4 ms·
Rebuttal to what? You accused them of being a tech cultist and then started talking nonsense about terrorist attacks that are already performed with cars and tr
by lucubratory 3y ago
Rebuttal to what? You accused them of being a tech cultist and then started talking nonsense about terrorist attacks that are already performed with cars and trucks and would probably be harder to do in a self-driving world, as well as fear-mongering about "hacking" when all modern cars can be hacked by ATPs anyway, and they're the only ones who'd be capable of pulling off something like what you're talking about. Nonsense doesn't require a rebuttal and neither do insults.
- paul7986 3y agoAny computer can be hacked, so nonsense (?) and you are saying a AI robot car will never be hacked? It previously happened in Charlottesville sometime ago (https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2015/5/1/2015may-researchers-hack-into-driverless-car-system-take-control-of-vehicle https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2015/5/1/20...) and will surely happen again but possibly not just one car but a fleet as others in this thread agree/noted. There's two sides ..either you're all for them or on the fence or against. Im on the fence with trusting Waymo more then Cruise as Waymo's been at it for more then a decade but am concerned about all things I noted. I did not insult anyone it was tongue and cheek. As well i was just responding to the drinking and driving analogy which my argument and that are two different ones.