What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@eddiejennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
People often are delusional about what actual rights they have.
Exactly - that's why it's italicized.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
It's really more the crazy way some people talk. I believe that most realize it's note a "right" but currently basically a universal given assuming you pass the test and haven't given them a reason to not allow you to (DUI, etc). So they kinda view it as a quasi-right.
-
@nerdydad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
Try taking the keys from your elderly parent when its unsafe for them to drive but they don't see it that way.
Exactly - though this is not exactly the same. At least in the city - making all cars self driving doesn't keep you locked at home. If anything it's more freeing for a person.
-
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@nerdydad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
Try taking the keys from your elderly parent when its unsafe for them to drive but they don't see it that way.
Exactly - though this is not exactly the same. At least in the city - making all cars self driving doesn't keep you locked at home. If anything it's more freeing for a person.
We have somewhat had that ever since taxis have existed. You're just paying somebody else to do the driving for you.
-
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
It's really more the crazy way some people talk. I believe that most realize it's note a "right" but currently basically a universal given assuming you pass the test and haven't given them a reason to not allow you to (DUI, etc). So they kinda view it as a quasi-right.
Which is should be. People say "driving is a privilege", instead of a right. But in reality, if you step back and think about it, something that is a privilege instead of a right... is just a right not protected from discrimination. Nothing should be subjective the way that driving is. It hugely impacts the ability to work, social mobility, freedom, safety, etc. of people, yet individuals with zero oversight, credentials, or understanding have the power to discriminate freely with it.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
It's really more the crazy way some people talk. I believe that most realize it's note a "right" but currently basically a universal given assuming you pass the test and haven't given them a reason to not allow you to (DUI, etc). So they kinda view it as a quasi-right.
Which is should be. People say "driving is a privilege", instead of a right. But in reality, if you step back and think about it, something that is a privilege instead of a right... is just a right not protected from discrimination. Nothing should be subjective the way that driving is. It hugely impacts the ability to work, social mobility, freedom, safety, etc. of people, yet individuals with zero oversight, credentials, or understanding have the power to discriminate freely with it.
I'm gonna jump in on the band wagon here and say that people have the right to move freely. Which then gets transformed into this idea of "I have the right to drive a vehicle" which clearly aren't the same.
You can move to the south pole for all "I" care, but you aren't going to be driving the oil tanker to get there.
-
@nerdydad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@nerdydad said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@travisdh1 said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
tell me about it.
Well, the Lidar sensors are generally quite expensive still. While some companies claim to have solved that issue, getting a machine learning platform to learn all the nuances involved in operating a multi-ton object safely still seems to be a challenge
The probable worse issue is getting the cars to anticipate what crazy humans will do.
That's why we need to outlaw the dangerous pieces and just keep the safe ones. They've already shown that the track record thus far is that ALL accidents are being caused by humans.
Sadly, people feel that their rights are being taken away by not being allowed to drive.
Who believes they have a right to drive? I've never seen that claimed. The whole licensing processes kind of goes against that.
Try taking the keys from your elderly parent when its unsafe for them to drive but they don't see it that way.
Exactly - though this is not exactly the same. At least in the city - making all cars self driving doesn't keep you locked at home. If anything it's more freeing for a person.
We have somewhat had that ever since taxis have existed. You're just paying somebody else to do the driving for you.
Yes and no. In today's world, you often own a car - you want to go somewhere at the drop of a hat, you walk to your car, get in and go. Cabs are nothing like that.
Self driving cars can be exactly like that.
Of course this doesn't talk about the expectation of future metros where you don't own a car, and you basically call an uber to come get you - paying your monthly fee instead of the big upfront cost of car ownership.
-
@scottalanmiller - speaking of self driving cars. How do you think this affects the poor? Currently people purchase very inexpensive cars and drive these things around until they die and then do it again. Do you think an imposed law of no more people driving cars is a play against the poor, along the same lines as gas tax is a play against the poor.
Play is the incorrect term, but I can't think of the right one. I'm meaning to say, that getting rid of human driven cars could be more burdensome on the poor just like gas taxes are more burdensome to the poor.
-
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller - speaking of self driving cars. How do you think this affects the poor? Currently people purchase very inexpensive cars and drive these things around until they die and then do it again. Do you think an imposed law of no more people driving cars is a play against the poor, along the same lines as gas tax is a play against the poor.
Play is the incorrect term, but I can't think of the right one. I'm meaning to say, that getting rid of human driven cars could be more burdensome on the poor just like gas taxes are more burdensome to the poor.
Opposite. I think it directly supports the poor. Humans are the highest cost and risk in driving. Our current licensing system directly discriminates against the poor and minorities. Self driving cars will lower the cost of driving, lower the cost of taxies, lower the cost of insurance, lower the barriers to entry, increase the mobility (both physical and social) of working classes, and so forth.
Everything about "driving yourself" caters to the rich. You have to be able to afford a card to get a license, but you can't get a job without a car. It's a system that often makes it trivially easy for the rich to acquire cars and jobs, and often blocks the poor from the same thing. Self driving cars also makes it possible to share cars for the poor in ways that they cannot today.
It also helps stop the current situation where automative safety is something you pay a premium for with the poor often at dramaticaly higher risk due to all kinds of conditions that will be heavily abated from going to self driving.
Self driving cars level the playing field in many ways.
-
The same people who mandate self driving cars will be the same people who somehow offer free transportation via self driving vehicles, one would imagine.
I need to find an old 90’s F250 to restore and keep ready to roll...
