Live data from Hacker News

The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

techcrunch.com

321–330 of 471 posts

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#321
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI has nothing to contend with the boostrap narrative. You just shift the target. Rather than pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to not starve or die of exposure, you pull yourself up by your bootstraps to do anything at all beyond basic survival with a roof and bread. You want a car? Go work for it. You want TV? Go work for it. Etc. UBI is only meant to reduce the demand for total income enough that people can…

No, people will just slack because they can buy bread. We already saw this in the soviet block. The human brain works on incentives. Remove the incentive the human is in free fall.

The simple fact is that a tiny fraction of our population can create a lot more wealth than the rest of them doing all the busywork they could possibly do, and this is only going to get worse as automation continues to increase. We need to rethink the idea that you need to contribute to eat because it simply isn't true anymore. Now, we can either start giving people what they need to live because they're humans and shouldn't be left to freeze to death, or we can roll tanks on the neighborhoods with the most have nots and keep up the crime, keep the property values low, and generally treat people like crap. I give it 50/50 either way at this point because so many people are so married to this idea that the only way you should be kept alive is if you're a benefit to someone else and I'm sorry, but in the wealthiest nations on the planet with celebrities and CEO's raking in billions, you'd think we could manage to find some cash somewhere to keep people alive if for no other reason than we CAN do it.

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#323
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI has nothing to contend with the boostrap narrative. You just shift the target. Rather than pulling yourself up by your bootstraps to not starve or die of exposure, you pull yourself up by your bootstraps to do anything at all beyond basic survival with a roof and bread. You want a car? Go work for it. You want TV? Go work for it. Etc. UBI is only meant to reduce the demand for total income enough that people can…

No, people will just slack because they can buy bread. We already saw this in the soviet block. The human brain works on incentives. Remove the incentive the human is in free fall.

I have a hard time believing under any economic system Americans would be content with bread when their neighbor is eating steak. That is the whole basis of the consumerist culture that powers a good portion of American capitalism.

And the Soviets are a terrible example. Centrally planned economies of course destroy all individual incentives to accel or improve.

But if you seriously think the only way economic systems like the US's can function is by threatening starvation and exposure to incentivize working, then what is the point of progress to begin with if we are stuck in the same vicious cycle regardless? All progress is effectively meaningless if at the end of the day you are still laboring to not die of hunger.

And the Soviet's didn't have bread to begin with. Their people starved not because of "free" stuff, but because there was "no" stuff so long as the central planning existed and was as inept as it was (that, or intentionally restricted).

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it won't, and it will come with a few of it's own (getting American's past the bootstrap narrative is probably the biggest single one) but it is a step in the right direction. That being said if you can think of another example where we put 3.5 million people out of work nearly overnight along with an entire support system built on their salaries and needs, I'd love to hear it. The only similar thing I could think…

You think that one morning drivers will wake up and will be laid off? You think that will happen in a year? In 10? This is not grounded in reality.

Does the pace really matter? The coal miners of the Kentucky and related areas have had decades and way too many are still dying of drug overdoses while waiting for their 'next big break.'

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#325

This "Nirvana" of the driverless truck is focusing on long distance trucking. There are a number of issues with this. The biggest one is that there is already a solution to the long distance safe movement of goods with minimal human involvement. It is called a t-r-a-i-n. Trucking companies already use long distance trains as alternatives to long distance truckers. It is far cheaper and less technologically risky to s…

Trains may already be a solution, yet a very large percentage (as high as 75%+ in Europe) of freight is carried using trucks. There's plenty of business for the driverless trucks to take over without having to tackle competition with rail.

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but if a driver falls asleep it's clearly their fault, if they survive the accident they will be charged with manslaughter. If a driverless truck rear ends a car because of a glitch or a mechanical fault where it didn't see the car in front for some reason, then I can only imagine the corporation recalling all of them at huge cost, and possibly paying millions of dollars in damages. I think the point is that when…

The company making the vehicles will be responsible for any damages, and paying a massive insurance premium I'm sure. There will be legal consequences for gross negligence and anyone damaged will be made whole. I don't see how that's any different than the system we have now. And the emotional appeals cut both ways. How long before the parents of a child killed by a drunk or sleeping truck driver say "Why was he driv…

> How long before the parents of a child say ... "Why wasn't he replaced by a machine?"

The ultimate point being that the answer might be "decades." It might take that long for the prevailing opinion amongst the public and/or politicians to change that way. And it is affected by the actual accidents involving automated vehicles in the short term.

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What about the roads themselves? I'm curious how an autonomous truck will handle a snow-covered highway, fog, potholes, and tight corners caused by narrow roads, bad parking, snow banks, etc." It won't; at least, it won't need to handle narrow roads, bad parking, snow banks, etc. The autonomous truck need not drive the whole route that a human driver does now. Drive down the Ohio Turnpike and you will see numerous p…

Would it still be an advanced net if you had humans in the trucks as a 'backup', with the autonomous driving doing 90% of the 'boring' driving down the highways? Humans would still drive the last mile (ha!). Would that be significant safer and more efficient to make it worthwhile? If you limit autonomous driving to the main freight routes on the highway, I can see self driving vehicles happening a lot sooner than I p…

They started truck automation in mining and container terminals in ports. Areas with no other traffic and the possibility of active guidance (beacons along/embedded in the route and so on.)

Highways are the next obvious use. I could see automated trucks driving down the transcanadian highway for example or similar long interstate stretch.

I gotta say though, if we're going that way, why not go intermodal, add a RR right of way through the interstate with a double-track, operate automated freight trains and automated transshipment terminals. Just load the trailer onto the train and go. I know rail isn't sexy but it'd make sense in terms of carbon footprint (trains could be multimode diesel-electric/electric depending on corridor.) And most of that rail net could be fully automated.

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#328

Can someone explain why we're supposedly getting driverless cars and trucks yet the simplistic task of ordering food isn't automated? Why does McDonald's have order takers?

McDonalds already has automated order takers around here. There are still humans, but so will there still be manned trucks, just fewer.

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#329
So many comments here are in the form of "People won't trust autonomous vehicles." Well I'm people, and I trust them. And it's for one simple reason: Whatever bugs they have can be fixed for every autonomous car on the road at the same time. That just can't be said for human beings. Every one of us has to learn how to idle icy roads, fog and other hazards individually, with wildly varying results. A computer program does it once, and is constantly getting feedback from the millions of cars on the road all the time.

Sure, people want someone to blame for accidents. And people might not like the idea of cars without drivers, or worry about contrived "Does the car kill the driver or the pedestrian" situations. But at the end of the day, statistics is overwhelmingly on the side of driverless cars. Saying "Yes, but people aren't reasonable enough to see that" isn't helpful. The question is, how quickly can we get people to do what's best after the technology has been perfected?

Re: The driverless truck is coming, and it’s going to automate millions of jobs

#330
post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One accident might set back consumer driving for 50 years, but not commercial. The safety record simply needs to be much better than human drivers, which shouldn't be too hard, because one driver is already taken out of the equation. And there are billions upon billions to be saved, in our corporatocracy of the USA, it WILL happen. Bad roads shouldn't be too much of a problem, they can just use humans on the bad road…

Public and political perception need to consider autonomous commercial trucking to be safe, rather than safer. "Safer than human drivers" all too easily becomes "we can't control when these robot trucks my crash into a mother driving her kids to school," when you put it into the political regulation arena.

> Public and political perception need to consider autonomous commercial trucking to be safe, rather than safer.

No, safer than humans is the bar.

Post reply on HN