4 ms·

And we've now, at the behest of these companies, redefined statists down to: - thinks it's OK for neighbors and local government to have a say in whether peopl

by x0x0 10y ago

And we've now, at the behest of these companies, redefined statists down to: - thinks it's OK for neighbors and local government to have a say in whether people run a hotel next door, possibly sharing a roof or even a wall - thinks it's OK to require pretty reasonable background checks ala Austin for taxi drivers - thinks it's OK to have some safety regulations around self driving cars sharing our roads beyond hey, it worked in my car on this specific stretch of road so, you know, yolo

stale2002 10y ago
Congratulations, by waiting a year to implement self driving cars, through overly burdening government regulations, you just killed ten thousand people. What about those people? The people who WILL die in car accidents next year unless we do something about it. Screw them, right?
- tptacek 10y ago
  This isn't a self-driving car. It's a driver assist. It depends on an alert driver behind the wheel. What we're learning is that these systems can, in some circumstances, be the worst of both worlds --- a human driver lulled into complacency by technology that was not designed to handle complicated road conditions autonomously --- a system that itself generates both human and machine error.
  - syntheticnature 10y ago
    There's an interesting similarity with Air France 447 in your description -- a crash caused by information overload and the normal assist system going into an alternate mode.
- henrikschroder 10y ago
  Noone is arguing about the benefits of self-driving technology in general. The question at hand is: Does this specific piece of equipment actually work as described, and move us towards that goal, or is it a piece of cobbled together junk that will cause more accidents? If you want to sell this specific piece of equipment on the consumer market, you'd better have a good answer to that question, and be able to back it up with more than "hey, it worked for me this morning!"
- x0x0 10y ago
  my god, idlewords couldn't have written this better

by x0x0 10y ago

stale2002 10y ago

Congratulations, by waiting a year to implement self driving cars, through overly burdening government regulations, you just killed ten thousand people. What about those people? The people who WILL die in car accidents next year unless we do something about it. Screw them, right?

tptacek 10y ago
This isn't a self-driving car. It's a driver assist. It depends on an alert driver behind the wheel. What we're learning is that these systems can, in some circumstances, be the worst of both worlds --- a human driver lulled into complacency by technology that was not designed to handle complicated road conditions autonomously --- a system that itself generates both human and machine error.
- syntheticnature 10y ago
  There's an interesting similarity with Air France 447 in your description -- a crash caused by information overload and the normal assist system going into an alternate mode.
henrikschroder 10y ago
Noone is arguing about the benefits of self-driving technology in general. The question at hand is: Does this specific piece of equipment actually work as described, and move us towards that goal, or is it a piece of cobbled together junk that will cause more accidents? If you want to sell this specific piece of equipment on the consumer market, you'd better have a good answer to that question, and be able to back it up with more than "hey, it worked for me this morning!"
x0x0 10y ago
my god, idlewords couldn't have written this better