[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

Driverless Trucking. How fucked are we?

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 93
Thread images: 13

Driverless Trucking.
How fucked are we?
>>
File: 0923409.jpg (223KB, 1500x750px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
0923409.jpg
223KB, 1500x750px
>>1698733
i dont fucking know, and i don't care. automation is inevitable everywhere. we are maybe fucked, idk because population is 7 billion, and jobs taken by computers, and i don't like socialism, soo uuh lets see senpai
>>
Ideally they still require a driver behind the wheel to take over if things go wrong.
>>
File: 1474010754880.jpg (97KB, 915x960px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1474010754880.jpg
97KB, 915x960px
>>1698733
>Muh jobs are going to disappear because of automation
No nigger. You job is going to change. Look at factory workers.
>>
>>1698748
>Look at factory workers.
What factory workers?
>>
>>1698744
nope
>>
>>1698733
Not fucked, unless you refuse to change and cling to the idea of "muh jerbs"
>>
>>1698744
Given that truck driving is the last good low-education job, we're better off without them.

If there's a mechanical or radar or camera problem it can just pull itself over and wait for maintenance to arrive.
>>
>>1698744
Do you honestly think that's realistic? Sure, it'd be a union's wet dream.

But think about the implications. You have to invest in very expensive technology - and still pay salaries? Where's the fucking benefit? Why invest in the first place if there's no cost reduction? Just for the reduction in traffic accidents? While nifty, this makes the "driver" job even more pointless.

Like - what's a "driver" going to do that the driving software can't? To check the software's decisions the driver would need to pay attention 100% of the time. Do you think a single "driver" would be capable of this during several hours of driving? They'd read, be on their phones, sleep, whatever - nobody will be paying attention if the damn thing drives itself and that means when a finge case rolls around where it would matter they're not ready to intervene. And that's not even considering that humans have an abysmal track record of reacting properly during emergency situations (especially when future "drivers" will have zero actual driving experience).
>>
>>1698758
Well those jerbs prop up the economies of many small regional towns. Those small towns have already been getting economically crushed which resulted in the crazy election year we had. What happens when we crush them even harder? Keeping in mind the regionally based electoral system gives them an advantage in politics.
>>
>>1698770
What are you going to do, stop the advancement of the human race just because some rednecks don't want to learn new skills?

Get these people some education in new fields.
>>
>>1698748
Oh you mean like they used to have 100's of people in one warehouse and today there's like only 4-5 highly specialized technicians?
>>
>>1698772
>Get these people some education in new fields.
No one voted for free education so I'm not sure how you mean for that to happen with rising education costs and their diminishing prospects.
>>
>>1698772
>muh advancement of the human race
>>
>>1698778
Maybe they should vote for a better education system then. Or, idk, pick up a book once in a while.
>>
Doesn't stop with trucking either.
>>
>>1698761
Wait, why is it bad that people can have a good paying job. Are you saying the economy will be better off with those people being forced to find a lower paying job? Not seeing your point here.
>>
>>1698803
>Wait, why is it bad that people can have a good paying job.
What good paying job are you referring to?
>>
>>1698797
Car ownership won't go away, because Uber will own all the cars. we will still need mechanics and car washes. This will also never happen BTW.
>>
>>1698803
Oh I see.... I miswrote.
I meant to say DESPITE truck driving being a good paying job, we're better off without human drivers... referring to the deaths.
>>
>>1698769
The benefit is the increased safety of automated driving. A human could be required for liability and accountability of the equipment. Also if you think we're close to having AI that can safely maneuver a vehicle for all situations in the trucking industry, you don't know the industry.
>>
>>1698806
>we will still need mechanics and car washes.
Except much fewer of them and (and heavily automated) all under a single roof, owned and operated by the company. Efficiency and monopolization kills the jobs and the wages.
>>
>>1698812
Industry insider estimates have human driving dead by the 2030s.
>>
>>1698820
I think it's realistic that technology will make drivers unnecessary but I would be surprised if we end up with completely unmanned tractor trailers on the road by then if ever.
>>
>>1698797
I fucking hope that happens one day. I don't want to see Uber of all fucking companies becoming the car monopolist, but the idea is extremely appealing to me. Make transportation a public utility. All cars are colletively owned and self-driving. Citizens just order transportation and a few seconds later board the next vehicle available at their door.

