Except the things I said have already been going on for some time. "First they came for the street racers" - already done; everything I've seen indicates that most of the developed world has really tightened up traffic enforcement since about the 1970s. "Then they came for the V8s" - currently in its second phase, with the 1970s/80s having been the first. "Then they came for the remaining combustion engines" - multiple plans to this effect already in motion in Europe. "Then they came for the cars you could drive yourself" - nothing concrete yet, but I've already seen people who think an all-driverless future is the way forward, and at this point I don't think we can count on the majority of people to think otherwise, even in the US. "Then they came for me - and I had no way to run." Fringiest of the fringe left has already said that AGW skeptics are dangerous and should be locked up for the good of everyone else, thought fortunately none of that has come to fruition. Apparently, in places like Canada and the UK which honor no specific right to free speech, the situation is significantly worse. As for not implementing all the rules in a second, didn't you stop to consider the possibility that by the time incoming tyranny becomes obvious, it'll be too late? I mean, here in the US, Trump got elected specifically because we're all tired of career politicians who pretend to care about their constituents, but just continue pushing their own agendas when they think we're not looking. Whether that was the right choice, or will achieve the intended effect, is not to debate here, but what happens when he's out of office? And what about the rest of the world? So then, we all have a choice. We can either continue buying into each new argument about safety, or air quality, or global warming, then try in vain to hold back tyranny when it's already inevitable, or we can start now by denying future tyrants the tools they need to achieve the level of control they'll want. See, they always have and always will have an argument that sounds good at least on the surface. Either we're about to run out of oil, or the earth is going to get too hot/cold, or there's too many traffic fatalities, or we have air-quality problems (not that some places don't, but I do believe that national solutions to urban problems should always be given an extra measure of suspicion, and am also in favor of finding solutions that will allow people to keep their combustion-powered cars). Anything they try in the future will have some kind of similar "if you don't agree with us you're selfish/backwards/uncaring" argument attached. Somewhere we have to stop listening, and start resisting. I'd prefer we start before it becomes illegal.
The problem is, self-driving cars do have a ton of benefits for non-car people, ca. 95% of the society. You're on the losing side. 19:1, admit it. You're trying to block change most people welcome. Also, what about just not electing politicians who seem to want to control everybody?
Such as? I admit, there are positives to self driving cars. But the government could just push public transport more instead, and improve that. They have less emissions, are driven by professionals (most the time), reduce traffic, and all you need to do is wait or call for a vehicle (depending on the service), get in, be taken from A to B, get out, and be happy. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than buying and personally owning your own 2-ton slab of metal with enough computing power to drive itself. You'll need to worry about maintenance too if you own your own vehicle. Why ruin something people enjoy to appeal to people who don't enjoy it, when there's already pretty good alternatives?
Because people often prefer to be in their own cabin, because the schedule doesn't match with theirs, and because many people live in places so remote that it does not make sense to provide public transport. Actually, most futurologists speculate that in the future, the average person won't own a car - there'd be fleets of self-driving cars, people would get a subscription in one of them, and then they'd have a car on demand. The exception would be remote areas, where there is too much land for a fleet, so people would own their cars instead.
