|
steinrokkan posted:As I said, you are just an example of a masculine construct of what cars represent, with all the illusions of control and power, and the insecurities that would follow after relinquishing them to an automaton it's not an illusion of control and power, it is actual control and power. and would i be wrong to have those feelings? is it a good thing to relinquish all control and power (over my life, on the road at least), but then have that control exercised upon me by an outside force? why is that a noble thing, thats how youre talking about it at least, like im wrong to feel along those lines. when one "surrenders their control", they do so with the expectation that theyre not handing it over to someone else to exercise on them, thats fetishization. still shocked you brought up the word first, because i think that's part of whats going on here. the fethisization of control, wanting someone else to have it.
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:56 |
|
|
Tautologicus posted:Tesla never ran an ad campaign so whoever trained the consumers it wasnt them Tesla essentially pays its own consumers to advertise ("early adopter credit"), which they do, very heavily, through many forms of media (youtube, facebook, etc). Asserting that there is something fundamentally special about a given product and consumers' willingness to consume it is pretty mock worthy dude. steinrokkan posted:In an automated car you pick your schedule, and your choose your own stops. You can also alter your path and destination at any time. You can pick your schedule for public transit, and you chose where to get off and on. You can alter your path by getting off and getting onto another route  Your choices are more circumscribed but it's essentially the same as riding in one of our future-is-here google robot cars
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:Tesla essentially pays its own consumers to advertise ("early adopter credit"), which they do, very heavily, through many forms of media (youtube, facebook, etc). Asserting that there is something fundamentally special about a given product and consumers' willingness to consume it is pretty mock worthy dude. I didn't say fundamentally, but they came as close as any company has gotten recently, at least any major company. The point is Tesla owners advertise for the company far more than Tesla advertises for itself, and they have succeeded in that way,
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Partly because they are straight up paid to do it, and partly because Tesla has very shrewdly courted the type of nerd that likes to show everyone their pokemans analogue
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
so you're all a bunch of cucks, is that it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
neat a new filter!
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
self driving cars are part of the cuckold undercurrent in western civilization, got it
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
 well, g'nite
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
the gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
certain things are filtered and become certain other things, hth
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
"a machine could never be capable of making the computations necessary to drive a car" ~somebody who is apparently too stupid to realize that he is a machine capable of making the computations necessary to drive a car
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
and get this: you're not even a machine specifically designed to control a car, you're a general-purpose machine but making something whose sole task is to get from point A to point B by itself without killing anybody: clearly impossible
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
runupon cracker posted:and get this: you're not even a machine specifically designed to control a car, you're a general-purpose machine Lots of death over billions of years got us this far, let me know when cars catch up to the billions of years of development humans have had.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
runupon cracker posted:"a machine could never be capable of making the computations necessary to drive a car" humans are not machines in any meaningful sense of the word
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:it's not an illusion of control and power, it is actual control and power. It's totally an illusion for most accidents, because 1) you don't have the 1337 driving skillz necessary to save yourself from getting t-boned and 2) even if you were one of the maybe 0.1% of people that did in ideal conditions you aren't going to be 100% alert all of the time (this is humanly impossible and therefore also out of your control). It's also not a noble thing, it's just that for practical reasons it doesn't matter whether your hands are being useless on the wheel or whether in 15 years your hands are off the wheel and CarOS 2.1 Commuting Edition for Workgroups takes over. There also seems to be a disconnect people who think driving is some sort of worthwhile activity that makes you
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 09:40
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:It's totally an illusion for most accidents, because 1) you don't have the 1337 driving skillz necessary to save yourself from getting t-boned and 2) even if you were one of the maybe 0.1% of people that did in ideal conditions you aren't going to be 100% alert all of the time (this is humanly impossible and therefore also out of your control). no reasonable man does anything to "be more manly", thats a....ah forget it the people who play the "more manly" and "insecurity" cards are fighting against themselves in some way, and are losing, and want someone or something to take over. meanwhile real people with a good sense of themselves arent looking for the deus ex machinas of the world. and a person driving a car does have power over their surroundings, and control over the car. they might not have control over their fate but no one does. one has a responsibility in a car to be attentive and not crash into other cars or pedestrians. at the moment of impact no one has power or control, whether you're in a self driving car or not, but at least up to the point the people with the steering wheel had some semblance of it. there will still be crashes in self driving cars. computer glitches, competing interfaces, tire blowouts, mechanical failures. im sure it will happen more often than anyone thinks. all technology is fallible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 09:49
|
|
|
a man does things to prove himself. to do things to become "more manly" is the attitude of the trivial homosexual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:and a person driving a car does have power over their surroundings, and control over the car. they might not have control over their fate but no one does. one has a responsibility in a car to be attentive and not crash into other cars or pedestrians. at the moment of impact no one has power or control, whether you're in a self driving car or not, but at least up to the point the people with the steering wheel had some semblance of it. there will still be crashes in self driving cars. computer glitches, competing interfaces, tire blowouts, mechanical failures. im sure it will happen more often than anyone thinks. all technology is fallible. Yeah and so? I'd rather be able to watch netflix, jerk off, sleep, or generally gently caress around while being driven around instead of having to actively drive around. A self driving car is an automated chauffeur. I'm totally fine with having the same risk of death (or even slightly higher, given the convenience factor) as with an actual chauffeur. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:a man does things to prove himself. it's still stupid
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Yeah and so? I'd rather be able to watch netflix, jerk off, sleep, or generally gently caress around while being driven around instead of having to actively drive around. A self driving car is an automated chauffeur. I'm totally fine with having the same risk of death (or even slightly higher, given the convenience factor) as with an actual chauffeur. sounds luxurious. why not get the actual chaffeur if you think you want to live that lifestyle
