None of the vetting Uber does will dissuade a driver from harming a passenger after the vetting is done. It's not like having your fingerprints registered.
Still it is better than not having inspectors at all. Would those restaurants EVER have cleaned up? Would they even have been concerned about rats in the food storage? Without regulation it can *always* be far worse.
In this case taxi companies are clearly paying their drivers more and treating them better. When making a decision like this, I look solely at how the people with the least bargaining power get treated, and taxis are clearly ahead of Uber in that regard.
I thought LIDAR was the creme de la creme of sensing technology. One sensor can't detect squirrels?? How many sensors would be required if they had to detect dogs and cats as well like in a real neighborhood? Autonomy has a long long way to go.
a) cause food poisoning.
b) go out of business as a result.
In real life things don't work that way but it's cute that you think things do. Businesses will make thousands of dollars, give people food poisoning, and then just bounce back under another name. It happens in other industries all the time. Look at the whole Theranos fiasco. These days it is very easy to be too big to fail.
The whole point of regulation is so that businesses can't fuck you over. Without regulation how would you know whether the building you reside in is safe or not?
Taxis don't do that in my city, maybe they do that in yours.. If that is the case then complain to your government about enforcing taxi pickups. Don't patronize a company that is just bad for everyone.
Where I live, taxi's have to:
- provide protection shields for the drivers
- Provide an emergency 911 strobe on the top of the car
- fingerprint the drivers with full police check
- have commercial insurance
- Have at least one taxi outside all major hotels
- Have at least x taxis outside the airport
- Have taxis equipped for the physically disabled
My apologies if I Uber actually does all this and I did not realize it.
They don't follow the same restrictions where am from. Here the cars have protection shields for the drivers and emergency strobes on top of the car. Also all drivers have to be fingerprinted and carry commercial insurance.
The problem is that the average American is so distrustful of the government that they will blatantly do things that are bad for everyone such as allow companies like Uber in. I hope we realize this and stop it before we are like India and they are like us.
This is why I think autonomy has a long way to go: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor....
"It needs a special LIDAR for squrrels".. what if the campus had dogs and cats like the real world? Would we need another lidar for each of them? Obviously sensor tech isn't even very good.
I'd like to know what would happen if someone found a stuffed squirrel and put it on the road, would this contraption deduce that it should drive around the squirrel since it is not moving? We have a real long way to go with reasoning in order to reach full autonomy..
How does the public at large get screwed? Anyone in a city can order a taxi and they know what they are getting. With an Uber you may get one you may not, they may be surge pricing they may not. If you are physically disabled and require a special vehicle you are screwed. If you don't have a smartphone you are screwed. When I have caught a taxi I walk to the nearest hotel and there are always several outside.
Hello.. Uber doesn't employ anyone. The drivers aren't employees. They might employ office staff. This means they don't take any of the risk, which is a big deal. So people using Uber does not raise employment. Even if they were employees they're getting a far smaller piece of the pie than taxi drivers so the point stands. Woo.. there is Uber and Lyft. One day Uber buys Lyft and there is one company. It is different than other companies because the taxi industry is regulated, thus forcing them to care about people.
Insurance companies can't do anything they want. If I lend my car to someone else and they get in an accident, they can't legally come after me for damages. It is the same scenario with automated cars.
How can you say a vehicle that is confused by a sandbag in the road or a shopping bag blowing in the wind is better than a human? I just don't get that. You can't have a car that is going to stop for every blowing shopping bag. On the other hand, if it is a rock swinging on a rope you had better stop. From what I know about current AI, it can't tell the difference yet.
I'd rather protect a corrupt industry in need of some moderation that employs thousands of people and from which I get some benefits, rather then protect a single corrupt company that employs almost no one and cares about benefiting no one but themselves.
And unregulated taxis weren't safe, and there too many of them on the road to the point that it was causing accidents. Furthermore, there was no way to force them to accommodate people who lived in less profitable areas of a city or to serve people with disabilities. What's your point? If regulation wasn't required then it wouldn't be there.
But in this case, the public gets clear benefits from taxi regulations. The drivers are vetted, the cars are fitted with safety equipment, there aren't too many of them on the road, they can be contracted to be waiting where people need them like at hotels and airports, and all people in a city get served equally no matter what area they live in or what kind of physical disability they have.
This is new technology, there is no previous version. Really it comes down to whether they survive lawsuits from people who's families they injure and/or kill.
Slashdot Mirror
None of the vetting Uber does will dissuade a driver from harming a passenger after the vetting is done. It's not like having your fingerprints registered.
