Driverless cars to boost demand for 3D printed organs

[davislane1]

Are you all so insufferably lazy, stupid, or just plain indolent, that you actually want self driving cars? Is that so you'll have more time to "tweet" inane nothings like, "duh, my car is driving me to work".

In this sorry a** excuse for a society, something as imbecilic as that is liable to net you 10,000 followers.

"Oh death, where is thy sting"? (William Shakespeare)

^ spot on.
Not to mention ( however I will anyway) driving is one of the great sensory experiences of our time.

Ever been a passenger in someone else's car? Ever taken a taxi? Or a bus? Or a train? Or (is my point made yet?). Did you feel oh-so deprived because it wasn't you behind the wheel?

I highly doubt it. Lots of us aren't fussed on driving, so if the car is automated, that's great!

I'd rather be driven somewhere and have the "great sensory experience" of reading a book, rather than concentrate on the people around me who might kill me because they can't drive properly.

Captaincranky's problem is that he's a man stuck in a woman's world. Until you understand what this means, you won't understand what he's on about. He is, however, quite correct in his criticism.

 

[Guest]

@ captaincranky: I agree with you, however I was explaining the possible positives about driverless vehicles. I very much enjoy driving myself. I wanted to buy an Acura TL but they didn't offer it in a manual transmission (only paddle shifting). So I saved some money and went with the less expensive ILX because it is available with manual. While I only have 206hp as opposed to 305hp, I enjoy shifting.

 

[Rickk]

My question is if you are in an accident with a driverless car "who gets the blame" the car?

 

[Guest]

Seems to me the car company would have to be responsible for driverless vehicles. However I'm sure they'll still force you to buy insurance, and it would be no fault insurance. Both insurance companies would have to split the cost.

 

[red1776]

Ever been a passenger in someone else's car? Ever taken a taxi? Or a bus? Or a train? Or (is my point made yet?). Did you feel oh-so deprived because it wasn't you behind the wheel?

I highly doubt it. Lots of us aren't fussed on driving, so if the car is automated, that's great!

I'd rather be driven somewhere and have the "great sensory experience" of reading a book, rather than concentrate on the people around me who might kill me because they can't drive properly.

As a matter of fact I have. I always prefer to drive if I have the option, preferably with an manual transmission and a whole lot of horsepower. To me driving is a wonderful sensory experience.

rather than concentrate on the people around me who might kill me because they can't drive properly.

So people screw up ey? who...excuse me ...whom do you think is programing these little 'smart roller skates' that will be traversing the country?
I have a bulletin just over the wire Bubba, life is full of risk. If you think that driverless (and I loathe to even call them cars) will eliminate risk, I believe you have an unhappy surprise coming.

I highly doubt it. Lots of us aren't fussed on driving

Lots? by number, sure, by percentage not even close. I am one of those who is "fussed on driving" and as such follow all matters automobile. When a public mass transit is offered, people still prefer to take there own car to get from point A to point 2. look at cars sales, membership in car enthusiast associations, number of vehicles on the road by year. It has risen every year despite the price of fuel, the increased taxes, and the fact that the stats are slanted towards the baby boomers turning 60+ faster than any age group.
And in a bit of purely anecdotal evidence. I live in a rather unremarkable suburb of Minneapolis. Despite the cities best and very considerable efforts to get people out of their personal chariots by offering a vast public bus service and the infamous 'Minneapolis Transit Train'. During the summer months you can bet your sweet bippy that about every eight vehicle will be a 67 vette, a Super Bee, or a classic car that someone has "fussed over" I travel around the country and see no difference in any corner of the US with the exception a few small towns that have agreed to be purchased by a corporation and paint themselves green and agree to trip over free range chickens on the way to the co-op for their wheat grass.
I can appreciate that you do not belong in the camp of those of us that look upon automobiles as 'personal chariots' and very much appreciate and enjoy the freedom to move about as we individually see fit. There are a lot of us who do however. Unless the plan is to force us all into these dreadful 'risk free' Hal operated tin cans with Police making sure that no one is driving. The result of having a mix of driverless cars and driverless cars sharing the roadways will be considerably less than very good. I would hazard that it will be less better (I'm a half full kinda guy) than the rate of incidents now.

