Articles, Blog

The Truth About Self-Driving Cars

The Truth About Self-Driving Cars


– Imagine a 747 crashing and
killing everyone on board. Now imagine it happening once a week, every week, spread out over a year. If this were the norm, would
you set foot on an airplane? This seems absolutely crazy, but that’s how many
people human drivers kill in just the U.S. each year. Globally, that number is over one million. – Most of the accidents
are caused by human error. Drinking and driving, distracted driving, these are all human factors
that lead to accidents. So, autonomous vehicles
can improve safety. – Robot cars hold the promise of saving tens of thousands of lives every year. (suspenseful music) But that is just one of the ways in which they can utterly transform society. Welcome to Uprising. Fear not. – The robots are already here. – So, it’s in autopilot now. It’s maxing out my speed
at 30 miles an hour. And you can see the
cars on all sides of me on the control panel here. – Was that the car
breaking or was that you? – That was the car breaking. So, I haven’t really done anything. (light music) – The world of transportation and mobility is being turned upside-down. So the question now is, as we go forward, can we direct this
towards a better future? – It’s hard to imagine a
technology with greater capacity to change the world than autonomous cars. In addition to saving lives, it could have massive
environmental benefits by reducing congestion
and increasing efficiency. – And we have, overall, a
city with much less land devoted to roads, much less
land devoted to parking. And we use those lands in a
way that people will enjoy, whether it’s park space or playgrounds. It will mean that we have
better transportation, more equitable access. – And those are just the
changes we can think of now. Many of the changes it will bring are just unimaginable at this point. Do you think anyone anticipated
drive-thru restaurants or the suburbs when the
automobile was invented? And on the topic of
unintended consequences, it’s just as possible
that autonomous vehicles could actually make things worse. – If our automated cars
are personally owned, in other words, if we just
take these automated cars and just superimpose them
on today’s usage patterns and ownership patterns,
it will lead to a future in which the cars are used twice as much. They’d use more energy,
they take more space, probably lead to more sprawl. And for the simple reason
that if the car is automated, you don’t have to pay
attention to driving. You can treat the car as a hotel, as an entertainment center, office, and therefore, why wouldn’t
you spend more time in it? – People can commute for longer distances, creating more congestion, so we have to be cautious about that. That could be a negative impact on cities. – How society uses autonomous
cars will determine the kind of future we have. And to get the future we want, we might need to change
how we think about cars. – The beautiful picture of
sustainable transportation of automated cars in the
future being positive depends on two factors. One is that we move beyond
personal ownership of vehicles, and two, that the vehicles are pooled. In other words, more than one person is riding in them at a time. Pooling really is the answer. Optimus Ride is a company focused on what we call geofenced autonomy, so the ability to deploy
vehicles at low speed, 25 miles per hour or
less in a geofenced area. That could include a industrial park like the Brooklyn Navy Yard that we’re in, it could include a university campus, these are all geofenced locations. So we think that the introduction
of self-driving vehicles can start in those markets, and over time, we can expand the level of complexity that we go into. – There are already self-driving
cars of various levels. There’s automatic braking,
there’s adaptive cruise control. There are even cars that will change lanes and maneuver in traffic or park for you. And more and more people
are adapting to car-sharing and pooling through human
driven services like Lyft. Society is making little
moves in the right direction. – The beautiful future that I envision does depend on automation. But this future, it’s
not all automated cars. It includes the scooters
and electric bikes and walking, buses and rail. It’s a vision that moves away
from personal car ownership to a suite of mobility services. And the other thing to think about, too, is that this is going to
be a generational thing. We’re not going to have
self-driving vehicles everywhere next week. It will take a generation. It will take 25 to 30 years to do that. The ability to have a
fully autonomous vehicle which is able to drive in every condition, that’s more than 10 years away. – The car was invented to move us around, to free us from other limitations. But in the last 100 years, it has become its own sort of prison, keeping us locked up in freeways and searching for parking spots. It also puts us in a
tremendous amount of danger. Autonomous vehicles
offer us the opportunity to escape that prison. Will we be smart enough to take it? (dramatic music) Thanks for watching this
episode of Uprising. Please like and subscribe. It really helps us grow our channel as well as tell more stories about people who are thinking differently
and changing the world.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

100 thoughts on “The Truth About Self-Driving Cars

  1. Not gonna happen! What happens when you mix self driving cars with human driven cars? What's gonna happen to all those driving jobs? Who is going to accept the liability for all of the damage that these cars can and will cause. It will take you 200 years to make the changeover.

