LogFAQs > #953430914

LinkPizza posted...

They wouldnt do anything that would hurt their profits.

This is sort of like saying, "Digital cameras will never replace film; disposable camera companies wouldn't do anything that would hurt their profits."

LinkPizza posted...

There will always be money. Or a currency, I should say.

You should, because those are not the same thing and you've readily demonstrated in this topic that you don't understand the difference.

LinkPizza posted...

So, they would have to be programed to know how to program Or programed to learn to program, which is like being programed to know how to program Which is what I said. Wed still have to program them to know how to program (or how to learn how to program first)

Why are you using conditional tense here as though it hasn't already happened?

Robots already know how to program, dude. That's one of the easiest things to teach a program how to do.

LinkPizza posted...

And I want to be perfect because if I have to give up control, it better be perfect. If not, Ill do it. Its really that simple

And you'll do it worse than an AI, because even if it isn't perfect, it's still better than you. And, as a result, very quickly you will find that you cannot be employed in a field that an AI can do. This will extend to things like driving as well - in much the same way that you are no longer allowed to have a horse do the manual work that an internal combustion engine does and be on the same highway, you - a human driver - will eventually be banned from driving a car outside of special hobbyist tracks designed for that purpose, because you are far more unsafe than the AI-operated cars.

LinkPizza posted...

And they still probably wont go over the speed limit.

You're complaining about not being able to break the law with this point.

Campaign for higher speed limits if you actually want this to happen.

LinkPizza posted...

And many people that dont need a new car wont even look at them.

They don't need to be. The beauty of self-driving cars is that they don't need to be "owned" by anyone. Instead of owning a car and having it take up a bunch of space in your property and, in essence, requiring a fairly significant chunk of space in your home (driveway and garage), you can simply buy-in to a network of self-driving cars. Any time you want to go somewhere, you simply press a button that says, "Send a car to pick me up at 8:00". When 8:00 rolls around, your self-driving car will be ready and waiting for you and you just hop in, let it drive you to wherever you're going, get out, and the car will be on its way, heading off to drive its next passenger.

At any given time, most cars in existence are idle, sitting in parking lots or driveways. By shifting to self-driving, you would dramatically reduce the need for both number of cars and amount of space dedicated to them, which would have all sorts of positive implications on waste, carbon emissions, real estate prices, and the like. Plus, it means you would basically have all the benefits of owning a car with none of the financial obligations.

LinkPizza posted...

And I heard from someone else that the push for electric cars seem to be more in demand than self-driving

This is a non-sequitur. It's not like a car has to choose between being electric or being self-driving; it can be both. Most self-driving cars already are electric.

---

Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!