SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Uber may be looking to purchase thousands of autonomous cars, but it seems that no deal has been finalized:
Ride-hailing service Uber has sounded out car companies about placing a large order for self-driving cars, an auto industry source said on Friday. "They wanted autonomous cars," the source, who declined to be named, said. "It seemed like they were shopping around."
Loss-making Uber would make drastic savings on its biggest cost -- drivers -- if it were able to incorporate self-driving cars into its fleet. Volkswagen's Audi, Daimler's Mercedes-Benz, BMW and car industry suppliers Bosch and Continental are all working on technologies for autonomous or semi-autonomous cars.
Earlier on Friday, Germany's Manager Magazin reported that Uber had placed an order for at least 100,000 Mercedes S-Class cars, citing sources at both companies. The top-flight limousine, around 100,000 of which Mercedes-Benz sold last year, does not yet have fully autonomous driving functionality.
Another source familiar with the matter said no order had been placed with Mercedes-Benz. Daimler and Uber declined to comment.
Auto industry executives are wary of doing deals with newcomers from the technology and software business who threaten to upend established business models based on manufacturing and selling cars. "We don't want to end up like Nokia's handset business, which was once hugely profitable...then disappeared," a second auto industry source said about doing a deal with Uber. [...] Earlier this week Mercedes rival BMW said it was considering launching its own ride hailing service in what would amount to a rival business to Uber.
An order of 100,000 Mercedes S-Class cars would cost billions, even with a steep discount. Reuters hasn't removed the reference to the 100,000 Mercedes-Benz cars, as seen above.
(Score: 0, Redundant) by khallow on Monday March 21 2016, @01:41PM
Just in case anyone is still unclear on the undeniable fact that no capitalistic corporation has the slightest interest in wasting one thin dime providing employment for a single member of humanity if there exists any cost-effective means to avoid it.
It's not their job, buttercup. It's your job to show that it is cost-effective to employ you.
(Score: 2) by RedBear on Monday March 21 2016, @06:03PM
Yeah, I'm absolutely certain that's what I just said. Buttercup. Your comment is quite redundant. And you missed the point entirely.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 22 2016, @12:52AM
Yeah, I'm absolutely certain that's what I just said.
Then you should have said something else rather than "Job creators my foot." It's quite clear from that statement that you don't get it. A lot of people wouldn't do stuff for money, if they could just get the money. Employers are not unusual in that. But they can't get something for nothing. In the case of employers, that means that they have to pay someone to work for them.