10 ms·

> Self driving cars are not important other than for a few exec ego This is where you really go off the rails. You can't possibly believe this.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
baz00 3y ago
Literally the main reasons for the push for self-driving cars are to drive operating costs down for private taxi services by removing humans and to have a marketable feature that can be upsold on luxury vehicles. These are a net negative for society as they drive up unemployment and consumption. It's ego because it's a gold rush revenue source if it plays off and various CEOs have been pushing because while stock price is rising for the bubble, they're earning.
- ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
  Is there a technology that doesn't automate work and isn't sold to consumers for money? Self driving cars could potentially end car accidents outright, saving 40,000 lives in just the US per year. But that would put some mechanics out of business.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jlmorton 3y ago
  No, the main reason is to free up millions of man years of time for other more more desirable activities, and to reduce the tens of thousands of people killed in daily carnage on our roads.
- Zigurd 3y ago
  In the US it is very difficult, due to low density, road design, and use patterns, to make transit service, especially bus lines, both economical and pleasant to use at rush hour. AVs can enable surge capacity for bus service, and a mix of vehicle sizes. It can enable smooth transfers, more lines with more stops, and higher frequency of service in a lot of places that have really bad mass transit. Guangzhou already has a few autonomous bus lines. Compared to the cost of a bus, a conservative approach to an AV sensor suite is cheap.
flandish 3y ago
Why not? Public mass transit is far more efficient. The push for cars keeps car owners (in the corp and profit sense) alive. Only. Add in the pretend notion that cars equal freedom and it’s just a cycle of energy wasting nonsense. If we (tech fans) really wanted to help alleviate the problems roads have (traffic, accidents, etc) - public mass transit is the way to go. But I guess .. where’s the immediate hype-based profit in that? (think: “omg blockchain… I mean nft… I mean ai!!1!!”)
- userbinator 3y ago
  Add in the pretend notion that cars equal freedom and it’s just a cycle of energy wasting nonsense. It is freedom. Life is "energy wasting" too, but don't let that get in the way of ideological virtue-signaling... Those working in the mass transit industry call passengers "cattle" for a reason. Roads may have problems but the alternative you're proposing is far worse.
  - flandish 3y ago
    How is it freedom? It’s being beholden to a road, a licensure, a financial burden, an environmental one, and so on… Yes, one can get into the car and drive and live “the way of the road” like Ricky’s dad on TPB but again: How is that freedom? “Freedom” is american marketing.
  - inferiorhuman 3y ago
    It is freedom It's a tragedy of the commons.
  - jprete 3y ago
    I don't think I've ever heard of self-driving cars as a freedom-promoting technology. In fact, I remember self-driving car fans of a decade ago being very enthusiastic about the prospect of banning human drivers.
  - kakwa_ 3y ago
    > Roads may have problems but the alternative you're proposing is far worse. Sorry, but "far worse" is simply excessive. Living in a large European city, namely Paris, and having experienced both car and mass transit, I prefer the second option a lot, to the point I sold my car without replacement about 6 years ago after 2 years of barely using it. There is of course the ecological aspects, but even in terms of quality of life, I much prefer public transports: it's cheaper, it's less stressful, it's more predictable and I'm able to do other things like reading while transiting. By comparison, in this context (dense urban area), cars, with their needs (maintenance, parking, etc) are actually more constrain than freedom. And that's not like I'm a unique case, most of my colleagues either use public transports or (e)bikes, car users are a minority (~20%). In Paris, there is even a large proportion of the population who didn't even have a driving license at all. Doesn't it means that mass transit is the perfect solution? no. But in dense urban area, it's probably the best compromise.
jrflowers 3y ago
I like the idea that the ability to use both hands to eat chicken nuggets while operating a motor vehicle at speed is so inherently and universally valuable that a person couldn’t possibly believe otherwise.
- rad_gruchalski 3y ago
  One could confidently put the makeup on without being annoyingly interrupted every couple of hundreds meters by having to drive up to the next red light!
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    We must endeavor to enjoy the Pacific Coast Highway as God intended: while perfecting my smash attack timing with Lucario at 65mph
- ForestCritter 3y ago
  not if they try to turn a u turn on a highway at 70
- jlmorton 3y ago
  I always love an Internet take. Currently, Americans spend about 100 billion hours driving every year, which is about 11 million man-years. If you can't see the transformative impacts of freeing up that much time for people to enjoy any other activities, whether it be doing work, reading a book, sleeping, or eating chicken nuggets, then I honestly have no idea what to say.
  - mrbadguy 3y ago
    It might be easier to free up some of those man-years by planning and constructing towns/cities such that people don’t have to drive in them, than developing self driving cars. The two things aren’t even mutually exclusive, you could have a happy, mostly non-car based existence, and then supplement it with a self driving car on the occasion that you really need it (assuming it’s ever achieved).