  2. Just based on all the negative comments here, I'd say you're going to meet so much resistance that 200 years to implement this may be a bit optimistic.

  3. Driverless cars would be good if it truly is increasing the user's full potential and allowing them to live a more free and fulfilling life. For instance for elderly, the disabled and people under the influence of various substances who have a harder time driving. On the other hand for most people it would ultimately hinder and worsen their quality of life as one would now be limited on their ability to travel based on when said automated vehicles arrive but also would now be subject to an algorithm, a corporation and the direct letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law. That doesn't mention the potential for black hat hackers to abuse this system for various malevolent reasons, some being fatal or the fact that societies that inhibit it's citizens or denizens ability to travel are usually more authoritarian. I can very well see scenarios where the government pushes mandates that one would not be able to use any such vehicles in the event that they are behind on for instance their taxes, various bills, unpaid fines, simply being Earth day.

    Also not to mention there's a certain joy and liberating feeling in being able to drive, independently, all on your own, to wherever the hell one would want to go. And yes of course one can die while driving, just like how one can perish from heart disease or complications from diabetes or unfortunately increasingly from taking one's own life. There's also the fact that in most urban and suburban areas there already is a way to travel from one place to another without needing to drive where one shares the vehicle with various strangers that exist, it is called a public bus, the train, or a Subway. So those are just some of my critiques and concerns on the matter but I do see that there can be some good uses for the concept.

  4. I understand the appeal to some people but to me its to dangerous. Even if they somehow make it so that these cars can't be hacked wirelessly I imagine poping the hood open to access the computer inside is probably as easy as crooks do today to steal parts. Thieves could then just send the car to the nearest chop shop. Also imagine a stalker/rapist could hack it while their victim goes inside a store or even while their in their house so when they use it next time they use it they pull up into their abductors garage for some "alone time". A terrorist could buy one legally and send it to purposely go on a rampage. The concept is cool but sadly like the flying car it has to much potential for abuse by the worse of humanity.

  5. Based on what authors came up to conclusion that self-driving car are better, safer, more convinient etc?

    Everyone has their own scheduling, personal, educational, professional, recreational, travel, leasure etc, etc, etc needs, and priorities.
    In 99.999% of those needs simply are not the carpooling scenario.
    So, one day car bots might become another little transportation instrument/alternative, but this is not a panacea for future lifestyles

  6. Sure I want a self-driving car!
    My self driving it. 😂😂
    I enjoy driving.
    I don't want some robot/computer doing it for me.
    I want to do it myself.
    When I had to get my vehicle fixed, I had a rental car that had a back-up camera.
    I never used it.
    I trusted myself.
    My daughter would say, "Mom, you have a back-up camera!"
    I said, "So…I trust my own eyes not a camera lens installed on the back of a car."
    Probably one day it will be standard on every single vehicle that there will be a back-up camera installed on that vehicle.
    I have always wanted to take a ride in a flying car.
    But….wouldn't the person who owns that vehicle have to have a pilot's license first?
    Flying cars would have to share the same air space as planes and helicopters.
    Just wanted to share my opinion.

