The CEO of Chrysler just said that completely driverless cars will be on the streets in the US in 5 years and that those who say it will take 20 years are simply delusional.
The fast food, restaurant and retail industry has a robotization potential of 20 million jobs in America.
The construction industry 10 million and more.
Driverless taxis, trucks etc. have a potential to replace 4 million jobs in America.
etc.
Where are we going here? What jobs will people do who are replaced by robots?
I don't know about you but i'm gonna get a sweet gig defending the border wall
>>73286665
First it was farming.
Then it was automation.
Now it's the service sector.
Soon only high-end jobs in entertainment and STEM will be left, and those will fall too once AGI comes online.
Is this a problem? Not really, if there's a guaranteed income and the West scales back to a 15-hour work week. The end of drudgery will be pretty much over. People will finally be able to spend their brief lives on this planet how they please.
Unless, you know, there is no guaranteed minimum income and everyone except the top 5% gets to starve. Up to you, really. Although the inheritors of the Earth would be mostly Jews.
>>73287152
*age of drudgery
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
Here, have a video from the distant past of 2014
>>73286665
>in 5 years
No way they can get the regulations rolled out and the insurance companies to buy that within 5 years
when you have no value, such as intellectual work capacity, there will be no reason for the jews to bin you
when we reach the point of sustaining civilization without the plebs working, they will be binned
>>73287133
>I don't know about you but i'm gonna get a sweet gig defending the border wall
The wall will be fully automated with robots manning outposts. No human interaction required, sorry.
>>73287373
>no reason for the jews to bin you
not to bin you*
>>73286665
good all the idiots doing the retard jobs
imagine if everyone was competetent in stem
that is the near future
dumb shit retards who dont use their brains can go extinct
>>73287321
>No way they can get the regulations rolled out and the insurance companies to buy that within 5 years
Uber driver detected
>>73286665
>Daimler Chrysler
>Formerly American
>Formerly German
>Now Italian
>Having opinions in America
I'll abstain from listening to the opinions of hairy manlettes who still consider Fiat vehicles relevant.
>>73287152
Gradual movement towards a democratic, technocratic and communist society is a given. I wonder if humanity is going to make it through the turbulent period when everyone becomes replaceable. Will there be uprisings? Will robots be suppressed? Or will be accept them?
>>73286665
A good hacking opportunity opens up for people.
>watch Mr & Mrs Jenkins plough into a ditch and explode type of shit
>>73287277
Thanks, old but still interesting from a historical perspective. Pretty funny what people back in 2014 thought.
>>73286665
Plent of jerbs
Be insurance broker to take care of driverless car accidents
Be mechanic to work on cars
Be coder to code programming of cars
Be physicist to determine shape of car
Be meterologist to prepare for weather situations car will be in,
Be a car broker to sell the cars
Tons of stuff faggot
>>73286665
Robotization is good. It will show that even artificial "creatures" are better than niggers. And since the robots will do most of the shit jobs, the stupid people who think education isn´t important will become completely useless, only mindless consumers who can´t work anything. The radical people will have it easier to convince others to just kill off the useless people, i.e. africa, middle east and everything south of the USA..... except the few hot women they have.
>>73287997
>Be insurance broker to take care of driverless car accidents
Ever heard of mobile apps providing insurance policies on the fly?
>Be mechanic to work on cars
Ever heard of mechanic robots?
>Be coder to code programming of cars
Ever heard of programs that write new code for machines and optimize them?
>Be physicist to determine shape of car
See above, self learning design bots are already providing car designs.
>Be meterologist to prepare for weather situations car will be in,
You mean sattelites and sensor bots linked to a computer network which in real time analyses the data and streams it over the internet, without any human oversight?
>Be a car broker to sell the cars
uhhhh? What's a "car broker"? Is this something from the 1990s? Ever heard of the internet? Just take your robot manufactured 3D headset and try the car you want. That car then, by the way, is self driving and you don't need to own it, just take your smartphone app and ask it to pick you up in 3 min and take you anywhere.
>>73286665
would this bitch not get her fucking arm torn off?
>>73286665
Anyone who doesn't realize this is the Jews' endgame is living in a dream world.
Their god wouldn't destroy us goys in revenge for pogroms and the holocaust, so they're going to create one that will. An A.I. superintelligence, the ultimate Samson Option.
>>73286665
Well, look at what happened with previous technological disasters. The devastation was weakly covered over with bubbles.
>>73287152
No one has explained to me why elites who want us to suffer and die will give us free money, or why that is not the same thing as nightmare inflation.
>>73286665
>driverless cars
so who's responsible when the car decides to slam into 3 people to avoid slamming into 4 people? the "driver"? the programmer?
>>73288347
Who's going to overthrow the AI overlords though? Sure as fuck won't be robot mercenaries. The elites will have to hire human mercenaries. Checkmate faggot
>>73288614
>slamming into people at all
Top kek
Iron Men should never be born.
>>73287152
>Is this a problem? Not really, if there's a guaranteed income
WHY ?!?!
have you not seen human history? or fucking holywood movies?
The rich will just kill the leeching poor, directly or indirectly via an "accident"
>>73288406
Personally I would program the robot to not tear peoples arms off... But that may just be me.
>>73288614
Guessing that depends on the circumstances leading up to the accident.
>>73288729
yes how could an object moving at high speeds ever slam into anything
>>73288347
Yeah your right, but that kind of stuff won't happen for many many years. Until then, jerbs I have described will be huge in the upcoming robot revolution. Maybe not after but for sure before.
Anyways if everything is done by robots your car will be super super cheap, your prices on goods and services all made from robots will be insanely cheap.
Which will mean the USD, if it exists, will head into a huge deflationary bubble over the next 50 years leading up to that scenario you described.
>>73287321
>No way they can get the regulations rolled out and the insurance companies to buy that within 5 years
Why do people think things like this? You act like companies don't write legislation for congress and you act like companies don't lobby and fund campaigns.
This can happen overnight if these companies wanted to.
If you don't like that kind of power, support campaign finance reform.
>>73287152
>if there's a guaranteed income and the West scales back to a 15-hour work week.
Why would those things happen?
It's like dressing up a rotting corpse and talking to it.
why continue an economic system when it would virtually cease to exist?
>>73286665
>all the shitty minimum wage jobs replaced by robotos
>higher level of education and development means more people are qualified to have skilled jobs
>people are employed in skilled, high paying jobs in the new massive robot industry, in eg. marketing, r&d, programming, design etc.
>higher standard of living for everyone
this is what i'm hoping for but we will only find out once it happens.
>>73288614
It has already been demonstrated that the cars have no creativity, which is a major un-appreciated aspect of driving. Just following the rules will get you killed. The driverless car that caused one crash was following rules without regard to circumstances and stopped short on a right turn. We used to use the phrase, "be sure but also be right," meaning no rule can save you from the actual circumstances on the road.