Still it is better than not having inspectors at all. Would those restaurants EVER have cleaned up? Would they even have been concerned about rats in the food storage? Without regulation it can *always* be far worse.
In this case taxi companies are clearly paying their drivers more and treating them better. When making a decision like this, I look solely at how the people with the least bargaining power get treated, and taxis are clearly ahead of Uber in that regard.
..and you need to buy a second charger for the other earpiece! Brilliant!
Don't worry about the pigeons. They will be around a lot longer than we will.
Yes and then some real moral issues surface. At what point is a minor human injury more important than a house pet's life?
I thought LIDAR was the creme de la creme of sensing technology. One sensor can't detect squirrels?? How many sensors would be required if they had to detect dogs and cats as well like in a real neighborhood? Autonomy has a long long way to go.
a) cause food poisoning. b) go out of business as a result.
In real life things don't work that way but it's cute that you think things do. Businesses will make thousands of dollars, give people food poisoning, and then just bounce back under another name. It happens in other industries all the time. Look at the whole Theranos fiasco. These days it is very easy to be too big to fail.
The whole point of regulation is so that businesses can't fuck you over. Without regulation how would you know whether the building you reside in is safe or not?
Taxis don't do that in my city, maybe they do that in yours.. If that is the case then complain to your government about enforcing taxi pickups. Don't patronize a company that is just bad for everyone.
Where I live, taxi's have to:
- provide protection shields for the drivers
- Provide an emergency 911 strobe on the top of the car
- fingerprint the drivers with full police check
- have commercial insurance
- Have at least one taxi outside all major hotels
- Have at least x taxis outside the airport
- Have taxis equipped for the physically disabled
My apologies if I Uber actually does all this and I did not realize it.
They don't follow the same restrictions where am from. Here the cars have protection shields for the drivers and emergency strobes on top of the car. Also all drivers have to be fingerprinted and carry commercial insurance.
The problem is that the average American is so distrustful of the government that they will blatantly do things that are bad for everyone such as allow companies like Uber in. I hope we realize this and stop it before we are like India and they are like us.
This is why I think autonomy has a long way to go: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor....
"It needs a special LIDAR for squrrels".. what if the campus had dogs and cats like the real world? Would we need another lidar for each of them? Obviously sensor tech isn't even very good.
I'd like to know what would happen if someone found a stuffed squirrel and put it on the road, would this contraption deduce that it should drive around the squirrel since it is not moving? We have a real long way to go with reasoning in order to reach full autonomy..
Sure.. but the contest should be on ice, with snow covering lane markings and signs.
How does the public at large get screwed? Anyone in a city can order a taxi and they know what they are getting. With an Uber you may get one you may not, they may be surge pricing they may not. If you are physically disabled and require a special vehicle you are screwed. If you don't have a smartphone you are screwed. When I have caught a taxi I walk to the nearest hotel and there are always several outside.
Hello.. Uber doesn't employ anyone. The drivers aren't employees. They might employ office staff. This means they don't take any of the risk, which is a big deal. So people using Uber does not raise employment. Even if they were employees they're getting a far smaller piece of the pie than taxi drivers so the point stands. Woo.. there is Uber and Lyft. One day Uber buys Lyft and there is one company. It is different than other companies because the taxi industry is regulated, thus forcing them to care about people.
Insurance companies can't do anything they want. If I lend my car to someone else and they get in an accident, they can't legally come after me for damages. It is the same scenario with automated cars.
How can you say a vehicle that is confused by a sandbag in the road or a shopping bag blowing in the wind is better than a human? I just don't get that. You can't have a car that is going to stop for every blowing shopping bag. On the other hand, if it is a rock swinging on a rope you had better stop. From what I know about current AI, it can't tell the difference yet.
I'd rather protect a corrupt industry in need of some moderation that employs thousands of people and from which I get some benefits, rather then protect a single corrupt company that employs almost no one and cares about benefiting no one but themselves.
Yeah well then it's pretty pathetic they aren't doing a better job than they are yet.
And unregulated taxis weren't safe, and there too many of them on the road to the point that it was causing accidents. Furthermore, there was no way to force them to accommodate people who lived in less profitable areas of a city or to serve people with disabilities. What's your point? If regulation wasn't required then it wouldn't be there.
But in this case, the public gets clear benefits from taxi regulations. The drivers are vetted, the cars are fitted with safety equipment, there aren't too many of them on the road, they can be contracted to be waiting where people need them like at hotels and airports, and all people in a city get served equally no matter what area they live in or what kind of physical disability they have.
This is new technology, there is no previous version. Really it comes down to whether they survive lawsuits from people who's families they injure and/or kill.