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

baz00 3y ago

Literally the main reasons for the push for self-driving cars are to drive operating costs down for private taxi services by removing humans and to have a marketable feature that can be upsold on luxury vehicles. These are a net negative for society as they drive up unemployment and consumption. It's ego because it's a gold rush revenue source if it plays off and various CEOs have been pushing because while stock price is rising for the bubble, they're earning.

ToValueFunfetti 3y ago
Is there a technology that doesn't automate work and isn't sold to consumers for money? Self driving cars could potentially end car accidents outright, saving 40,000 lives in just the US per year. But that would put some mechanics out of business.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jlmorton 3y ago
No, the main reason is to free up millions of man years of time for other more more desirable activities, and to reduce the tens of thousands of people killed in daily carnage on our roads.
Zigurd 3y ago
In the US it is very difficult, due to low density, road design, and use patterns, to make transit service, especially bus lines, both economical and pleasant to use at rush hour. AVs can enable surge capacity for bus service, and a mix of vehicle sizes. It can enable smooth transfers, more lines with more stops, and higher frequency of service in a lot of places that have really bad mass transit. Guangzhou already has a few autonomous bus lines. Compared to the cost of a bus, a conservative approach to an AV sensor suite is cheap.

flandish 3y ago

Why not? Public mass transit is far more efficient. The push for cars keeps car owners (in the corp and profit sense) alive. Only. Add in the pretend notion that cars equal freedom and it’s just a cycle of energy wasting nonsense. If we (tech fans) really wanted to help alleviate the problems roads have (traffic, accidents, etc) - public mass transit is the way to go. But I guess .. where’s the immediate hype-based profit in that? (think: “omg blockchain… I mean nft… I mean ai!!1!!”)

userbinator 3y ago
Add in the pretend notion that cars equal freedom and it’s just a cycle of energy wasting nonsense. It is freedom. Life is "energy wasting" too, but don't let that get in the way of ideological virtue-signaling... Those working in the mass transit industry call passengers "cattle" for a reason. Roads may have problems but the alternative you're proposing is far worse.
- flandish 3y ago
  How is it freedom? It’s being beholden to a road, a licensure, a financial burden, an environmental one, and so on… Yes, one can get into the car and drive and live “the way of the road” like Ricky’s dad on TPB but again: How is that freedom? “Freedom” is american marketing.
- inferiorhuman 3y ago
  It is freedom It's a tragedy of the commons.
- jprete 3y ago
  I don't think I've ever heard of self-driving cars as a freedom-promoting technology. In fact, I remember self-driving car fans of a decade ago being very enthusiastic about the prospect of banning human drivers.
- kakwa_ 3y ago
  > Roads may have problems but the alternative you're proposing is far worse. Sorry, but "far worse" is simply excessive. Living in a large European city, namely Paris, and having experienced both car and mass transit, I prefer the second option a lot, to the point I sold my car without replacement about 6 years ago after 2 years of barely using it. There is of course the ecological aspects, but even in terms of quality of life, I much prefer public transports: it's cheaper, it's less stressful, it's more predictable and I'm able to do other things like reading while transiting. By comparison, in this context (dense urban area), cars, with their needs (maintenance, parking, etc) are actually more constrain than freedom. And that's not like I'm a unique case, most of my colleagues either use public transports or (e)bikes, car users are a minority (~20%). In Paris, there is even a large proportion of the population who didn't even have a driving license at all. Doesn't it means that mass transit is the perfect solution? no. But in dense urban area, it's probably the best compromise.

jrflowers 3y ago

I like the idea that the ability to use both hands to eat chicken nuggets while operating a motor vehicle at speed is so inherently and universally valuable that a person couldn’t possibly believe otherwise.

rad_gruchalski 3y ago
One could confidently put the makeup on without being annoyingly interrupted every couple of hundreds meters by having to drive up to the next red light!
- jrflowers 3y ago
  We must endeavor to enjoy the Pacific Coast Highway as God intended: while perfecting my smash attack timing with Lucario at 65mph
ForestCritter 3y ago
not if they try to turn a u turn on a highway at 70
jlmorton 3y ago
I always love an Internet take. Currently, Americans spend about 100 billion hours driving every year, which is about 11 million man-years. If you can't see the transformative impacts of freeing up that much time for people to enjoy any other activities, whether it be doing work, reading a book, sleeping, or eating chicken nuggets, then I honestly have no idea what to say.
- mrbadguy 3y ago
  It might be easier to free up some of those man-years by planning and constructing towns/cities such that people don’t have to drive in them, than developing self driving cars. The two things aren’t even mutually exclusive, you could have a happy, mostly non-car based existence, and then supplement it with a self driving car on the occasion that you really need it (assuming it’s ever achieved).