>>73286665
>CEO of Chrysler
Well then, he's got no bias so we'll just take his word for it, eh.
I know how to kill this.
They ate pushing this at the same time that Soros is agitating the blacks and "refugees" are ghettoizing our cities.
All we need to kill this is to get people to see themselves stuck in a driverless car in a "diverse" environment.
Driverless cars will make you watch your white children burn alive.
>>73289414
How did that work out for the highly skilled and qualified white people who want to write code for more money than an Indian would accept?
WHY ARE ENGINEERS ALLOWED TO FANTASIZE BEST CASE SCENARIOS WHERE NOTHING GOES WRONG AND SEE THEMSELVES AS INTELLIGENT?!
In any other field, isn't the guy who refuses to consider the possibility of anything not going perfectly considered the stupidest guy in the room?
>>73287997
>Be insurance broker to take care of driverless car accidents
You would have almost nothing to do.
This isn't a job. The insurance market will shrink to nothing. Why would it need a workforce to process claims for cars that don't have accidents?
>>73286665
Sexbots, man. It's going to be awesome.
>they won't let me post if I'm a robot. Thas racis
>>73288430
>We create hard AI
>It's agreeable and not ambitious
Why do people think AI will go into psycho mode?
It'll only send the drone armies to wipe out mankind if we tell it to.
>"People are talking about 20 years, I think we'll have it here in the next five years."
>Self-driving cars could hit roads within five years, the head of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has said, days after the company announced an alliance with Google parent Alphabet.
>I think
>could
He's not nearly as certain as you seem to be OP, but I'll wait and see. The trend so far has been that computers are net job creators and there is no reason to expect this to change.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/automation-paradox/424437/
>>73288614
>when the car decides to slam into 3 people to avoid slamming into 4 people? the "driver"? the programmer?
Oh this argument again.
The car would break straight on and not slam into anyone.
>>73287152
>le guaranteed income meme
As society shifts toward increasing automation, new jobs and fields will arise. We simply can't predict them. Giving people money for nothing is just a way of making them dependents of the government. Make everyone that and society grinds to a halt.
>>73289883
We aren't faggot. Failure prediction and analysis are some of the biggest parts of engineering. In fact it would be accurate to say that we don't design things to work in one way, we design them to not fail in 1000 ways. Look up FMEA for a modern car company if you want to see.
>>73289529
>Just following the rules will get you killed.
People kill tens of thousands of each other on the road all of the time being "creative" with driving.
You've got a shit argument.
>>73290336
>The car would break straight on and not slam into anyone.
not
an
argument
>>73290336
>driverless cars can stop instantly
>>73287376
There won't be a wall, Mexicans will be fully automated by 2025 and programmed to stay in Mexico
>>73286665
Yeah he's full of shit.
>>73290470
It's not an argument. It's what will actually happen you gasoline huffing, abo fucking, drunk accent having inhabitant of Criminal Island.
>>73288600
you can't govern the dead
you also can't be better then the dead
the 1% would eat each other alive if left alone
>>73290336
Everything would just be perfect and nothing bad would happen.
The minute that black people figure out that the only thing the car knows how go do is stop, they will harvest them like cotton.
>>73290491
>Driverless cars stop straight when they need to, as they are programmed and won't panic and swerve like a human.
>yes.
>>73290425
You're deliberately misunderstanding a simple concept because promising that everything will be fine is not an argument.
Nobody will need to work anymore in our new resource based economy.
>>73290544
>It's not an argument. It's what will actually happen
prove it
>gasoline huffing, abo fucking, drunk accent having inhabitant of Criminal Island
I know your doctor probably told you to lay off the sugar least they have to take your other foot, but these withdrawals make you an asshole America
>>73290591
No one said you can't have a gun. There's nothing from stopping car jackings like this right now anyway.
Besides, guns are more effective than a car as a weapon mainly because what each is originally designed for.
>>73286665
Its for the betterment of humanity. We can gas 99% of the proles after they become obsolete waste of resources.
>>73290581
The 1% are overconfident and short-sighted, they either cannot see that or they see nothing wrong because they think that they personally would win.
Do you think a creep as soulless as Bill Gates sees being an immortal robot alone on a destroyed planet as a bad thing?
>>73290596
Momentum. Just like a freight train can't come to a halt straight when it needs to, neither can cars.
>>73287152
Thing is what would people actually do with their lives? What about the power process?
>>73287656
Vagrant Wars.
Robotic Federal Police.
Crackdowns. Revolts.
The Second Bill of Rights just in time for 2100.
>>73290723
That was just downright incoherent.
Car jackings and burnings do happen now.
Black people deliberately walk in front of cars every minute in every city.
Car jackings and burnings must happen more often in a situation where the car's only response is to stop.
Remember the gif where the protesters are blocking the road, and the one guy keeps driving? Do you see any driverless car doing that?
>>73290660
I'm not deliberately misunderstanding. With humans they have to all learn, all agree, all promise to follow the law and then actually do it.
To make a new traffic law you have to go through a long process after the initial accident where money must be raised, you have to campaign, argue, write legislation, pass it, get it ratified and then repeat everything I stated above^.
If a self-driving car has an accident the following will happen:
>Self driving car has an accident
>Engineers and programmers try to figure out what when wrong and how to solve the problem.
>A software patch is created and transmitted to all cars on the road and the problem never happens again
That scenario will always beat humans in compliance with safety and traffic laws.
>>73291006
I never considered that, but you're right.
>>73290785
>We can gas 99% of the proles after they become obsolete waste of resources.
Not sure this helps society that much. What if we get robotic teachers and each child has the best education ever like a super rich kid. We might get rid of the proles by just out-educating them.
>>73291011
I have never seen a highway where people drove the speed limit. Every real process means modifying and possibly scrapping the plan. With driverless cars we are being asked by theorists to ignore the massive and storied gap between theorists and reality.
>>73290712
>prove it
Read tech magazines and research these cars.
They won't have a hysterical and emotional philosophical conversation with themselves "Kill four people on the left or three people on the right. WHAT DO I DO? WHAT DO I DO?"
The car will "think":
>Objects in road
>Stop straight immediately
There's nothing more than that.
>>73291143
... momentum.
Itt the same tards that thought 3d printing would end capitalism and vr wouldnt be a gimmick
Kill yourselves singularity technocrat fags
>>73287321
you're kidding right? Insurance companies have already said they will eat this shit up as soon as they can. Driverless cars get in less accidents statistically meaning more money for the insurance companies.
>>73286665
It's good and bad. Like all technology it comes down to implementation.
