5 ms·

> I'll just keep reading articles that say they are 5 years away, just as I did 5 years ago, and the armchair futurists will keep dreaming... I'm quite surpris

> I'll just keep reading articles that say they are 5 years away, just as I did 5 years ago, and the armchair futurists will keep dreaming... I'm quite surprised that you can be a skeptic on the concept as a whole. Being skeptical about the given timeframes is perfectly reasonable (and probably correct), but humans do so, so many things terribly. We have automated away so many tasks in our world, both for efficiency and safety, that i can't even see an argument to counter that. To extend that further then, why shouldn't we want human drivers off the roads asap? It's a dangerous act that, frankly, many people aren't qualified for. Self-driving cars have so much potential behind them, that being a "skeptic" seems quite confusing to me. Just because it's a difficult problem, does not warrant giving up. The safety benefits alone, are well, well worth it.

joeclark77 11y ago
Cars give us freedom. The reason that technocrats love "self-driving" cars is the same reason they love trains of all kinds: it means that "the system" controls who may go where, and when. A lot of us are skeptical of self-driving cars because a lot of their advocates want the next step to be banning private citizens from driving, which you've just confirmed, thanks.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- linkregister 11y ago
  Given the current electorate in the United States, I think it would be nigh-impossible that human-driving cars would be banned. Notwithstanding the fact that the cost to equip every vehicle on the road with self-driving technology would be wildly expensive in the short term, Americans respond vigorously to threats to freedoms that are ingrained in their culture (visceral freedoms, not freedoms that are less tangible, such as electronic privacy). Examples: firearms, tobacco, alcohol. I could foresee this happening in one or two Western European countries, though I would expect Germany and Central Europe to hold out (the German electorate resists regulation that impedes the speed and power of their automobiles). An aside: how would a car being self-driving affect the owner's ability to direct it wherever he or she pleases?
  - lukaslalinsky 11y ago
    Self-driving cars will always have limitations. It's just not possible to make it ready for all kinds of road or even off-road surfaces. Fast-forward into future, if human-driven cars get banned, there will be no reason for self-driving cars to have manual controls and the only option for car will be to refuse to go into a situation it can't handle. I very much believe in gradual improvements and that is what many large car manufacturers are doing. I can easily imagine not needing to control my car on a highway, in a city, or when parking it, but I expect the manual controls will stay there for a very very long time.
  - joeclark77 11y ago
    If the car is driven by a computer at Google, then it can be "hijacked" by the computer. A few years after mandating that everybody have self-driving cars, the argument will be that certain roads don't need to be in the system because there's far too little traffic. After that, it'll be argued that Google should be able to divert you away from certain areas of town where there's been high traffic or other hazards, without asking you. Then it'll be argued that the government can mandate certain routes in order to preserve the environment or some such excuse. Then it'll be seen as entirely reasonable that all auto "routes" be managed by city planners who want to control noise, pollution, etc, for your own good. It'll be incremental. Fortunately, as you say, there are still a majority of sane people who vote in the USA. Will that still be true a generation later?
    - dTal 11y ago
      >city planners who want to control noise, pollution, etc I would predict electric cars before self-driving cars, so they won't have that excuse at least.
      - joeclark77 11y ago
        I would predict that I'll never drive one of those deathtraps either!
- fizzbatter 11y ago
  > A lot of us are skeptical of self-driving cars because a lot of their advocates want the next step to be banning private citizens from driving, which you've just confirmed, thanks. Lol, i think you're mistaking my (attempted) logical thinking towards some type of agenda towards banning humans driving cars. You seem far more agenda driven, heh. Just because i think we are extremely unqualified for driving, does not mean i want to ban the act. It be extremely improbable to achieve, with all the costs of upgrading the entire infrastructure alone making your defense of this almost seem like a half hearted joke. Moreover, even if in some magic realm where we can make all cars into self driving cars to abolish human driving, i'm just simply not in favor of removing human rights. Yes, i would want to make it difficult for you to drive, but for your own (and mine!) safety. Our safety standards for driving tests are incredibly, and i mean incredibly, laughable. How often we enforce rules and laws for driving are also laughable. Almost no one even follows some of the most basic rules, like speed limits, and the more extreme people often break sobriety laws. Self driving cars would give us a platform to A: Raise the bar for who can drive, and what sort of training you need. and B: Be more willing to ban someone from driving if they put others at risk, through speed, drugs, alcohol, or whatever. We have a hard time banning drivers these days because it very negatively impacts your life if you cannot drive. In a world with self driving cars though, you can still have a first class life. Driving is now something of leisure. Anyway, nice try at putting words in my mouth - next time make them a little less tinfoil though, please.

