Well that and the whole part where you murder yourself every time you use one. :P
Or have sex with your evil/good double.
Wait. Am I the only one that thinks that? DID I JUST TYPE THIS OUT LOUD???
Look at eCommerce - it went from “I will never trust some random website with my credit card and bank info” to completely ubiquitous in less than a decade. There will be people who are unsettled by it, and don’t want to give up the control of their own car, but I think perceptions will shift quickly once the technology becomes commonplace. I don’t think the tech itself will be all that common until 2025, of course, so by 2030 we will only be seeing the early adopters and the first signs of a paradigm shift. By then we’ll all be the old farts who just don’t trust the robots, and our kids will think of them like we think of elevators.
Based on recent events maybe that was the right opinion. :)
Think of all the credit monitoring and identity protection jobs that were created, though! You’re joking (or at least half-joking) of course, but more seriously, I think one of the things that evolved to combat the threat was that credit card companies became very good at dealing with fraudulent charges. One of the first things that will happen with driverless cars is that humans will learn to work with them on the road, anticipate how they drive, how they react to situations like 4-way stop signs or making a left across traffic, etc. Institutions will adapt too - if the cars need a clear hand signal from a traffic cop, traffic cops will learn how to give one, for example. These things aren’t being dropped wholesale and invisibly into some pre-exisiting game world
When Uber refused to acknowledge that they needed permits for autonomous driving, California pulled the registration on all their vehicles, so they couldn’t drive them with or without a driver. Uber San Francisco experiment has stopped for now.
I’m assuming California will let them proceed after they follow the damn rules and get proper state permits for autonomous driving.
Just as a follow-up to this, I looked up the numbers. As of 2015, less than 1/4 (~22.6%) of all the automobile-driver professionals (the people actually driving) are under 35. Compare that with people working sales or office jobs, where 38% are under 35 and we can see that the shift is already well underway.
I really do think a lot of the problem is about respect and finding jobs that don’t just make ends meet, but provide some feeling that you have a future and are doing the right thing.
If Amazon messes up, I’m not getting a semi-truck through my living room.
When we have 100% complicated robot surgery available, I’m sure you’ll be the first to sign up. I won’t accept waiting for v 1.1 though, v 1.0.
Yea, I think I would wait for the first patch or two.
Me too, but someone has to try it out or there will never be a first, and I’m certain there are many folks interested in trying it out.
But the idea that your bank account could be drain and you could be left with massive credit card debt because someone got your info was a major drawback for early adopters and those concerns seemed paranoid and archaic in less than a decade. Let me know when we have the first story of an automated car or truck driving into someone’s living room (something that actually happens with human drivers).
Don’t you think though we should start with robots doing surgery on knees and fingers and maybe not start with hearts and brains?
You keep beating this horse about the dangers of trucks, but no one is “starting with” semis - this technology has been in large-scale development for nearly 30 years already, it’s been exploding as the rest of the AI industry explodes over the past 5 years, and it has been heavily, heavily tested using smaller cars. At some point you have to start testing it on trucks or you are never going to be able to do things unique to trucks, and there is a massive financial incentive to do so. Doing surgery on knees and fingers might be a great way to train some of the more-basic skills needed by surgeons, but each surgery is unique and at some point you are doing it for the first time on a live human. I would like all surgery robots to undergo extensive training before they perform a new type of surgery and to be assisted by human surgeons until we are confident in their skills, but that’s also true of all human surgeons. Similarly, I don’t want unsafe automated trucks on the road, but neither does anyone else and no one is advocating for that. I don’t even understand what you want to prove about this - are you saying we should fully automate every compact car on the road before we automate a single SUV, then get all SUVs automated before any pickups and all pickups before dump trucks and all dump trucks before semis?
Well, well, well… Timely.
If I drive down a public road, how many self-driving small cars am I passing on average? Aren’t they demanding Tesla remove the turn auto-pilot from their cars and every time a Google car bumps into something we’re evaluating why. No, I don’t think we’re there. I am not going to stop pointing out how dangerous it is.
But you do let me know when you are the first person to sign up for brain surgery, v1.0. We’ve had robots in healthcare for years too so I’m sure you’ll be fine with it.
I’m pretty sure you pass a lot more self driving cars than semis, even out in California (actually I think most semi testing is in Nevada anyway). My friends out in California have noticed self driving non-teslas out quite a lot actually.
I’ve also never heard of anyone demanding Tesla remove the auto-pilot from their cars. The only thing I’ve heard is some countries wanting Tesla to rename it because people don’t realize what the term “auto-pilot” actually means (it doesn’t mean autonomous in aerospace industry).
Also all autonomous vehicles must report every accident to the DMV, not just ones they cause. And so far Google has caused very few accidents, but they have been bumped into by human drivers much more. This is so the DMV is kept aware of actual issues that come up and so Google, Ford, etc… don’t hide accident statistics in their favor.
So I"m not really sure what point you are getting at.
When a large number of cars are self-driving on the road and doing so successfully, then we should move onto the more dangerous vehicles like semis, buses and inner city hauls.
Makes sense. If you have ever driven any distance in Nevada you know you rarely have to turn the steering wheel.
Could it possibly be worse than Nebraska?
Or, we could apply a more logical standard, like “when they have been extensively tested under conditions that don’t jeopardize human lives, we can begin to test them in conditions that do. Once they been extensively tested with backup drivers and various training wheels, we can begin to use them in more natural conditions.” Or put more simply, “we shouldn’t have unsafe vehicles on the road.” Your requirement is just completely arbitrary and has nothing to do with what we actually want, which is safety. It’s as relevant as saying that we need to automate motorcycles and ATVs before cars, because they are less dangerous to other drivers, so only when a “large number” of motorcycles and ATVs are successfully self-driving can we begin to test the tech on cars.
Your brain surgery analogy is just a bad one - not only does it not make sense to assume brain surgery would be safer because some robot has successfully repaired a knee, but your implication that my personal reluctance to be the first recipient of that surgery would support your argument is just bizarre. I’m not getting brain surgery from the version 1 robot unless it’s my only chance to live, regardless of how many other surgeries have been automated. That doesn’t mean I think we should avoid building such robots, or that I don’t think there are people who would make a different choice.
I have never driven in Nebraska, but I have driven from Reno to Winnemucca and north into Idaho. I think over that entire 250+ miles you make one left turn.