The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers • Hacker News Board

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#151

Post by samuli » Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 9:39 AM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #89

rdtsc wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cars should yield to pedestrians and cyclists The problem is if they don't and pedestrian gets killed there is not way to resurect the pedestrian, and start over. Therefore, pedestrian's goals is staying alive regardless of what laws are written in the books. To put it another way, most countries out there have laws about "cars yield to pedestrians on crossings" but in a lot of places I wouldn't want to prove a poi…

I would be very happy if all taxis and other commercial vehicles (Uber, Lyft, etc.) would have their speed tracked and automatic citations issued for going more than 15 mph above the speed limit. As it is the taxis and Uber cars speed along my 25mph limit residential street at 50mph+ all night long.

Ask the city council to install some speed bumps. That's what they do here in Finland.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#152

Post by sanoli » Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 12:05 PM UTC

rdtsc wrote: post #38

jurassic wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really see the problem with this. Cars should yield to pedestrians and cyclists, and the only reason they don't always do so now is because of some impatient humans at the wheel who prioritize their speed over the safety of other road users. Without road-raging human drivers behind the wheel, is the vehicle occupant going to care that they got to nap a few minutes longer on the way to work? Or got to read a f…

> Cars should yield to pedestrians and cyclists The problem is if they don't and pedestrian gets killed there is not way to resurect the pedestrian, and start over. Therefore, pedestrian's goals is staying alive regardless of what laws are written in the books. To put it another way, most countries out there have laws about "cars yield to pedestrians on crossings" but in a lot of places I wouldn't want to prove a poi…

You know, in my country (Brazil), airbags were optional until last year, and this only after a lot of political fighting because of strong lobbying from the automakers. In a country with so many automobile related deaths (44,000 in 2010, more than gun related deaths, and there are a lot of gun deaths here) it's ridiculous that the bills were so hard to pass. Also, if you refuse a breathalyzer test, it can't be used agains you (the refusal), unlike what happens in many countries. So I'm all for regulation and logging, and penalties to speeding drivers. Sorry to the libertarians (I'm one on some issues) but, less regulation my ass.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#153

Post by sanoli » Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 12:10 PM UTC

woofyman wrote: post #15

jjoonathan wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, people will take advantage of AI drivers, but everything will be recorded and I'm sure the autonomous car companies can figure out how to put those recordings to use. Name&shame, sell the info to insurance companies, push to make it an automatic ticket, etc. After a shakedown period a more or less reasonable compromise will surely emerge.

I don't want to live in a society where every car becomes a tool of law enforcement.

I want to live in a society where less and less people die by reckless driving - make that 'less and less people die by automobile, period'. As far as I can see, only technology will do that, education being the other means but a much less reliable one. If law enforcement only gets involved when a crime is comitted, that's fine by me.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#154

Post by sanoli » Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 12:13 PM UTC

unclebucknasty wrote: post #54

nostromo wrote: post #8

One thing I haven't heard much about is how humans and AI drivers will interact. If we all assume that AI cars are going to be very conservative and very competent drivers, will people take advantage of that? Will human drivers become even bigger assholes that cut off AI drivers at every possibility, knowing that an AI will not hit them? Why wait in a big line for an exit, when you know an AI car will always let you…

For me the bigger question is WRT the ongoing quest to marginalize human beings. Once we automate everything, then what?

Then we distribute the free time to the whole population, accounting for the vast majority who never had the means to accumulate wealth

or

I don't know

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#155

Post by bjelkeman-again » Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 4:15 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #133

bjelkeman-again wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually live in such a country. Most (all?) of northern Europe is well functioning that way. It can work.

What's your effective tax rate? I'm being somewhat facetious, but there are several ways to fund local governments, including but not limited to: A. Tax the people directly based on $ASSET (usually income, or property, or a combination of the two). B. Lower direct taxes as well as state and federal grants, and fines from enforcement. As someone who doesn't necessarily mind sending a few dimes on the dollar to the gov…

Sweden's effective tax rate is 37% on a salary of $100k (2012). UK is about 32%, US about 27% (all read from a graph) [1].

In Sweden this extra tax provides free schooling up to and including university (you even get paid going to higher education US$300+/month in grants), low cost health care with a cost ceiling (US$130/year), affordable child care, social security net, local government owned and (well) managed infrastructure (power, water, fibre, roads, etc.)

Our local government is funded through direct taxation. My local government tax rate is 30.2%.

Not sure it tells the whole story though. VAT is not included in effective tax rate AFAIK (as defined in the Economist article).

[1] http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2012/10/focus-4

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#156

Post by afarrell » Fri, Dec 18, 2015, 6:58 PM UTC

10735922 wrote: post #79

grogenaut wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: ellaboration. Stopping in traffic and calling the cops because of this is going to be a non-starter. If you're the cause of the blockage how are they going to get there? The GP is right, there are many situations where it's not going to well, and I can see lots of pranks by highschoolers that will completely mess with self driving cars. Heck an accidental release of confetti would be an interesting experiment.

Why are you pretending to be stupid? The cops would only be called if the car is blocked for several minutes or the passenger decides to do so. Nobody cares if the car has to brake for a few seconds and then continues driving as usual. We spend far more time at traffic lights anway.

"Why are you pretending to be stupid?" Is a rather abrasive tone for HN.