Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

blogs.forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 214 posts

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#151

Post by maxwell »

randomdata wrote: post #115
bh42222 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you're being down-voted, it's a valid question. Computers have eliminated a lot of jobs over the last 30 to 40 years. For example VisiCalc, did a lot of what many tax accountants charged for. It used to be that humans, mostly women, switched (or routed if you will) phone calls. Automation certainly does eliminate many jobs. But interestingly it also seems to make previously impossible things possible…

I think you make some great points. If we look back in history, almost everyone was a farmer. Farming was the job you did to survive, whether you liked it or not. Along came tractors and other farm machinery, and now something like only 3% of the population are still employed as farmers. Interestingly, farming has been moving to driverless equipment out in the fields for the last couple of decades. At first it was no…

> now something like only 3% of the population are still employed as farmers.

That's about exactly accurate: it was 2.8%, as of 1998, and is projected to dip down to 2.4% by 2018. [1] I happened to be looking at this just a few minutes ago, linked from http://zamfi.net/blog/one-day-we-will-all-be-programmers

[1] http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_201.htm

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#152

Post by nooneelse »

bh42222 wrote: post #110
anti wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3) Loss of jobs. When we're heading to a future of robotic anything that will replace an entire profession, drivers in this case. What will be the economic effect of it?

I don't know why you're being down-voted, it's a valid question. Computers have eliminated a lot of jobs over the last 30 to 40 years. For example VisiCalc, did a lot of what many tax accountants charged for. It used to be that humans, mostly women, switched (or routed if you will) phone calls. Automation certainly does eliminate many jobs. But interestingly it also seems to make previously impossible things possible…

Personally, I look forward to self-driving sleeper cars and a new type of motel that is little more than a secure parking lot plus some nice bathrooms. What is the feeling of "where you live" if you switch cities each time you sleep?

Also, in your hypothetical, if we are all routing calls as our day job, doesn't that mean that at any one time, 1/3 of humans are asleep, 1/3 routing calls, 1/3 possibly on calls. With at least two people per call. How can that not be workable?

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#153

Post by esoteriq »

yichi wrote: post #144
esoteriq wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was thinking that driverless cars would be a boon for people who cannot drive (for whatever reason -- visual or otherwise). I do wonder, however, if laws will require driverless cars to have a person who is able to drive. (For legal or liability reasons in case of an equipment failure.) I do hope that doesn't happen, but it's possible.

Actually once it's been proven that robots drive much better than humans (which is not very difficult), people will want to probably outlaw human driving.

I wasn't really thinking about driving skills, but about equipment failure. There will always be a risk of equipment failure for automated machinery. Also, there's a risk of human error in the code governing driving.

One possible workaround is to have several people at some centralized location monitor driverless car performance. A monitorer could override the car and drive the car remotely in the event of equipment failure or bugs in the code.

But, maybe that's a pipe dream.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#154

Post by rdouble »

randomdata wrote: post #115
bh42222 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you're being down-voted, it's a valid question. Computers have eliminated a lot of jobs over the last 30 to 40 years. For example VisiCalc, did a lot of what many tax accountants charged for. It used to be that humans, mostly women, switched (or routed if you will) phone calls. Automation certainly does eliminate many jobs. But interestingly it also seems to make previously impossible things possible…

I think you make some great points. If we look back in history, almost everyone was a farmer. Farming was the job you did to survive, whether you liked it or not. Along came tractors and other farm machinery, and now something like only 3% of the population are still employed as farmers. Interestingly, farming has been moving to driverless equipment out in the fields for the last couple of decades. At first it was no…

Where do farmers use driverless equipment? I live in a farming community and nobody uses driverless equipment.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#155

Post by esoteriq »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #21
chc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, at least half of those sound like perfectly reasonable ideas. Aside from machine guns, I'm not sure there's a strong logical argument to outlaw any of them.

Presumably, the machine guns are only rentable at the range - what's the logical argument against that?

Why do people want machine guns at the gun range in the first place?

(Genuinely curious. I've never held a gun before in my life, so I wouldn't know.)