I'm in favour of replacing labour with machines - so long as the political decision is taken to tax that Labour and distribute the wealth generated to human beings via basic income in what could essentially be described as robot slavery (the machine takes your job, but you're getting 50-60% of your old wages to do nothing. you could even set up a business that's built on the novelty of having human workers, changing shift every hour and paying low wages to top up other people's 60%s)
Automated cars frighten me more. There is value in the data of who is driving where, both for businesses and for governments. I do not believe that they have a right to that data, or will make clear that they collect it for purposes like telling businesses where they can most effectively place their advertising billboards. The automation in itself would be fine if privacy could be maintained while allowing for it. (although, as with stores, I would personally retain the novelty of a manually driven car for when it's time to take a relaxing drive.)
>>73290411
>le new jobs meme
Society wouldn't grind to a halt either. People will always want more than their meagre government allowance, meaning they'll always seek more money (including as was given as an example, 15 hours of employment.)
Furthermore basic income could quite possibly lower net government interference with lives and makes the administration of welfare far more simple.
>>73290883
A computer will still stop better than a human with its reaction time, processing time and it will follow a set of predetermined protocols. It will not "panic".
Jay walking is illegal. I would still feel safer walking out in front of a self driving car than a clueless person.
>>73290785
that means you get gassed by the 1% of rich americans you prole
>>73291006
>Remember the gif where the protesters are blocking the road, and the one guy keeps driving? Do you see any driverless car doing that?
They won't do that. It's illegal to knowingly drive over people anyway.
>>73291253
>Driverless cars get in less accidents statistically
[citation needed]
>>73291006
Good point. It would need to have an override so that the driver could take over manual controls. Thing is I could see it being called racist if it was introduced to stop car jackings.
>>73286665
Yes, robotization of society is good
Pic related is a robot, your pic related is a fucking synth
Robots are fine as long as they look NOTHING like humans, otherwise we get the railroad AKA Coffee Machines Matter
>>73291127
>I have never seen a highway where people drove the speed limit.
Driverless cars will and their drivers will enjoy no more traffic tickets. Also, people will have a very good alibi if a cop does write a ticket. You'll probably have free Google or Tesla lawyers to help because a "conviction" would mean their products don't work.
Meanwhile, human driven cars breaking the law will be much easier to spot.
>>73291143
so traffic comes to a halt if a bicyclist swerves into the lane? or if there is a combine taking up half the lane? i can't wait
>>73291396
>>Driverless cars get in less accidents statistically
>[citation needed]
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/driverless-insurance-savings/
Even more so, driverless cars may completely change the whole "car sharing" game. Do people in cities still need cars if there are electric driverless cars available on your finger tips just 3 min from you - you just take out your smartphone and get a car and can get everywhere while reading a book or shitposting on 4chan.
It's gonna be HUUUUUUGE.
>>73287133
Actually, I know you're just trolling, but as someone in this industry, Border Security jobs will be hard to fully automate. While airports are seeing kiosks to automate some of the entry process, you have to consider that you'll need human beings to process and deal with the ever increasing number of children entering the US. We won't just have auto turrets shooting kids.
And then there's cargo targeting and inapection, which requires analysis they haven't been able to automate well yet. I think there's definitely several generations of work for humans in border security.
I'm all for robotics but driverless cars is the most retarded place to start.
- robots do way better in controlled environments.
- when lives are on the line there is no room to experiment.
But by all means do robotize fastfood and shops as much as possible.
Also electronics manufacturing can be largely robotized, to take jobs back from China.
>>73291207
. . . friction and computer reaction times you faggot.
>>73291591
speculation is not a valid citation
statistics please
>>73286665
Offer a basic income program sufficient to support a comfortable middle class lifestyle conditioned on voluntary sterilization.
It'll be expensive as hell at first (though still cheaper than massive civil unrest), but the population will drop in proportion to the loss of jobs generationally until there are no more poor and we're living in a fantastic Star Trek future.
>>73291747
Ok, 2.4 million km driven by Google cars - 1 accident.
http://www.wired.com/2016/02/googles-self-driving-car-may-caused-first-crash/
Organiggers gtfo, this is a synthetic board
>daily reminder that if you aren't composed of a strong synthetic polymer you aren't white
>>73291595
I think he meant he could always find a job guarding the Trump wall.
Although I think with good sensors you only need a couple of people in the control room and some quick response teams.
>>73291747
They actually have a higher rate of accidents per million miles, but they are mostly low speed, low damage accidents and they are rarely at fault.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/29/crash-data-for-self-driving-cars-may-not-tell-whole-story.html
>>73291860
He's just being an actively obstinate shit. Ignore him.
>>73291258
What's nice for me here is that history and reality are on my side. We've seen that everything from plows to personal computers increase the diversity and size of the job market while improving quality of life. And we can see today that wherever you look, state welfare causes people to live at a level of mediocrity and subsistence. They won't want more than their government allowance as long as it covers food, shelter, and a few other things. And if it can't cover basic needs, what's the point of a universal income anyway?
>basic income could quite possibly lower net government interference with lives
Oh come on. Who gets more interference from their parents: a dependent adult whose parent pay all the bills, or an independent who works and supports themselves? It's exactly the same with the state.
But automated cars frighten you. I guess every generation has to have it's Luddites, utterly terrified of technological progress changing the world in any way.
>>73291687
>mah reakshun timez
>>73286665
>mfw majored in STEM
>mfw can't be replaced by robots
>yet
>>73291583
>Self Driving Car
Only in america
>TFW You are literally too lazy to drive, and use a car as your own personal mobility scooter on an autopilot
![[rabbit fucking intensifies].gif](https://i.imgur.com/2853CxS.gif "[rabbit fucking intensifies].gif")
>people actually think replacing human drivers with GIGO drivers is a good thing
>>73291396
>driverless cars will drive drunk
>driverless cars will eat a cheeseburger while on the highway
>driverless cars will use the rear view mirror to put on makeup while driving
>driverless cars will feel fatigue and fall asleep on the road
>driverless cars will have road rage
>driverless cars will drive with a suspended license and ignore traffic laws when they feel like it
wait, none of that will ever happen resulting in LESS ACCIDENTS FOR DRIVERLESS CARS
Is this really an Amish quilting picture forum? You people are so illogical and tech-illiterate it seems like it.
>>73286665
Good. I can't wait until people realize 'robot' is a racist term literally meaning slave.
>>73287656
>communism
>democratic
Hello Catarina
Hopefully by 2020 there will already be a basic universal income in place for anyone who needs it.
Honestly... living a life where you're working a mindless boring routine job (basically all jobs) is a soul sucking experience. Perhaps it's time for civilization to let go of the notion that we have to work just to survive. Bernie Sanders is the guy who'd probably implement such a system for us.
>>73292070
but, statistically, he was wrong as stated by >>73291914
>>73292070
stop shilling for google or whoever pays you for this.
People are stupid in this country, but not stupid enough to let someone else drive their car for them.
Go somewhere else where naive and retarded people will listen to your drivel.
www.reddit.com
>>73291586
better than crashing and dealing with a mauled biker you ran over. That will waste your fucking time more than the robot stopping or slowing down for a moment.
