Seems pretty useful for getting stuff around town. I'm not sure how far they come from, but the trucks pulling up to the supermarket across the street...
You realize that those trucks are probably long-haul OTR, not local traffic, right? So they need be able to travel hundreds of miles and refuel quickly.
Hell, an average route for FedEx is 160mi/day. In town. I just don't see how a lorry that can go less than half that distance before shutting down for the workday is in any way feasible.
Full disclosure, I am an American who lives in the Midwest, which is a different environment than Japan. You could fit the whole island chain in Missouri with plenty of room left over, so obviously there's a scale issue.
If pedestrians smartphone zombies become a major problem we can always take the pedestrian detection AI from self driving cars, install it in these trucks and have it play a very loud recording of a shrill female voice yelling in a cranky tone of voice (think Michelle Wolf) the words: "LOOOK OUT!!!...you brainless smartphone zombie!" every time one of them seems likely to wander onto the road.
Make it the voice of Mallory Archer and you've got a deal.
I used to work at the corporate office of one of the 3 largest auto parts retailers in the US; our bad weather policy literally read: "In the event of bad weather or natural disasters, it is even more important than ever that team members show up for work."
Essentially, if my house got destroyed by a tornado, I needed to go to work because someone somewhere needed car parts.
What would this psycho do without the ability to incorporate encryption into his psychotic fantasies? Would he just blow the bomb up with a timer?
Probably.
Which is what makes it a facile argument in both cases - a crazy asshole that wants to kill people will find a way, and no amount of laws or banning of inanimate objects will stop him.
Which Constitutional Amendment guarantees that? Or is that a California thing? I can imagine the state might have passed a law, after the LAPD mistook a white kid and two asian ladies for Chris Dorner, and opened fire on their vehicles.
Personally, I prefer dangerous liberty to peaceful slavery. YMMV.
Why own a depreciating asset that requires constant fuel, maintenance and taxes? Especially when a round trip Uber ride costs less then parking downtown.
I don't know about Uber, but where I live it costs $20 one way to take a taxi to work, so $40/day round trip.
$40 x 5 = $200/wk
That's $800/mo., not including any weekend or after-work driving.
I currently pay about $80/mo for fuel (big-ass V8 pickup), another $85/mo for insurance, and we'll say another $80 in maintenance (spread out over the year). Truck's paid off, but before my payment was about $220/mo.
So, $800/mo to ride everywhere in someone else's car, or $465/mo MAX to drive my own vehicle befiore paying it off, ~$250/mo now.
Granted, the numbers won't be the same for everyone, but that's my reasoning for preferring ownership to rental.
Having said that, if the snow is say 50cm deep is it really a good idea to drive through it?
I don't know, does keeping your job seem like a good idea? Very few employers I've encountered are very forgiving when it comes to not coming in due to foul weather. "you could always get another job" is a nice platitude, but it falls flat in reality.
Assuming you have a suitable vehicle, you still can't see what is under there and are risking either hitting something or falling into something.
And despite that, literally millions of humans navigate such conditions regularly, most of them with little difficulty and no mishaps. Almost like we've done it before...
On the extremely rare occasions when it happens around here they close the roads until they can be cleared for this reason.
Good for you. Of course, not all of us live where you do, work where you do, or live like you do, so your experience isn't really an accurate baseline for the 306,000,000 Americans living today, now is it? Try spending some time in the Northern US this winter, might help you gain some meteorological insight.
Seems like an extreme edge case to me,
Yea, because cognitive dissonance. Universe doesn't revolve around you, bruh.
... and presumably the only person who would buy a self driving car with no manual mode is someone who can't drive anyway.
Sure, unless that's the only option we're given. When's the last time an auto maker took public comments when designing a product?
Isabella, Aguadilla, and San Juan seem filled with wealthy American mainlanders buying up every bit of property they can find, or at least that was what I observed when I was there 2 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems pretty useful for getting stuff around town. I'm not sure how far they come from, but the trucks pulling up to the supermarket across the street ...
You realize that those trucks are probably long-haul OTR, not local traffic, right? So they need be able to travel hundreds of miles and refuel quickly.
Hell, an average route for FedEx is 160mi/day. In town. I just don't see how a lorry that can go less than half that distance before shutting down for the workday is in any way feasible.
Full disclosure, I am an American who lives in the Midwest, which is a different environment than Japan. You could fit the whole island chain in Missouri with plenty of room left over, so obviously there's a scale issue.
And, why is the stupidity of others my concern?
Short Answer?
Lawsuits.
It's ridiculously easy to sue someone else for your own stupid mistakes.
>
What's not solved though is the dirt produced by ICE engines in trucks and buses. Electric's a nice step forward in that regard.
Not really, you're just moving the 'dirt' from your backyard to someone else's. But it's still being produced and thrown into the global ecosystem.
If pedestrians smartphone zombies become a major problem we can always take the pedestrian detection AI from self driving cars, install it in these trucks and have it play a very loud recording of a shrill female voice yelling in a cranky tone of voice (think Michelle Wolf) the words: "LOOOK OUT!!! ...you brainless smartphone zombie!" every time one of them seems likely to wander onto the road.
Make it the voice of Mallory Archer and you've got a deal.
I used to work at the corporate office of one of the 3 largest auto parts retailers in the US; our bad weather policy literally read: "In the event of bad weather or natural disasters, it is even more important than ever that team members show up for work."
