Living in California all my life and seeing local municipalities essentially pretend they're still in the 1970s and adhere to car orientation and single family homes for their land use really makes me wish these jurisdictions would lose local control with policies like the Builder's Remedy.
Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
71–80 of 83 posts
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to drive a taxi. Now I write code. I paid for my own training. I'd expect to find that self-help is the most usual way to transition into other jobs.
The reality is, this is just not a functional pathway for the majority of people. So it’s not a solution It might be possible for some minority that has a particular penchant for this type of work, but neither the jobs nor the training exist at such scale that would be able to absorb the entirety of the driver workforce into the “write software for automated driving“ job.
The point is that they can just get a new, different, job.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
The part that's hard to understand is why we'd keep a job that kills people when it's no longer necessary.
This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles We don’t have these types of measurable capabilities because we don’t actually have the data that shows what is the fatality rate per million miles at the…
> This is the equivalent of saying, we need strong protections on the Internet, because child pornography exists
It's not remotely like saying this, and going straight to child pornography in is like going straight to the Nazis - the sign of an unserious argument.
> It’s not an actual argument because it doesn’t have specific measurable distinctions between deaths related to driverless vehicles versus driver vehicles
You're just not understanding the definition of the word argument if you think this is true. Also, these things are being measured, so we're getting to this understanding. If your argument is that we shouldn't put robotaxis on the road because we don't know if they're safer means that we can't measure if robotaxis are safer and thus regardless of their relative safety, we must ban them because we don't have measurements yet.
> I suspect that is actually a much bigger problem than the theoretical reduction in fatalities on roads
But that's not an actual argument because it doesn't have specific, measurable distinctions, no?
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
no way, most people have some incentive to avoid murdering another, because it will likely ruin or severely interrupt their lives - a robotaxi killing someone will result in an insurance payout, the company won’t even be shut down
Drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists don't consciously decide to murder them (at least not in 99.99% of cases), they do it out of negligence - opening a door without looking into the mirror, turning right at an intersection without looking for pedestrians or cyclists, not stopping at pedestrian crossings etc. etc.
I'll rephrase, humans have some incentive to avoid negligence despite being imperfect and occasionally being negligent anyway. Robotaxis are imperfect and have no such incentives.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
no way, most people have some incentive to avoid murdering another, because it will likely ruin or severely interrupt their lives - a robotaxi killing someone will result in an insurance payout, the company won’t even be shut down
We know from decades of safety research that threatening to ruin people's lives doesn't prevent accidents. All it does is make people lie about why the accident happened.
If there were no consequences for running someone over... a lot more people would get run over. I don't think we need much research for this.
If a robotaxi runs someone over, there's no one at the wheel to be held accountable... and the company has many incentives and resources to lie.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
no way, most people have some incentive to avoid murdering another, because it will likely ruin or severely interrupt their lives - a robotaxi killing someone will result in an insurance payout, the company won’t even be shut down
At least in Chicago - if you kill some cycling and it's an accident - it's just an insurance payout. You don't even lose points on your license. Unless you literally run someone over intentionally - you won't even lose your license. And if you do that, I bet you wouldn't even go to jail most of the time. Can't tell you the amount of cyclists I know that have been hit by cars (and myself) and I don't know a single dri…
And knowing which robot hit you will somehow make you more alive? Computers are all of the mistakes borne from humanity free from any sort of ethical reasoning.
I'd trust a drunk person more than a malfunctioning computer, personally.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least in Chicago - if you kill some cycling and it's an accident - it's just an insurance payout. You don't even lose points on your license. Unless you literally run someone over intentionally - you won't even lose your license. And if you do that, I bet you wouldn't even go to jail most of the time. Can't tell you the amount of cyclists I know that have been hit by cars (and myself) and I don't know a single dri…
And knowing which robot hit you will somehow make you more alive? Computers are all of the mistakes borne from humanity free from any sort of ethical reasoning. I'd trust a drunk person more than a malfunctioning computer, personally.
Despite what you might think, cyclists get hit a shocking amount and rarely die.
I'd rather there be Waymo on the road than drunks.
And it's honestly shocking the ignorance on here these days that so many people refuse to look at stats with overwhelming evidence Waymo is safer than average drivers significantly, and would blow drunks out of the water by a massive margin.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
And knowing which robot hit you will somehow make you more alive? Computers are all of the mistakes borne from humanity free from any sort of ethical reasoning. I'd trust a drunk person more than a malfunctioning computer, personally.
Despite what you might think, cyclists get hit a shocking amount and rarely die. I'd rather there be Waymo on the road than drunks. And it's honestly shocking the ignorance on here these days that so many people refuse to look at stats with overwhelming evidence Waymo is safer than average drivers significantly, and would blow drunks out of the water by a massive margin.
You think it's shocking that people who work on computers all day don't trust computers?
Waymo isn't magic, it's just making driving a series of decisions made by programmers.
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
> our DM has been utilizing Midjourney for character tokens for the bad guys I don't think, in all my years of role playing, I've _ever_ seen an image of one of the NPCs in our stories; at least outside of the rare store-bought adventures. Or, at least that I can recall, an image of _anything_ in our campaigns. Everything was verbally described. I wasn't even aware people generated pictures for home-grown adventures/…
When I was playing (about a decade ago) we made heavy use of static images. A few people drew their characters, others pulled images from online, and our DM would always flash an image of whatever boss we were about to encounter. These were all intended to be rough approximations, and were typically shared with deviations, e.g. "my character looks like this guy, but he uses a staff instead of a longsword, and he has…
That is pretty cool, thanks. I haven't been able to roleplay in a number of years but, if I can get back into it, I will certainly be making an image of my character :)
Re: Robotaxis 'do not belong in the city of Los Angeles,' lawmaker says
#80I agree, robotaxis do not belong in LA, at least culturally. The collective suffering of working-class commuters ascending and descending the income gradient on packed freeways is the thing that powers LA, like children’s screams powered the city in Monsters, Inc. Robotaxis can never replace that.
and how NYC is powered by young professionals looking into rich peoples' brownstones
https://www.tiktok.com/@morningbrew/video/723752513284188087...