5 ms·

Why do it on public roads? There are oil fields in North Dakota where a lot of driving needs to be done and corporations could completely control that environm

Why do it on public roads? There are oil fields in North Dakota where a lot of driving needs to be done and corporations could completely control that environment. Why not automate cargo ships? There's far less to hit in the ocean and far fewer inputs required. Why still have human pilots in airplanes when they're largely automated?

doublespanner 3y ago
It's all about the cost of a driver relative to the activity and risk; with taxis it's a much higher proportion than it is for aeroplanes.
- CSMastermind 3y ago
  If we wanted to make roads as safe as possible why not equip every vehicle with a breathalyzer that blocks the vehicles ignition if the driver isn't sober? Or use GPS to limit the speed of vehicles to the speed limit that's been set? For that matter why allow the sale of vehicles capable of exceeding 85 miles per hour (the highest speed limit anywhere in the country)?
  - doublespanner 3y ago
    Did you intend to reply to me? The reason we are trialing these systems on public roads is because that is where they must operate in order to make sense. It's not about safety alone. To respond to your tangent: Breathalyzers are not all that reliable, nor is GPS localisation... And a national speed limit would mostly reduce revenue (not to mention the new problems regarding who is liable for maintaining the limit correctly). There is a great history of implementing practical safety requirements, maybe not the first globally, but when it becomes practical to adopt something we generally do.
neysofu 3y ago
> Why not automate cargo ships? There's far less to hit in the ocean and far fewer inputs required. Maneuvering a ship is but a very small part of all that's needed to maintain a ship operational – engine maintenance, paperwork, dealing with port agents and customs, operating the radio, etc.. Much of that can be automated, I'm sure, but the return on investment is quite poor. Crew salaries are a small part of all operations costs, so you're not saving much by removing them from the equation. (Add to that the fact that large cargo ships can exceed $1B worth of cargo, so I'm not surprised that the economics don't make much sense.)

doublespanner 3y ago

It's all about the cost of a driver relative to the activity and risk; with taxis it's a much higher proportion than it is for aeroplanes.

CSMastermind 3y ago
If we wanted to make roads as safe as possible why not equip every vehicle with a breathalyzer that blocks the vehicles ignition if the driver isn't sober? Or use GPS to limit the speed of vehicles to the speed limit that's been set? For that matter why allow the sale of vehicles capable of exceeding 85 miles per hour (the highest speed limit anywhere in the country)?
- doublespanner 3y ago
  Did you intend to reply to me? The reason we are trialing these systems on public roads is because that is where they must operate in order to make sense. It's not about safety alone. To respond to your tangent: Breathalyzers are not all that reliable, nor is GPS localisation... And a national speed limit would mostly reduce revenue (not to mention the new problems regarding who is liable for maintaining the limit correctly). There is a great history of implementing practical safety requirements, maybe not the first globally, but when it becomes practical to adopt something we generally do.

neysofu 3y ago

> Why not automate cargo ships? There's far less to hit in the ocean and far fewer inputs required. Maneuvering a ship is but a very small part of all that's needed to maintain a ship operational – engine maintenance, paperwork, dealing with port agents and customs, operating the radio, etc.. Much of that can be automated, I'm sure, but the return on investment is quite poor. Crew salaries are a small part of all operations costs, so you're not saving much by removing them from the equation. (Add to that the fact that large cargo ships can exceed $1B worth of cargo, so I'm not surprised that the economics don't make much sense.)