This aside Bubbajim..it is bubbajim right?. For gods sake it was a tongue and cheek comment. You take yourself entirely too seriously. I hope you don't get so intellectually lost in ' An Inconvenient Truth' that you miss an important message coming over your iPhone.
Happy Riding

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

I don't like how the organ business is reliant on car accidents to get their organs. Less people dying to car accidents? How are rich people going to get those organs they so desperately need?

Same way poor people do, they wait in line. What they'll have to do is stop giving organs to people who refuse to follow Dr.'s orders. I have family who have worked on the transplant floor of a hospital. The place is full of people who drank through their first liver only to get a replacement and drink through that one too. There are plenty of people who need kidneys because of diabetes because they can't lay off the cake. And they don't start laying off the cake just because they get a new kidney.

Maybe the silver lining to an even greater organ shortage is that we'll stop giving them to people who have no desire to earn them.

 

[p51d007]

Well, since it's a google smart car...simple solution would be that when skynet(google) sees a decline in the overall supply of organs, they simply cause the cars to spontaneously crash into each other, at a safe enough speed to render the occupants DOA, but not bad enough to destroy their organs. Then after the organs are taken, and, google sees that the inventory is back up, they allow our cars to continue on, until the next low inventory.

 

[red1776]

Well, since it's a google smart car...simple solution would be that when skynet(google) sees a decline in the overall supply of organs, they simply cause the cars to spontaneously crash into each other, at a safe enough speed to render the occupants DOA, but not bad enough to destroy their organs. Then after the organs are taken, and, google sees that the inventory is back up, they allow our cars to continue on, until the next low inventory.

Now you're on to something!

 

[Bubbajim]

As a matter of fact I have. I always prefer to drive if I have the option, preferably with an manual transmission and a whole lot of horsepower. To me driving is a wonderful sensory experience.

[...cut bits...]

That was a bizarre little dig at the end of your post (not in that quoted bit). And perhaps I was wrong to include you in the "reply" button earlier, I was mainly railing against cranky's particularly cranky point:

"Are you all so insufferably lazy, stupid, or just plain indolent, that you actually want self driving cars? Is that so you'll have more time to "tweet" inane nothings like, "duh, my car is driving me to work".

In this sorry a** excuse for a society, something as imbecilic as that is liable to net you 10,000 followers."
---
Me saying "hey, there are some of us who don't like driving, that doesn't mean that we're lazy, stupid, indolent, tweeting imbeciles", does not equate to me saying "and I speak for everyone and no-one likes driving". Standing up for one side against a ridiculous assertion =/= me trying to pull down anyone who does drive. I wasn't the one flapping about with inane insults from a high-horse.

I'd never deny that other people obviously like driving, because who the hell am I to speak about what other people like? Similarly, who the hell is anyone to tell others they're "lazy, stupid" (etc.) just because they're not into something? It's like the teenage attitude of hurling insults because others don't like your favourite band - something most people get over.

On this topic people seem to think that they'll (a) be forced to use these cars (b) they're some sort of government program (c) anyone who quite likes the idea is an iPhone and NSA loving *****. I just find that attitude absolutely baffling.

 

[captaincranky]

That was a bizarre little dig at the end of your post (not in that quoted bit). And perhaps I was wrong to include you in the "reply" button earlier, I was mainly railing against cranky's particularly cranky point:

"Are you all so insufferably lazy, stupid, or just plain indolent, that you actually want self driving cars? Is that so you'll have more time to "tweet" inane nothings like, "duh, my car is driving me to work".

In this sorry a** excuse for a society, something as imbecilic as that is liable to net you 10,000 followers."
---

Ah, did I hurt your widdle feelings? I'm actually surprised you cranked you head out of your iPhone long enough to notice.

Well trust me, there are plenty of "imbeciles in this world, to which that statement directly attaches. As far as I'm concerned, you could have a PHD, and if you're "Keeping up With the Kardashians", you're a imbecile nonetheless.

What was that book you were going to read while being carted off to "work" by your car, St. Thomas Moore's "Utopia"? You do know that didn't work out, right?

One news article here is telling you that driverless cars will increase the need for 3D printed organs", the next telling you that, "driverless cars are safer". Huh? And pretty much the rest of , "the news" is people whining about being spied on by the NSA. Guess who's coming to a robot car near you? "I don't have any privacy anymore! In the next breath comes, "I can't wait for the iPhone 6". If our species becomes any more duplicitous, we'll be born with our lips fused in the center so we can more easily talk out both sides of our mouths...