joeclark77 11y ago

Cars give us freedom. The reason that technocrats love "self-driving" cars is the same reason they love trains of all kinds: it means that "the system" controls who may go where, and when. A lot of us are skeptical of self-driving cars because a lot of their advocates want the next step to be banning private citizens from driving, which you've just confirmed, thanks.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
linkregister 11y ago
Given the current electorate in the United States, I think it would be nigh-impossible that human-driving cars would be banned. Notwithstanding the fact that the cost to equip every vehicle on the road with self-driving technology would be wildly expensive in the short term, Americans respond vigorously to threats to freedoms that are ingrained in their culture (visceral freedoms, not freedoms that are less tangible, such as electronic privacy). Examples: firearms, tobacco, alcohol. I could foresee this happening in one or two Western European countries, though I would expect Germany and Central Europe to hold out (the German electorate resists regulation that impedes the speed and power of their automobiles). An aside: how would a car being self-driving affect the owner's ability to direct it wherever he or she pleases?
- lukaslalinsky 11y ago
  Self-driving cars will always have limitations. It's just not possible to make it ready for all kinds of road or even off-road surfaces. Fast-forward into future, if human-driven cars get banned, there will be no reason for self-driving cars to have manual controls and the only option for car will be to refuse to go into a situation it can't handle. I very much believe in gradual improvements and that is what many large car manufacturers are doing. I can easily imagine not needing to control my car on a highway, in a city, or when parking it, but I expect the manual controls will stay there for a very very long time.
- joeclark77 11y ago
  If the car is driven by a computer at Google, then it can be "hijacked" by the computer. A few years after mandating that everybody have self-driving cars, the argument will be that certain roads don't need to be in the system because there's far too little traffic. After that, it'll be argued that Google should be able to divert you away from certain areas of town where there's been high traffic or other hazards, without asking you. Then it'll be argued that the government can mandate certain routes in order to preserve the environment or some such excuse. Then it'll be seen as entirely reasonable that all auto "routes" be managed by city planners who want to control noise, pollution, etc, for your own good. It'll be incremental. Fortunately, as you say, there are still a majority of sane people who vote in the USA. Will that still be true a generation later?
  - dTal 11y ago
    >city planners who want to control noise, pollution, etc I would predict electric cars before self-driving cars, so they won't have that excuse at least.
    - joeclark77 11y ago
      I would predict that I'll never drive one of those deathtraps either!
fizzbatter 11y ago
> A lot of us are skeptical of self-driving cars because a lot of their advocates want the next step to be banning private citizens from driving, which you've just confirmed, thanks. Lol, i think you're mistaking my (attempted) logical thinking towards some type of agenda towards banning humans driving cars. You seem far more agenda driven, heh. Just because i think we are extremely unqualified for driving, does not mean i want to ban the act. It be extremely improbable to achieve, with all the costs of upgrading the entire infrastructure alone making your defense of this almost seem like a half hearted joke. Moreover, even if in some magic realm where we can make all cars into self driving cars to abolish human driving, i'm just simply not in favor of removing human rights. Yes, i would want to make it difficult for you to drive, but for your own (and mine!) safety. Our safety standards for driving tests are incredibly, and i mean incredibly, laughable. How often we enforce rules and laws for driving are also laughable. Almost no one even follows some of the most basic rules, like speed limits, and the more extreme people often break sobriety laws. Self driving cars would give us a platform to A: Raise the bar for who can drive, and what sort of training you need. and B: Be more willing to ban someone from driving if they put others at risk, through speed, drugs, alcohol, or whatever. We have a hard time banning drivers these days because it very negatively impacts your life if you cannot drive. In a world with self driving cars though, you can still have a first class life. Driving is now something of leisure. Anyway, nice try at putting words in my mouth - next time make them a little less tinfoil though, please.