For one, the efficiency improvement will not be as great as everyone thinks. Drivers often get paid less than minimum wage. Removing them will only save $100 a day, while there are certainly overhead costs for running AV cars.
Second point, drivers provide more than just driving cars. They provide customer service, they monitor the customers, and assist customers from unforeseen circumstances and people with special needs. Soe of these can be mitigated through cameras and such, but there will be cost associated with it and it won't be able to cover everything.
Without drivers, people will do horrible terrible no good very bad things to autonomous cars. There will be cost to fix damages, resolve situations, clean, repair, and avoid these things. ALWAYS. What about passengers who need special help? Would there havet o be specialized AVs for that?
Drivers cost $80 a day in some cities. Eliminating drivers may not save as much as you'd think.
Sure, Uber. I am sure it was a minor account issue. You are just saying that to avoid negative publicity. We hear about people getting banned all the time randomly for no reasons.
7%? That's 93.45 cents to a dollar that their male counterparts are making. So, perhaps this is a good story that the gap is smaller among Uber drivers.
You are right. I read it wrong. We can still drive our own cars and buses and trucks can still use the road.
With that said, this makes sense even less. So they want to ban all "personally owned self-driving cars"? Not sure what personally owned or business owned have anything to do with it.
Our tax money pays for the infrastructure and the roads. It's completely shameless that a private company wants to make all their money by monopolizing it
Unless they plan to pay for all of it, this better not fly. they also would have to buy hat real estate too. Buy all the roads and maintain them yourselves. Then I'm ok with it.
I think this is great. As part of the urban renewal projects, they started designating certain neighborhoods to be "car free." This can promote such initiatives. I am all for it. Super green.
I thought Juno was doing pretty well? They are the ones who offer equity to all drivers, right? (and low commission) I had a driver in Jersey City rave about them. ...except that I had requested an UberSUV.
RIDEGURU
Many of them says, "clean record." I didn't know about medallions. I guess history, reputation, and liability follow these things around?
"'Pick Up 11B' on the outer lane of the arrivals level. Board the "Green Route" shuttle, which will take you to the pickup lot to meet your driver."
HILARIOUS!!! You have to take a shuttle?!!!
Nope, not that quick.
For one, the efficiency improvement will not be as great as everyone thinks. Drivers often get paid less than minimum wage. Removing them will only save $100 a day, while there are certainly overhead costs for running AV cars.
Second point, drivers provide more than just driving cars. They provide customer service, they monitor the customers, and assist customers from unforeseen circumstances and people with special needs. Soe of these can be mitigated through cameras and such, but there will be cost associated with it and it won't be able to cover everything.
Without drivers, people will do horrible terrible no good very bad things to autonomous cars. There will be cost to fix damages, resolve situations, clean, repair, and avoid these things. ALWAYS. What about passengers who need special help? Would there havet o be specialized AVs for that?
Drivers cost $80 a day in some cities. Eliminating drivers may not save as much as you'd think.
Yeah, you can follow the class action suit stuff here.
http://www.junolawsuit.com/
Sure, Uber. I am sure it was a minor account issue. You are just saying that to avoid negative publicity. We hear about people getting banned all the time randomly for no reasons.
7%? That's 93.45 cents to a dollar that their male counterparts are making. So, perhaps this is a good story that the gap is smaller among Uber drivers.
You are right. I read it wrong. We can still drive our own cars and buses and trucks can still use the road.
With that said, this makes sense even less. So they want to ban all "personally owned self-driving cars"? Not sure what personally owned or business owned have anything to do with it.
The point is that they want to ban others and keep certain people, demographic, and businesses away from using the infrastructure.
They probably will claim this for all AVs but how convenient that they are the dominant force and will be the one benefit the most.
Our tax money pays for the infrastructure and the roads. It's completely shameless that a private company wants to make all their money by monopolizing it
Unless they plan to pay for all of it, this better not fly. they also would have to buy hat real estate too. Buy all the roads and maintain them yourselves. Then I'm ok with it.
What happened to the shares that were given out? Did the drivers see a cash out?
Umm...the # of uber cars climbing at that rate is alarming. Unique vehicles....so those drivers are making less and less then.
I think this is great. As part of the urban renewal projects, they started designating certain neighborhoods to be "car free." This can promote such initiatives. I am all for it. Super green.
I thought Juno was doing pretty well? They are the ones who offer equity to all drivers, right? (and low commission) I had a driver in Jersey City rave about them. ...except that I had requested an UberSUV.
Isn't it call the 'mugging'? or is that just stealing coffee at Starbucks?
CENTER. Best place to converse with the driver. It's rude everywhere else. Just don't be the dude to sit upfront on top of the drivers' stuff.
I mean, seriously. center is best. assuming there is no awkward mound and there is seatbelt.