What do you think about "autos"? (Self-driving cars)

[Army of GOD]

Personally, I am desperately excited for self driving cars. I think in 20-30 years well look back at today and wonder why the hell we opted to drive them manually.


What I find funny in the "afraid" camp is a kind of confirmation bias. For example, on the Tony Kornheiser show they talked about a story where a self driving car hit a bus in San Fran. Tony, pushing 70, freaked out and is clearly in the "people only" camp, but seems to forget that human driving car accidents happen all of the fucking time. Self driving car accidents are much, much more seldom.


Also, nietzsche is not allowed to vote since car technology has not yet reached Mexico

[riskllama]

i think it would be nice to have the option. for instance, you're loaded and just want to go the f*ck home and pass out on your front lawn. push the button, and you're there, minus the indignity of an impaired driving charge. personally, i enjoy driving. i don't need no stupid fucking computer to do it for me(unless i'm loaded, in which case : "Home, Jeeves")

[Metsfanmax]

I'm excited mostly for the increase in productivity it offers. A huge amount of my time is sunk because I have to pay attention to the road. It would be nice to be able to get places while still doing something useful during the ride.

[Dukasaur]

I can't say I'm excited for the future. As a professional driver, I know I will be obsolete before long. I just hope I manage to retire before I find myself retired involuntarily.

Still, saying "I don't want them" is pretty idiotic too. Once an advance becomes possible, those who refuse to embrace it simply get left behind.

Basically, we're in the end times now. Anything you can do a machine can do better. Kasparov was our last great hope that there's something unique about human creativity that can't be reduced to a microchip. As it turns out, there isn't. The question is no longer whether your job will become obsolete, but when.

[Army of GOD]

i think it would be nice to have the option. for instance, you're loaded and just want to go the f*ck home and pass out on your front lawn. push the button, and you're there, minus the indignity of an impaired driving charge. personally, i enjoy driving. i don't need no stupid fucking computer to do it for me(unless i'm loaded, in which case : "Home, Jeeves")

Yeah, that's a huge benefit of it. Drunk driving would become obselete...there would be absolutely no benefit to driving drunk if you have a self driving car option

I'm excited mostly for the increase in productivity it offers. A huge amount of my time is sunk because I have to pay attention to the road. It would be nice to be able to get places while still doing something useful during the ride.

interesting


For me numbers 1, 1a, 1b, 2 and 3 of going tonself driving cars are an increase in safety. I never really thought of " what I'd do while a passenger of a self driving car" but I could easily use the time to do work or watch movies/TV shows

I can't say I'm excited for the future. As a professional driver, I know I will be obsolete before long. I just hope I manage to retire before I find myself retired involuntarily.

Still, saying "I don't want them" is pretty idiotic too. Once an advance becomes possible, those who refuse to embrace it simply get left behind.

Basically, we're in the end times now. Anything you can do a machine can do better. Kasparov was our last great hope that there's something unique about human creativity that can't be reduced to a microchip. As it turns out, there isn't. The question is no longer whether your job will become obsolete, but when.

yeah, its a little depressing and slightly alarming, but I think self driving cars are a utilitarian champion. It screws over some people (professional drivers) but benefits more people.


Also, as per Kasparov, I read The Signal and the Noise by Nate Silver which had a whole chapter on Kasparov vs Deep Blue. I found that enthralling...how Kasparov "humaned" his way into a victory, but Deep Blue learned from it and won the seroes

[Metsfanmax]

For me numbers 1, 1a, 1b, 2 and 3 of going tonself driving cars are an increase in safety.

That is of course a big benefit but I'm concerned a bit about the ethical issues. It will be a long, difficult process to figure out how to assign blame and compensation when self-driving cars do cause harm.

[mrswdk]

[2dimes]

Will the first units be for public use like that taxi or privately owned by early adopters?

I think their biggest benefit will be for long distances, taking a trip from New York to SanFrancisco as opposed to getting to work or going to the grocery store.

I believe they won't be fully accepted until the generation grows into them by being the first ones to not learn to drive because they don't have to.

[mrswdk]

As someone who doesn't own a car and would only ever end up driving one that I'd hired for a vacation, I'd rather drive that car around than sit in the back and program it like an Uber.

[ADodgeStratus]

I am a self-driving car.

And I have a soul.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

MrsWDK. Were testing self driving cars as taxis in milton keynes, so that answers your question.

Why do we need to travel? Will these still be true in 20 years?

[mrswdk]

Why do we need to travel?

lolwat

[Bernie Sanders]

Why do we need to travel?

lolwat

We only want to hear from car owners, not from those who can't drive or who don't have cars.

