• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Elon Musk: cars you can drive will eventually be outlawed

Stormdragon said:
Elon, as I've said before, is repackaging 1960's Sci-Fi as his own ideas, and the news corporations, are eating it up. Hey, maybe it's 1950 again! Flying cars for everyone! :p
Click to expand...


Yeah, Musk's reusable Falcon 9 rocket with landing legs that is a fraction to operate than any other rocket in the business is really just a rip off of Disneys rocket in tomorrow land.
KSTPBK_10_56_N01B.jpg


23F2A92000000578-2868769-image-a-2_1418232578381.jpg
 
FXCLM5 said:
guys,

this is just like the PGE smart meter

it just will not fly, because us the consumer has every right to say i want to use xyz product when how and regardless of why.
Click to expand...

-Except that the PG&E smart meter has been "flying" just fine.
 
Looks like Musk does not want manual driving to be outlawed in these quotes from twitter:

To be clear, Tesla is strongly in favor of people being allowed to drive their cars and always will be. Hopefully, that is obvious.
Click to expand...

However, when self-driving cars become safer than human-driven cars, the public may outlaw the latter. Hopefully not.
Click to expand...

Musk will always be controversial because he is so visionary. He did the internet before anyone knew its power. They said running a Rocket business and a electric car business would never work. Look at them now. All those people out of work from the NUMI factory are back to work at the mostly refurbished Tesla Factory.

He even named the Dragon space capsule after the people that said he was "smoking something". Get it- "Puff the Magic Dragon". Oh yeah, solar....
 
Killroy1999 said:
Yeah, Musk's reusable Falcon 9 rocket with landing legs that is a fraction to operate than any other rocket in the business is really just a rip off of Disneys rocket in tomorrow land.
Click to expand...



The idea of such a rocket, is definitely older than Musk is. Maybe even older than Ernie. :D It's his being credited with the space elevator idea that really annoys me. But go ahead and keep fawning over Musk and his idea repackaging. Everyone else seems to. :banana
 
Stormdragon said:
The idea of such a rocket, is definitely older than Musk is. Maybe even older than Ernie. :D It's his being credited with the space elevator idea that really annoys me. But go ahead and keep fawning over Musk and his idea repackaging. Everyone else seems to. :banana
Click to expand...

I think you have that wrong. Musk criticizes the space elevator idea. I don't think Musk ever claimed that any of his successes were a original idea.
 
Self driving cars has to be in our future... Because it will take roads that are a vital ingredient. It will save a ton of money for business to do product distribution.

Computer programed fork lifts stocking shelves and filling orders that go on computer programed trucks, delivering.

This is so huge, and the only missing link, in computer run business operations.
 
louemc said:
Self driving cars has to be in our future... Because it will take roads that are a vital ingredient. It will save a ton of money for business to do product distribution.

Computer programed fork lifts stocking shelves and filling orders that go on computer programed trucks, delivering.

This is so huge, and the only missing link, in computer run business operations.
Click to expand...

Yup. Traveling on the freeway at max throughput, the freeway is 92% empty. Cars driven manually need a lot of space front and back and side to side to be safe. Freeways are a monument of inefficiency. Its great when they are empty an you are flying by $20 million of construction a minute.
 
There were news clips last night about a self driving Audi traveling from SF to NYC.
 
Many of us can't afford new cars now. They going to give / subsidize these things?

Think about the population explosion that will happen. You won't have to be parked to be screwing in the back seat anymore.


Think about the rise in alcoholism- no more having to be responsible when going out.
 
papa911 said:
Many of us can't afford new cars now. They going to give / subsidize these things?

Think about the population explosion that will happen. You won't have to be parked to be screwing in the back seat anymore.


Think about the rise in alcoholism- no more having to be responsible when going out.
Click to expand...

You mean like in places with good transit like NYC?

The assumption is that people are sober when they drive now.
 
afm199 said:
It's as much a situation of density as control or injury.

