6 ms·

Give it another 25, and you will have to pay a premium for things which are stand-alone, disconnected from the net. Want a car which is not navigating using clo

Give it another 25, and you will have to pay a premium for things which are stand-alone, disconnected from the net. Want a car which is not navigating using cloud AI? Only the rich can afford that...

rubicon33 9y ago
> Want a car which is not navigating using cloud AI? Only the rich can afford that... Good. I sure hope only a small fraction of the population will be able to manually drive their car in the future. It would save lives, time, and money for everyone if the bulk of the idiots were unable to manually drive their car.
- nxc18 9y ago
  I interpreted the alternative to that being locally run AI, which is not implicitly spying on you and capable of doing nefarious things (e.g. not allowing you to navigate until you pay this month’s upgrade fee).
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    I assumed the same, too. A self-driving car should be able to navigate itself without an Internet connection; any permanent ties to the cloud are just anticonsumer business strategy.
- reaperducer 9y ago
  > It would save lives, time, and money for everyone I'll give you "lives" and "money," but not necessarily time. I live in a place where self-driving vehicles can be spotted fairly regularly. Once a week or so. You can tell by the special license plates. They are always very ponderous, careful drivers. It's fascinating to see them gently slow to a stop for a red light, then take off like a jackrabbit when it turns green. Perhaps as the technology matures, they'll start to keep pace with traffic better. I'm actually looking forward to self-driving cars. It's all the personal time benefits of mass transit (book reading, meditating, general mental health), without worrying about accidentally sitting in someone else's pee.
  - cortesoft 9y ago
    I am pretty sure that is because they have to account for all the non-self-driving cars. If all cars were self driving, they could co-ordinate and go a lot faster.
    - ksenzee 9y ago
      They'll still have to allow for pedestrians and bikes, for the foreseeable future.
      - zerokernel 9y ago
        We'll just outlaw that. Compare: Jaywalking, avenues.
        killjoywashere 9y ago
        "Machine kills human because human violated traffic law" will never fly.
        jackvalentine 9y ago
        I think it will. The above poster's reference to how 'jaywalking' became a crime after motor vehicles associations conducted heavy PR campaigns to banish pedestrians from what once were shared streets is instructive.
        kalleboo 9y ago
        From stories I've heard of how joggers and cyclists are treated sometimes in the US, I wouldn't be so sure. It would have to be a child being killed.
hangonhn 9y ago
I really have no problem with sharing my information openly in cases my presence has an obvious effect on those around me. Letting other cars within a certain radius know where I am seems a reasonable sharing of my information. I would go as far as sharing my intended destination so that some "cloud" some where can better plot my route to minimize traffic for me and others. That said, storing all that information for later analysis, which is possible given what I've shared, would be an unreasonable use of my data (unless it's done as part of some aggregate information). The problem of course is that once I share that information I lose control of how it is used later. If someone can devise a way for me to share my information while controlling how that information can be used later, it would go a long way to striking the right balance. I guess that's more or less "personal DRM" for our information.
- willstrafach 9y ago
  I think the difference is consensual sharing of the information. Many would probably be OK with certain types of information collection, but the way some things are collected without overt notice or consent (Example: Wi-Fi SSID to GPS long/lat pairings on phones) is understandably concerning to some. > If someone can devise a way for me to share my information while controlling how that information can be used later, it would go a long way to striking the right balance. I guess that's more or less "personal DRM" for our information. It would not be easy to do this in a technical manner, as it could be defeated (as with most DRM). It sounds like a legislative solution would be best.
  - zerokernel 9y ago
    > It would not be easy to do this in a technical manner -> Homomorphic encryption is an active field of research. Legal is most likely the better solution. Probably.
siruncledrew 9y ago
Hands-free AI navigation is still worth it to not totally disable though. Now paying to not have all your personal driving data, preferences, and in-car conversations uploaded to the cloud is another story..

Give it another 25, and you will have to pay a premium for things which are stand-alone, disconnected from the net. Want a car which is not navigating using cloud AI? Only the rich can afford that...

rubicon33 9y ago

> Want a car which is not navigating using cloud AI? Only the rich can afford that... Good. I sure hope only a small fraction of the population will be able to manually drive their car in the future. It would save lives, time, and money for everyone if the bulk of the idiots were unable to manually drive their car.

nxc18 9y ago
I interpreted the alternative to that being locally run AI, which is not implicitly spying on you and capable of doing nefarious things (e.g. not allowing you to navigate until you pay this month’s upgrade fee).
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I assumed the same, too. A self-driving car should be able to navigate itself without an Internet connection; any permanent ties to the cloud are just anticonsumer business strategy.
reaperducer 9y ago
> It would save lives, time, and money for everyone I'll give you "lives" and "money," but not necessarily time. I live in a place where self-driving vehicles can be spotted fairly regularly. Once a week or so. You can tell by the special license plates. They are always very ponderous, careful drivers. It's fascinating to see them gently slow to a stop for a red light, then take off like a jackrabbit when it turns green. Perhaps as the technology matures, they'll start to keep pace with traffic better. I'm actually looking forward to self-driving cars. It's all the personal time benefits of mass transit (book reading, meditating, general mental health), without worrying about accidentally sitting in someone else's pee.
- cortesoft 9y ago
  I am pretty sure that is because they have to account for all the non-self-driving cars. If all cars were self driving, they could co-ordinate and go a lot faster.
  - ksenzee 9y ago
    They'll still have to allow for pedestrians and bikes, for the foreseeable future.
    - zerokernel 9y ago
      We'll just outlaw that. Compare: Jaywalking, avenues.
      - killjoywashere 9y ago
        "Machine kills human because human violated traffic law" will never fly.
        jackvalentine 9y ago
        I think it will. The above poster's reference to how 'jaywalking' became a crime after motor vehicles associations conducted heavy PR campaigns to banish pedestrians from what once were shared streets is instructive.
        kalleboo 9y ago
        From stories I've heard of how joggers and cyclists are treated sometimes in the US, I wouldn't be so sure. It would have to be a child being killed.

hangonhn 9y ago

I really have no problem with sharing my information openly in cases my presence has an obvious effect on those around me. Letting other cars within a certain radius know where I am seems a reasonable sharing of my information. I would go as far as sharing my intended destination so that some "cloud" some where can better plot my route to minimize traffic for me and others. That said, storing all that information for later analysis, which is possible given what I've shared, would be an unreasonable use of my data (unless it's done as part of some aggregate information). The problem of course is that once I share that information I lose control of how it is used later. If someone can devise a way for me to share my information while controlling how that information can be used later, it would go a long way to striking the right balance. I guess that's more or less "personal DRM" for our information.

willstrafach 9y ago
I think the difference is consensual sharing of the information. Many would probably be OK with certain types of information collection, but the way some things are collected without overt notice or consent (Example: Wi-Fi SSID to GPS long/lat pairings on phones) is understandably concerning to some. > If someone can devise a way for me to share my information while controlling how that information can be used later, it would go a long way to striking the right balance. I guess that's more or less "personal DRM" for our information. It would not be easy to do this in a technical manner, as it could be defeated (as with most DRM). It sounds like a legislative solution would be best.
- zerokernel 9y ago
  > It would not be easy to do this in a technical manner -> Homomorphic encryption is an active field of research. Legal is most likely the better solution. Probably.

siruncledrew 9y ago

Hands-free AI navigation is still worth it to not totally disable though. Now paying to not have all your personal driving data, preferences, and in-car conversations uploaded to the cloud is another story..