Think about what it would mean for our society, for our cities! Get rid of 80% of cars parked in the streets. Repurpose 90% of parking space. Fewer redundancies. Cheaper cost for the average citizen. Higher through-put on available streets and nearly zero accidents because the whole grid is networked. Shorter waiting and transportation times because there never will be traffic jams or waiting times at traffic lights (since the whole traffic can plan ahead to arrive perfectly without stopping or delaying). No time wasted since you can spend the entire travel not paying attention to traffic. Less ecological impact due to much more efficient driving and greaty reduced number of vehicles.

Sure, I see big problems. Hackers, privacy, less fun, fewer jobs, dependance, etc. I just have such a hard-on for how clean and efficient this giant machinery could be once we take out most of the human elements... fuck, I can't wait for the day they outlaw private car ownership and human drivers.
>>
>>1698783
>having the entirety of human knowledge at your fingertips
>"b...but muh trucks!"
Get over yourself. If rednecks can figure out how to make meth in gatorade bottles, they can learn to program.
>>
Not fucked at all, automation is great news and increases the overall wealth of society. It all depends on whether the government is competent enough to be able to distribute the new wealth as not to let it all go to a few CEOs and the rest becoming poor.
>>
>>1698778

Education is not getting more expensive because information is scarce, it's because of tens of billions of government money being poured in destroying price signalling and universities building fancy gyms and dining halls and bloating their bureaucracies with useless administrators.

You can learn coding and 3d printing and everything else cutting edge for maybe a few hundred bucks tops just online. Provided you are not a retard.
>>
>>1698739
only the menial jobs and the high computation requirement jobs. creative jobs developing directing jobs analysis jobs research jobs are in ore demand than ever before.
>>
File: IMG_2941.png (1MB, 900x1260px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
IMG_2941.png
1MB, 900x1260px
>>1698803
Efficient Tech shocks are universally awesome for economies, low payed wage slaves from flyover states may lose their job, but why do I care about Jimmy Bob and his fat wife and 3 retarded children? They'll find another low wage job or learn a new skill that isn't literally sitting on their asses watching the road all day
>>
>>1698812
Yeah, like I said - that seems to me not enough benefit, but maybe I'm wrong. I've considered the liability issue - but that would only help if the driver was liable. And who would take the job if you're liable for something that you have very little control over and only needs your intervention in rare crisis situations where you'd be most likely ill prepared and thus inevitably incur massive liability.

And yes, I know we're not even close. They're testing ideal conditions and nothing more. I live in a country where they approved several Alpine test courses this year, because the industry is slowly branching out into more difficult terrain and realistic conditions. Give it some time. Nothing so far has been able to stop progress. Ten years ago nobody (outside the few people in R&D working on the first iPhone) could have envisioned smart phones and the way they'd revolutionize our lives and our interactions with the internet. This day and age shit's happening *fast*.
>>
>>1698826
All the estimates have trucking driverless around a decade earlier, 2030s is for the greater society.

>>1698827
>fuck, I can't wait for the day they outlaw private car ownership and human drivers.
If terrorists keeping running people over it will happen sooner than gun regulation that's for sure.

>>1698829
>democratic socialism is our only hope
So we're fucked.