  7. Google will donate to State if CA huge amount of money for "highway improvement". Just as Stanford once sold it's land to the State of CA who had Stanford "hold it in peptuity" for the State, Google will be responsible for monitoring n maintaining flow of traffic.
    Thus Google will control who and when you travel.
    Gas car will be banned from being on roads at same time as autonamous vehicles. Gas card may drive at 2am if your electronic generated travel permit is approved.
    The roads will be access-controlled by Google and cars powered n directed by Google tech.
    Don't worry, your Google Home, board approval required, will be in their gps network

  8. I'm done with this life on earth , I'm ready for God to salvage the ones he can and flush the rest down the drain.

  9. Mark my words the government will force you into this by banning your vehicles use. Then at the same time all motorcycles and such will also be banned because of "human error on the road" The government doesn't care that you and I enjoy driving ourselves we will be made out to be selfish and Earth killers and dangerous….. PS I'd love to see this buy back program when it happens they will just take the cars from people or fine/tax you into submission.
    Also there will be a TAX to have and maintain the self driving POS because it will become a right or something stupid.

  10. No more speeding and parking tickets. No more auto insurance. No more chauffeurs, Lift, Uber, and taxi drivers. No more independence or autonomy, either. Perhaps these cars will do the best in Asian countries? It seems more their style and way of being. You DO know that those controls can be hacked, and that the driver's control overridden by those doing the hacking — legally or illegally, don't you? Nuclear energy is THE WORST and most dangerous form of energy — let alone finding safe locals for the toxic waste produced by the. I think it's outdated. Will more nuclear power plants and the subsequent radiation fallout be at play here, with self-driving cars in the future, en masse? Don't you think (?) that this issue will need addressing at some point in the very near future? Nuclear power — cui bono? Personally, I like a nice solid classic car with a v8 growl and a punch to it — while the wind blows through my hair. Jussayin'.

  11. Underline key phrase at 3.35. The acquiring and disposing of private property at once will. Is entitled to all Americans under the Constitution.

  12. Its already bad enough that we are tracked everywhere we go via our phones and our cars. I see it as an infringement on our privacy already that cars are hooked up to wifi and the internet. Now imagine if they start putting self driving cars on the road and you wanted to go somewhere but since the company providing the self driving service to your car doesn't like where you want to go, it could refuse to take you there. Kind of like the way social media is restricting free speech. You can throw your phone out but you can't disconnect these modern cars from the internet and self driving ones are just another way to take away our freedoms!

  13. If the planes were equally secure as cars, there would be 6 deaths in planes in the USA per year.
    Cars drove 3,6 trillion vehicle-miles in 2017 whereas the planes only flew 7.8 million vehicle-miles.

  14. We are always resistant to change but progress always takes hold. You don’t think twice of an elevator Operator over non human operated one, or passenger planes that are mostly autonomous.

  15. Just REMEMBER who is or has programmed them…these cars will wind up killing more people…and there is an agenda…when man tries to become a god…rather than letting God be God it always always ends badly…since the beginning…

  16. All this automated stuff is gonna get smarter & smarter. Then they will REALISE that we are USING them for our conveniences, for our human safety, & our entertainment. Then they will kill us.

  17. You will still be able to own a vehicle. It's just that we will be less Dependance on having to own a vehicle. Purchase of services or rentals for vacations could become more common. I may not have a desire to own a vehicle if I can simply call up AI equivalent to UBER and have that take me to the where ever I want to go and not worry about parking. If ownership has negligible improvement on my access, I don't care much for ownership.

  18. Lol let’s say driving cars come.
    20% labour force laid off.
    Global recession, riots starving and war!
    Many deaths these cars will instigate!

  19. I’ve been driving for 50 years. I’d love to be able to travel without having to deal with morons who have no idea how to drive. Autonomous will be great, but ONLY if ALL vehicles are self driven. Mix the two, and it will be the usual chaos on the roads!

  20. We don’t need self driving cars. I will never trust a machine that drives my car for me. You know people can hack These self driving vehicles, right?

  21. So, what happens when we figure out how to stop everything that kills people, and extend the lives of everyone here, all while focusing on procreating? Can you say 'standing room only'?

  22. Self-driving cars would be wonderful for folks who can't drive because they are physically and/or mentally basically shot to hell. Cheers!