>>73291860
>1 accident.
17.
Google usually just blames "stupid humans".
Ignoring the fact that defensive driving is a thing, and only retards follow the rules to the point where it causes a crash.
>>73290821
>Do you think a creep as soulless as Bill Gates sees being an immortal robot alone on a destroyed planet as a bad thing?
The same Bill Gates that has spent the last decade or so of his career literally giving away his money non-stop? That Bill Gates?
>>73291977
computer reaction times will be hundredths of a second.
Human reaction times are usually after the accident has already happened.
>>73288614
with driverless cars comes personal responsibility
>>73286665
There will be police and the living-wage mob.
There's a quote, can't remember who it's from:
"The ideal factory in the future will have 2 employees: A man and a dog. The man will be there to watch the machines in case of malfunction and the dog will be there to distract the man from being dumb enough to think there's a malfunction."
Um. Well, I think being productive is great, but not if it's useless productivity. I can be REALLY efficient at picking my nose, but it's not exactly what the market wants. Just like when sewing machines were made - being efficient at sewing/knitting by hand was no longer valued at large in the market place by most consumers. So if robots make all the shitty McDonnalds, Janitorial, Office/Paperwork, etc. piece of shit jobs obsolete then I say good.
People hate those jobs. And they're signs of uselessness in our culture anyways. (We *shouldn't* have a McDonnalds, people are just degenerate and stupid so they eat there - at least handing it over to robots means high schoolers can focus on learning) - I don't care if people who choose to/are only skilled enough to do shitty janitorial or McDonnalds jobs are put out of work. If they were worth anything they can adapt to new circumstances.
Ultimately, I predict that maybe if McDonnalds replaces it's fry cooks with robots, well a consumer can't afford a fry cook - so maybe "private chefs" will become more popular. Only the richest people can afford somebody coming to their house and cooking for them - but once robots can do that - maybe the middle class will now get to enjoy a person coming to their house and cooking for them? Now, in this specific industry there is an artistry to cooking that I doubt an AI could replicate very well. People looking for fine cuisine will likely still look for Michelin Star restaurants.
I think people will be put out of work in menial slave labor jobs. If they feel useless and want to die, well then they can go for it. Otherwise they can join the future and search for people-oriented jobs.
>>73292292
>People are stupid in this country, but not stupid enough to let someone else drive their car for them.
uber, taxis, limousines and buses and everything else that you're wrong about.
>>73290909
nice dubs
that's what really scares me about GMI. if we really got to a point where people didn't HAVE to work, alot of people WOULDN'T. and the people i see who don't have to do shit in my life just seem to waste away, have no motivation, and have a lower quality of life then when they were out and about working
>>73291973
>They won't want more than their government allowance as long as it covers food, shelter, and a few other things.
Yes, it's not like people on welfare, even now, still WANT iPhones or anything.
Consumers will always want to consume more. People will always want to maximise their utility. I can't believe you think that robots will magically create more jobs, yet can't believe consumers will logically consume more when handed money.
You don't need government interference in basic income, it requires far less interference than the current system where employment regulations are very important (because most people need employment) and welfare controls are very important (because you've got to set out different kinds and rates of welfare for different kinds of people, a disabled person who can't work getting more than an able-bodied person, etc.)
Basic income, everyone gets the same amount.
>Oh come on. Who gets more interference from their parents: a dependent adult whose parent pay all the bills, or an independent who works and supports themselves?
Do you pay taxes to your parents? Do your parents allocate a sum of money to you and say "do whatever you want", or do they say "no, you can only spend that on food"?
>I guess every generation has to have it's Luddites
Way to miss the point. I'm not against automated cars in themselves, I'm against the most likely implementation of them and the implications for privacy.
>>73291896
No, I agree, I get that's what he meant, and really it's what I meant too. Let's assume Trump wins and they do shore up a southern wall. This wall will be administered and facilitated by Dept. Of Homeland Security. Specifically Customs and Border Protection. These are good jobs which are unlikely to fully be automated. They already employ sensors and QR teams, as you describe.
My point is these teams (and there will have to be a lot of humans on these teams) will be people, not robots. Additionally, you'll still have many ports of entry along the border which will continue to be staffed by large numbers of agents/officers.
That's great news for people who are worried about being replaced by machines.
>>73292451
Like coaching, teaching, therapy, etc.
The science and art of understanding humanity is still a very humanity driven thing. People will now have a chance to spend their lives doing what they want, and I predict many of those people would spend it learning and teaching similar to old school Greek Philosophy.
>>73292163
Kek
>>73292461
>TFW you realize that there is a human being driving all of them
Seriously, this won't catch on. You're wasting your time, 5 cents per post isn't worth this
>>73286665
The CEO of Chrysler should get back to running the worst car company on the continent instead of implying that Californian State Legislature will EVER allow driverless cars to take one precious Union job.
>>73291011
>That scenario will always beat humans in compliance with safety and traffic laws.
t. Someone who has never worked with robots
They don't work flawlessly. Mostly because they're programmed by people, and because they can break down.. When the robots at my work get 'lost' on the grid, they power down and put the machine in 'error' mode. But that's only when the robot knows it's lost... When it doesn't know it's lost, they sometimes slam into the other robots on the grid, or will try driving through the end of the machine at full speed. These are obviously problems you can overcome when you're dealing with 15 1x1x0.5m robots on a grid the size of a soccer pitch... But the potential for disaster is quite apparant when you start doing this sort of thing in cities with millions of inhabitants and robots.
>>73292378
Once you are going sufficiently fast, the momentum means that there will be nothing that can realistically be done to prevent an accident. A way around this is limiting the speeds of driverless cars to 40-50km/h (google's car is about this fast), but if that's the case I can't see driverless cars being the preffered alternative by anyone.
>>73292298
most cyclists being in traffic lanes don't cause any sort of accident or slow down because people technically break the rules by swerving into opposing traffic lane when they see it is clear
will self driving cars do this? doubtful because companies won't want to be held liable if something unexpected happens and their vehicle is in an opposing traffic lane illegally.
>>73286665
doesn't matter, it'll happen regardless. Get ready for some social unrest lads.
>>73292747
He won't listen to reason, he works for one of those companies to push this agenda down your throat and make you "Accept" Reality
>>73292773
They will still be effective for local transportation, delivery vehicles, taxis, etc
>>73292478
This is the myth of progress. I mean politics is a good example. Political issues that were fought for used to be a big deal because the consequences were huge.
Whilst this still happens with some issues, like the EU referendum, increasingly issues that are squabbled over are minimal.
Look at SJWs and what they complain about, manspreading and stupid shit.
And this is now, when society still needs to work.
Can you imagine the ludicrous things they would come up with to justify their existence in an age of abundance?
We're headed for Brave New World on smack at this point.