>>1698832
Ok so you say we're going to put the millions of truck drivers into programming jobs? What programming jobs? Doesn't seem like there's really that many. And what exactly makes you think those jobs aren't also going to be automated heavily? Deep learning AI is in progress and programming is 100% information job, it will be one of the first things Deep AI is applied to.
>>
File: IMG_2711.jpg (54KB, 480x346px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
IMG_2711.jpg
54KB, 480x346px
>>1698841
>economies can never adapt to anything ever
This is what alt right fags actually believe
>>
>>1698834
>but why do I care about Jimmy Bob and his fat wife and 3 retarded children

If Jimmy Bob, his 8 cousins, his fat wife, her 4 sisters and their 3 retarded children have the ability to vote - all of a sudden politicians (and thus people) start caring. >>1698744 has a point. Maybe one day they'll create completely usless jobs for thos people. Basically just occupational therapy. Pay them for digging a hole and filling it back in.

If the value added elsewhere (in cities and high tech) is big enough, that may be the price to pay for social peace. Nothing hurting your self-driving car industry like a mob of rednecks with sledgehammers and blood on the streets after riot police deals with them. Once unemployment goes from 10% to 30 or 40% politicians will start to think about how to prevent riots and it'll probably include caring about Jimmy Bob and his fat wife in some way.
>>
>>1698846
Nigger, again, you have yet to explain why these same people are suddenly going to have zero proespects anywhere. Jobs always exist for the poor and useless in our society.
>>
>>1698841
>>democratic socialism is our only hope
>So we're fucked.
Say what you want about socialism right now, but for the post-scarcity society it is the only political ideology that makes sense. Capitalism wouldn't work at all, as it is based on jobs, which will all but disappear.
>>
>>1698848
I can't explain something that's going to happen in the future. But I can predict.

Software is the game changer. The very concept is less than 100 years old. We have no historical comparison available. Code is lightning fast and infinitely scalable on standardized systems. This is not automating a single factory with custom-made robots. This is on well written program automating a job in all factories around the world. That's huge.

The agricultural sector is dead. Went from 80% to less than 2% of jobs in 200 years since the industrial revolution. But at the same time industry and service sectors grew. Robots attempt to kill the industry sector, but that's more of a shift. You still need someone to build, service, program, maintain and supervise robots. But software/AI is going after the service sector. Drivers? Replaced. Accountants? Useless. Call center? Just a small box with electronics.

Jobs for the poor only happen when human labour is cheaper than the alternative - and yes, it is in many places (shout-out to the Bangladeshi textile industry). But we're talking about a large building filled with complicated machinery vs some dirt poor Asian kid. Software is different. Here we're talking about a small box with some code in it replacing dozens of dirt poor Asian kids and scaling it up doesn't require new code, just new small boxes.

Give me a perspective. I the people from the primary sector when into the secondary sector. The people form the secondary sector went into the tertiary sector (in developed countries). Where will the people from the tertiary sector go? I'd love for you to give me an out, because I cannot for the life of me think of one.
>>
>>1698851
>>1698845
I wasn't saying socialist ideas wouldn't work. I was saying we're fucked.
>>
>>1698778
>Liberals are college educated urban dwellers
>Truck drivers are conservative uneducated and rural

The same people who voted against easier access to education are the ones who will find themselves too uneducated to make a good living in the information-age economy.
>>
>>1698841
>Computers in literally everything
>Refrigerators
>Cars
>Factories
>Toasters
>"not that many" programming jobs

Literally everything is going to be pumped full of silicon in a decade or two.
>>
>>1698912
Why would that produce more programming jobs?
You do realize you don't need some to write a program for every fridge you sell right? There will be one guy writing software and updates for fridge code for entire companies.... or the entire industry if they all decide not to bother doing it in-house and buy the same computerization.
>>
>>1698912
There will be more jobs in IT. But not to the degree other people will lose their jobs.

How many ways are there to sensibly program a toaster?
>switch heating on
>sleep for x seconds
>switch heating off

I don't think you realize just how scaleable software is. One guy writes an open source library for crunchy bread and the whole world can operate their toasters pumped full of silicon without even a single job created. Code is digital and can be copied - no need to reinvent the wheel.