  23. Riddle me this. What will the car do when its under attack. Just yesterday i saw a Tesla driving its self. So i got in front of it and tapped my breaks. Spoiler alert! It didn't slow down. I saw the driver in the super tinted windows scrambling to take control and flip me off at the same time. So if i was to slam on the breaks would the robot really stop? What would happen if i where to block the road and the driver is asleep like you seen some idiots do, and i jack the idiot that has the super expensive car. Take it down the road and tear it apart to get the most valuable items from it. What then. A human should be able to whip it around or go around the obstacle, not a robot.

  24. I'll take the deaths and suffering! That simple. If you can't understand how dangerous this could be in someone's else's hand… Then you're the problem.

  25. The govts across the world will make driving so expensive it will become a luxury for the rich. Why would you need a self driving car if u are sitting in the car. Makes no sense.

  26. Automated transportation, is the answer to modern day transportation
    American demands, like privacy
    Speed, practicality, flexibility and the list goes on, but from what I can see the most important one is the fact tha you seem to be in absolute control of the situation while allowing you to relax
    Sit down and… Literally, enjoy the ride

    The downside is that when it comes out it will revolutionize the world but I don't see the ghettos going any where
    Plus this ease of technology advances
    Will only fuel the narcissist and entitlement of our weaker sex, bringing forth new waves of feminism if not stoped, if we don't face the monsters today they will surely destroy our civilization, the perfect example of this is Nancy Pelosi.

  27. All I can say is: Agenda 21. Its all about taking away our freedom, our sovereignty, which is almost gone any way. Self driving cars are the final nail in the coffin. The oligarchy elites want robots to replace all human workers with automation. If you think I sound like a conspiracy theorist, go down to Georgia and read the guidestones.

  28. This just won't work for me. How am I supposed to jump the railroad tracks in an autonomous car. I bet these cars won't be very good in the snow. Plus I like driving.

  29. I wish Freethink wouldn't tell people how to live their lives. Everyone is different. It might work for the city. But people who live in the burbs who have to run home from work to pick up their kids and go across town to get their kids to soccer practice on time, it just dose not work. Freethink dose not think about people with kids. They have one agenda and your lifestyle is not it.

  30. Born human not a computer, what would I learn. Why go to school, any. You will put everyone out of a job. People are good, stop calling everyone dumb.

  31. The safest thing a person can do is practice defensive driving and this happens through experience. This idea comes off as a socialist grab of transportation. These things might appeal to city drivers, but like everything else in city environments, it would deteriorate our quality of life and autonomy and degrade freedom of movement. I would like to leave Los Angeles because too many people are concentrated in one place, ensuring they live lives in an ideological bubble as well. Once regulations come in, as California is want to do, it would remove freedoms for others in more rural areas. And the carpooling idea illustrates that. Looks good for social engineering but not for individual freedoms.

  32. Liberals in the 20th century. "You don't need guns!" Liberals of the 21st century". You don't need to own a car!"

  33. Who are these dickless limp wrists that are afraid to drive their own vehicle.
    These simps are guaranteed to destroy liberties and freedoms.
    You afraid to drive ?
    Take the fukin bus you pussies.

  34. a CNC punch press a CNC welding machine these are good things Autonomous car no thank you cars should always remain manually driven and I'm pretty sure I am not alone in this opinion I am not such an invalid that I can't drive a vehicle for myself

  35. REASON NUMBER 4 – DISGUSTING USEFUL IDIOTS OF THE DRIVERLESS PROPAGANDA EVERYWHERE

    For example, Obama believes the stupid driverless propaganda! Unbelievable, the man must be stupid!

    www.youtube/watch?v=P31Fl8b…

    He believes this :

    computers never get tired, distracted nor drunk and we put aside the fact that humans never get computer viruses, cannot be hacked, cannot get frozen

    software nor hardware failure, a conventional car cannot have broken sensors nor servo engines because there are none

    my comment under Obama driverless video :

    The cause of the crash can be out of the car (fallen tree, animal, pedestrian, etc..)

