4 ms·

> This series of articles is fictitious and designed purely to explore possible futures, challenge and stimulate strategic thinking. Careful with the comments

• anthonyreinette 10y ago
  Hahah thanks ! You saved me a good rant session !
  • devoply 10y ago
    Well what's a rant. A rant is moral or righteous indignation expressed as such. But it's taken on another connotation as unwelcome cynicism akin to evil in the culture of positivity. I won't rant any more on this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteous_indignation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteous_indignation
• deathanatos 10y ago
  That statement should be way more prominent in the article. To not have that prior to the text, or not immediately after it (and not mostly through a paragraph that I skipped because I though it was about the author/website that's in a smaller font) seems highly manipulative.
  • CM30 10y ago
    No kidding. The fact it's right near the end of a fairly long disclaimer block is even worse, since most people will likely never read that far.
• TulliusCicero 10y ago
  I don't understand this even as fiction. If your car is fully self-driving, it obviously wouldn't matter if one of the passengers is drunk.
  • gambiting 10y ago
    Hmmmmmm, at the moment, in many EU countries for example, you are legally required to stop and give help if you see an accident(you actually can't get a driving licence if you haven't completed a first-aid course for that reason). One could make an argument, that even if the car is self-driving, the "driver" should be able to help or do a manual override of the car if it becomes necessary. At the same time, we already have autonomous train systems, and the conductor absolutely can't be drunk while in charge of the train. Why would it be any different for cars?
    • zyx321 10y ago
      That's not just for drivers. You must assist people in danger if you can do so without endangering yourself. We also have fully autonomous train systems with no conductors in the vehicles at all.