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
lower the barriers to entry
This is the big one. It directly lowers the barrier to entry especially if we move to a uber/taxi-esque system. Providers will be able to provide vehicles for much cheaper then a taxi is currently.
-
That being said I don't think we will see a regulation to stop people from driving... I think insurance will become prohibitively expensive so that the only people who can afford to drive would be the extremely rich. That will also die out when we see that driving yourself is an insane thing to do even for the wealthy.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
The self-driving car revolution can't come soon enough.
I tell myself that every time I'm driving or walking.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That being said I don't think we will see a regulation to stop people from driving... I think insurance will become prohibitively expensive so that the only people who can afford to drive would be the extremely rich. That will also die out when we see that driving yourself is an insane thing to do even for the wealthy.
I bet we will. At some point a child will be killed by a careless driver and it will be murder rather than manslaughter because a lawyer will show that, just like with drinking and driving, getting behind the wheel of a self driving car meant he was willing to kill a kid for the joys of being in "control". If he had "control", that makes it murder two.
That'll be the argument.
-
In the 1950s people would have said that we'd never see the day that drinking and driving wasn't legal, just that insurance would get higher and higher. Yet today, finally, nearly all states have made it illegal to drink and drive. This is just the useful extension of what that started.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller - speaking of self driving cars. How do you think this affects the poor? Currently people purchase very inexpensive cars and drive these things around until they die and then do it again. Do you think an imposed law of no more people driving cars is a play against the poor, along the same lines as gas tax is a play against the poor.
Play is the incorrect term, but I can't think of the right one. I'm meaning to say, that getting rid of human driven cars could be more burdensome on the poor just like gas taxes are more burdensome to the poor.
Opposite. I think it directly supports the poor. Humans are the highest cost and risk in driving. Our current licensing system directly discriminates against the poor and minorities. Self driving cars will lower the cost of driving, lower the cost of taxies, lower the cost of insurance, lower the barriers to entry, increase the mobility (both physical and social) of working classes, and so forth.
Everything about "driving yourself" caters to the rich. You have to be able to afford a card to get a license, but you can't get a job without a car. It's a system that often makes it trivially easy for the rich to acquire cars and jobs, and often blocks the poor from the same thing. Self driving cars also makes it possible to share cars for the poor in ways that they cannot today.
It also helps stop the current situation where automative safety is something you pay a premium for with the poor often at dramaticaly higher risk due to all kinds of conditions that will be heavily abated from going to self driving.
Self driving cars level the playing field in many ways.
I'm trying to see the transition in this. I suppose if taxies are there day one (and frankly why wouldn't they be) the poor could pay for the pickup service until they save enough to own their own. Though I wonder what the cost of a taxi ride will be? I have a hard time seeing the cost being less than what is currently pay for their current driving situation (cost of license/car/fuel/maintenance/insurance). Fuel costs will be the same - with any luck, insurance to the taxi company will be a fraction of what it is today, but the vehicle cost will be drastically higher, but your splitting it amongst call it 4 people a day. I suppose the car could do more local pickups during the day, but I was considering averages in a place like Omaha. We're talking about a taxi that has to take people from the center of town to the outskirts of town, not like the 15 block typical rides in NYC.
We'll take my typical commute. It takes 20 mins to get from my house to work. I need to be there by 7 AM, so the pickup is at 6:30. We can assume someone else could be picked up by 7:30 in my neighborhood to be at work by 8.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That being said I don't think we will see a regulation to stop people from driving... I think insurance will become prohibitively expensive so that the only people who can afford to drive would be the extremely rich. That will also die out when we see that driving yourself is an insane thing to do even for the wealthy.
See this is the opposite than I expect, I expect the rich to flock to self driving, granting them more time to do whatever while being transported, huge win for them.
Though the insurance thing do it, but why would drive the prices of insurance up? The prices today are obviously reasonable enough that even the poor have insurance, granted not great insurance, but they have it in a lot of (possible most) situations. Of course this has a lot to do with competition.
Assuming that there aren't laws mandating human-less cars, only the rich will have self driving for the next 10 years, If we're lucky at that time, as the rich start to trade in their first/second gen self driving cars, the poor will be able to afford them - in the meantime the poor and middle class will still have plenty of human driven cars on the road along with insurance likely staying near or at the same as we see today.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
In the 1950s people would have said that we'd never see the day that drinking and driving wasn't legal, just that insurance would get higher and higher. Yet today, finally, nearly all states have made it illegal to drink and drive. This is just the useful extension of what that started.
It's things like this that make me think they'll simply outlaw human driving (on open roads) instead of dealing with lawsuits about murder if you are a driver.
-
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
In the 1950s people would have said that we'd never see the day that drinking and driving wasn't legal, just that insurance would get higher and higher. Yet today, finally, nearly all states have made it illegal to drink and drive. This is just the useful extension of what that started.
It's things like this that make me think they'll simply outlaw human driving (on open roads) instead of dealing with lawsuits about murder if you are a driver.
That's what I assume, but not until there are lawsuits first to trigger it.
-
@dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That being said I don't think we will see a regulation to stop people from driving... I think insurance will become prohibitively expensive so that the only people who can afford to drive would be the extremely rich. That will also die out when we see that driving yourself is an insane thing to do even for the wealthy.
See this is the opposite than I expect, I expect the rich to flock to self driving, granting them more time to do whatever while being transported, huge win for them.
That's the thing about self driving... everyone wins. The rich already have drivers, this just lowers the cost a little. But it levels the playing field so that the poor can use their time better, too.
