4 ms·
On one hand, I am sympathetic to fears of driverless car safety and job losses. I would not be a big fan of having my (hypothetical) children playing on a stree
by village-idiot 8y ago
On one hand, I am sympathetic to fears of driverless car safety and job losses. I would not be a big fan of having my (hypothetical) children playing on a street that self driving cars are being tested on.
On the other, if you threaten the employee within the car or attempt to drive them off the road, you should be prosecuted with the full force of the law. There are still people within those self driving cars, and attempted homicide is still a crime.
Edit: being opposed to attempted vehicular homicide is an unpopular opinion. Never saw that coming.
- cruella_deville 8y ago...hey driver get outta the car and go take lunch, and heres a number for a tow truck when your done eating. i would do the same in my village, as would most others who live here. its not about the jobs, its about the loss of privacy due to the incidental "meta as moby dick" mass surveilance that occurs
- village-idiot 8y agoI think vandalism is generally bad, but at least it's far far less bad than harming people. Politically I doubt that vandalism is a good way to stop self driving cars. Waymo can afford to replace damaged parts, and they could also smear their opponents as criminals, even if it's a minority of those concerned. This is the exact same playbook that those opposed to civil rights used, smearing protests as "riots". Playing directly into that hand is not a wise choice, IMHO.
- cruella_deville 8y agoyeah that little pointed stick incident on that island off the coast of india was a thing wasnt it ?
- walshemj 8y agoA local village for local cars :-)
- userbinator 8y agoAnother position to take against driverless cars (or rather, the proliferation and eventual obligation thereof) is the loss of freedom and control. Instead of the fault of human causing harm to another human, it's replaced with the fault of an opaque, massively complex algorithm; and that is rather unsettling to some people.
- village-idiot 8y agoInteresting question that I don't know the answer for, how many of these concerns were similarly raised with the rise of the car or the train before it?
- pjc50 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_flag_traffic_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_flag_traffic_laws Trains also experienced lots of concern, from the legitimate to the ludicrous.
- mmmeff 8y agoGhost in the Shell touched on this really well. There's the potential for bad actors to plant dangerous training into these algorithms. Hypothetically, someone could turn an entire fleet of self-driving taxis into an assassination mechanism. Every vehicle can wait until a specific individual is spotted crossing the street and fail to stop at a light. The corporation that owns this taxi then will say there was a software failure with the one specific taxi, take it out of commission, and move on with business as usual. A few deaths a year is still less than the death toll of human-operated cars, after all.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- anigbrowl 8y agoOK, please offer an alternative vector for opposition besides litigation, which is expensive, slow, uncertain, and arguably rigged in many situations. For those who distrust or are cut off from institutional processes, what form of opposition do you recommend?
- freehunter 8y agoOrganize a protest with signs. Petition the government. Like you mentioned, sue the companies. But ultimately if the government says it's legal (which it has and it is) and lawsuits and protests fail, you're going to have to accept it at some point. That's part of living in a civil society, compromises always have to be made. If everyone threatened violence for things they don't like, we wouldn't be able to call ourselves "civilized". Pointing a gun at a person because you don't like the kind of car they're driving isn't exactly a workable solution.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]