Uber defies State of California order to get 'self driving car' permits(businessinsider.com)
businessinsider.com
Uber defies State of California order to get 'self driving car' permits
http://www.businessinsider.com/uber-defies-california-regulators-to-keep-its-self-driving-cars-on-the-road-2016-12
4 comments
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13198079
Uber is presenting it's tech to the public as 'self driving', but their lawyers argue that it's not really 'autonomy' since they have live drivers there overseeing and taking over if needed.
It's not an unfair argument by Uber: their cars are not really autonomous ... there is a driver after all.
I wonder if this could have been avoided were Uber to have had more consistency in its messaging.
Also, if State of California were more clear as to what 'autonomous' actually means, i.e. 'fully autonomous' vs. 'driver assisted'. Because there is obviously a pretty big difference :)
It's not an unfair argument by Uber: their cars are not really autonomous ... there is a driver after all.
I wonder if this could have been avoided were Uber to have had more consistency in its messaging.
Also, if State of California were more clear as to what 'autonomous' actually means, i.e. 'fully autonomous' vs. 'driver assisted'. Because there is obviously a pretty big difference :)
They also present their car service as "car sharing", but it is just another taxi service. So you don't share your care, but just go where the client tells you to go whenever you want to go there or not.
[deleted]