to get out of the human driving model as fast as it can due to all of the labor law difficulties they have. Becoming a TaaS service without drivers before about 2025 is their best chance of survival. Killing them through the vulnerabilities in their current driver-based model before that transformation is successful is about the only way the cab companies can delay the inevitable. Don't believe for a moment that this argument is all about what is going on today.

GPS is just one of the many components needed for autonomous vehicles. I'm glad to have millions of people testing these routing systems ahead of time and would hope the professional drivers would be doing so too. Their knowledge is too valuable to just drive pampered execs around. They should be getting paid by the engineering teams to help develop the product.

I struggle every day to automate as much of my job away as possible and dream of the day when nobody has to work. Equitable distribution of the wealth when that day comes is a social scientist's problem, not mine.

Re:Engineers don't drive Cabs

[Roger W Moore]

Killing them through the vulnerabilities in their current driver-based model before that transformation is successful is about the only way the cab companies can delay the inevitable.

I think it very unlikely that Uber will be leading the revolution of self-driving cabs. Their reputation is so low at the moment that it is very unlikely to be able to persuade many local governments that they can be trusted with the safe operation of a fleet of computer-controlled cars. They are the Ryan Air ground transport.

Definitely helpful.

[kiminator]

The Knowledge is certainly helpful. The problem is that there are idiosyncrasies to city traffic that are virtually impossible for algorithms to capture adequately, and the error rates on them are much too high for a cab driver to tolerate.

I do strongly feel that a good GPS application with up-to-date traffic information will be of tremendous help to a cab driver, but if they don't know the routes themselves, they're going to make mistakes. Sometimes the GPS app will not understand that you can't make a certain turn at a particular intersection. Sometimes it will misread traffic because one lane is far slower than another lane. If you know the streets well, it's often pretty easy to shave a few minutes off of the travel time, and know the best way to avoid big slowdowns if something like a car crash happens.

GPS apps are also often pretty terrible at the start and end of the journey. At the start, it may not realize which direction you're moving, or how best to reach the road if you're in a parking lot still. At the end of the journey, it may not know the best entrance, and if the best entrance is on a different street than the GPS thinks, it may require a significant detour that would be avoided by simply setting the destination properly. Knowing the city well enough for this can act as a good patch for these inadequacies.

Brain changes

[ebcdic]

The hippocampus grows measurably while a taxi driver learns The Knowledge: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16086233

Cool story, bro.

[argStyopa]

...but let's talk about how Capitalism will fuck this.

It may be wonderfully charming that your Black Cab driver knows the whole city by heart, but (almost) NOBODY IS WILLING TO PAY FOR IT.

If someone asked: "will you pay an extra $1 for a cabbie that knows the text of the Magna Carta?", it may have been a grueling example of memorization and a clever trick but almost nobody cares. And capitalism is about paying as little as possible for what you need, and nothing else that costs money.

See, most people just want (from their cab) to get from point A to point B in as reasonably short a timeframe as possible. GPS and system-aware autocars can do this well enough.

Sorry, I see no need to protect buggy-whip makers nor blacksmiths in 2018. Like those professions, I'm sure The Knowledge will remain of some boutique value to a few tourists, and thus a few examples will persist tucked in between carriage horses at Hyde Park, but as an INDUSTRY? Why?

I'll take Google maps, thanks

[Locke2005]

The problem with memorizing every street in the city is, the streets are constantly changing. Google maps is usually a lot more up to date, and suggests alternate routes to work around traffic jams. The downside of using mapping software is it routes heavy traffic to out of the way streets that usually have very little traffic, annoying the people that live on those streets.

Sin City

[Anonymous Coward]

I drove a cab in Las Vegas and we had to pass a test showing that we knew where all the casinos were. There was also a bait shop on the way to the Lake Mead. In addition, we had to know where the Blue Diamond Truck Stop was and where Parump, NV was. I missed the Parump one. Learned later that Parump, NV was where the closest legal brothel was located, about 90 miles from Las Vegas. Had one fare there in two years of driving.

The knowledge is irrelevant, cost is relevant

[Anonymous Coward]

London is an expensive city but it's not like everyone is made of money and Black cabs are notoriously expensive. Uber etc can offer a service that more people can afford and that's why they have a great following. The Knowledge is impressive and good but who cares if you aren't going to pay for a taxi anyhow and are used to schlepping it on the bus?

News Flash! Cabbies believe they add value!

[psmoot]

Wow, stunning. Cabbies who have invested tons of effort in learning The Knowledge believe that effort adds value! No kidding, anyone who's invested effort learning a skill wants to believe that was worthwhile. No one wants to believe their skill is obsolete or low value.

If this makes cabbie service so much better, wonderful! Let's put it to a test. Uber and Uber drivers are betting GPS is better. Cabbies are betting humans are better. Let them both compete for riders and in a few years, we'll have a really good idea which is preferable.

This is, you'll notice, exactly how we decide which other product and service innovations are worthwhile and which are not.