Go ride your bicycle with training wheels. Don't forget to wear your protective helmet with knee and elbow pads. We wouldn't want you to harm yourself.

Once they have computer controlled bicycles you can contribute your thoughts on that issue.

[Dukasaur]

Why do we need to travel?

lolwat

We only want to hear from car owners, not from those who can't drive or who don't have cars.

Go ride your bicycle with training wheels. Don't forget to wear your protective helmet with knee and elbow pads. We wouldn't want you to harm yourself.

Once they have computer controlled bicycles you can contribute your thoughts on that issue.

[Endgame422]

This is an interesting video that dives into the implications of self-driving cars.
Professional drivers like duk will only be the first set to go with this new age of automation.
Soon enough humans will be more expensive and less efficient then machines for nearly every job.
By 2050 I imagine more then 1/3 of today's jobs will be automated.

[mrswdk]

That network of coffee robots sounds absolutely awesome.

[warmonger1981]

What's the ethics to this technology? Does the computer get to play God when it comes to vehicle accident? Each car has a male driver ages 40. One smokes and the other doesn't. If both cars get into accident but the odds of the smoker are calculated at a 1% chance more of surviving ,but is more costly on medical bills in the future due to his smoking, does the car kill the smoker due to bus burden on society for smoking of the other driver yet he's statitically 1% less of survival? Or if one car has children and the other doesn't. Who decides who dies?

Are people really ready to relinquish their right to move FREELY? Your not free if someone can cut your car off in an instant. How about lady in I think Nevada who was driving her car on the highway and missed a payment. The bank who owned the note on the car shut it down while she was driving on the highway. She could have died.


Will you get taxed on every mile you travel in the future? Will you be restricted of travel due to numerous sercumstances. I see this becoming a problem in the future.

Cadillac CT6 has cameras all around the vehicle for the police state monitoring you. BMW has a system to track your vitals. If your blood pressure goes up or your heart rate excellerates the car will kick on air conditioning to help calm you.

[WingCmdr Ginkapo]

Why do we need to travel?

lolwat

Travel for work - no longer required
Travel for consumerism - no longer required
Travel for human interaction - debatable
Travel for fun - debatable.

Humans are surplus to requirements.

[mrswdk]

What's the ethics to this technology? Does the computer get to play God when it comes to vehicle accident? Each car has a male driver ages 40. One smokes and the other doesn't. If both cars get into accident but the odds of the smoker are calculated at a 1% chance more of surviving ,but is more costly on medical bills in the future due to his smoking, does the car kill the smoker due to bus burden on society for smoking of the other driver yet he's statitically 1% less of survival? Or if one car has children and the other doesn't. Who decides who dies?

Are people really ready to relinquish their right to move FREELY? Your not free if someone can cut your car off in an instant. How about lady in I think Nevada who was driving her car on the highway and missed a payment. The bank who owned the note on the car shut it down while she was driving on the highway. She could have died.


Will you get taxed on every mile you travel in the future? Will you be restricted of travel due to numerous sercumstances. I see this becoming a problem in the future.

Cadillac CT6 has cameras all around the vehicle for the police state monitoring you. BMW has a system to track your vitals. If your blood pressure goes up or your heart rate excellerates the car will kick on air conditioning to help calm you.

I don't think a bot could learn to write a warmonger post. At last, we've found a role which will survival the mechanical onslaught!

[tzor]

Technology is only part of the problem; people are the other half. I've been starting to get involved with "waze." To do that, one has to enter the destination into the cellphone. You know you might want to go from point a to point b, but what about the stops along the way? You have to think about them before the trip, plan them into the waze itinerary. Things like this will have to become the common mindset before the fully self driving auto becomes possible. ("Excuse me, I think I have to pop off to the station to get myself some more gas" probably won't be available until much later in self driving car history.)

[mrswdk]

Why do we need to travel?

lolwat

Travel for work - no longer required
Travel for consumerism - no longer required
Travel for human interaction - debatable
Travel for fun - debatable.

Humans are surplus to requirements.

Has saxi been talking to you about Skype dinner parties too?

[warmonger1981]

I'm indestructible as my thoughts live forever.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

I like the idea (especially when leaving the bar). I certainly know they're safer than human operation. However, I'm not too keen on the powerlessness of it. Warmonger has a point, when a car can be remotely accessed, shut down, or locked, it gives me pause.

Also, as someone who rides a motorcycle frequently, good luck making all cars autonomous in 20-30 years.

-TG

[mrswdk]

Warmonger has a point, when a car can be remotely accessed, shut down, or locked, it gives me pause.

Yeah but as long as you instruct warmonger not to tell you the secret behind vapor trails then the government will have no need to assassinate you.

[waauw]

If it takes down my car insurance cost I'm fine with it.