How would you get to the mall? File a "driving plan"? Cause if you have to tell these turds where to go, you might as well put your hands on the wheel, feet on the pedals, and do it yourself.

A self driving car is probably the last admission by the human race declaring, "the computer is more capable of taking care of ourselves than we are".

"O Brave New World..".....!

(Why don't you look up the origin of that quote, I'm going for a ride. (y)BTW how many fingers am I holding up)?

 

[wiyosaya]

There's 6 BILLION of us now! What say we make it so everybody lives forever!

Let's make it so that nobody has enough to eat, and nobody will be able to afford health insurance.

We've eradicated smallpox, (mostly), what say we eradicate death altogether?

And while you're at it, print me a new a**hole will ya?

The everybody lives forever part has already been explored in fiction by the very interesting story (IMHO) "Torchwood: Miracle Day" and others I am sure.

As I said before, this article about driverless cars increasing the need for 3D printed organs is far from scientific. However, it seems like the author of this article has gotten what they want in generating a bunch of "oh my God" and "heaven forbid" responses that news and social media loves from those who may take some time to think from a detached and rationally critical perspective.

Who knows, the NSA might even come an arrest you when 1991 model cars are deemed weapons of mass destruction for the pollution they spew.

 

[captaincranky]

The everybody lives forever part has already been explored in fiction by the very interesting story (IMHO) "Torchwood: Miracle Day" and others I am sure.

Lifespans in humans are increasing. And while it certainly won't get to the point we live forever, we're fast approaching the point where we eat ourselves off this planet.

3D printed organs are the surgical community's golden fleece. Soon, even surgeon's assistants will live in mansions worthy of a rock star. (I was going for the ironic with that).

...[ ]....Who knows, the NSA might even come an arrest you when 1991 model cars are deemed weapons of mass destruction for the pollution they spew.

Well, you can't accuse me of not sensationalizing my responses to headline mongering sensationalism, now can you?

And BTW, my '91 is a motorcycle

As a side note, I think the auto makers will embrace anything that makes them money, and look good at the same time. Provided of course, there's at least a 25% markup on it.

 

[wiyosaya]

Lifespans in humans are increasing. And while it certainly won't get to the point we live forever, we're fast approaching the point where we eat ourselves off this planet.

Sounds like the article title should have read:

"Driverless cars expected to increase the need for 3D food printers"

 

[red1776]

That was a bizarre little dig at the end of your post (not in that quoted bit). And perhaps I was wrong to include you in the "reply" button earlier, I was mainly railing against cranky's particularly cranky point:

"Are you all so insufferably lazy, stupid, or just plain indolent, that you actually want self driving cars? Is that so you'll have more time to "tweet" inane nothings like, "duh, my car is driving me to work".

In this sorry a** excuse for a society, something as imbecilic as that is liable to net you 10,000 followers."
---
Me saying "hey, there are some of us who don't like driving, that doesn't mean that we're lazy, stupid, indolent, tweeting imbeciles", does not equate to me saying "and I speak for everyone and no-one likes driving". Standing up for one side against a ridiculous assertion =/= me trying to pull down anyone who does drive. I wasn't the one flapping about with inane insults from a high-horse.

I'd never deny that other people obviously like driving, because who the hell am I to speak about what other people like? Similarly, who the hell is anyone to tell others they're "lazy, stupid" (etc.) just because they're not into something? It's like the teenage attitude of hurling insults because others don't like your favourite band - something most people get over.

On this topic people seem to think that they'll (a) be forced to use these cars (b) they're some sort of government program (c) anyone who quite likes the idea is an iPhone and NSA loving *****. I just find that attitude absolutely baffling.

What are you on about??

On this topic people seem to think that they'll (a) be forced to use these cars (b) they're some sort of government program (c) anyone who quite likes the idea is an iPhone and NSA loving *****. I just find that attitude absolutely baffling.

Are you kidding? You have to be very young. Are you aware of some thing called incrementalism? The government has already forced us to 'do' or not do' a litany of things that previously freedoms. They do it (amongst other methods) by taxing, retaxing, and taxing some more that which it deems you should not be doing/not doing. Another method is placing it under a new category or name, or redefining due process, freedom of speech, or freedom of information. This area is so vast, will urge you to look it up yourself. if on the other hand you think I'm full of twitter, I can bury you in fact to this point.
No my friend, if you think they are not heading towards we all drive these voluntary or not. You have a great big pre-programed surprise heading your way.