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:07
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:sounds luxurious. why not get the actual chaffeur if you think you want to live that lifestyle Self-driving cars allow the unwashed masses to experience more convenience and luxury at a lower price. This is good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
blowfish posted:it's still stupid the downward slide continues
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:14
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Self-driving cars allow the unwashed masses to experience more convenience and luxury at a lower price. This is good. it probably won't happen the way you imagine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:it probably won't happen the way you imagine. Wages are expensive you know, and only rich people can hire a full time chauffeur. Early self driving cars will bring chauffeur-style convenience to the upper middle class, and later models will target the mass market, like with every other technology that normal people now enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:21
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Wages are expensive you know, and only rich people can hire a full time chauffeur. Early self driving cars will bring chauffeur-style convenience to the upper middle class, and later models will target the mass market, like with every other technology that normal people now enjoy. i predict, that if this happens, people won't actually own the cars as the maintenance on them will be prohibitively expensive and/or complicated for the average consumer. instead, they will be a fleet vehicle, and one will be much like the other. and products will be sold to the passenger inside the car via advertising and tie-ins. as per usual. neutrality will fail due to the economics of the whole enterprise, and it will be a free for all among the tech companies to hoard their latest captive market for themselves. Sign into your Google Account to access your self driving car riding time period. It's gonna be awful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
Just imagining highways of these things proceeding along at an orderly 65 mph, evenly spaced...ugh, its a dystopia
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
theperminator posted:Lots of death over billions of years got us this far, let me know when cars catch up to the billions of years of development humans have had. For all their awesomeness, biological systems still have their bottlenecks. DNA can only store so much information. We have to learn most of the stuff we do and we can't easily transfer that knowledge to others. How many people would use speech recognition if it took years of speech exposure before the computer could understand what you say?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:30
|
|
|
roads and highways will look much more like conveyor belts than they will throughways for life and commerce.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:30
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:Just imagining highways of these things proceeding along at an orderly 65 mph, evenly spaced... its a utopia ftfy suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 10:35 on Jul 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:roads and highways will look much more like conveyor belts than they will throughways for life and commerce. commuting as god intended: a thing that's basically the same as infrastructure maintenance. if the average person notices it or has to put effort into it, something went wrong
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:32
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:i predict, that if this happens, people won't actually own the cars as the maintenance on them will be prohibitively expensive and/or complicated for the average consumer. instead, they will be a fleet vehicle, and one will be much like the other. and products will be sold to the passenger inside the car via advertising and tie-ins. as per usual. neutrality will fail due to the economics of the whole enterprise, and it will be a free for all among the tech companies to hoard their latest captive market for themselves. Sign into your Google Account to access your self driving car riding time period. sensors and computers are cheap you know but if more people ended up using what essentially amounts to public transportation, nothing would be wrong with that either
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:roads and highways will look much more like conveyor belts than they will throughways for life and commerce. That sounds more like an argument against urbanization. Major highways at rush hour already look like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
Rotacixe posted:That sounds more like an argument against urbanization. Major highways at rush hour already look like that. when it's stop and go, but not when they're clear. in major cities everyones going 75-80 weaving between lanes. it's an argument against the encroachment of Machine Culture, and Progress For the Sake of Progress
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
Rotacixe posted:That sounds more like an argument against urbanization. Major highways at rush hour already look like that. Suburbanisation, you mean. A properly dense urban area doesn't need people to commute by car, since everyone lives less than five minutes away from the nearest bus/subway stop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
Tautologicus posted:roads and highways will look much more like conveyor belts than they will throughways for life and commerce. Driving is a menial task with the only purpose of saving time and labour compared to moving people and goods on foot. It's just been glorified into some individualist fantasy while other equally menial tasks are seen as a burden that should be eradicated. Strangely I don't see any people complaining about the washing machine destroying the freedom of doing laundry by displacing the washboard and requiring les time to achieve the better results. Sure, if somebody wants to do manual-sports, they will only be able to do them in manual cars, but public roads are no place for showing off your mad skillz in street racing or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
you just won't have the same options in a self driving car. its capabilities will be limited and basically pre-set. it won't be able to go "off course". i don't see how it could. it would have to understand and be able to imagine the human world in order to do so. a bunch of years ago my family and i drove up to northern maine to Bar Harbor where a friend of the family had a lakehouse. we had to drive all the backroads of maine to get to the coast, and then an unmarked dirt road to the cabin, a mile long dirt road or so. How am i supposed to tell a self driving car to navigate that whole thing. I don't see how its possible. And if it were possible it would be frustrating as all hell, and you'd be screaming to be able to take the wheel and do it yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 11:57
|
|
|
broken record: the thread
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:broken record: the thread AI doesn't exist. they will have to jury rig it, and what they will be able to jury rig won't solve the issue i described.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
why do you continue to pretend the only self driving cars are going to be google pod cars? I'd say, "well a self driving vehicle with off road capabilities would have a steering wheel" but then you say "the google car doesn't have a steering wheel!" and the cycle begins anew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 12:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 11:56 |
|
|
Tautologicus posted:AI doesn't exist. they will have to jury rig it, and what they will be able to jury rig won't solve the issue i described. Dude who doesn't know poo poo about AI declares it doesn't exist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 12:02
|
|