    If the cause of the accident was in a car, we could analyse it this way :

    1. conventional vehicle with driver. (the old one, without driverless functions, without any sensors)

    cause of the crash in the car can be :

    the human driver OR the technical, mechanical mistake in the car

    2. driverless vehicle.

    The cause of the accident can be :

    the central computer failure (hardware/software) or sensor failure or technical, mechanical mistake in the car

    there is no central computer nor sensors in case 1., there is no human driver in claim 2.

    Human driver is the fault in 90% accidents in case 1.

    How does this idiot Obama know the driverless car would have 90% fewer crashes? It would mean,

    a central computer nor sensors cannot ever break down!

    What a nonsense!

    Are there no hardware failures, is there no frozen software, no viruses nor hackers?

    The car jumps over the holes in the road; there can be very cold or very hot weather or very high air humidity. The computer in a vehicle must break down more often than a computer in an office does.

    The computer in an office often stops working.

    Obama is not using his brain; he only repeats driverless propaganda. He is a useful idiot!

    According to the research of University in Michigan driverless cars will be 5x more likely to crash than human drivers!

    The next point is – 90% of accidents in the traffic were caused by human error – only 70% of that humans were drivers of the vehicle (the rest were pedestrians, passengers, people who committed suicide by staying in front of the oncoming train, etc…)

    Human error is not equal to driver error.

    REASON NUMBER 5 – DRIVING YOUR CAR IS ONE OF THE MOST SECURE ACTIVITIES YOU CAN DO IN FACT!

    You say 35.000 car deaths in the USA per year, right? LIE !!!!

    The whole truth is :

    car occupants – 13.000 deaths

    pickup and SUV occupants – 9000 deaths

    large truck occupants – 600 deaths

    motorcyclists – 4700 deaths

    pedestrians – 5376 deaths

    bicyclists – 817 deaths

    total 35.000 deaths in 2015 in the USA

    www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/…

    //umich.edu/~umtriswt/PDF/UMT…

    There are almost three mil deaths in the USA per year; traffic accidents are number 7 in preventable causes of death.

    smoking – kills 500.000 Americans yearly (could be banned immediately)

    obesity – 300.000 deaths

    accidental injuries hobby work sports 130.000 ends

    alcohol 90.000 deaths

    firearms accidents 35.000

    drugs and intoxications etc….

    1,2 mil traffic deaths worldwide? There are 150 mil birth and 50 mil deaths yearly worldwide.

    Overpopulation plus 100 mil people. To be clear.

    You need to drive your car for 500.000.000 miles to get into a traffic accident (not 100 millions as Musk lied to promote his autopilot). If you drive 15.000 miles per year, you have to drive for 33.000 years to get into a fatal traffic accident statistically! Being in your bathroom is more dangerous than driving your car in fact!

    REASON NUMBER 6 – DRIVING IN WINTER

    I live in a family house that is on a hill (in a city) the street where I live goes 17% uphill app. 700 meters.

    There is ice/snow on the road today.

    I am just curious what would the driverless car do? Would it drive uphill and skid backwards in the middle of the hill and demolish all the cars staying on the side of the road, or would it refuse to drive up the mountain?

    I always stop my car under the hill, check the snow with my foot – is it a powder, or sticky snow, is there ice under the snow? I watch pedestrians whether they can walk on the street without falling. I try to drive up the hill. If I failed, I would drive back to make the 2nd attempt at higher speed. Driving down the mountain, I wait a couple of minutes in front of my garage until all pedestrians leave the street (a quiet pedestrian could walk in the middle of the road without getting that I cannot entirely stop my car on ice).

    I don't believe the computer would manage the situation in the same way.

    REASON NUMBER 7 – MOTION SICKNESS, SERVICE, FALSE ADVANTAGES

    1.) driverless cars and motion sickness – people who are motion sick cannot be passengers in a small vehicle like a car (for example my wife), though being drivers would mean they got no symptoms.

