Slashdot Mirror
San Francisco To Restrict Goods Delivery Robots (bbc.com)
San Francisco officials have voted to restrict where delivery robots can go in the city, in a blow for the burgeoning industry. From a report: Start-ups will have to get permits to use such bots, which will be restricted to less crowded urban areas. Opponents are concerned about the safety of pedestrians, particularly elderly people and children. Walk San Francisco, a group that campaigns for pedestrian safety, wanted a complete ban. A range of companies have begun trialling small robots that can deliver food and other goods. They use sensors and lasers in a similar way to self-driving cars in order to navigate their routes. Robotics company Marble - which describes its machines as "friendly, neighbourhood robots" - began testing in San Francisco earlier this year.
California, and SF in particular never came across something they couldn't restrict. Except wildfires apparently.
One thing I love about SF supervisors and government offices! They focus on the important things that touch everyone, like food delivery robots. Not those pesky little problems that only affect a few people, like housing policies, transportation policies, tax policies. These are the things that matter, right on, good job!
Having a bunch of motorized wheeled vehicles driving around on the sidewalks is a bad idea. Even if they don't hit anyone, they will create congestion and confusion.
Confine them to the streets.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Now that everyone on the streets seems to be an UBER driver, it takes forever to get anywhere in SF. With one person to a car, driving around aimlessly half of the time waiting for the fair that takes them home, the roads are completely packed.
Robots are sure to fix this when everyone buys a personal robot for driving and picking up food. Who needs to leave their house?
--
"Purple Rain, Purple Rain" - Prince
If San Francisco really cared about public safety, they would ban illegal aliens instead of welcoming them as an illegal "sanctuary city." But NO, technological innovation such as delivery robots are what these liberal/progressive knuckleheads are focused on.
âoeOpponents are concerned about the safety of pedestrians, particularly elderly people and children. Walk San Francisco, a group that campaigns for pedestrian safety, wanted a complete ban.â
Yeah, theyâ(TM)ll be much safer with UPS and fedex trucks driving around.
Do you have ESP?
They need some porta-potty robots.
Luddite
[luhd-ahyt]
noun
1.
a member of any of various bands of workers in England (1811–16) organized to destroy manufacturing machinery, under the belief that its use diminished employment.
2.
someone who is opposed or resistant to new technologies or technological change.
Organization? You must be joking..
Anybody who remembers "Segway will transform entire cities" (followed by ban) should have seen this coming.
Delivery robots are an idiotic idea anyway. Imagine I'm a disaffected teenager and I see a delivery robot coming down the sidewalk. List my options.
Breakfast served all day!
Delivery bots use much of the same hardware and software as self-driving cars, but have market pressures toward lower cost. If they are mass-produced, this will bring down the cost of self-driving cars to the point where even economy cars can be self-driving. Also the AI problem that delivery bots face is arguably more difficult than a self-driving car, in that pedestrian traffic is much less regulated. So they might also drive advances in machine learning from which self-driving cars will benefit.
On the other hand, if delivery bots start injuring a lot of people, the backlash may extend to self-driving cars as well.
They may find that the robots will require protection from pedestrians. I can imagine irate people having been (almost) run over or shoved/scared out of the way might react somewhat aggressively towards a robot and any subsequent robots that they meet. After all, they're machines, not people with feelings and rights that can apologise and make amends.
I can also see municipalities being put under pressure to put up barriers to restrict their access to some areas. Not sure how that'd affect people who need to use mobility aids though.
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
if not more dangerous. There are more than 1.25 million road traffic deaths globally each year: http://www.who.int/gho/road_sa... . Millions more are badly wounded.
SF chose a cheap conservative PR, instead of making a serious effort of ending this WW3 on roads.
Anyone want some nearly new robots or parts? These are "overstock demo" units. At these low, low prices, there's no warranty, and serial numbers have been removed for your convenience. We occasionally have self driving cars and parts, too!
Everybody else better sleep with one eye open. We're the expendables.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Think about that.
Does nobody else ever write Dystopian SF?
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
San Francisco? What if the robot is a transsexual gluten free vegetarian carbon neutral robot with a hipster beanie on its head and also has cupholders for Starbucks drinks?
I predict that the future will include more self-driving vehicles designed to carry delivery bots than those designed to carry people. The bots will be taken to the delivery location by a vehicle, roll or walk off on their own to take the product to the door or even to the person, and return to the vehicle. People will even be able to receive deliveries in parks. You could be sitting in a park and order a meal to be delivered to your picnic table.
Integrate a living creature, e.g. a rat, or even an insect, and it is then technically a cyborg. Cyborgs are not robots.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
Bicycles are legally classified as vehicles (but not motor vehicles), and should use normal traffic lanes on the street if no separate bicycle lane is available. Some local laws may allow cycling on the sidewalk, sometimes for minors only. It may also be allowed if the sidewalk is explicitly marked as a multi-use path, or is provided with a marked sidewalk-level bike lane. But normally bicycles are supposed to use the road.
They're concerned about pedestrians? That's an even better reason to allow robots! Tell me, have you *ever* seen a UPS truck legally parked or stopped? Have you ever seen one obey the speed limit in residential areas? That shit is the real danger, people let their feelings get the best of them when there isn't a single person to blame and sue when something goes wrong.