Besides, as computing power grows, efficiency is less of an obstacle. And even then, the most efficient software is already written by other software. Look up genetic algorithms. You write a few lines of code, run it a billion times and after a day it spits out the solution to your initial problem as software that no human will ever understand but that works better than anything a human could come up with in a year of hard work. Near endless trial and error means nothing to a machine and will produce better results than the single threaded human brain trying to rationally come up with a solution.
>>
why is /biz/ filled with morons? states won't allow driverless trucks because the first time, and it would happen, the truck glitches out because pajeet copied the wrong code from stack exchange and wipes out a family in their minivan you'd have soccermoms from all over the country unleash hell on politicians.

it's the same way that planes are virtually self flying save for landing and take off, but you still have two pilots in the cockpit as required by law.
>>
>>1698941
Michigan made it legal for driverless cars to operate without humans behind the wheel. The end is coming.
>>
>>1698733
As a former trucker I have to say good fucking riddance. Trucking is an awful job. You have to live in what's essentially an 8x8 tin can. No one on the road or at the dispatch office gives a shit if you live or die. It's a nightmare.
>>
>>1698748
Went from getting paid $11 a hour to do Mexican labor at one factory to $19 a hour operating an automated machine at another factory. Feels good.
>>
>>1698733
they already made those

they're called "trains"
>>
>>1698769
Driving isn't even 50% of a truck drivers job
>>
>>1698733
VA here
can confirm, am software developer
>>
>>1698769
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnWggbEDY5U
>>
>>1699007
>19 an hr feels good
Lol. I make 36 an hr and I feel poor as fuck
>>
I worked in the industry unlike most of y'all chucklefucks. A major mine I visit is already using a fleet of driverless dump trucks, body trucks and light vehicles to move bulk product to rail.

This same mine is pushing for a autonomous train for next year/this year (2017) and they will get it. The technology is ready right now and its being used.

Drivers will not be out of the job right away. Instead current truck drivers will become truck supervisers in which they come along for the ride between staging point A and B and take over when local delivery is required.

If you are industry right now you should be developing your mechanical skills because someone still has to fix these piece of shit trucks until your robot overlords figure that out too. Stop seeing it as a negative thing -- people will be out of jobs in the future ... But did we really want the human race doing that kind of work to begin with?

I don't want humans flipping burgs, sitting in trucks for 12 hours or assembling shitty products in factories. The human race is more than that and any improvement to the system I think is a huge step in qualify of life for our race.

>>1699010
Already in the process my friend
>>
>>1698772
Not everyone is smart enough to contribute to a highly advanced economy.

And what is there for manual labor types to move into? No new labor industry is going to pop up to replace what is about to be automated. There is no new industry to transition to. Servicing robots? They replace 10 jobs for every 1 they create.
Agriculture: dead. Industry and manufacturing: dead. Service industry: being phased out. Shipping and construction: ditto. What's left?

>But I'm an engineer/ accountant/ manager/ real estate agent (kek) etc
You're fucked too buddy. Your job is being automated as well (see recent Forbes article on the investment bank that just replaced all it's managers with an algorithm. Accountants are about to be obsolete, I have inside knowledge on this, and REAs are also currently being made redundant by some web software currently in the works), and if it's not, the competition for your job is going to skyrocket from all these newly unemployed people, meaning wages will drop even if you can keep it.

Whatever industry you're in will have fewer consumers to sell to as well meaning more cut jobs and a feedback loop, for example:
>Well I'll be fine, I service the robots at the Ford plant.
No one will have a job, so they can't buy your cars fucko

NO ONE is immune. Even if you happen to own the factory that makes all the robots (not to imply all automation is done by robots) you better prepare your asshole too because the government iis either going to tax you to the point of zero profit or will seize your "means of production".
>>
>>1698733
I had no idea there were so many truck drivers.
>>
>>1699007
How many other $11/hr people weren't that lucky?
>>
>>1699273
No kidding. $32 here and ready to hang myself.
>>
>>1698816
It's not going to be monopolized. Google, Uber, Lyft, and Tesla all have reasons to compete in this market. I don't know if Lyft can compare to Uber in terms of capital but the other two certainly can.
Not to mention the brand-new companies that will emerge to serve regional needs in this new industry.
>>
>>1699337
>Your job is being automated as well

Quants have always had deterministic inputs and outputs which can be clearly measured in $$, and pay based on that. Of course they can be replaced with software (in fact being a quant in 2017 means writing such software), as can their management. Normal jobs are not so clear-cut and normal jobs require people skills.