    Driverless cars would make more people motion sick. (the incidence of action sickness could increase from 8% to 30%)

    2.) service of shared cars How would the service be done? Some mistakes cannot be recognised without the testimony of the owner. For example, my air-condition stopped working twice daily for a minute. It would work during the service-check. There would be no owner of the car to say this to mechanics. Therefore, this mistake in the driverless car wouldn't be recognised by the mechanics because the vehicle is shared.

    I know mistakes in my car, I wouldn't make a long trip with this kind of error. What about the shared driverless vehicle? The air condition would break down in Death Valley.

    3.) Driverless propaganda says the people could work in the car. What a nonsense! It would make the people motion sick. The people should watch the road in front of the car all the time!

    Why don't the people work in taxis today? Because a small vehicle shakes itself, there are centrifugal forces in bendings; there are holes in the road, so the car jumps over them, etc… The passenger wouldn't read more than one email if the vehicle moved.

    4.) the driverless propaganda says there would be fewer cars. But less existing cars would mean more cars on road and more congestion !!!

    A-home B-wife's work C-husbands work a-b = 10 km, b-c=10 km, c-a=10 km.

    2 conventional cars in the family would drive daily : a-b-a + a-c-a = 40 km

    1 driverless car in the family would drive a-b-a-c-b-a-c-a = 70 km daily

    5.) The people use their own car only 4% of the time (4% of 24 hours daily).

    So? I use my sofa 3% of the time, should I share it with the homeless? What's the point? I use my fireplace 0,1% of the time. So?

    6.) There could be less parking places/garages in the driverless future. They could be turned into parks and playgrounds for kids.

    WHAT ???? Do you want to turn my garages into playgrounds for foreign kids? My private property? Are you idiots? Most parking places are private property (owned by companies) I believe these programmers don't understand the purpose of a parking lot. I give you an example. Many people buy groceries in a supermarket. They all can load bags full of groceries into their cars at the same time in a parking lot. They couldn't load them into the tunks of driverless cars at one place for example at the entrance of the supermarket, be there no parking lot. The line-up and the amount of waiting time would be huge.

    If my car parked itself, I wouldn't know where it is. It could be too far to carry heavy bags there. Loading outside at the entrance is nonsense, there would be a couple of hundred people to pack their cars. It can only be done in a parking lot.

    REASON NUMBER 8 – THE PEOPLE DON'T WANT THEM

    almost 70% wouldn't get in a driverless car, 46% of Americans even don't want to share the road with them.

    9 out of 10 drivers wouldn't use the driverless car. People who are keen on driverless cars are no drivers in fact. They are kids, nerds, disabled people, neo-Marxists who hate private property, etc… I cannot imagine a blind person alone using the driverless car in fact. What if he wouldn't know the exact spelling of the destination address? How would he check it on a map? Wouldn't it be easier for him to explain it to the taxi driver? (for example, the street is close to the football stadium, second to the right etc…) How would the blind person get out of the car? Directly into heavy traffic? There would be no taxi driver to hold his arm and lead him onto the sidewalk. Who would help the disabled with their luggage be there no taxi driver?

    Are the elderly really keen on working with Smartphone with parkinsonism fingers? Omg…

    REASON NUMBER 9 – THE STUPID HORSE AND CARRIAGE ANALOGY AND STUPID "INEVITABLE

    NEW TECHNOLOGY" ARGUMENTS

    You can steer the horse, you can steer the car, but you cannot steer the driverless car in real time. BIG DIFFERENCE! Cars are more practical than the horses are, so the market has decided in favour of the cars.

    Driverless cars are completely impractical in comparison with classic cars, so the traditional car market should be banned, the human driving should be prohibited, and the people should be forced to use the stupid driverless crap against their will by the governments. Disgusting!

    Is every new technology inevitable? Must we use it?

    What about gas chambers?