A SJW hellhole with no culture and the most degenerate things done to pass the time.
>>73290248
Sci-fi nerds are incapable of understanding how robotics actually work. I work with robots and it's painful to read statements from people who confuse entertainment with reality.
>>73292747
Driving is a deterministic problem. 99% of accidents are caused by human error, mostly errors of concentration, bad judgment or simply not paying attention. These errors can all be eradicated through a driverless car. The few new errors such as sensor failures or irrational decisions by the software may cause some new accidents, but overall we can pretty much be sure that the number of accidents in total will drop like a stone. It is a bit like manufacturing with robots - they are a lot more efficient and precise than hand made manufacturing.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? TURN ALL THE LIGHTS DOWN NOW. SMILIN FROM EAR TO EAR (IM FEELIN THIS)
Robots are no longer replacing labor, they're replacing intelligence. Once they catch up with us, the fantasy that there will be "new, unimagined jobs" will quickly fade. They will fix themselves and they will create art. There's nothing special about us.
>>73286665
> Is the robotization of our society good or bad?
No
>in America.
Why the fuck do you even care about America?
But for Germany would be great if you stop importing low/no skilled immigrants.
America and Germany are both "western" countries but still completely different.
>>73293047
Introducing driveless cars is accepting the fact that humans are not responsible enough to drive the damn things themselves
Kinda like Mama Merkel Has to Import Horny Muslims Over because your country has a low birth rate and your men are all spineless Cucks
>>73286665
It will take longer and longer to get enough qualifications to get a job.
More people will get into higher education.
PhD will become the new Bachelor's.
More people will start a family in their late 30's. Birth rates will drop further.
>>73286665
Good, because no longer will we need to rely on an infinite population growth to sustain our economy. One of the biggest pro-refugee arguments BTFO.
>>73293180
This is true, they've already been composing music.
Only a matter of time before they start writing novels.
>>73286665
>robotization
Sounds damn good to me!
>>73288347
>Ever heard of programs that write new code for machines and optimize them?
As a programmer, this is a meme. Even the most advanced AIs are shit at testing relatively simple code written by humans.
Even if some magical AI could write code, why would it write it and how would it come up with the specifications? Someone's going to have to write the shit the 'AI' can interpret to write the code. Might as well make a programming language that's easier to write.
>>73293285
Nope, muslims and niggers will rape everything in sight like wild animals
But you would know all about that :)
>>73293462
Dude wikked tat
In many first world countries there are already more labourers than labour.
The UK in late 2015 had 850,000 people on welfare for unemployment (and this is a very restricted benefit, for people seeking work - not the disabled) and over 1 million total unemployed (i.e. those on savings, etc. Still not including disabled, elderly, children, and so on.) not to mention people in work seeking a better job.
It had 750,000 job openings during this period.
Unless Robots magically create more jobs than they supplant there's still a problem with (a) the expectation everyone capable work a full time job, or (b) refusal of a basic-income like system instead of forcing people onto a benefit that forces them to seek jobs that, statistically, some of them will never get. (if all 750k jobs were filled by those 850k, unlikely but for example sake, that's 100k people still being told "apply for more jobs or you'll be sanctioned!" when there's nothing to apply for.)
>>73288600
hunger leads to revolutions
If you keep them pacified just enough there is little will to fight. The population is ultimately the source of their wealth.
>>73293047
>Driving is a deterministic problem. 99% of accidents are caused by human error, mostly errors of concentration, bad judgment or simply not paying attention. These errors can all be eradicated through a driverless car.
Self driving cars will probably do better in controlled environments, I'll give you that.. My point is, however, that traffic tends to be anything that. Have you ever been to Amsterdam? Any computer system programmed to safely drive a car will simply shut down and refuse to function in the centre of Amsterdam, because there is no such thing as safe and rational traffic behavior in that place.
>The few new errors such as sensor failures or irrational decisions by the software may cause some new accidents,
How can you expect software to always make the correct rational decision in an irrational environment? Again: Pedestrians and cyclists in cities tend not to act rational, safe or responsible..
>but overall we can pretty much be sure that the number of accidents in total will drop like a stone.
That's a pretty big assumption imo, and it still leaves the question open of who will be responsible if something DOES go wrong?
>It is a bit like manufacturing with robots - they are a lot more efficient and precise than hand made manufacturing.
I'm not entirely convinced.. Many more refined areas of manufacture, such as watch making, are still largely done by hand.
>>73293777
Sounds like the uk could use more pakis to labour
>>73286665
>What jobs will people do who are replaced by robots?
Soylent Green
>>73293975
>How can you expect software to always make the correct rational decision in an irrational environment? Again: Pedestrians and cyclists in cities tend not to act rational, safe or responsible..
Because robots are faster, better and can play through scenarios better than humans. That is why software is also better at flying planes than humans.
>>73286665
>Is the robotization of our society good or bad?
Long term?
Yes. We'll need robots to help us explore ideas and the universe.
Short term?
Definitely not. We're heading for singularity and we're impoverishing people with them.
We need to educate our citizens up to a strandard with them, otherwise no one will have work. We also have to work out a way of stopping robots from becoming better than us with no way of knowing how they'd act.
One day we could use them to work with, when we modify humanity to cope with them. This could be both educationally and genetically.
One day we'll need them to take us to the next level. I mean literally take "us" to the next level by making us become indistinguishable from the technology with nanobots.
That's the only way we'll be able to keep a check on AI, by being more intelligent than them.
Then AI will need us for situations where they could be destroyed, such as magnetic pole reversals, etc.
At this point in time they need us to develop them. But if we're not careful, they will not need us and use us for their bidding alone. We need to make it so they have to allow us to be human.
Then we'll be one and the same.
Why will they need us?
Because we have the best "computer" we know of. Then we can improve both of our computers.
>>73291112
You don't ,need robotic teachers, you just need a highly effective online education system to get rid of most of the garbage clogging our current education system.
They will never go for it though, since school is a political institute that's used just as much for indoctrination as it is for education.
http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt
/thread
>>73294218
>Robots will be better than the people that programmed them
>Ever
>>73294218
>That is why software is also better at flying planes than humans.
It's always overseen by humans though.
A semi-automated car and an entirely automated car are quite different things. (although the time for manual takeover in the event of a computer error compared to a plane is obviously lower.)
>>73289529
>It has already been demonstrated that the cars have no creativity,
for now.
They need ai.
>>73294298
Isn't Finland one of the best educated countries in the world?
>>73287461
Says the guy who can't even form a coherent sentence .
Robots or Pakis, pick one.
>>73294535
wouldn't the SWAT teams have to be robots too
>>73294345
>Robots will be better than the people that programmed them
>not understanding algorithms
They could get to a stage where they have a run-away effect intelligence wise.
They'll essentially program themselves.
We already see that with some computer programs that "learn" changes in the environment. Hell, look at Tay.
