Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China • Hacker News Board

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#21

Post by ThomPete » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:14 PM UTC

bertomartin wrote: post #10

perfmode wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who owns the future though? While I am not a nationalist and I think it's commendable that the human race is making progress, I'm concerned that advances in technology are causing troubling concentrations of wealth among those who operate and control the technology.

luddites thought the same ;)

The luddite fallacy is in itself a fallacy as we are today not just talking about replacing physical labour with technology we are also replacing jobs that require mental abilities and at higher and higher levels of abstraction in an environment thats exponentially progressing.

The cold hard reality is that a lot of the jobs that's been created in the US are wallmart jobs or part time jobs and that the cost of living is going up.

So those who keep mentioning luddite fallacy owe it to explain what new jobs it is they see replacing the current jobs. Because if it's just a hope that it will be all right in the future some day it's not really an argument for anything.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#22

Post by cushychicken » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:16 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #20

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that? Jobs are going to be lost anyways, whether from cars or from a different technology. Are you arguing the problem is that people aren't able to continue to do trivial things which technology can easily replace them at? Or that they will not have a relevant skill / source of income? If the former than we sh…

I was responding to the OP who said it wasn't a zero zum game. Not sure why we are suddenly discussing what I propose instead. All I am saying is that it's easy to forget that real people are effected by progress and that the narrative that we all benefit is kind of disingenuous from that perspective and I believe we need to think harder on what to do about that because it's only going to increase.

That was a quick backpedal. :)

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#23

Post by CmdrSprinkles » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:17 PM UTC

perfmode wrote: post #19

CmdrSprinkles wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you suggest though? Should we intentionally hold back technology so that factory workers and bus drivers have jobs? Especially as these automation schemes generally have the promise of drastically increased safety. I agree it is a problem that people will be put out of work, but that is kind of an inevitability. Which is why a lot of people are arguing that basic income needs to be investigated much more clos…

Thomas Piketty has articulated a path forward. I support his view that governments ought to step in and institute a global tax on wealth.

Except that doesn't solve this problem (mostly: Read all the way through)

The issue isn't The Wealthy having all the money. The issue is technology that will actively remove jobs. It doesn't matter if minimum wage is 90 pounds an hour if you don't have a job. An automated train isn't The Wealthy stealing money. It is a conductor out of work because their job could be handled by a raspberry pi.

Basic Income is a theoretical concept (been implemented in small, borderline meaningless, experiments) to combat that. Everyone gets a bare minimum "salary" regardless of if they work. That covers cost of living (how much more varies). Then, those with jobs have the potential to earn a lot more (incentive to work) on top of that.

What Thomas Piketty proposes wouldn't address the lack of income to those put out of work by technology but could, possibly, help to pay for solutions that would.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#24

Post by ThomPete » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:18 PM UTC

cushychicken wrote: post #22

ThomPete wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was responding to the OP who said it wasn't a zero zum game. Not sure why we are suddenly discussing what I propose instead. All I am saying is that it's easy to forget that real people are effected by progress and that the narrative that we all benefit is kind of disingenuous from that perspective and I believe we need to think harder on what to do about that because it's only going to increase.

That was a quick backpedal. :)

In what way?

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#25

Post by dtnewman » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:21 PM UTC

I worry about the regulatory aspects of getting self-driving cars off-the-ground in the United States. It is inevitable that self driving cars will make mistakes and people will be injured or killed as a result. It is also inevitable that people will be injured or killed as a result of people driving cars. But in the long run, it's virtually guaranteed that self-driving technology will result in safer cars and fewer driving deaths. Computers can respond quicker, communicate well with other computers (hopefully) and they don't get drunk.

It's a fact of life that while accidents from ordinary drivers go unnoticed (ironically because they are so frequent), car crashes from self-driving cars will get covered extensively by the media, at least for the short term.

All this means that it will be a tough regulatory environment for self-driving cars in the US. In China, the government has more power to create regulatory policies around self-driving cars that take a long-term view without having to worry as much about lawsuits and other concerns.

