Here are some statements from a NY Times article that just appeared tonight that support what I have been saying about Uber for the last three days:
Uber's self driving cars were no where near as good as its competitors and its systems were in fact struggling to perform adequately. A crash was inevitable.
In fact the NY Times obtained an internal Uber document and found:
1. Uber's new CEO (he replaced Travis Kalanick last August) wanted to eliminate the self driving car programme at Uber but was convinced otherwise that it was in their interests to keep it going.
2. Uber's AVs were not living up to expectations for many months. "The cars were having trouble driving through construction zones and next to tall vehicles, like big rigs. And Uber’s human drivers had to intervene far more frequently than the drivers of competing autonomous car projects."
3. "Waymo, formerly the self-driving car project of Google, said that in tests on roads in California last year, its cars went an average of nearly 5,600 miles before the driver had to take control from the computer to steer out of trouble. As of March, Uber was struggling to meet its target of 13 miles per “intervention” in Arizona, according to 100 pages of company documents obtained by the NY Times".
4. To accelerate their AV miles to give the appearance of success, Uber took the decision to remove one of the previously two test drivers they had in the vehicle so they could allocate more single test drivers to more vehicles to gain miles. In other words, safety be damned. Uber claims the second driver was not there to perform safety but to enter data, a task that fell to the single driver once the second driver was removed. In other words, less safety. By the way, Waymo removed their second driver in Phoenix in 2015 after more than 6 years of testing, but still uses two drivers when it enters a new location. And recently Waymo has felt its programme is now so advanced in Phoenix that it has removed all test/safety drivers from its self driving cars.
5. Uber was put under pressure to deliver a driverless service by the end of this year and their new CEO was expected to visit Phoenix next month to ride in one of their self driving cars in a project internally called "Milestone 1. Confidence". That visit will not take place now. Recall that last month, Uber agreed to settle a long-simmering legal case brought against them by Waymo.
6. Uber's safety driver was looking down and her hands were not where they were supposed to be, namely hovering above the wheel in case it needed to slow down suddenly. So not only was Uber's car not road ready according to internal documents but its safety driver was not following company policy.
7. A year ago, Uber arrived in Phoenix with more than 400 employees and more than 150 self driving cars. In October they decided to eliminate the second driver in the car to accelerate their programme, and this decision was taken over the objections of some of their safety drivers. These drivers were worried that it would be difficult to stay alert after hours of monotonous driving.
8. Comparing the two programmes at Waymo and Uber, the Times notes: "Uber also developed an app, mounted on an iPad in the car’s middle console, for drivers to alert engineers to problems. Drivers could use the app anytime without shifting the car out of autonomous mode. Often, drivers would annotate data at a traffic light or a stop, but many did so while the car was moving, said the two people familiar with Uber’s operations. Mr. Kallman said it designed the app to meet government safety guidelines for in-car software to minimize distractions.
Waymo had a different solution when it moved to a single safety driver. It added a button on the steering wheel for drivers to create an audio explanation when they took the car out of autonomous mode.
Not all drivers followed Uber’s training. One was fired after falling asleep at the wheel and being spotted by a colleague. Another was spotted air drumming as the autonomous car passed through an intersection, according to the two people familiar with Uber’s operations."
Leaving aside the implications of this tragedy and the legal issues facing Uber, the reputation of Uber's self driving programme has been severely damaged, perhaps beyond repair. The fast and loose culture that the new CEO had hoped to bring under control is still a huge problem for them to solve. Had the new CEO followed his initial decision to exit the pursuit of creating their own self driving vehicle, this tragedy would never have happened.
What strategic advice would you give Uber at this stage? Mine would be: close it down and enter a partnership with Waymo (an Uber shareholder) to provide an Uber ride hailing service using Waymo's technology as soon as Waymo decides it is ready to offer it commercially. Recently Waymo filed for a commercial license to operate a ride hailing service with their own app in Phoenix and this was approved in January. I would also recommend that Uber let Waymo choose which employees, including Uber's engineers, they want to retain. And Uber should focus their attention on limiting the reputational and legal damage they will surely face as a result of this tragedy which could have been avoided.
The Times cites a Gartner analyst who suggests that other competitors might be given the benefit of the doubt with a crash. Not so with Uber.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/...column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
R, The scene is a lot brighter than the Uber video. XC90 using dipped beam illuminates far enough in front to give 4 seconds of reaction time at the speed they where going.