Essentially, if my house got destroyed by a tornado, I needed to go to work because someone somewhere needed car parts.
Why does just internet cost more than internet + cable?
Because it can, so it will.
Don't look for rhyme nor reason when discussing corporate pricing schemes.
What would this psycho do without the ability to incorporate encryption into his psychotic fantasies? Would he just blow the bomb up with a timer?
Probably.
Which is what makes it a facile argument in both cases - a crazy asshole that wants to kill people will find a way, and no amount of laws or banning of inanimate objects will stop him.
Ergo, my point.
In the case of children, it's already illegal in many places to leave them at home unattended, let alone traveling in a vehicle.
Nanny-state hypocrisy, lmao
Your right to a safe driving experience
Which Constitutional Amendment guarantees that? Or is that a California thing? I can imagine the state might have passed a law, after the LAPD mistook a white kid and two asian ladies for Chris Dorner, and opened fire on their vehicles.
Personally, I prefer dangerous liberty to peaceful slavery. YMMV.
Antifa means AntiFascist, if you are against it, you are pro-fascism,
So if I call myself AntiPoor, that makes me rich?
Neat.
or bullshit, whichever seems more logical (hint: the second thing).
What about a psycho who straps a bomb to you, and the only way to disarm it is to break incredibly strong encryption?
Don't laugh, it's not as far-fetched as you might think.
Don't most commercial safes actually have backdoors in their designs for law enforcement
None that I've ever seen.
....the stage for another round of clashes in the tug of war between privacy and public safety.
No, there is a clash between privacy and dragnet operations by lazy and corrupt law enforcement.
This.
Seriously, if your entire investigation hinges on the contents of one locked cell phone, you couldn't be doing it more wrong.
You think there is no price competition in gasoline?
I think the cause is far less important than the end result; to that end, you seem to agree with me:
In fact, this intense price pressure is exactly why gas prices tend to rise an fall in sync.
Ours is not to question why, ours is but to do and die... and pay standardized retail markup.
Factors similar to those resulting in not much price competition between cable providers
Totally dissimilar markets. Cable is infrastructure intensive, and has huge barriers to entry. Rides have near zero barriers to entry.
Because roads aren't infrastructure and cars are cheap!
Seriously, I laughed my ass off when I first read your comment.
When Uber and Lyft pulled out of Austin, local companies filled the void within days
https://www.curbed.com/2017/6/...
You keep using that word, but I do not believe it means what you believe it means.
If both gas stations agreed upon a price, that would be collusion.
Why own a depreciating asset that requires constant fuel, maintenance and taxes? Especially when a round trip Uber ride costs less then parking downtown.
I don't know about Uber, but where I live it costs $20 one way to take a taxi to work, so $40/day round trip.
$40 x 5 = $200/wk
That's $800/mo., not including any weekend or after-work driving.
I currently pay about $80/mo for fuel (big-ass V8 pickup), another $85/mo for insurance, and we'll say another $80 in maintenance (spread out over the year). Truck's paid off, but before my payment was about $220/mo.
So, $800/mo to ride everywhere in someone else's car, or $465/mo MAX to drive my own vehicle befiore paying it off, ~$250/mo now.
Granted, the numbers won't be the same for everyone, but that's my reasoning for preferring ownership to rental.
I never said it wouldn't work - I merely pointed out who will ultimately profit in a rental-based economy.
In other words, why do you think there will be no price-competition in The Sucky Future?
Because I actually pay for my own cell phone and internet services, buy my own gasoline, et al.
It's called the voice of experience.
Why own a thing, when you can pay someone else an exorbitant fee to use theirs temporarily?
This will work out brilliantly for the 0.004% who currently own 80% of the wealth.
Having said that, if the snow is say 50cm deep is it really a good idea to drive through it?
I don't know, does keeping your job seem like a good idea? Very few employers I've encountered are very forgiving when it comes to not coming in due to foul weather. "you could always get another job" is a nice platitude, but it falls flat in reality.
Assuming you have a suitable vehicle, you still can't see what is under there and are risking either hitting something or falling into something.
And despite that, literally millions of humans navigate such conditions regularly, most of them with little difficulty and no mishaps. Almost like we've done it before...
On the extremely rare occasions when it happens around here they close the roads until they can be cleared for this reason.
Good for you. Of course, not all of us live where you do, work where you do, or live like you do, so your experience isn't really an accurate baseline for the 306,000,000 Americans living today, now is it? Try spending some time in the Northern US this winter, might help you gain some meteorological insight.
Seems like an extreme edge case to me,
Yea, because cognitive dissonance. Universe doesn't revolve around you, bruh.
... and presumably the only person who would buy a self driving car with no manual mode is someone who can't drive anyway.
Sure, unless that's the only option we're given. When's the last time an auto maker took public comments when designing a product?
Just like how it was an "enormous stretch" that smartphones would be used to track our every movement and association, right?
People who blindly trust the government tend to be the first ones down chute.
Isabella, Aguadilla, and San Juan seem filled with wealthy American mainlanders buying up every bit of property they can find, or at least that was what I observed when I was there 2 years ago.
... for the people who own the central banks.
It's their playground and they know what works best for them.
FTFY. The global banking cartel doesn't like competition.
I agree that's how it should operate, but the trouble is, that's not how it actually operates.
I can see local and state officials scrambling to find new revenue streams once they realize they won't be making fat bank of writing tickets anymore.