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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 130 posts

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

#61

Post by hx87 »

imh wrote: post #50
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…

I want the DMV to only license drivers when they are safe, alert, and driving defensively, so I want the DMV to only license autonomous systems when they can meet or exceed the bar of safe, alert, and defensive drivers. We can't enforce that humans drive that way after they're licensed, but we can enforce it with autonomous systems. We are already happy regulating driving, and we shouldn't lower the licensing bar to…

> We can't enforce that humans drive that way after they're licensed

Wait, isn't that what traffic police are for? Sometimes I wish speed limits were universally removed so that police will be forced to enforce the other 99.99% of traffic laws more strictly.

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

#62

Post by ThomPete »

Zigurd wrote: post #56
ThomPete wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim was that we will all benefit. So I am asking how is that benefitting those who loos their jobs. Sure you can cherry pick your perspective and make OPs statement true, but whats the point of that.

About a million people die on the roads each year. Even though the US has a relatively low rate of road fatalities, there are still tens of thousands of people killed each year and hundreds of thousands injured on the roads. Even the poor and jobless benefit from not getting mangled in a car wreck or run down while cycling, and the health care money saved can go to directly aid them.

What does that help them if they can't feed their family because they have no jobs.

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

#63

Post by nartsbtaa »

ThomPete wrote: post #55
nartsbtaa wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But jobs moving to China and India isn't solving the underlying issue I thought we were talking about automation and technology? What do China and India have to do with this? I never said it's good for a society when their jobs are displaced to another region. > I would really urge anyone who think that technology creates more jobs than it removes to show where those new jobs are I would really urge people to think…

I was about to answer you first question but I can see you removed it. With regards to your second: We are. I was just trying to pre-empt the claim that more jobs have been created.

Sorry, I removed it because I realized I misinterpreted your comment.

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

#64

Post by hx87 »

VeejayRampay wrote: post #54
EGreg wrote: post #42

How come no one has figured out that these self driving cars can be tested with light soft and fuzzy tops which only look like real cars, so if they crash into something, even at high speed, they wouldn't hurt anyone and couldn't be sued for a lot? They could then skip to testing much more daring maneuvers on higher speed than they would otherwise.

Unless I'm missing something the car needs to have an engine, that's heavy enough to kill people, even at moderate speeds, no?

Not if you go all-electric. Motors are light, batteries are heavy, but battery packs give you much more packaging flexibility than an ICE engine.

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

#65

Post by hx87 »

rfghsfgt wrote: post #32
it_learnses wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

One danger is that it lowers the incentive to work.

If there is little need for work, extrinsic incentives to work don't matter much. Intrinsic incentives (i.e. work is fulfilling) will be enough.

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

#66

Post by hx87 »

wcummings wrote: post #33
it_learnses wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

>Not sure what the downsides are yet It's fantastically expensive.

Not any more expensive than paying all the wages under the current system. Besides, it gets rid of the current welfare system's eligibility-determining bureaucracy, so it might even be cheaper.

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

#67

Post by stevendaniels »

finid wrote: post #45
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars are much more valuable to China than the US. China, for all its development, lacks road and parking infrastructure and places to put them even if it was willing to build them. So cities like Beijing are incredibly congested. Likewise, the driving culture in many Chinese cities (all slightly different) is often very bad, it isn't uncommon to see someone back up on a free way because they missed their…

it isn't uncommon to see someone back up on a free way because they missed their exit in Beijing....The US, for the most part, doesn't have these problems I'm guessing that you haven't driven anywhere near New York City or Boston. I've seen my fair share of drivers backing up or driving on the part of the road they're not supposed to just because they missed their exit. Someone said I've done that myself, but I'll ne…

Bad driving behavior exists everywhere, but in China it's much more common than in the US. Left turns from the extreme right lane (and vice versa), is another common thing you'll see. In my experience, the drivers in Beijing are better behaved than those in Qingdao. Lane changes without signals (while you're in the lane) are also really common.

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

#68

Post by ThomPete »

nartsbtaa wrote: post #53
ThomPete wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It hasn't always been the case though. It's only been the case for around 200 years. Before that the progress was so slow that there was no issues transitioning as most kind of work took generations to change. The problem is that now things changes so fast that lots of people simply can't re-educate them selves and the market doesn't really need that many people, yet we have no plan what so ever for this issue beside…

> But jobs moving to China and India isn't solving the underlying issue I thought we were talking about automation and technology? What do China and India have to do with this? I never said it's good for a society when their jobs are displaced to another region. > I would really urge anyone who think that technology creates more jobs than it removes to show where those new jobs are I would really urge people to think…

I am thinking about jobs and productivity as two separate metrics which is exactly why I am coming to the conclusions I am.

Productivity goes up because of technology but those who gain financially are mostly those who work in technology or own resources.

Cost of living is going up too which while salaries for most aren't. The kind of jobs you can get if you aren't in a few privileged industries are wallmart jobs or part time jobs. 12 million people are about to get a run for their money when the one job that couldn't be outsourced suddenly can to robots.

So no I don't believe the competitive edge in the US is really about it's technological or scientific edge but rather a host of other things like the dollar which allow US to stay afloat despite it's soon to be 20 trillion dollar deficit, the size of the market, it's access to the international markets, the system which doesn't redistribute well and so on.

I have no interest of low-wage jobs coming back. What I do have an interest in is that people recognize that a lot of people are being left behind not just brushing it aside as the price of progress. Because never before have so many been left behind with no real chance of a future unless it's on welfare. And if you think this election was bad just wait til the next one, unless we start recognizing the problems and actually address them.

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

#69

Post by ithkuil »

croon wrote: post #34
CmdrSprinkles wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 theor…

I would say that the issue is The Wealthy having all the money. Take it a few steps forward. At some point the factory owner (whether local or conglomerate) holds all the money and has 0 workers. The only thing he can buy is new resources to produce more stuff, but no one can buy that stuff because no one works anymore. At some point it's just a machine making stuff that no one can afford to use other than the very f…

correct. If the only way to have money to spend is to work then if nobody works nobody can buy anything. UBI is one way to make people who don't necessarily work have money to spend. Taxing the wealthy is one way to fund UBI (the other is printing money, which is basically taxing savings indiscriminately by causing inflation). I honestly don't know if that would work on practice. But the point is that merely taxing the wealthy and do nothing to address the fact that people without jobs don't get money won't fix the problem of jobs disappearing. However there is a big social and psychology barrier that prevents giving money go those who "don't deserve it" by sweating for it. On of the big drawbacks in current welfare systems though is that whoever currently benefits from them has little incentive to work a little bit because they would get the same amount of money but they'll actually have to work. The only incentive is to get a job that would pay more than what you get from welfare and that creates a barrier and also reinforces the stereotype of some people just not be willing to work (e.g. because of laziness).

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

#70

Post by NumberCruncher »

it_learnses wrote: post #28
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.

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...

For sustaining the basic income the owners of the automation and resources should pay taxes. At least a bit. How much tax do the big players pay?
Post reply on HN