Knowledge certificate, up-sell

[Anonymous Coward]

In the age of GPS and maps for everything readily available having the Knowledge is more of an up-sell. Definitely helpful to the driver and likely helpful to the rider. Uber in London could off an Uber Knowledge tier at a slightly higher price, where the driver uses the Knowledge and not the Uber app.

Re:GPS can be ass backwards...

[Anonymous Coward]

Chris, he just figured someone your size uses the cargo entrance.

To their credit...

[DeVilla]

To their credit, the London cabbies can deliver more than a quick ride from here to there. My brother and I had a largely unplanned vacation in Europe. (We knew where & when we were flying in & out and very little else.) One of our first days in London we asked a cabbie to show us a few high lights. He was as good as any tour guide and it was a lot more intimate. We also got some good suggestions of place to visit for a bit. Yes, we tipped generously.

Can't say the same for the cabbie in Paris. Can say not all French waiters are rude to American men. (A stereo type we'd heard.)

Nice gimmick for the 20th centuary.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not worth a 200% markup on uber prices (or 100% on a pre-booking cab) and before people spout on about safety and professionalism.. look up what John Worboys did for a living.

They are better than a GPS - but it's marginal

[Chrisq]

There are times when a cabbie will be able to do things that GPS can't. For example, when taking you to a hotel a cabbie might say "I can drop you off at this corner and it's a 50 yards down there, which will take you less than a minute, or I can take you to the door, but with this traffic and the one-way system it will take another 15 minutes". Traditionally they have been able to anticipate traffic, take fastest routes, and estimate times better than GPS, but things like Waze are catching up. However the advantage is marginal and for many trips a cheaper mini-cab would be almost as good.

Aaah, the American psychopath.

[Anonymous Coward]

Always thinking of assholeries, always assuming assholeries, since psychopathy is the foundation and rule set of your society.

It's actually scientifically proven!
Somebody noticed, that all studies regarding human behavior were made with American students.
He repeated them with people all over the world.
And it turns out, the whole scientific basis was bullshit, as the old assumptions were only true for Americans, and Europeans to some degree.

Most humans were very social, and worked for the group effort.
Only westerners were very self-centered and psychopathic (aka sociopathic) in their behavior.
And Americans were the extreme of that extreme.

Which explains the concept of profit, upon which US society is based. (Essentially being the concept of manipulating or forcing people into paying more for things than they are worth, by having to work more, to have that kind of money, than was worked for the product, and hence than the product is worth. So an action from the same category as theft, robbery, fraud and racketeering.)

A great British film on this

[terremoto]

There's a British TV film (play) about this. Made in 1979, it is #83 on the BFI list of the greatest British television programmes. Unsurprisingly, the film is called The Knowledge.

Oh, my sweet summer child

[drinkypoo]

Waze can't beat a London taxi driver because Waze will not route you down bus only lanes and streets which a taxi can also use.

It's difficult to beat protectionism.

Troll doesn't mean "I disagree". It means someone is saying these things solely to piss people off, and usually doesn't even believe what they're saying. But it's a fact that it's difficult to beat protectionism, and it's also a fact that bus/taxi-only lanes are protectionist. And it's also a fact that neither HOV lanes nor bus lanes actually work. The carrying capacity is all out of proportion to the cost.

The wonders of a GPS1

[whitroth]

Yeah, like the time a few years ago when a GPS had my agent lead us an extra 30 mi or so on the DC Beltway by going the *wrong* direction.

Or the times that it, or Google maps, *always* wants to get you onto an Interstate, rather than using the through streets that the natives know.

And some idiot thinks that a London cabbie doesn't know if a bridge is out? Better than the GOP? Or why they should, or should not, go down that street?

Real World knowledge trumps what you're told by someone who wasn't there.

Knowledge is already public.....

[Anonymous Coward]

If these cabbies carry a google phone or an apple phone on them, then their market advantage is already gone because google and apple and ergo any tech company already has their "knowledge" and their "application of said knowledge" stored as trip data to be mined by the relevant AI for Uber or what ever..... So get with the program and use the GPS and tracking services to enhance the Knowlege service. The exam is from the 1800's so how the fuck can it be relevant today. The real people cabbies can still compete today but they best take advantage of the new tech or they may as well be driving a horse and cart along with that "knowledge" for all the good it will do them.

20 pounds vs 10 pounds

[CanEHdian]

Let me see, 20 pounds for a cabbie to take me from point A to point B for 20 pounds but without GPS, or 10 pounds for an Uber driver who uses a GPS device and it may take 10 minutes longer (or less, if the GPS helps to avoid a traffic jam)... hmmm... decisions, decisions.

lol

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry but that's just a bad reason. GPS is objectively better. I lived in the UK and in my experience Uber was far more reliable than taxi drivers on average (with notable exceptions, of course). In fact I never once had an issue getting somewhere with Uber but taxi drivers consistently either took me to the wrong place or asked me for directions which I didn't know and led to additional charges while they tried to find their way.