-
• #227
Teleporters.
-
• #229
.... He says it's short sighted, I say "what do you suggest?".
Ride a bike ride a bike ride a bike...
-
• #230
-
• #231
Clever double bluff there tubbs, pretending you don't know it's a 'humorous' website.
-
• #232
I don't eat hummus.
-
• #233
Made me chuckle.
-
• #235
So excited.
-
• #237
Imagine a doctor that will never tire, never make mistakes...
"Imagine a jetliner with a pilot that never makes a mistake, never gets tired, never shows up to work with a hangover..."
We all know how that worked out.
-
• #238
We all know how that worked out.
Yeah the Terminator forgot how to drive a f*cking car
-
• #239
Guardian piece on the Tesla S:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/07/electric-car-tesla-motor-roadster-electric-sports-carIn which the reporter gets a fair few facts wrong. It's not a sports car for a start.
-
• #240
Not to be outdone, Daimler plans for a robo HGV
-
• #241
I want new knees, hopefully Google will come through. Though I'd rather not have knees connected to the internet, and would have to disable the tracker chip.
-
• #243
^Sounds like things are getting (auto) ramped up. Unless all these sr robotics recruitments are to service the autonomous robo-production lines
-
• #245
I was watching a small fleet of Zipcars going by earlier and it made me think. How is it all going to be priced?
As in, hypothetically, let's look far ahead. How are cars going to be paid for. PAYG? Mile plans? Time plans? Auction!! (horrible thought).
What about supply/demand? Let's assume parking is obsolete right, and it's rush hour, I don't believe for one second the companies are going to use a flat rate to charge everyone. Supply will be limited for sure, which means pricing can fluctuate during the day!
Even the frikking weather can affect it.This is making my head hurt, I need a drink.
-
• #246
Ride a bike then?
-
• #248
"Driverless cars, such as those being developed by Google, could be lethal weapons, the FBI has reportedly warned."
What, just like normal, driverful cars then? I'll take my chances with the robotic killing machines, thanks.
-
• #249
Stupid FBI.
"The predictions go against the message that firms who are developing the technology have tried to put out. They have argued that taking the human driver out of the car would remove a lot of the risks involved in driving.
The report noted that ambulances, police cars and other vehicles rushing to deal with emergencies would be helped by automated cars. "The risk that distraction or poor judgement leading to collision that stems from manual operation would be substantially reduced," it read."
-
• #250
Plus you'd remove the "car chase" from being possible, removing a big risk - and all the funding from Police! Camera! Action!
Some good points in that article, albeit a bit defeatist. Take "self driving" out of the title and it could simply be talking about the current state of automotive culture and how it's hanging on the precipice of failure.
It's relatively short sighted in the way it highlights only the negative aspects of the tech. It's like pointing at the hyperloop and saying "well, it only carries 10 people at at time, its pointless".
Look further ahead and the possible elimination of car ownership might mean less cars in congested cities. If looked at from a different perspective, this is another direction to take to improve transportation, rather then wait for a "truly transformative solution". He says it's short sighted, I say "what do you suggest?".