We have way too many people, and the congestion gets worse yearly. I can see 5-8 years from now where automated cars/busses and trucks will get designated lanes and individually operated will be banned during commute hours or pushed to one slow lane. Simply because the way it's going it's already almost impossible to deal with the 50-100 mile commutes and only going to get worse.

In Iowa, nobody gives a fuck.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It'll happen first in major urban centers driven by policy-makers looking to solve the congestion issue. At some point, we will have to embrace mass transport; self-driving cars might be the cleanest way to do that without completely changing our car-centered infrastructure. Will be interesting to see whether the family car survives in its current form, or moves into the cloud. We're already seeing a shift toward vehicle as a service (Uber, etc.), I know lots of 20- and 30-somethings who have no interest in a car. The big car makers are already at war with Google and Tesla over that.

Aside from the infrastructure changes needed to support it, consider all the revenue dependent on everyone owning, driving, and crashing their own cars. Fewer speeding tickets and traffic accidents means fewer highway patrol jobs, first responder jobs, tow-truck jobs, body shop jobs, insurance jobs, DMV jobs, traffic court jobs, auto manufacturing jobs, etc etc. And that's just first order impacts. Doubt that will all get sorted in 10 years.
 
For those of you who are skeptical of just how long it will take for self-driving cars to happen, this article is a long, but good read:

http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html

A lot (maybe most) is not directly relevant to the topic of this thread, but basically the idea is that humans tend to think of the future in a linear manner, whereas most technological progress occurs exponentially. In other words, it's difficult for us to predict when certain advances will happen, and we tend to overestimate how long it will take to get there.

The rest of the article is interesting, too (argues that Terminator or The Matrix scenarios are totally feasible), but I digress...
 
papa911 said:
Many of us can't afford new cars now. They going to give / subsidize these things?

Think about the population explosion that will happen. You won't have to be parked to be screwing in the back seat anymore.


Think about the rise in alcoholism- no more having to be responsible when going out.
Click to expand...

A lot of people could not afford cell phones when they came out.

Cars are already heavily subsided: The roads are subsidized, oil and gas is subsidized, Cash for Clunkers was a huge subsidy.
 
I just like the legal angle. Get in a wreck with somebody, and the two of you involved are subject to lawsuit. Get in a wreck with a driverless car, and the auto company, the dealer, whoever designed it, etc etc, are all the OTHER party. Sounds like a great opportunity for a lawyuh!
 
Bay Arean said:
I just like the legal angle. Get in a wreck with somebody, and the two of you involved are subject to lawsuit. Get in a wreck with a driverless car, and the auto company, the dealer, whoever designed it, etc etc, are all the OTHER party. Sounds like a great opportunity for a lawyuh!
Click to expand...

Just adding simplistic thoughts, most likely the first generation of self-driving cars will require a licensed and insured person in the driver seat, even if the person is sleeping, AND require the person to assume full responsibility of wrecks. Just like tyre makers aren't responsible for blowouts and wrecks, rare Firestone/Ford incidents in 2000 notwithstanding.

But right you are; this can turn out to be an all-you-can-eat for lawyers.
 
Marcoose said:
Just adding simplistic thoughts, most likely the first generation of self-driving cars will require a licensed and insured person in the driver seat, even if the person is sleeping, AND require the person to assume full responsibility of wrecks. Just like tyre makers aren't responsible for blowouts and wrecks, rare Firestone/Ford incidents in 2000 notwithstanding.

But right you are; this can turn out to be an all-you-can-eat for lawyers.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of automated driving features in a cars now: lane departure, brake assist ... have those caused problems.

The Google cars have already driven enough real road miles to be safer than the average human driver.
 
tzrider said:
Interesting that motorcycles haven't come up in the conversation yet.
Click to expand...

Let's keep it like that.

Self-driving has many applications; long haul, commute, old age, disabilities, urban congestion, DUI, bad weather, etc. Motorcycling, while good for all those, is about driving, connecting with the machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top