San Francisco protestors are disabling autonomous vehicles using traffic cones

[rhdevries]

Considering its SF I think an easier way for them to stop them would be to hire homeless dudes to take dumps on the car cameras. It'll block their cameras plus it'll solve the poop on the sidewalk issues SF has.

 

[rhdevries]

"Waymo says it will call the police on anyone caught interfering with its fleet of robotaxis."

Yeah, right, good luck with that. The SF police don't even get out of bed for anything less than homicide these days since it won't be followed up by the DA's office.

 

[rmcrys]

Because most cars owned by humans are sitting idle for over 90% of their existence. ...That is a huge savings that would be split between the consumer and the vendor. ...That is a whole lot less than a loan/lease, gas, maintenance, and insurance.

What you describe is not an advantage of a self driving car, you are describing private owned cars vs taxi ! What does that have to do with my vehicle driving for me but still "sitting idle" 90% of the time? So, for that cost being "diluted", just don't buy a car and call a taxi when you need it! Driven by a human that even may chat with you...

Here in London you could also add that you wouldn't need to pay for parking or the time it takes to find that parking. I guess you wouldn't have to pay insurance, servicing costs, repairs, fuel and an MOT (our yearly vehicle test). Plus the streets would become more pleasant without them

Again, what you are talking has nothing to do with a car being driven by AI or a human.

Just sell your car and call a taxi or catch a bus or ride a bike anytime you want. But the public transportation can be driven by a human...

In New York most citizens don't own a car, they take public transportation.

 

[rhdevries]

IMHO
- these groups are just annoying and borderline of being useless, usually they are unrealistic "against everything" just because

- I stand that AVs and technology ought to not substitute humans unless they do something very risky / hard. I find the full self driving fantastic if there is also a human "driving", not that cars just replace the taxi drivers. The same in coffee shops or bars, I won't accept to have a robot attendant.

Not sure why everything has to be an either/or. I'm fine with automated coffee-shops, bank machines, etc. However, if the market demands it there still will be coffee shops with people serving. Different strokes and such. Same with drivers. I'm cool with an AI driven car so I can chat with my friends on the phone, etc. However, I'm sure some people will still want full-service drivers who can also talk with them, provide security, etc.

 

[rhdevries]

How about a comparison of death and injury caused by human drivers vs automated ones?

Probably not a whole lot of like-to-like info on this yet since the automated ones are just really beginning. However, one thing certain is that automated driving will only get better and better while human drivers will not. If anything, human drivers have gotten worse and worse the last several years in America. It's not 100% certain why but many experts think it has to do with distracted driving and increased drug use (prescription and otherwise).

 

[mbk34]

Again, what you are talking has nothing to do with a car being driven by AI or a human.

The cost of a taxi is based on lots of things. The human driving it is probably the largest cost - if that goes away then the price of a taxi ride goes down. Insurance for taxis is another cost that will come down if AI driven cars have fewer accidents. If a taxi is being used 24/7 then it's a more efficient use of the vehicle so prices should come down again. Here in London the official taxi drivers take between 2 and 4 years to pass their "knowledge" tests - that "cost" would also go away. AI taxis are going to be EV's and these always have lower maintenance and running costs. If the cost of using these taxis reaches a point where it makes more sense to use them than own a car then fewer people will own cars (at least in cities) and that means you don't need all that parking.

I like a nice drive like anyone else but driving in cities is not a nice drive. I'll also admit I have 2 ICE cars and a bunch of motorcycles but I can see which way the wind is blowing. I can also see why.

 

[rmcrys]

The cost of a taxi is based on lots of things. The human driving it is probably the largest cost - if that goes away then the price of a taxi ride goes down.

There is exactly where your argument is wrong

1) for you, more important than finding a balance between machinery and human dignity, rights and job... it's the cost / company margins

2) your argument has a fallacy: if you cut a job to lower the cost, you're going to pay more unemployment taxes + there will be less money for the social and public services + robbery / bad neighborhoods.

At the end of the day, your vision is politically extreme right wing: as long as a corporation has high margins and for you (on short term) it's cheaper, than it's fine.

Let's do the exercise the other way around:
- the world follows your route, the AI and robots eliminate humans from bars, restaurants, taxis, etc
- it gets (on the short term) cheaper for you and, as you earn the same, you have more money
- on a medium term, those same corporations want to keep earning more so they increase the prices due to the "inflation", so you will be at the same start point but paying more taxes because of the unemployment
- on a long term, also your job will be replaced by AI and you'll be unemployed, so the same will apply to you as those guys. You'll be frustrated and your life quality will sink as the titanic...

Congratulations.

 

[mbk34]

I sympathise and understand everything you say but unfortunately that's not the way the world works. Businesses would want AI because it's cheaper and causes fewer hassles. Customers would want it because it's cheaper. Cities would want it because it results in fewer vehicles, less parking requirements, fewer accidents and less pollution. Taxi drivers obviously don't want it but who do you think will win?

 

[rhdevries]

I sympathise and understand everything you say but unfortunately that's not the way the world works. Businesses would want AI because it's cheaper and causes fewer hassles. Customers would want it because it's cheaper. Cities would want it because it results in fewer vehicles, less parking requirements, fewer accidents and less pollution. Taxi drivers obviously don't want it but who do you think will win?

Sounds like win-wins all around, although you're right, taxi drivers won't like it. Then again, there are way more jobs than people looking for them out there. They'll most likely get better jobs that pay more in the tech industry or many other sectors.

 

[Bruce Fraser]

I remember back in the 60's the old story about how a company spent a lot of money developing an ink pen that would write in outer space, upside down. Shown to the (at the time) USSR, they asked them what they thought....
The USSR rep said...we just use pencil.

Still quoting that old piece of misinformation? Read the real story here: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-nasa-spen.

 

[Joe_B]

If they 'unlive' a dog, they will 'unlive' humans. AVs aren't safer than human drivers when AVs block ER vehicles enroute to save lives. AVs aren't safe when they block public transit vehicles. AVs aren't safe when they have multiple cameras to record everything in the environment and yet cannot navigate their environment safely and properly. Good luck suing for damages -- who is responsible for the AV decisions and harm caused from negligence? Are these vehicles required to carry insurance? How is it rated (I.e. is the propensity for damage they cause 'shared' by other drivers in the area enduring increased premiums because of the presence of AVs?) Write your representatives and tell them you don't wish to be part of another human experiment that makes a handful of individuals uber wealthy off your rights to enjoy full access to public roads and the expectation Emergency responders can respond.