Perhaps the fear of seeing the Chinese companies "getting there first" with self-driving cars will be an impetus for US regulators to create policies that are encourage the development of self-driving cars.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#26

Post by deepnotderp » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:22 PM UTC

neves wrote: post #14

Don't forget that they hired the guy behind Google's self driving car, Andrew Ng: http://venturebeat.com/2014/07/30/andrew-ng-baidu/ Does it takes just a hire to compete against all Google's patents?

Andrew wasn't their self driving car leaders, he was their DL and ML leader, he didn't lead the SDC division specifically.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#27

Post by JulianMorrison » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:26 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #4

hesdeadjim wrote: post #2

There is so much talk in the current rhetoric about the US losing its dominance in science and technology. But it is a tad myopic to not be excited about a country of a billion people pushing the boundaries of what is possible. It is not a zero sum game and we will all benefit.

How? How do the uneducated in the rust belt benefit? And perhaps more importantly when? I agree that technology for society in general make us better of over time, but society consists of individuals who don't necessarily benefit from this. In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that?

People used to have jobs walking behind horses in fields, while the horses pulled ploughs and so forth. Pretty stultifying, dawn to dusk staring at horse's ass. A generation from now, manual driving will be viewed as maddeningly dull makework for human drones. Hours of staring at roads with instant death the punishment for dozing off? Wouldn't do it if you paid me.

I'd have said, hopefully the world gets basic income and then a full leisure society sorted out. But honestly, not feeling optimistic right now. The Trumpoids and Brexiteers voted to get their makework back. They won't get it, the economics will make sure of that. But they probably will get unemployed.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#28

Post by it_learnses » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

ThomPete wrote: post #20

forgotpwtomain wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that? Jobs are going to be lost anyways, whether from cars or from a different technology. Are you arguing the problem is that people aren't able to continue to do trivial things which technology can easily replace them at? Or that they will not have a relevant skill / source of income? If the former than we sh…

I was responding to the OP who said it wasn't a zero zum game. Not sure why we are suddenly discussing what I propose instead. All I am saying is that it's easy to forget that real people are effected by progress and that the narrative that we all benefit is kind of disingenuous from that perspective and I believe we need to think harder on what to do about that because it's only going to increase.

Yep, agreed. Universal basic income is one solution that keeps coming back as a silver bullet. Not sure what the downsides are yet, but I'm pretty certain that there's still going to be haves and have nots: just a few rich that own all the automation and resources vs the rest of us just surviving on basic income.

Maybe we'll all be ok immersed in VR adventures as long as we're fed and clothed...

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#29

Post by ThomPete » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

JulianMorrison wrote: post #27

ThomPete wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? How do the uneducated in the rust belt benefit? And perhaps more importantly when? I agree that technology for society in general make us better of over time, but society consists of individuals who don't necessarily benefit from this. In fact 12 million jobs are in danger of being lost to automated cars. How are they going to benefit from that?

People used to have jobs walking behind horses in fields, while the horses pulled ploughs and so forth. Pretty stultifying, dawn to dusk staring at horse's ass. A generation from now, manual driving will be viewed as maddeningly dull makework for human drones. Hours of staring at roads with instant death the punishment for dozing off? Wouldn't do it if you paid me. I'd have said, hopefully the world gets basic income…

How many of the horses have jobs today though? :) But sure I agree. That doesen't change that for some people their job is all they have. If you take that away they have no realistic future unless it's some post scarcity society.

Re: Baidu’s self-driving cars begin public test in Wuzhen, China

#30

Post by rfghsfgt » Thu, Nov 17, 2016, 4:38 PM UTC

dtnewman wrote: post #25

I worry about the regulatory aspects of getting self-driving cars off-the-ground in the United States. It is inevitable that self driving cars will make mistakes and people will be injured or killed as a result. It is also inevitable that people will be injured or killed as a result of people driving cars. But in the long run, it's virtually guaranteed that self-driving technology will result in safer cars and fewer…

The issue is that self driving cars are naturally _worse_ than human drivers, and the only way to ensure that only the _good_ self driving cars get on the road is regulation.

Like flying, if anyone could build an airplane and fly it, flying would be more dangerous then driving. It's the FAA which keeps these things in check.