I live in India. Irrespective of whether the Government bans driverless cars or not, Indian roads and traffic conditions are not suitable for driverless cars. Period.
On contrary it might actually bring some order in traffic situation.
India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
71–80 of 124 posts
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because automated weaving makes clothes a lot cheaper. Put another way, when workers become more efficient -- one factory worker able to control many weaving machines, or a relatively small group of programmers able to control many cars -- people's standard of living increases. Maybe you're willing to pay more for clothes, or transportation, or any one thing. But paying more for all of the things that have gotten che…
If things have gotten cheaper, why does everything in a 1917 sears catalog, adjusted for inflation, look so inexpensive? Solid metal tools used to cost less than the modern walmart plastic thing.
Not sure if this is right but maybe because wages were lower back then even with inflation?
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#73Reminds me of this story > The story goes that Milton Friedman was once taken to see a massive government project somewhere in Asia. Thousands of workers using shovels were building a canal. Friedman was puzzled. Why weren't there any excavators or any mechanized earth-moving equipment? A government official explained that using shovels created more jobs. Friedman's response: "Then why not use spoons instead of shove…
The brilliance of the Friedman anecdote is that it reveals something Higher-Life-Form types like Nitin Gadkari, who propose to save you with the wonderful power of regulation, miss. What they miss is that in their world there's no logically sound riposte to Friedman's question. It should be spoons. Teaspoons, even. Creates more jobs. But actually what works is, perhaps, shovels. And then, if you can afford it, earth-…
An alternative is not to be so black and white (and assume a single dimension is all that matters), and say that shovels maximizes a set of goals: making work efficient AND creating jobs.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#74A long-ish read.
In Indian malls, there are so many helpers standing around that if you lift up a merchandise, you'll be jump scared by someone asking you how she can help you. People are also used to asking the prices of the items, even though just flipping around would reveal the tags that clearly earmarks the final price (all tax and details). Indian are more used to DIFM (Do it for Me) than the western DIY culture.
Personally, I usually go on weekdays and I can have about 3+ people buzzing around me trying to help me decide what I want to buy. They all are my personal Siri for that location and context.
The labor market is also so cheap that Indians can afford to get much cheaper manual solutions than the one time bigger investment in automation and technology. Most people also know that it is more economical in the long run but don't really want to wait for the far-future gain.
If I hire a wash-helper to just wash my clothes twice a week, it will cost me just about ₹1000 ($15) (or even less) a month in Bangalore. A good washing machine (no dryer) will set you back by about ₹30,000($466). At that rate, I can have the wash-helper wash my clothes without failing or consuming electricity for 2+ years.
Very similar with a Dishwasher. A dishwash-helper can equivalently go on for 3+ years without any mechanical failure, no electricity consumption and you can talk to her. No annual maintenance needed either.
In early 2005, I was speaking at my first international conference and had my first US culture experience. There was a big mall opposite the Hyatt, Dearborn (forgot the name). I went in at a store and there was nobody to help me. The unmarked labels didn't help either. I did realize that I had to scan the barcode with a scanner (attached at quite convenient locations) and shows me the price details including the state tax. Manual labor is costly stateside and automation and modernization can bring in huge ROI. In India, anything that is a DIY needs someone to show them the DIY to the people.
So, when the transport minister says what he says, it is so easy for him to look for all the easier and more comfortable routes - just get someone to do it, "drive the car". We are a country where if Ikea comes in, my advice will be to have an army that can go and assemble their furniture at the customer location.
You, me and the people who think about automation, thinking 10 years ahead etc are far and few in between, especially in India, so he will very likely win.
Hell, many other politicians and fanatics are fighting over the exclusion of the word "cow" in public exhibitions such as movies.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#75It is easy to shit on the politician's statement, but at least try to understand where they are coming from. India is facing massive crises on multiple fronts. Huge number of youth enter the job market every year and there simply aren't enough jobs to go around. Driving employs a lot of people who vote, so he can't just ignore their concerns.
In many states, unemployed youth are likely to create a law and order crisis or exacerbate one that already exists. Neither does India have a huge amount of money lying around to fund something like UBI.
However, this situation didn't just happen on its own. Indian bureaucracy stifles private businesses by all kinds of vague regulations. A lot of effort is needed to rectify this and some people in power understand this, though it would take some time for them to bring the rest of them on board.
Secondly, the automobile industry in India is extremely significant. I believe they also bring in a substantial amount of foreign exchange now. If the global market is moving towards driverless technology, then India's corporates can't afford to be left behind. And they will put a lot of pressure on the law makers.
Finally, these politicians aren't very principled people. They will definitely change their tune under the right circumstances.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#76India should beg the English to come back and rid them of this nonsense.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#77A complete joke, India can't even supply 24/7 electricity and water to the majority of their population, they may as well be discussing the outlawing of thermodynamics. It is as if a child showed up to a dissertation discuss astrophysics, what a bunch of clowns.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question -- why not? What makes this a bad idea?
Seriously limits technological progress. Pretty much insures Indian tech companies cannot develop this IP in their homelands. Who knows what kind of tech driverless car might beget, like space navigation, etc? What kind of economy of scale it would enable? The quality and lifestyle and savings from freeing people of having to be fully present during this dull activity. People could use that time in the car to do so m…
As a consultant I recently traveled to a client office; the Wifi was spotty and failed so often I literally had a mild anxiety attack and had to head back to the home office just to clear my mind.
I can only imagine what privileges the next generation are going to upgrade to necessities.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Once self-driving cars hit, the switch will be immediate and massive. I would predict 10% to 90% penetration in probably less than 12 months--the limitation will simply be building the cars fast enough. That's a lot of people suddenly with no income." It will probably take 12 months just to form the exploratory committee that will form the actual committee that will even begin to consider legalizing fully driverless…
> It will happen, but it's definitely not going to be "immediate". Normally, you would be correct. However, there will be so much at stake that there will be huge amounts of money greasing the skids on any required legislation. Real Level 3 Autonomy will displace 75% of truckers almost immediately--that's 1.5 million jobs lost. You will have one or two drivers in the front truck and a half-dozen trucks running autono…
No that's not how auto insurance works. It's a commodity with high competition and low profit margins. Insurance companies set prices based on expected losses. There's no reason to think that the arrival of level 4 autonomous vehicles would cause an increase in losses on human driven vehicles. If one insurer jacks up prices then the others will undercut them to gain market share.
Re: India will ban driverless cars in order to protect jobs
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because automated weaving makes clothes a lot cheaper. Put another way, when workers become more efficient -- one factory worker able to control many weaving machines, or a relatively small group of programmers able to control many cars -- people's standard of living increases. Maybe you're willing to pay more for clothes, or transportation, or any one thing. But paying more for all of the things that have gotten che…
If things have gotten cheaper, why does everything in a 1917 sears catalog, adjusted for inflation, look so inexpensive? Solid metal tools used to cost less than the modern walmart plastic thing.
You got me curious, so I looked... page 1082 and 1083 of the Sears catalog, from 1912 https://archive.org/details/catalogno12400sear shows that a standard hammer was $0.66, and a hand saw was around $1.50 (there are several models from $1.05 to $1.95). So $0.66 (from 1912) is $15.82 in 2016, and $1.95 is $35.96.