[JohnBrowdie]

surprising that driverless cars are getting so little support at FR. go to any public place and look around, folks. could a computer really do a worse job than the vast majority of the people you see around you? no, I thought not.

the faster we are 100% driverless, the better off we will all be; I just hope it happens before we reach full “idiocracy” levels.

[Alberta's Child]

There's a simple reason why these "driverless cars" get so little support here.

Freepers tend to support public policies that hold people accountable and treat them like responsible adults instead of making everyone meet standards that are established to accommodate the sizeable portion of our population that is incompetent or retarded.

Imagine that.

You'll probably find almost zero support on FR for the development of robots to take school exams for children ... for the same reason I described above.

[Bryanw92]

>>could a computer really do a worse job than the vast majority of the people you see around you? no, I thought not.

Yes, a computer could do worse. Unless, of course, you took away peoples freedom to drive a car. Then, all the cars could get in a well-ordered line and wait their turn. We could get where we are going in a very average period of time with no benefits to accumulating skills or learning to work traffic efficiently.

So, the computer wins as long as we are content to trudge forward, in good order, as expected of us by our betters.

After all, no one REALLY needs to drive their own car. It’s not like the Founding Fathers envisioned a day when sedans would have 300 horsepower! Operating your own vehicle has no legitimate transportation purpose.

[ClearBlueSky]

I am not opposed to driverless cars, or robotic physicians, or 'smart' technology of any kind. I DOUBT the level of intelligence developing and programming such technology. We are tending to invent things before we work out all the bugs or develop the ability to control future problems. If your computer needs a 'patch' for a bug, well that only affects you as a user. If a robotic car develops a 'bug' while in use it can mow people down.

What will be interesting to see is the new crop of lawyers who will specialize in defending the robot cars in injury/death cases. Who do you sue? The car itself, the manufacturer, the programmer? Or will we actually have incidents where NO one is responsible for death or injury?

[cymbeline]

“the faster we are 100% driverless, the better off we will all be”

I won’t go that far but the various accident avoidance devices they’re now putting on cars are great.

I was watching seagulls fly near our motel room railing a couple of weeks ago. The person below us was feeding them. It’s utterly miraculous how they can control their flight with those huge wings. When I see a robot do what those gulls do then possibly robotic driving is feasible.

[Nifster]

Why should I support something that someone else can control?

Apparently you are the only one who thinks that in a time of crisis the government will be nice and let our self driving cars go where we want

[Fresh Wind]

the faster we are 100% driverless, the better off we will all be;

The only way that will happen is by government edict.

It's amazing how many so-called conservatives have no problem with that.

[backwoods-engineer]

could a computer really do a worse job than the vast majority of the people you see around you? no, I thought not. the faster we are 100% driverless, the better off we will all be; I just hope it happens before we reach full “idiocracy” levels.

An incredibly naive, if not completely ignorant point of view.

Moreover, cars are freedom. No way in HELL am I going to give over control of my vehicle to some government-controlled computer. You blue-staters can keep your self-driving cars.