3 ms·

This is just a transition to driverless cars. Uber knows it and they are willing to pay the price.

celticninja 10y ago
That doesnt make sense. Yes I know that Uber want to transition to driverless vehicles but they cannot do that right now, they will need to maintain their momentum until such a time that they can do that. Which right now means adhere to the ruling to ensure that Uber still has a brand in the UK when they introduce driverless vehicles.
- tcrews 10y ago
  That's at least 10-20 years before the legal implications of driverless cars are figured out. That is, if the technology really proves to be reliable. Uber better have a lot of VC money to keep burning $2.4bn/year.
ethanbond 10y ago
I hope all their investors have their fingers crossed that governments are going to be totally okay with self driving cars. Despite, you know, a) totally unproven technology, b) no legal structures for liability, c) no legal structures for taxation, d) unemployment of local transportation workers, e) 100% of "gains" from said unemployment going to a Silicon Valley company, f) Uber's long track record of basically being an asshole in every market it sets foot in, g) did I mention the fact that there are no driverless cars? And hey, if they're only losing (not spending, losing) $600,000,000 per month, they've got what, at least another couple years of VC money to burn? I'm sure everything will be figured out by then.
phatfish 10y ago
It probably depends if they can hold out for true autonomous vehicles to become a reality. It will be a long time before you see such cars on London streets, or anywhere without specifically designed lanes in fact. All that cash they have accumulated is either going towards building a true driving AI that can mimic human decisions and not kill. Or it's being used to lobby/bribe governments to make their business model work while having to give compensation to drivers.

That doesnt make sense. Yes I know that Uber want to transition to driverless vehicles but they cannot do that right now, they will need to maintain their momentum until such a time that they can do that. Which right now means adhere to the ruling to ensure that Uber still has a brand in the UK when they introduce driverless vehicles.

tcrews 10y ago
That's at least 10-20 years before the legal implications of driverless cars are figured out. That is, if the technology really proves to be reliable. Uber better have a lot of VC money to keep burning $2.4bn/year.

ethanbond 10y ago

I hope all their investors have their fingers crossed that governments are going to be totally okay with self driving cars. Despite, you know, a) totally unproven technology, b) no legal structures for liability, c) no legal structures for taxation, d) unemployment of local transportation workers, e) 100% of "gains" from said unemployment going to a Silicon Valley company, f) Uber's long track record of basically being an asshole in every market it sets foot in, g) did I mention the fact that there are no driverless cars? And hey, if they're only losing (not spending, losing) $600,000,000 per month, they've got what, at least another couple years of VC money to burn? I'm sure everything will be figured out by then.

phatfish 10y ago

It probably depends if they can hold out for true autonomous vehicles to become a reality. It will be a long time before you see such cars on London streets, or anywhere without specifically designed lanes in fact. All that cash they have accumulated is either going towards building a true driving AI that can mimic human decisions and not kill. Or it's being used to lobby/bribe governments to make their business model work while having to give compensation to drivers.