5 ms·

The whole point of robot taxis is to eliminate the job “driver” “Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States What exactly is hard to under

The whole point of robot taxis is to eliminate the job “driver” “Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States What exactly is hard to understand here?

idopmstuff 3y ago
The part that's hard to understand is why we'd keep a job that kills people when it's no longer necessary.
- AndrewKemendo 3y ago
  This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles We don’t have these types of measurable capabilities because we don’t actually have the data that shows what is the fatality rate per million miles at the scale of integration that an entire fleet they have supplanted the taxi industry would do. You’re better off actually evaluating what is the death rate of taxis compared to individual drivers because the individual drivers are not going to be replaced at the same rate as taxi drivers and so the taxi drivers is the first more important number to evaluate with respect to traffic fatalities Unless you’ve done that specific math, and walk the dog out, including the Wayno reports, some of the cruise reports, and some of the reports from Tesla (which killed a guy if you recall) then you might have an argument As it stands, all I see with driverless cars is we’re trying to replace humans in an entire labor category, and we have nothing for those people to do I suspect that is actually a much bigger problem than the theoretical reduction in fatalities on roads
  - idopmstuff 3y ago
    > This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists It's not remotely like saying this, and going straight to child pornography in is like going straight to the Nazis - the sign of an unserious argument. > It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles You're just not understanding the definition of the word argument if you think this is true. Also, these things are being measured, so we're getting to this understanding. If your argument is that we shouldn't put robotaxis on the road because we don't know if they're safer means that we can't measure if robotaxis are safer and thus regardless of their relative safety, we must ban them because we don't have measurements yet. > I suspect that is actually a much bigger problem than the theoretical reduction in fatalities on roads But that's not an actual argument because it doesn't have specific, measurable distinctions, no?
guil177 3y ago
I mean longterm strategy is non sensical. Why not ban personal car to make the demand for driver even higher?
robg 3y ago
What’s your data to back that up? If truck drivers, there’s nothing close that would turn huge trucks robotic for the current generation.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Wait, aren't huge trucks slated to be the first ones to be replaced by autonomous equivalents? Making a self-driving long-distance truck is a simpler, more constrained, and easier to solve incrementally problem than making a self-driving passenger car.
gruez 3y ago
>“Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States ...which still only work out to 1-2%
- uoaei 3y ago
  ...which works out to roughly 3-7 million people. Unless you want to pay them UBI, you're going to have to help them find and transition to other categories of jobs.
  - progne 3y ago
    I used to drive a taxi. Now I write code. I paid for my own training. I'd expect to find that self-help is the most usual way to transition into other jobs.
    - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
      The reality is, this is just not a functional pathway for the majority of people. So it’s not a solution It might be possible for some minority that has a particular penchant for this type of work, but neither the jobs nor the training exist at such scale that would be able to absorb the entirety of the driver workforce into the “write software for automated driving“ job.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - smabie 3y ago
        The point is that they can just get a new, different, job.
    - itishappy 3y ago
      That would roughly double the number of tech workers.
- lo_zamoyski 3y ago
  And 1-2% don't matter? That's an odd take. Whom do you serve?

The whole point of robot taxis is to eliminate the job “driver” “Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States What exactly is hard to understand here?

idopmstuff 3y ago

The part that's hard to understand is why we'd keep a job that kills people when it's no longer necessary.

AndrewKemendo 3y ago
This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles We don’t have these types of measurable capabilities because we don’t actually have the data that shows what is the fatality rate per million miles at the scale of integration that an entire fleet they have supplanted the taxi industry would do. You’re better off actually evaluating what is the death rate of taxis compared to individual drivers because the individual drivers are not going to be replaced at the same rate as taxi drivers and so the taxi drivers is the first more important number to evaluate with respect to traffic fatalities Unless you’ve done that specific math, and walk the dog out, including the Wayno reports, some of the cruise reports, and some of the reports from Tesla (which killed a guy if you recall) then you might have an argument As it stands, all I see with driverless cars is we’re trying to replace humans in an entire labor category, and we have nothing for those people to do I suspect that is actually a much bigger problem than the theoretical reduction in fatalities on roads
- idopmstuff 3y ago
  > This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists It's not remotely like saying this, and going straight to child pornography in is like going straight to the Nazis - the sign of an unserious argument. > It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles You're just not understanding the definition of the word argument if you think this is true. Also, these things are being measured, so we're getting to this understanding. If your argument is that we shouldn't put robotaxis on the road because we don't know if they're safer means that we can't measure if robotaxis are safer and thus regardless of their relative safety, we must ban them because we don't have measurements yet. > I suspect that is actually a much bigger problem than the theoretical reduction in fatalities on roads But that's not an actual argument because it doesn't have specific, measurable distinctions, no?

guil177 3y ago

I mean longterm strategy is non sensical. Why not ban personal car to make the demand for driver even higher?

robg 3y ago

What’s your data to back that up? If truck drivers, there’s nothing close that would turn huge trucks robotic for the current generation.

TeMPOraL 3y ago
Wait, aren't huge trucks slated to be the first ones to be replaced by autonomous equivalents? Making a self-driving long-distance truck is a simpler, more constrained, and easier to solve incrementally problem than making a self-driving passenger car.

gruez 3y ago

>“Driver” happens to be the most popular job in the United States ...which still only work out to 1-2%

uoaei 3y ago
...which works out to roughly 3-7 million people. Unless you want to pay them UBI, you're going to have to help them find and transition to other categories of jobs.
- progne 3y ago
  I used to drive a taxi. Now I write code. I paid for my own training. I'd expect to find that self-help is the most usual way to transition into other jobs.
  - AndrewKemendo 3y ago
    The reality is, this is just not a functional pathway for the majority of people. So it’s not a solution It might be possible for some minority that has a particular penchant for this type of work, but neither the jobs nor the training exist at such scale that would be able to absorb the entirety of the driver workforce into the “write software for automated driving“ job.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - smabie 3y ago
      The point is that they can just get a new, different, job.
  - itishappy 3y ago
    That would roughly double the number of tech workers.
lo_zamoyski 3y ago
And 1-2% don't matter? That's an odd take. Whom do you serve?