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#156

Post by melling »

dkokelley wrote: post #28
DanielStraight wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you deal with the inherent inefficiency of having a separate vehicle for every passenger (or small group of passengers)? Publicness is not the only benefit of public transportation. Trains and buses are incredibly efficient per passenger mile. They also take up a lot less space than cars, and last longer and cost less per passenger to manufacture. Making a car driverless doesn't solve these problems.

Theoretically, driverless cars could be programmed to behave in a collective fashion. Yes, a train is incredibly efficient when 300 people need to go from the same place to a different place. But in reality, 300 people are coming from 300 places and going 300 places. Driverless cars could calculate partial carpools or transfers to more efficient vehicles like trains depending on the needs of the commuters. A "smart c…

A car can't leave the station traveling west at 220 mph arriving at its destination in 30 minutes. Driverless cars will be great but we also need fast, efficient ways to move people too. I want mine to pick me up at the station when my train arrives.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#157

Post by randomdata »

rdouble wrote: post #154
randomdata wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you make some great points. If we look back in history, almost everyone was a farmer. Farming was the job you did to survive, whether you liked it or not. Along came tractors and other farm machinery, and now something like only 3% of the population are still employed as farmers. Interestingly, farming has been moving to driverless equipment out in the fields for the last couple of decades. At first it was no…

Where do farmers use driverless equipment? I live in a farming community and nobody uses driverless equipment.

When I say driverless, I'm not precluding the presence of an operator.

John Deere's iTEC Pro, for example, is capable of controlling the tractor, but still requires an operator to be in the cab, just in case. Although here's a fun video of someone who disabled the safety sensors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU4liQvrcm4

I don't know of any large operator that isn't using at least autosteer, which, for things like cultivating essentially is driverless. For what it is worth, I come from an area of grain farmers.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#158

Post by seabee »

melling wrote: post #90
alanh wrote: post #81

We expect people to be frightened of robotic cars for the same reason they are scared of dying in a plane crash: Some deep-seated fear of dying in a manner that isn’t our own fault. Thoughts: 1) Marketing/PR for autonomous vehicles needs to really drive home their safety, so when you hear “robot car,” you think “… saves lives.” 2) Is it hard to imagine the opposite fear in children born 10 years from now? Having seen…

I think you've got the reason people are afraid of flying wrong. People aren't afraid of dying in a bus crash, or on a train, even an automated one, like they are of flying.

Given the nature of public transport I think we can discount the "out of my control" factor. We can even remove the human element; driverless trains are found in quite a few places and nobody is screaming in terror on them.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains

So what is it about flying? Probably the whole "trapped in a metal tube travelling at 500mph a mile above the ocean" thing.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#159

Post by skybrian »

msluyter wrote: post #139
anti wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3) Loss of jobs. When we're heading to a future of robotic anything that will replace an entire profession, drivers in this case. What will be the economic effect of it?

Marshall Brain wrote the very interesting (IMHO) "Robotic Nation" in the exploration of your question: http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm And, to save time, here are the standard HN responses: 1. Marshall Brain commits the Lump of Labor Fallacy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy ): The lump of labor fallacy holds that the total amount of work is fixed. This is considered fallacious bec…

You're picking some bad examples for future growth. Instead, look at the problems people really want to solve.

I'd pick health care as something that's just going to keep growing. As long as people have health problems, there will be a market for attempts at solutions. As the rest of life becomes more affordable, more money can be spent on this.

Re: Nevada passes law authorizing driverless cars

#160

Post by rdouble »

randomdata wrote: post #157
rdouble wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do farmers use driverless equipment? I live in a farming community and nobody uses driverless equipment.

When I say driverless, I'm not precluding the presence of an operator. John Deere's iTEC Pro, for example, is capable of controlling the tractor, but still requires an operator to be in the cab, just in case. Although here's a fun video of someone who disabled the safety sensors: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU4liQvrcm4 I don't know of any large operator that isn't using at least autosteer, which, for things like c…

Thanks for the link. I should ask around to see who is using these. edit: sounds like i'm wrong, they ALL are using automated equipment. they just sit on the tractor, too.
Post reply on HN