With the way automation has been trending, driving will soon

File: 1426521727820.jpg (388KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 1000x1500px

Normalfags do not and will not trust automatic cars for another 40 years at the minimum, period. They do not consider them to be safe and are terrified they will run over pedestrians, miss stop signs or plow into a wall altogether.

Stop posting this horrifically weak bait.

File: 1372396051353.jpg (7KB, 167x144px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 167x144px

>>16365890
(you)

who cares I hate commuting with a passion

automated transport will be one of the best things to happen

>>16365890
This. To a normalfag,
>I am not in control
Means
>I am going to die

They see them as death traps, and a solution looking for a problem. "Not nearly safe enough for MY family" is a phrase you will hear repeated ad infinitum. No legislation will pass barring manually operated cars, due to both public opposition and political threats from southern lawmakers and representatives who would rather secede and risk civil war than allow this to come to pass.

>>16365907
stop replying to your own posts lmao

(sad)

>>16365907
Which is ironic since the normiest of normies are utter shit at driving and are arguably in control of their vehicle in the first place.
>all people I've heard being enthusiastic about self-driving cars were women
>surprise surprise

>>16365919
>>all people I've heard being enthusiastic about self-driving cars were women

and surprise surprise they are the ones who would (in anons head) use the MUH CHILLUNZ argument

automated transport will be much more favored to the chore of driving

>>16365926
>the MUH CHILLUNZ argument
It is real and it's dangerous.
I blame it for the very existence of the Nissan Juke and "urban SUVs" being considered legitimate vehicles.

>>16365890
You're still in denial, automated transport will be the norm in 5 years, car ownership and on-road operation will be a luxury afforded by only the few who can afford the yuge insurance premiums shortly after.

One day, we will all be automated transport riders.

>>16365941
Go
Ask
A
Normie
Retard
They will foam at the mouth at the mere suggestion, every single time, yammering about the Tesla crashes that have already killed people. Stay ignorant. This sentiment will not change.

>>16365941
>5 years
nah
It will become somewhat usual within the next decade but not the norm. There simply won't be enough of an offer and the prices will be too high for such a quick takeoff.

>>16365948
weird how every one I talk to thinks self driving cars are a great idea

I think you need to stop projecting your own beliefs onto others

>>16365948
Plenty of people (especially young people) can't wait for self-driving cars to become the norm so they can just shitpost on normiebook during their commute.

>>16365948
Why would I ask a normie? It's not like it's going to be their choice.

Driving will one day be akin to cancer, and the cigarette ads that are popular now will be about being killed by a driver.

>>16365957
They're not my beliefs. I know what work Google is doing and the reliabiliy rates of the systems on those RX350s. They're the beliefs of enough people (read; the entire Trump voter base plus every single boomer still drawing breath that didn't vote) that the opposition to any and all efforts to legislate automated cars above manually operated ones will result in massive opposition both popular and political. It is not going to fucking happen.

>>16365963
And don't forget the "killing the planet" argument.

>>16365963
You do know that all these anti-smoking campains are led by tobacco companies who willingly make them overly partisan, inaccurate when it comes to facts and figures and do all they can to make them unappealing to the youth so some decide to start smoking as a counter-reaction, right?
>marlboro is currently the biggest name in anti-tobacco ads and campains

>>16365881
>soon
you mean in a few hundred years?

>>16365975
oh so only the retards oppose it

the majority of the country arent Trump supporters

I havent heard a single person oppose automated cars outside of /o/ and other tryhard enthusiast types either

>>16365987
It doesn't matter who it is. Only that enough people do. And they do. So get fucked and take your garbage thread back to /b/.

>>16365995
no they dont

stop projecting

File: realistic-love-dolls-016.jpg (19KB, 312x470px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 312x470px

>>16365881 >>16365890
>With the way automation has been trending, driving will soon become purely a luxury activity enjoyed by the richest 1%.

It is ominous that automation has a significantly higher safe driving rate than human drivers. There doesn't even need to be a specific law saying everyone has to use automation whenever possible. The insurance company policies will simply cite statistics and set policy rate fees. Cars that drive on automation 95% of the mileage get the normal rate and cars that use dangerous manual driving pay 150% of what they do now. People might say that is unfair, but the government will be "in" on the plan to try to push drivers to use more green driving methods as well as statistically safer driving.

Automation will follow green algorithms. And it will be hard to defeat since all cars in the future will phone home just like GM cars with Onstar already do. So switching to manual driving would be immediately noted by the central database.

Will drivers prefer artificially driven cars? Or do they prefer the real thing? Artificial is safe and doesn't rip off your wallet. The real thing is definitely riskier, can get your wallet hit by higher fees and higher costs. So, do you like the cool efficiency of artificial or the warm hot pulse of a real car?

I bet many will prefer the realistic fake car.