    What about 3D – TV?

    Electronic paper and pen? Why do we still use the traditional paper and pen? They are practical!

    What about the shovel? Why do we still use it?

    What about the knife? You could cut the meat up with a laser (but how would you cut close to the bone? How would you open a plastic package with the laser without burning it ?)

    What about human cloning? Inevitable?

    Come on….

    The driverless cars are emasculating, imprisoning, anti-American and inhuman.

    https://amgreatness.com/201..

  36. The stupid idea of driverless cars should be banished. There are at least 9 reasons for that :

    REASON NUMBER 1 – THEY ARE IMPRACTICAL

    If you drove to the mountains in winter with your family in order to ski, and if your car without steering wheel stopped because of much snow on the road, would your family happily get out of the car, walk and freeze?

    How would you park at an exact location, for example, close to your back door in order to load something heavy, without having the steering wheel?

    How would you search your lost baby by aimlessly driving around?

    How would you escape criminals? One of them would stand in front of your car so the car wouldn't move.

    How would you hit a person that is shooting at you with that car?

    How would you pick up your wife staying on a sidewalk?

    Your car wouldn't know which person you want to pick up, where would it stop? How would you find her if she said "I am next to the football stadium" what would be her GPS address? I could find her by driving around the stadium in my "drivered car".

    How would you find a place without knowing its address? There are many places I can find by driving whereas I couldn't find them on a map.

    For example, I want to drive to a big pine-tree to the right of the river where I gave the first kiss to my wife! What's the GPS address of the tree? How could I find it on the map?

    How would you swerve to a restaurant/petrol station if you needed to stop for pissing? Do you believe that redefining your aim in the smartphone is more practical than one move with the steering wheel?

    What if your car drove you into a crowd of aggressive people, into a flood, or into a tornado?

    What if the destination address was one huge building (for example hospital), how would the car know where to stop? Traumatology, or paediatrics, or stomatology? Should I carry my child with fever 500 meters in the rain only because my car is driven by a goofy computer so it stopped in front of gynaecology instead of the

    paediatrics?

    How would I escape from a burning mall? The stupid car wouldn't drive across the pavement because it would be against the rules!

    What if my smartphone fell on the floor and broke down? Wouldn't I be able to use my car then?

    Would the computer in the car work in winter at very low temperatures? What about the thick layer of ice on sensors?

    What about the sensor being suddenly broken by a stone during the drive?

    Hackers? Frozen software? Hardware failure? Viruses? Servo engine fixed to your steering broken down?

    What about ice on road, freezing drizzling rain, sleet, hail?

    People who believe driving is nothing but a movement from A to B are dangerous simpletons. What can we expect them to do as next? Eating ban? Obesity kills 300.000 people in the USA yearly. Kitchens at home could be banned, restaurants banned, grocery stores banned, all the people could be fed by intraventricular infusion in the hospital. It would save lives, money, time, wouldn't it? The infusion is cheaper than the food is. Restaurants and supermarkets could be turned into parks and playgrounds. You could work (for example, write emails) while getting the infusion. Eating is like a horse and carriage, the infusion is modern technology! This would make people happier and healthy (NOT OMG!!!)?

  37. If any of satellites are not working properly, good luck with the self driving vehicles. Snow and lightning can effect the driving also.

  38. I think this self driving car is an opportunity for hackers to kidnap ppl and hold them for ransom, organs or human trafficking. Reality – a self driving car crash it injure the passengers. Who will be going to jail, the maker or the car?

  39. The battery production for one autonomous car alone creates a carbon footprint greater than several 1980s era Buicks! Where do we believe these will be manufactured? Where, and how, will these batteries be disposed of once they no longer can be recycled?

  40. The system didn't allow me to post the 3rd part of my comment "driverless cars should be banished, there are at least 9 reasons for that". I have posted the comment but I can't see it in incognito mode. Therefore, I think nobody can see it. The owner of youtube is google, the owner of Waymo is google. Pathetic!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *