When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Waiting to get my audio fixed on my pc tmo. Who else was in the vehicle with her? The way the video was shot it wasn't just her in the car. Makes me wonder if this was partially set up just for a story.
Waiting to get my audio fixed on my pc tmo. Who else was in the vehicle with her? The way the video was shot it wasn't just her in the car. Makes me wonder if this was partially set up just for a story.
She's a reporter. She brought her camera man, which you need for a TV story. There's no big conspiracy....
Why doesn't the car just let the person it picks up drive? That makes the most sense to me so that they can easily idle and then show up to someone on command. I would massively prefer that not only vs an Uber/taxi/etc but even to my own car so if I'm forced to deal with a city and the nonsense within I don't risk even my beater
Why doesn't the car just let the person it picks up drive? That makes the most sense to me so that they can easily idle and then show up to someone on command. I would massively prefer that not only vs an Uber/taxi/etc but even to my own car so if I'm forced to deal with a city and the nonsense within I don't risk even my beater
How would you know the passenger is licensed, experienced or insured? or drunk? As if the self driving car isn't a big enough liability.
How would you know the passenger is licensed, experienced or insured? or drunk? As if the self driving car isn't a big enough liability.
Eventually, I would not be surprised to see these Robot-Mobiles get alcohol-breath-detectors. Drunk persons would not be driving, of course (the vehicle's electronics will)....but it is still probably a good idea, for liability reasons, not to have intoxicated persons inside.
think of all the horse poop shovelers, blacksmiths and others that lost their jobs when cars became a thing.
LMAO, Bit. I was thinking the same thing.
Yes, the jobs lost are tangible. And we can certainly sympathize with the people who lose their jobs, as there's obviously a human dimension. .
Of course, the rise of the internal-combustion engine destroyed a whole other personal transport industry – the horse and carriage. Lots of jobs were lost as a result, but rather than declining (which often happens when new technology is still improving), employment in the automotive industry escalated rapidly over the following 3 decades. There was no net loss of jobs. Partly it was related to how the productivity per worker grew in its early days. As output went up, the price of cars dramatically decreased. This in turn meant that the number of consumers buying cars increased, helping the industry as a whole to scale up and require a larger workforce. What’s more, well-paid industry workers came to form part of the market that could and would buy the products they themselves were making. A win-win. Looking at today with how many jobs are supported by the automobile industry (many of them really good ones too), and the fact that I'm posting in an automobile forum of all things, it's safe to say Dave and the rest of us are all quite excited that cars displaced horses as a main source of personal transport.
Over time, millions of people are going to need to switch occupations with the rise of AI. There are too many people in jobs that are declining, like assembly-line workers, manufacturing, and retail cashiers. Any kind of work involving a lot of data collection and processing can and will be done by a machine. That's called progress. Again, we're all descendants of the benefits of the industrial revolution, else we could all still be riding horses.
Lord knows many horses were happy that cars were invented - "Finally, something to get these damn men off our backs every day!"
Having said all of that, it's going to take a lot to get me in a driverless taxi. And I'd prefer to not live in an area that has them. I'm not there, yet.
Over time, millions of people are going to need to switch occupations with the rise of AI. There are too many people in jobs that are declining, like assembly-line workers, manufacturing, and retail cashiers. Any kind of work involving a lot of data collection and processing can and will be done by a machine. That's called progress.
Cashiers still exist (and will exist for a long time yet) because many shoppers simply don't want to deal with self-checkout lanes. I use the self-checkout lanes myself.....but only to make sure that it is done right, and that I get credit for my coupons and store-discounts.
Having said all of that, it's going to take a lot to get me in a driverless taxi. And I'd prefer to not live in an area that has them. I'm not there, yet.
There, you yourself (correctly) said it.....the appearance of progress is not always actual progress.
There, you yourself (correctly) said it.....the appearance of progress is not always actual progress.
but that's not what he wrote. at all. he said he's not ready for it, or is not comfortable with it. that's different than whether it's progress or not.
some people are terrified or just hate flying, but is flying not progress from before it was widely available?
and passengers have no clue that the 'pilots' are not flying 90% of the time, they're just watching, like one of those ride along 'drivers' in test self-driving cars.
nevertheless, whether some people are still not comfortable with flying, it was an amazing actual step of progress for the world as will be self-driving cars.
imagine being unable to get out and have a self-driving car deliver food or medication at any time of day.
imagine being unable to drive and being able to go see a friend or loved one at any time of day.
self-driving will enable this and much much more. and a fleet of more self-driving cars than we've had human drivers is amazing because they can be recharging when needed without impacting availability.
many boomers may be afraid, but the future of self-driving is enormously bright despite this silly video.
some people are terrified or just hate flying, but is flying not progress from before it was widely available?
Compare today's airline fee-policies, surcharges, sardine-can seating, passenger-service, rude/drunk/uncouth passengers (sometimes with guns or weapons), price-fixing, and other policies with those of the airlines of several decades ago, and one can hardly call it "progress"
imagine being unable to get out and have a self-driving car deliver food or medication at any time of day.
imagine being unable to drive and being able to go see a friend or loved one at any time of day.
self-driving will enable this and much much more. and a fleet of more self-driving cars than we've had human drivers is amazing because they can be recharging when needed without impacting availability.
True (and I am not denying that), but those Robot-Mobiles still have to be able to get whatever or whoever they are delivering or carrying to the right address, safely, within a reasonable amount of time.
many boomers may be afraid, but the future of self-driving is enormously bright despite this silly video.
That journalist in the video doesn't look old enough to be a Boomer...she looks maybe 40 or 50.
Cashiers still exist (and will exist for a long time yet) because many shoppers simply don't want to deal with self-checkout lanes. I use the self-checkout lanes myself.....but only to make sure that it is done right, and that I get credit for my coupons and store-discounts.
There, you yourself (correctly) said it.....the appearance of progress is not always actual progress.
You make a good point, Marshall.
Technological progress is technology-based advancements that lead to increased economic productivity resulting in economic growth. The advancement in technology "aids organizations in improving the efficiency of their production process in a cost-efficient manner. The innovations offer customers more convenient, accessible, and seamless services. This progress enhances labor productivity and improves other factors of production. However, it also has negative consequences, which include job displacement and sometimes, employee dissatisfaction."
Thus, in many countries, progress is often only measured as economic growth. But real progress would involve growth that doesn’t externalize social or environmental costs. Progress could be measured by how well those at the bottom are doing, not only those at the top.
As Danny Dorling, the Professor of Geography @ University of Oxford (United Kingdom) said so eloquently: "For me, Progress is about what actually matters most in life: health, job satisfaction, housing quality, living standards, and real education. Finland, for example, has one of the lowest rates of infant mortality in the world and the highest proportions of workers satisfied with their lives and the flexibility of their jobs. More workers can choose which hours they work in Finland than in any other country. Finland also has the world’s lowest homelessness rate (the US has one of the highest) and is renowned for its education system. And Finland has greater income equality than the US, and a much lower carbon footprint. Not surprisingly, its people are happier."
Originally Posted by bitkahuna
but that's not what he wrote. at all. he said he's not ready for it, or is not comfortable with it. that's different than whether it's progress or not.
True. As the great PT Barnum once said, “Comfort is the enemy of progress.”
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Compare today's airline fee-policies, surcharges, sardine-can seating, passenger-service, rude/drunk/uncouth passengers (sometimes with guns or weapons), price-fixing, and other policies with those of the airlines of several decades ago, and one can hardly call it "progress"
Maybe not progress for airplane riders (though because of cheaper flights, more people have access to airplane travel, so that's progress for the masses). Though, for those who are running the business of keeping an airline profitable (and shareholders happy), all those ails you mention above are indeed a sign of progress. And in our market-driven economy here in this country, this description of progress often tops all others.
And as Bit said, there will be a lot of benefits to driverless cars for society as a whole, too many to count (and ones we can't even visualize right now). And in the future, one of them will likely be fewer accidents. I think we average like 40,000+ car accident-related deaths in the United States...and that's with a variety of airbags in cars, and driver safety aids and advanced crash testing. But most of us rail against a manufacturer like Tesla when a single accident occurs using its driverless technology. But let's say driverless cars (intermingled with cars with actual drivers) reduced accidents to 20,000 car accident-related deaths in the US, would we call that progress? Likely not. Instead, most of us would argue that car manufacturer technology should be perfect. Many of us would readily suggest that "self-driving cars are dangerous so this is definitely not progress". We quickly lose sight of how dangerous cars with actual drivers are.
Though in some ways, I agree with you, that “Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master.” But ultimately, progress or a continual technological evolution is the result of our collective desire to lead a better life. And for many, self-driving and/or driverless cars are indeed one of the next steps to a much better quality of life, no matter how we personally feel about this forthcoming technological advancement.
Though in some ways, I agree with you, that “Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master.”
that horse left the barn a long time ago. between phones, cloud, remote services, medicine, on and on and on, humans are now 'pretending' to run the world.
i laugh now when i watch serious shows about people making high level decisions in government based on petty grievances and agendas, it's all so ridiculous but unfortunately such ignorant decisions have major consequences. our only hope long term is AI government to stop the humans from ruining the world.
that horse left the barn a long time ago. between phones, cloud, remote services, medicine, on and on and on, humans are now 'pretending' to run the world.
Horses, though, are still around.....I don't see any signs of them becoming extinct, even in the U.S.
07-02-23, 04:15 PM
But most of us rail against a manufacturer like Tesla when a single accident occurs using its driverless technology. 
We quickly lose sight of how dangerous cars with actual drivers are.