Accountants can only be replaced in simple situations. Finding and exploiting tax loopholes, interpreting incomplete or inconsistent data (e.g. computing a tax basis for a Bitcoin balance or a property in a failed state), determining the taxable value of weird asset types (e.g. to determine whether they are eligible for inclusion in an IRA), and explaining any of this to human beings, all requires humans. As does verifying the data going into and out of software algorithms. They also need to contact people, collect signatures, etc., etc.

Engineering involves a lot of tradeoffs which ultimately come down to human values. On the more scientific or mathematical side of things, it veers into research, which is something we're nowhere near understanding how to automate, even in cases where you have a well-defined problem to solve. For example, it is an open research problem to describe public-key encryption in a way that automated theorem provers can understand; current research works around it by choosing stronger security models than semantic security, e.g. "circular security" where the decryptor can obtain encryptions of the secret keys themselves (or encryptions of encryptions of the keys, or so on).
>>
>>1698733
It's the most common job, sure. But remove all trucking jobs and you're looking at maybe .5 percent increase in unemployment, if that much. Automation will fuck up many industries, not just trucking alone.
>>
>>1698748
Just kill yourself, you ignoramus.
>>
>>1699372
>It's the most common job, sure.
>maybe .5 percent increase in unemployment

Do the same.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU
>>
It's 50 years away so I don't care.
>>
>>1699337

>tfw the owner class is the only segment of society immune to coming automation smug_pepe.jpg

Honestly looking forward to all of you low IQ plebs starving to death while my robot servants bring me fresh chicken tendies.
>>
>>1699520
It's not going to turn out the way you might think.
>>
>>1699257
Yeah, perfect example why a software driver would be infinitely better than a human driver. It would have perfect 360° awareness all the time and would have to figure out the course for this delivery only once and would then be able to perfectly execute repetitions without additional effort. It's horribly inefficient having a new driver figure this shit out each week while jumping around his truck for 5 minutes.
>>
>>1699370
You're not wrong, I agree with most of what you wrote. But I don't think it'll help in the long run.

>Normal jobs are not so clear-cut and normal jobs require people skills.
Yes, interaction with people will be the only thing theoretically automation proof. But practically? It'll become a luxury once people get used to robot interactions. Gas stations used to be staffed at pumps. Now I'd wager there's 95%+ self-serve gas stations. Because it's cheaper. Self-serve check-out is being tested in stores around the world. Once they roll it out and the decision becomes "Do I go to the robot store because it's cheaper and faster?" it'll take off and human clerks will be reduced to luxury stores for people willing to pay for human interaction. The technology is there - RFID the products, NFC the payment - walking in, grabbing products and walking out already doesn't require any human interaction. People just have to get used to it and for the few hick-ups natural language processing has to get better (which they're working on). Major airlines are already rolling out chat-bots instead of human customer service. Call centers will be next and finally you'll be able to talk to your store robots.

>Accountants can only be replaced in simple situations. Finding and exploiting tax loopholes, interpreting incomplete or inconsistent data
Yes. As of now that is. Once they close the digital loop there won't be inconsistent or incomplete data since everyone will use the same XML invoicing standard. That still leaves the actual accountants, but with rewriting the tax code so it is machine readable (no wiggle room and loop holes) you could get rid of 95% of them. Yeah, there is a strong lobby against it - but theoretically we could automate 99% of accounting right now. This is not a technical but a political issue.

Once we replace judges with algorithms, AI will be more effective at lawyering. Human work is only needed to make information digestable to humans.
>>
>>1698733
>Software developers
>Farmers
>Teachers

wew lad
>>
File: 1416609106142.jpg (24KB, 400x307px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1416609106142.jpg
24KB, 400x307px
>>1699337
luddite fallacy.

