Comments on: State forces Uber to stop testing self-driving vehicles

By: Ray Richard

Ray Richard — Mon, 26 Dec 2016 16:43:00 +0000

There should be some sort of compromise, as this is certainly the future of transportation.

By: Spurwing Plover

Spurwing Plover — Mon, 26 Dec 2016 15:01:39 +0000

PEACE ON EARTH

By: Standing Fast

Standing Fast — Sat, 24 Dec 2016 19:43:12 +0000

Merry Christmas, comrades.

By: Queeg

Queeg — Sat, 24 Dec 2016 17:45:49 +0000

Comrades

Goals for drones and robotic cars

Eliminates millions of good paying distribution jobs

By: Spurwing Plover

Spurwing Plover — Fri, 23 Dec 2016 22:05:51 +0000

How about a self driving car that drives all crooked politicians off to rh nearist prison in the area and illegal aliens back across the border

By: Standing Fast

Standing Fast — Fri, 23 Dec 2016 19:41:19 +0000

If self-driving vehicles were exclusively for use by disabled or elderly people, restricted to surface streets, banned from all highways and freeways, and met the highest-possible standards for safety, then I might reconsider my opposition to them.

I don’t think Uber is doing anything heroic by quibbling with the DMV over semantics. The DMV’s exclusive and sole purpose is to protect the public by regulating driving in our State. Operating motor vehicles is not a God-given right, it is a privilege granted by the People to those who qualify.

Uber is losing the good will of many people who support their wonderful alternative transportation service.

Liberty is not freedom from any kind of control. It is about the exercise of Self-Control. In the absence of self-control, the people of a society must ask government to step in and protect them from those who would endanger their lives, freedom and independence, property and pursuit of happiness.

Meantime, if Uber is going to persist in offering driverless cars for their clients, then I will not be calling on them for service.