 

[Bubbajim]

What are you on about??




Are you kidding? You have to be very young. Are you aware of some thing called incrementalism? The government has already forced us to 'do' or not do' a litany of things that previously freedoms. They do it (amongst other methods) by taxing, retaxing, and taxing some more that which it deems you should not be doing/not doing. Another method is placing it under a new category or name, or redefining due process, freedom of speech, or freedom of information. This area is so vast, will urge you to look it up yourself. if on the other hand you think I'm full of twitter, I can bury you in fact to this point.
No my friend, if you think they are not heading towards we all drive these voluntary or not. You have a great big pre-programed surprise heading your way.

Sigh. Your assumptions about me and others whose opinions differ to yours are the things that baffle me. You seem to think that I'm naive about the world.

Being a member of Privacy International and the BHA, having attended protests, signed petitions and written to my MP dozens of times around privacy and many other topics, I feel comfortable with where I'm aiming my ire - and it's just not at self-driving cars. You're making absurd leaps in judgement that just aren't supported by anything.

If you're worried about your privacy so much, do something about it. But calling people kids on a tech forum doesn't exactly scream 'informed opinion'. Go read some A C Grayling or some Jaron Lanier if you want to see roughly where my opinions align when it comes to liberty, morality and our technological future. I see legislation as my targets - those I can actually pit myself against. When it comes to private businesses' activities - I just won't buy their products if I don't like them. You can do the same with these cars when the time comes.

 

[red1776]

Sigh. Your assumptions about me and others whose opinions differ to yours are the things that baffle me. You seem to think that I'm naive about the world.

Being a member of Privacy International and the BHA, having attended protests, signed petitions and written to my MP dozens of times around privacy and many other topics, I feel comfortable with where I'm aiming my ire - and it's just not at self-driving cars. You're making absurd leaps in judgement that just aren't supported by anything.

If you're worried about your privacy so much, do something about it. But calling people kids on a tech forum doesn't exactly scream 'informed opinion'. Go read some A C Grayling or some Jaron Lanier if you want to see roughly where my opinions align when it comes to liberty, morality and our technological future. I see legislation as my targets - those I can actually pit myself against. When it comes to private businesses' activities - I just won't buy their products if I don't like them. You can do the same with these cars when the time comes.

While that was a nice attempt you once again did not bother to respond/engage in anything I wrote. I have provided sources, and while your at it what assumptions? Your age is the only thing I have speculated on and in fact I did not call you a "kid" I said very young.
You going to this:

Your assumptions about me and others whose opinions differ to yours are the things that baffle me

.
I have not made any assumptions. You have made many statements that I can empirically prove to not be true. I have tried to engage you in ideas and you have been very steadfast in this deflection mode. I acknowledged that not everyone likes to drive or an enthusiast etc.
From earlier post:

I can appreciate that you do not belong in the camp of those of us that look upon automobiles as 'personal chariots' and very much appreciate and enjoy the freedom to move about as we individually see fit. There are a lot of us who do however.

And this:

If you're worried about your privacy so much, do something about it

A bit of assumption there on your part. What makes you think I don't? I have been politically active for 30 years, and just a tad more than "signing a petition" or "attending protests."
And this:

and it's just not at self-driving cars. You're making absurd leaps in judgment that just aren't supported by anything.

Would you care to point out these "absurd leaps in judgment" I am making?
If you are talking about things like the Google cars or the Government trying to get us out of our cars, or legislating behavior, the evidence, legislation, and history is heavily weighed towards my assertions and it can all be found in congress's own budget and from the (not even attempted to be veiled) mouths of the politician's mouths.
I have responded to ideas of government trying to get us out of our cars, incrementalism, loss of freedoms, human error in these tin cans, the percentage of deaths that accidents account for etc etc and you have not responded with ideas, only deflection that I am making assumptions. Again I have been trying to engage you by countering your false statement of fact and being unaware of how the government has legislated behavior etc. The one thing I have not seen from you is ...an idea...or counter argument.
This is a thread where people discuss things. You attempt to send me off to read some papers and books to "know where you stand?" ...really?
If you can't express where you stand for yourself, I have lost interest.
Good luck