We can't imagine what roles will be needed in the future, but look at it this way; Have all mankind's problems been solved? Is there anything else left to do?

Half the world has no clean water, no toilet etc. Diseases yet to cure. Environmental problems. Colonize space.

There is still so much to do. Robots will cause mass disruption, but not mass unemployment
>>
>>1699909
>We can't imagine what roles will be needed in the future
Sure, that's what the historical record tells us. But does it still hold true for the future? We obviously can't settle that question, but I'm not willing to blindly accept an historical truth.

Human hands used to be more dextrous than machines. They're not anymore.
Human hands used to be more versatile than machines. They still are, but our production lines are build on heavy division of labour. And machines are better at tirelessly and precisely repeating the same movements.
Human brains used to be much more powerful than machines. AI, deep learning, etc is severely threatening that and even beating the human brain at single tasks.
Human brains used to be more versatile than machines. They still are, but what is it worth? How many hyper-creative researchers and artists do we need? And we've already seen some scary things where AI can come up with a creativity formula, invent their own style of painting, compose hit music that humans like, etc.

So right now the only clear advantage humans have going for them is that human labour is cheaper, and that's only the case for minimum wage domestic jobs and third world countries. And most humans being stuck in menial work because a robot is more expensive than their wage doesn't strike me as a great way forward or a great argument against the luddite fallacy.

We may be currently creating a lot of new kinds of jobs, but really, how many social media managers do we actually need? And with machines and software consistently beating us at physical and mental labour - what's the way forward? What would a future job have to look like that humans would be guaranteed to out-perform (future) machines at it and that it would provide employment for the masses? And I think this is a new problem that calls the old truths into question. Can you imagine such a kind of job we wouldn't immediately mechanise? Our machines are better than us for the first time in history.
>>
File: laughing.jpg (49KB, 500x350px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
laughing.jpg
49KB, 500x350px
>>1698748
>>1698751
underated
>>
Keynes said in 1930 that by year 2000 humans would need to work 3 hours a day in developped countries. Today unemployment is the difference between gains of productivity and legal working hours

Marx predicted this. If we don't reduce legal working hours capitalism will colapse
>>
We need to divide work and use our free time for leisure, as Seneque told us to do !
>>
>>1699909
Space colonization is not going to happen. inb4 you start babbling about Mars. No sorry. Mars is a dead planet with no atmosphere. Unless you want to live underground like a mole.

To get to other planets would require the ability to bend space time or worm hole. That technology is nowhere in sight.

We've got this one little planet and we are not doing a very good job at taking care of it.
>>
>>1699957
>Keynes said in 1930 that by year 2000 humans would need to work 3 hours a day in developped countries

This is true. Look at Mr Money Mustache. Worked full-time for ten years and then did whatever after that. Because money today is worth more than money tomorrow this is more efficient than working fewer daily hours across an entire lifetime, but the principle is the same.

The reason people don't do this is because of consumerism, not because they're "forced" to work more.
>>
>>1700020
Rofl
>>
I don't think we're fucked at all. Let truckers lose their jobs. Reduce work week to 30 hours a week. This will add a 4th shift. Since companies don't like OT. Unions will push companies to increase wages since can't survive ect. Economy will adjust. It will be painful. The adjustment will be gradual. Since states move state by state. I'm more optimistic then pessimistic about our robot overlords.
>>
>>1700200
>Reduce work week to 30 hours a week.

this is basically already happening because of the shitty healthcare that incentives companies to provide the least amount of benefits possible
>>
>>1699325
Great perspective
>>
File: 1478139041909.gif (975KB, 188x132px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1478139041909.gif
975KB, 188x132px
>>1699535

>Implying me an my estate buddies dont have a massive amount of guns and ammo.

