3 ms·
Everything here is objectively correct and this is a comment that contributes to the conversation. But I saw your comment and it was already gray, with 0 minute
by uoaei 4y ago
Everything here is objectively correct and this is a comment that contributes to the conversation. But I saw your comment and it was already gray, with 0 minutes of age. Funny how shamelessly "rational" people react emotionally when their preferred narrative is challenged.
- trgn 4y agoIt's because the commenter's solution to the problems of waste, noise, pollution, obesity, and people dying and getting maimed through traffic violence, is, essentially, the removal of a technological layer. Driverless cars, in opposition, is the addition of a technological layer. We are all modernists now. Essentially, this means that we perceive technology in itself as a value. The primary value is not the end goal, say, for example, a healthy urban environment. No, instead, living in a sci-fi future with robotic vehicles is a value, because it is technologically more advanced than a future without that. In modernism, it's a sickness of the mind really, a solution cannot be imagined, unless it involves technological mediation. This has been the curse of human civilization for a good 100 years now. Anyways, I don't think research in driverless cars is wasted. They are better than the current state of affairs. They can only be a marginal improvement though, they are not a paradigm shift.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago> It's because the commenter's solution to the problems of waste, noise, pollution, obesity, and people dying and getting maimed through traffic violence, is, essentially, the removal of a technological layer. I thought they suggested public transportation?
- bowsamic 4y agoYou must be new to HN
- gverrilla 4y agodon't forget there's $ on the line: a lot of "hackers" here are only corporate slaves and will do anything for a salary, just like good nazi soldiers.