SELF DRIVING CARS!!! WANNA KNOW WHY KIDS?!?!?!?!?!? BECAUSE FUN IS OVERATED AND SAFETY IS MLG PRO EDITON COOL!!!!!! SAFTY IS MORE FUN THAN ROLLERCOASTERS!!!!!!!! WE TRUST ROBOTS TO DRIVE OUR CARS EVEN THOUGH THEY WONT BE PERFECT DRIVERS EITHER!!!! AI ERRORS!!! TOTALY COOL!!! PROBALY THE BEST PART WILL BE WHEN THE WATER ENTERS THE SURCUTRY RUNINING THE CAR FOREVER AND SO YOU HAVE TO PAY ANTOTHER AFFORDABLE $1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!! TOTALY AWSOME!!!!! WE SHOULD WATCH ROBOTS RACE INSTEAD OF DOING IT OURSELVES BECAUSE WHO SEREOUSLY WANS TO DO THAT WE WOULD RATHER BE OBSSEDED WITH BALL SPORTS LIKE FOOTBALL AND BASKETBALL AND ALSO RATHER EXERSISE 24/7 BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE OBSESSED WITH IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! POUPULAR IS ALWAYS BETTER!!!!!!!!!!! MOTORSPORTS IS TERRIBLE BECAUSE IT'S UNPOPULAR!!!!!!!!! INFACT, WHY NOT WE SHOULD BANISH CARS ALLTOGETER AND MAKE DRIVABLE BASKETBALLS INSTEAD!!!!!!!!!!! IT WILL COST $999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 DOLLARS!!!!!!!!! TOTALY RAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND THIS IS WHY KIDS WE SHOULD ABOLISH THE ENJOYMENT OF DRIVING, COOL, RIGHT!?!?!?!?!?!? *cough cough sarcasm cough cough*
Yeah, and drive properly, what I said there was a joke... They should be more strict (in correct ways) on drivers/ learning drivers. --- Post updated --- Its a silly joke about self driving cars and it also dived it's foot into ball sports being more popular than motorsports and high prices of modern day, nutty indeed, nutty indeed... Self driving cars will destroy the enjoyment of driving on the road...
Appeal to ridicule, perfect solution fallacy, and a bit of not understanding inflation and complaining about the kids today.
Allright, you have a right to do it. Just consider that "changes in auto styling" is a shitty reason to kill yourself.
Self driving cars would destroy the fun and enjoyment of driving... --- Post updated --- Yes... OR, someone messes up the circuitry somehow and makes the car undrivable by the computer basically making it a glorified bench/gazebo ...
The future of cars? It's not bright IMO. Just these all things with self-driving and electric cars... Self-driving cars are total nonsense. I don't know why some people think that computer is smarter than human being. And what if computer brake down during driving or someone hacks it? What then? And electric cars. I know that some people are convinced that it doesn't pollute the air. But, it's so if you have natural resources. In many countries (Serbia for example) people get electricity from thermal power plants. In that case electric cars pollute a lot more than normal cars. Plus, many substances needed for bateries are extremely toxic and pollute a lot too. So, I think that 90% of people that support electrification of cars, are completely blind and they're not seeing the bigger picture.
What if your hydraulic brakes fail while you're going down a steep hill? What if your engine decides to throw a rod into your face? What if the wheel bolts fall off on the highway? Sometimes you just have to trust the manufacturers to make a reliable product.
tried and tested technology, but when the software will likely be different per car you can't say the same thing.
True there are far more variables that way. But we already have computers in cars with their own different softwares managing things for us already, such as stability and traction controls, navigation systems, auto-pilot (in some cars), self-parking systems, etc, and they generally work. Plus, most manufacturers use different mechanical systems for their cars (drivetrain, braking systems, suspension etc.), and they are still reliable despite being mostly different per car. I can only see danger in the situation of the software being brand new and all the bugs not having been ironed out prior to a self-driving vehicle being released, which would be a major lack of responsibility on the part of the company that made said car. As for cars in general, I personally think that we're starting to make an exponentially bigger compromise with styling, performance, practicality and visibility, for the sake of crash safety ratings, with an exponentially lower increase in safety. Cars are getting heavier, more bloated, and harder to see out of, but the passengers inside have maybe a 5% higher chance of not sustaining serious injuries, and that's only in the specific scenarios for which they test the cars in the first place. Plus, how many times have you seen an early 90s hatchback crashing into another car at an intersection because they couldn't see them through their A pillars? Safety features like airbags, crumple zones etc. are fantastic. They save lives. But when it gets to the point where there are more accidents due to poor visibility, surely the car isn't all that safe, right?
I may not speak for everyone, but until I can trust my desktop computer to not just crash, for no reason whatsoever, I'm not gonna trust a computer that controls the very fast moving metal cage I'm in. Atleast when hydraulic brakes and wheel bolts fail, they have a reason behind their failure. Often, computers just stop working because they feel like it.