I'm going to look in to buying a surplus tank or armored transport in the next 5 years. Not that im going to need it, local police department already has a couple, and they know who pays the bills.
>>
>>1698866
this is a pretty good exploration of your idea:
http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

or just read the wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manna_(novel)
>>
>>1698761

> that image

Planes have been automated since the 1970's. And yet we still have human pilots in them. Why do you think that is? Furthermore piloting a vehicle is much more unpredictable and hazard prone, than a plane that flies a straight line from A to B.

The point? Driverless cars are to me like those videos in the 1950"s where they thought everyone would be living on the moon in 20 years.

Not gonna happen. Not anytime soon anyway.
>>
>>1699909
You can be a go-getter and still believe in Destiny. This Blair Waldorf guy sure was a troll.
>>
>>1700959
>implying that if it was possible those cheapskate plane companies wouldnt have made it happen already
planes havent been able to take off and land automatically safely because AI/sensor/computing advancement has only recently come far enough recently.
what planes have currently is the equivalent of cruise control. modern missiles have more advanced sensors and AI than commercial planes.
>>
>>1700959
Well, you may have had a point 10 years ago, but now we have drones. Both military and civil drones already have autonomous flight capabilities (holding patterns, returning to base on loss of signal, etc). The future is finally happening.

Incidentally, most common commercial air planes also haven't been updated since the 1970s and still have mechanical "autopilots". We're only starting to build computerized planes (and not doing a particularly good job at it yet - probably due to lack of experience).

Also, planes are held to much much higher standards than road vehicles. Flying is statistically one of the safest ways to travel, but is consistently perceived as the most dangerous. Every day more people die in road accidents than die in aviation accidents in a whole year. But we accept and ignore the road deaths. So driverless cars will be held to much lower standards. They don't need to be perfect, they only need to be better than human drivers (which is very low bar).

>>1700949
Thanks, I'll look into it.
>>
>>1698827
I can't wait for that either, I fucking can't wait to see aerial flybys of traffic (or lack thereof). It's gonna be in every single "most satisfying video evar" on YouTube. Everyone's gonna realize we truly are living in the future.
>>
>>1698733
Driverless fucking. How trucked are we?
>>
>>1698867
Well what do you even mean by that then? I'm not in love with the fact that liberal economics is gonna win, but I'm not dumb enough to think we should keep trying to put square pegs in round holes.
Good news is that capitalism is working fantastically right now. Implementing socialism will only happen unemployment hits like 50% or something.
And after that, when were in a post-scarcity economy, we're gonna have something that looks a whole lot like communism. The good news is that you replace the corrupt government with an AI that's smarter than the sum total of all the humans that have ever lived combined.
And as long as the programmers don't fuck up we probably won't have to worry about it going nuts and killing everyone.
You'll have anything you could ever want before you even know you want it (as long as you don't want something that's physically unfeasible like a planet made of gold). And people wonder why aliens don't contact us. Most people won't fucking care if the weirdest and coolest aliens ever knocked on their door at that point.
>>
>>1701880


thAHAHHahhaah I sea water you did deer XD
>>
>>1698733
Number one job in America used to be farming. Tractors made farming a lot easier, and life goes on.
>>
File: 1473257172012.jpg (120KB, 700x401px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1473257172012.jpg
120KB, 700x401px
>>1698733

The way of the future.
>>
>>1699337
>Not everyone is smart enough to contribute to a highly advanced economy.
then do whatever the fuck you can do to make money, try to contribute to the society in the process, enjoy the benefits of a highly automated society, and go tell your politicians to stop being lazy.

also, don't believe all the bullshit media says. it's true that computers can replace people, that doesn't mean they will replace them tomorrow, or even in 20 years. that also doesn't mean people will be willing to replace other people.

>>NO ONE is immune. Even if you happen to own the factory that makes all the robots (not to imply all automation is done by robots) you better prepare your asshole too because the government iis either going to tax you to the point of zero profit or will seize your "means of production".
>muh commie gubmint
kek
>>
>>1700965

lol blair waldorf is a character from gossip girl

the character is literally useless
Thread posts: 93
Thread images: 13


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.