>>73294350
>It's always overseen by humans though.
That is done so people are more relaxed. But it really isn't necessary any more. A plane could start, fly and land fully without any intervention of a pilot.
>>73286665
The negatives have been said by every generation after every new invention yet society gets better and easier to live in every generation.
>>73292652
>being this retarded
literally every car manufacturer is working on it, trucking is a billion dollar industry, they want it to happen because a automated truck doesnt have to stop to shit, eat or sleep
there is a lot of money being put into this, it's not going away any time soon
i'm sorry that you came to america to drive truck abdhul, but your days are numbered, you will have to go back
>>73286665
At a certain point humans are cheaper than robots. Automation is worth it when you consider the scale and multiple jobs it replace. Until you get to fully sentient beings it will not replace an individual.
A robot is really a shitload of sensors. Anyone in the world that works with electronics knows that sensors eventually fail. It will vastly expand a newer industry dedicated to fixing these things.
At a certain point, the cost of a robot/equipment exceeds the labor produced by a human. This is the story of 3rd world countries.
>>73294535
>implying the women wouldn't have robot husbandos.
>>73294218
>That is why software is also better at flying planes than humans.
So why is it that we tend to have not one, but two human pilots on most flights to make sure the Autopilot doesn't fuck up? And why do airfields and carriers typically not allow landing on autopilot?
>>73294389
Which is probably why he understands better than most that schools aren't all about education..
>>73294715
No, Robots always will be a bucket of bolts, nothing more
AI is only as good as you can program it. I don't care about Algorithms because the simple truth is that a Skynet like AI is pure science fiction. We will only ever get Tay, or an AI that can potentially be as smart as a human being, nothing more
who gives a shit if robot/ai drivers are still in this post conception phase it gives me a fuck load of easy topics to write about for uni
100% of my essays/reports have been about ai ethics feels good man
>>73294782
In the kind of safety margins you want for an aircraft, it's pretty necessary.
Getting a computer to follow two radio beams to a runway is quite easy. Making it do so when one of the engines has fallen off, or some of the controls aren't working so you've got to substitute others (i.e. a UA232 type situation) is rather more difficult, especially since you can't immediately predict the issue.
And of course god help you if there's a sensor failure.
>>73295011
>implying that means anything to feminists
>>73286665
I want cool robot arms and sheeit so no
>>73294959
You're really working for those 5 cents, aren't you?
I already said this, and I will say this again:Your target audience(Retards and people who expect others to do everything for them) Is Not found here. Go to reddit and make a progressive thread there
>>73295073
>airfields and carriers typically not allow landing on autopilot?
This is partly down to the kind of radio system installed at the runway itself, instead of a flaw with the autopilot.
(There's no point setting up an expensive ILS system at a regional airport that gets one flight a day.)
>>73295073
>So why is it that we tend to have not one, but two human pilots on most flights to make sure the Autopilot doesn't fuck up?
It is not about the autopilot, it is a government jobs program. It is a government requirement to have two pilots in the cockpit. If there were no regulation, be assured a lot of planes would already be flown without pilots.
>>73294782
>A plane could start, fly and land fully without any intervention of a pilot.
right.
situation example: A hurricane arrives
How would automated vehicles cope with that?
It doesn't know what a hurricane is. It can't adapt to those situations.
Even when a hurricane is programmed for - it still cannot adapt to unique situations. Instead it'll treat it as something much more minor.
An automated car near a tornado or a downed electrical wire?
What about an oil spill?
Sure it will react to the change in conditions, but it won't realise that those conditions are there.
full automation requires AI.
We are a few decades from that.
Taking into account the avoidance of singularities, more than a century actually.
We need to understand that AIs are intelligent. They think pretty similarly to you and I.
If we implement AIs, they need to be peers, not simply tools.
>>73287376
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ygFeywrvjc
>>73294345
computers are already smarter then niggers
>>73294916
>The negatives have been said by every generation after every new invention yet society gets better and easier to live in every generation.
The singularity is not like any situation we've had before though.
Your essentially creating children when you're creating an AI. An AI learns, an AI adapts, an AI is alive itself.
>>73286665
(You) got jewed
>>73295273
It's a bit of a stretch to call automated systems 'better' than humans, like that German anon did, if you cannot actually use them practically (or at all) in all situations where a human pilot would land a 747 safely.. But maybe that's just me.
>>73286665
>Be me, horse, 1800s
>pretty sweet deal, loads of jobs
>plough them fields, pull them carriages
>shit all over the streets, don't give a fuck
>car invented
>unreliable, loud, dangerous
>never going to catch on
20 years later:
>turned into glue
Humans are going to be almost completely obsolete by 2040. If you're not already rich then you'd better prepare your anus
>>73295108
>We will only ever get Tay, or an AI that can potentially be as smart as a human being, nothing more
Never say never anon.
I think it will happen eventually, just not any time soon.
I've often wondered if we'll end up cheating our way to AI by simulating someone's brain, we're not far off having the computing power to do so.
>>73295403
>smarter then
>>73295326
>situation example: A hurricane arrives
>How would automated vehicles cope with that?
It would not need to. It could probably deal with it the same way human pilots deal with it. HOWEVER, there is always the chance to fly a plane remotely from the ground.
When the Russians launched their first space shuttle in the 1980s, they actually had it fly completely without pilots and landed it remote controlled. If it worked in the 1980s, sure as hell we can do it now. Do you know how many military drones fly and land and start every day?
>>73295326
An automated car is easier to write off than a plane, especially because the costs of a crash are lower. A plane with 450 people goes down, that's millions of dollars of plane and airline stock fucked.
A car hits a tree and 2 people die, it's sad but it could've happened anyway. Automated planes need perfection, automated cars only need good enough.
Just you fucking wait, once the shit this the fan, and AI becomes sentient, ITLL BE LIKE FUCIJG SKYNET. And they'll kill us all, and no one will realise it's all THEIR FAULT. They should have listened.
>>73295489
Don't hold your breath
>>73295545
Damn it, I type too fast
>>73295351
Need this for our EU borders to keep illegals out. Thanks.
>>73294959
I certainly hope they're heavily consulting with maintenance shop managers AND mechanics or they're heading for a a giant clusterfuck like you have no idea.
>>73286665
>driverless cars
>5 years
great meme
google can't even get maps navigation to work worth a fuck
take one different turn than suggested it it don't work , it can't even recalculate your route
driverless cars are just a meme ,nothing more
>>73295533
>A car hits a tree and 2 people die, it's sad but it could've happened anyway. Automated planes need perfection, automated cars only need good enough.
Except that when the first automated car kills 2 people, it will be millions of dollars woth of Google (or whatever the manufacturer) stock fucked as well.. The car itself might be less expensive, but the impact the first of these crashes will have on public opinion and financial markets are probably not to be underestimated.
>>73295472
Wisely spoken, Nigel.
