3 ms·
Maybe for someone who is paying close attention, or even works in the industry, this distinction can be made. And that's valid for now. That a company has not
by bckr 5y ago
Maybe for someone who is paying close attention, or even works in the industry, this distinction can be made.
And that's valid for now. That a company has not had a major accident so far does not mean that I'm not going to be their first victim.
I love the idea of self driving cars.
But they are also really scary.
They're being brought to us by the same industry that gave us
* BSOD
* "why the heck can't I share my screen right now? can you share your screen? yes? well why can't I share my screen?"
* Your account has been terminated for breaking the terms and conditions. You cannot appeal this decision. We are now deleting 4TB of your life's work.
* An attacker has gained access to your email account. Your life is now ruined.
`But they're safer than human drivers!`
So what. They're new, they're capable of killing you, they're brought to you by tech.
They're f'n scary.
Self-driving advocates will do well to acknowledge this rather than being dismissive.
- jeffbee 5y agoIt's easy to dismiss you because your arguments are nonsense. Uber's murder car was not autonomous. It was not capable of ever operating without a "safety driver". Therefore it was not an autonomous vehicle. Nor is any Tesla. Waymo has operated cars with zero humans aboard at various points going back quite a few years. They are legitimate autonomous vehicles.