3 ms·

BBC always seems to add commentary where there is no need for commentary. It's like they are trying to stir up controversy just to sell people on the stories. P

BBC always seems to add commentary where there is no need for commentary. It's like they are trying to stir up controversy just to sell people on the stories. Personally, I don't think there's anything boring about a car driving itself. The fact that it is so safe, is actually really exciting. If it is proved that these cars are better, safer drivers than humans that is something really exciting. Can you imagine human driving being illegal in 20 years because it's so unsafe? How's that for excitement. There's no reason for BBC to try so hard to appeal to our emotion. The story is great in and of itself.

mintplant 11y ago
The headline is clearly written to attract clicks, but in the article body, I felt this was more tongue-in-cheek than stirring up controversy. The author repeatedly concludes that, though the driving style may be different, this "boringness" is actually a very positive feature. > It was slow. It was cautious. It was safe, a more attentive driver than any human could possibly ever be. > And later that evening, as I snaked my way back to San Francisco on the four-to-five lane wide Interstate 880, I wished it was the Google car driving me home. ... > That's a terrible complaint, isn't it? The impeccable standards are a sign the technology is really quite magnificent. ... > The way Google sees it is that even with those theoretical scenarios - where it's forced to choose between what it thinks is the least harmful - the Google car is still far smarter than a human, and, crucially, will save thousands of lives by existing in the first place. > Riding in a Google car may be slow and boring, but the effect it will have on the world certainly isn't.
- learning_still 11y ago
  Personally, I don't think it needs to be there at all. There are other ways to make it more interesting, like imagining a world where it's illegal for humans to drive, than to lazily call the cars boring just to troll.

mintplant 11y ago

The headline is clearly written to attract clicks, but in the article body, I felt this was more tongue-in-cheek than stirring up controversy. The author repeatedly concludes that, though the driving style may be different, this "boringness" is actually a very positive feature. > It was slow. It was cautious. It was safe, a more attentive driver than any human could possibly ever be. > And later that evening, as I snaked my way back to San Francisco on the four-to-five lane wide Interstate 880, I wished it was the Google car driving me home. ... > That's a terrible complaint, isn't it? The impeccable standards are a sign the technology is really quite magnificent. ... > The way Google sees it is that even with those theoretical scenarios - where it's forced to choose between what it thinks is the least harmful - the Google car is still far smarter than a human, and, crucially, will save thousands of lives by existing in the first place. > Riding in a Google car may be slow and boring, but the effect it will have on the world certainly isn't.

learning_still 11y ago
Personally, I don't think it needs to be there at all. There are other ways to make it more interesting, like imagining a world where it's illegal for humans to drive, than to lazily call the cars boring just to troll.