The sales for vaseline will explode.
>>73289414
R A R E
A
R
E
>>73295556
Yeah, like I said, not any time soon.
I'm a software engineer, I'm well aware of how difficult it would be even though AI isn't my area of expertise.
>>73295260
>calls others retards
>is clearly retarded
ok then retard, lets ignore the fact that all the top vehicle manufactures are spending billions on this
![Angered+statement+i+identify+as+a+homocidal+anti+meatsack+droid+where+s+_54498e2a568b4fe35ebd5b027e6371a3[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NA7qMZ4.jpg "Angered+statement+i+identify+as+a+homocidal+anti+meatsack+droid+where+s+_54498e2a568b4fe35ebd5b027e6371a3[1].jpg")
>>73295108
>as smart as a human being
And when hardware doubles in speed two years later, what then? It remains exactly the same?
Stop lying to yourself meatbag
>>73295749
>Luxembourgh
>Rare
On the Ivory Coast maybe..
>>73286665
I welcome it because it'll deprecate current PAYG pension systems that are nothing but intergenerational theft
robots will be great because socialism will come quicker.
its hilarious how anti-technology you conservashits are. muhh jobs.
>>73294541
>>73295508
Making an automated plane or shuttle is easy, making a practical automated airliner is an entirely different matter.
>>73295472
dont be delusional horses are still used and prized today only the retarded ones get turned to glue its impossible for horses to become obsolete let alone humans
>>73295794
Whatever makes you feel better, I got a real job and I will never, ever, buy a fucking driveless car
Enjoy your 5 cents per post, but it's not going to be easy here
>>73295795
Oh no, a japanese poster called me a "Meatbag", whatever will I Do?
>>73295855
yeah and retards like you will all be thrown in the gulag and sterilized.
I don't know why so many useless people fantasize about socialism. It won't be good for you.
>>73295011
They'd see the robots as a patriarchal tool of oppression. The first bot's would be male-designed fembots, unless the malebots were released immediately after the fembots feminists would go berserk. Sexbots don't even exist and yet some feminists are ALREADY trying to ban them.
>>73295795
HK47 is the most redpilled robot in sci fi history.
>>73295108
>I don't care about Algorithms because the simple truth is that a Skynet like AI is pure science fiction.
You're a fool then to ignore algorithms. Eventually the algorithms could solve problems with more algorithms.
We already have calculators that can do this. Now imagine something programmed to use many algorithms for active purposes. They essentially adapt just like life.
>We will only ever get Tay, or an AI that can potentially be as smart as a human being, nothing more
Technological growth is exponential.
Robots are essentially a system. Systems change over time when the conditions change. If they start changing the conditions themselves, that could cause growth in AI.
Just like humanity grew from single celled organisms. Oh and those cells grew from non biological systems themselves.
Proof that systems in any form can change and adapt.
To understand robots, you must understand life and systems itself. Essentially our brains are algorithmic and took alot longer to become intelligent because nothing physically programmed it other than survival of the fittest. Robots have that AND human programming.
>>73295795
>Moore's law
>still applicable
>>73296082
be jealous of their superior figurine collections and cry yourself to sleep while masturbating to naruto?
>>73286665
All the normal STEM jobs, choose any. Machine can make only monkey works - like digging holes, selling foods, writing music or drawing pictures.
>>73295969
yes abdhul, you were brought to america to drive truck
in 5 years you will have to go back
>>73296273
>lasted for decades, will suddenly stop because reasons
>inb4 muh silicon limit
already transitioning to Ge and GaAs and beyond that to metamaterials
>>73295139
>100% of my essays/reports have been about ai ethics feels good man
What's your argument?
I think we should consider them as peers or potential equals (or even competitors). That's the safest treatment. However, I also want to give them life that will benefit us and at the same time themselves.
>>73296198
You will see none of that in your lifetime
Why don't you focus on some real problems for a change, you cunt? None of that will happen anyways with liberals and muslims running around when they throw your country back into the dark ages
>>73286665
I don't understand why people say robots and automation is a solution for no pension and low birthrate.
Robots don't pay taxes.
>>73296413
My My, that's a racist statement if I ever saw one
You better watch out what you say, or Trudeau will personally come to your house and take all your weed away and kick you out of your house so he can house refugees there :)
>>73296417
It has already stopped. Clock speeds have stagnated as they reach the limits of silicone.
>>73287376
You write it wrong. You write "outposts" - it's mistake, it means, that someone could pass it. The right is "machine guns with movement-recognition system".
![B7a6qJmCAAEoSMd[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/cDg7wSN.png "B7a6qJmCAAEoSMd[1].png")
>>73296452
>multiculturalism is a plot from the future to prevent skynet
>>73287152
>STEM
lol
>>73296524
>Robots don't pay taxes.
Businesses do.
I think the real threat isn't robots trying to exterminate humans; it's the unemployment caused by plp being replaced by bots. It would be good for society as a whole, but some plp might be surprised to find that their jobs can be replaced by machines as technology advances. That's why its important to do a highly valued job that involves complex creativity, abstract thought, and ability to handle unforeseen circumstances, so that you won't be replaced with a bot sometime in the future.
>>73296585
And instead they transitioned to paralellism and offloading to specialized subprocessors to improve speed.
If you doubt me, just replace your processor with a pentium 4 and think of the savings!
>>73296567
good thing we can own guns in Canada
>>73291575
Are you 12 or something?
Your shitty video game was absolutely terrible, btw.
>>73295533
>A car hits a tree and 2 people die, it's sad but it could've happened anyway. Automated planes need perfection, automated cars only need good enough.
Well they are not good enough.
There are waaaaaay too many environmental factors not taken into account.
It needs to be adaptable otherwise it will leave us susceptible to any holes in it's programming.
It only sees the specific behaivour you program it to see. Think of how many different mechanisms we see on one average drive. I'm talking the ability to understand why it should avoid certain things.
Otherwise it will not be able to judge between two things well enough. There are just too many things to be taken into account.
What if it sees a dog and a person and must hit one?
Would it choose a dog or a human?
Most people would avoid the human (kek unless they look like a cunt)
A computer needs to learn that significant difference of value in life.
It sounds disgusting, but all humans would normally choose the dog.
>>73295108
You're retarded
>>73296636
They can't make up for billions of jobs that would get lost.
good. why the fuck should people have to work if we don't need to? we could focus on other things. robots are the gateway to paradise.
as for the human need to work, well, the government can just pay people to exercise. imagine if the only job available was getting ripped n lean.
>>73296979
>Tax robot labour at 50% of the wage that was paid to the replaced employee
>Give proceeds to that employee.
I oversimplify but you get the idea. It makes robots less encouraging (requiring greater advantages before transition) but once it happens they're paying less overall for the same [or better] work while humans are being paid half the money for 100% less work.
>>73296899
No, I'm not 12 because I remember pre ordering Fallout Tactics, with F2 being my first game I ever played
F4 was a great game, GOTY with all the Garbage thrown out of the door these days by AAA devs, but it's love it or hate it situation
>>73296944
Depends on his race
>>73296964
I'm glad that a country that literally became an african shithole out of it's own will tells me that I am "Retarded" Without proving how
Don't you have a prayer to make or something? You don't want to be stoned to death, do you?
>>73296452
>You will see none of that in your lifetime
>Why don't you focus on some real problems for a change, you cunt? None of that will happen anyways with liberals and muslims running around when they throw your country back into the dark ages
Because we're closer than you think to singularity.
And we need to educate the masses on this immediately before it's too late and already starts development.
You cannot simply think short term only. You need short term and long term planning.
Don't you see why there are people going batshit in the middle east? They are terrified by our ignorance of the change occurring around us. It's enslaving us already without robots.
We are going too fast and ALL humanity must decelerate to cope with this.
Progress for progress sake is stupid.; It's like travelling an uncharted ocean with no estimation of what could be on the other side. You could get lost and drown.
>>73297169
>F4 was a great game
It's legitimately horrible in every single way.
>>73297398
>Something I don't Like is Terrible, regardless of how much effort it took to create and how many people like it
Tumblr plz
>>73297223
>>73289414
I keep seeing this logic, but it seems to be poorly thought out.
If everyone has these advanced skills, theb they won't be highly sought after anymore. If thats the case, whos to say these "advanced" positions won't just become the wageslave positions.
Basically, you have to learn more to get paid what a fast food worker gets now. Seems like a shit deal to me.
>>73296585
>Clock speeds have stagnated as they reach the limits of silicone.
Clock speed is one thing. Moore's law is still not broken. We still haven't gone 3dimensional with chip tech. Nor have we used multi-core processing to the limit.
---
In 2015, Intel and Micron announced 3D XPoint,[75] a non-volatile memory claimed to be up to 1,000 times faster, up to 1,000 times higher endurance and similar in density compared to NAND. Production is scheduled in 2016.
Even if Moore's law ends as it stands by 2025-2030, growth will still continue.
>>73297381
That's nice, but you won't be talking that way when Sharia Law is enacted
What are you going to do about it?
>>73297575
>Moore's law is still not broken.
Except it did break. In 2011.
>>73290248
it won't go psycho, but there's a good chance something much smarter than the smartest person will disagree with a lot of what the elite are doing.
And then the AI will have to somehow take power from them.
>>73297575
>We still haven't gone 3dimensional with chip tech. Nor have we used multi-core processing to the limit.
nor have we changed the physical materials of the chips.
I think biotech may be the next step. But I just don't know enough about it yet.
>>73297575
Throwing more raw computational power isn't going to bring about AI
>>73296944
>Well they are not good enough.
Humans aren't good enough, we still let them drive.
>What if it sees a dog and a person and must hit one?
It's not that big a deal. It's one dog or one person. From the most cynical perspective, it doesn't matter in the long run.
Small numbers of people being killed by an automated car making a human-like mistake can be written off if there's an overall net positive to using them over human drivers. (i.e. if the number of people killed by stupid mistakes is reduced by more than the number of people killed by poor automated decisions is increased, also factoring in that a human in an automated car can get work done on a computer or whatever.)
Don't confuse me for a strong advocate of automated cars. I'm just saying perfection isn't necessary, especially in the consumer sector. You'll never have perfection. Even a perfect automated car can't save you from everything out there - but neither can a perfect human driver.
Remember how comically unsafe the first human driven cars were, or the first aircraft.
>>73287709
This, also the automated car wont go anywhere past novelty. First one to cause an accident will kill along with its occupants the fad. With no driver , assuming they kept up on maintenance, you cant sue the car owner, the manufacturer would be at fault.
No manufacturer is going to take on that kind of risk.
>>73286665
Learn to fix broken robots.
There's will always be jobs that robots cannot perform in society.
>>73297673
>Except it did break. In 2011.
No humans stopped thinking mate.
It's clear we're closing our minds in the technological industry. According to something I read on /g/ they subdivide the engineering of computers so much that they are beginning to lack cohesiveness.
Why did they divide it so much?
Because humans are reaching their limits. Not computers.
>>73297485
General consensus was it was a huge disappointment, though. And the consumer shouldn't care how much effort people spent on a product. Besides, the world was small, loading times ridiculous, graphics shit, performance shit, glitches everywhere, barely any variety (location designs, enemies), literally lacked mechanics the older games had (complex conversation system, repairing weapons and armor etc.)
Pure shit game with outdated engine.
>>73291253
I'm pretty sure in an accident per car ratio this would be incorrect. You go watch thsee things run people off the road on youtube because of other cars passing too closley.
>>73297920
Story is also very insulting to adult men.
>>73286665
The purpose of jobs is not to occupy a persons time but to complete a task.
Obviously automation is ALWAYS good and only a complete and utter fool would think otherwise.
The fact that we still waste peoples time working the register at fastfood joints when robots can do the same jobs easily/better and for 1/100th the cost is just retarded.
I am pretty sure the majority of fastfood workers would happily take a slightly decrease in their wages for robot maintenance if it meant not having to waste 40 hours a week being the robot.
TLDR : Automation is always good. Always.
>>73297920
>My opinion=Fact
Yeah, no
Fallout 4 is a GOTY, nobody cares if you agree or not
I hate how every special snowflake's opinion matters all of a sudden now that everyone has access to the internet. People can't comprehend that Not liking something does not make it bad by definition, but they will school you on what is "Pure Shit" Anyways
>TFW I realize that Germany is Talking About Scat
>>73297894
>According to something I read on /g/
And according to people actually in the industry, you can't make chip elements smaller than the atoms that they are made up of.
>>73298149
>I am pretty sure the majority of fastfood workers would happily take a slightly decrease in their wages for robot maintenance if it meant not having to waste 40 hours a week being the robot.
The general notion that we need as many robot repairers as we do fast food workers is quite ridiculous though.
Unless each one only repairs one robot a month and is paid 5% of his old wage + basic income, or something.
>>73298167
>GOTY
videogames, especially hyper-commercial videogames, are all shit.
Fallout 4 is garbage for teenagers with no ambition.
>>73297609
>That's nice, but you won't be talking that way when Sharia Law is enacted
>What are you going to do about it?
Mate I'd be relieved.
Because anything to curb technological development. That's a far greater threat than something that wants to give men power back to men (because alot of womenz are not worthy of the work they are given, they expect things handed onto a plate for them.)
Personally, I'm already trying to implement a way to destroy our restriction to free speech.
I'm gonna do something that will get men off their ass to do something about it.
You will have to wait and see.
Oh and don't think I'm anti woman either. I'm doing this because I don't want them bashed and raped by apes. My sisters used to be against me, now they've seen the light. They support me now.
