Driverless cars' effect on LCF
#104
Senior Member
#105
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,475 Times
in
1,836 Posts
#107
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
My post was in response to others saying we should pre-pay funeral expenses before there are driverless cars on the roads, so my question was to them, i.e. when do they predict the first pedestrian/cyclist will be killed by a driverless vehicle, not whose fault will it be. This is a thread about predictions.
#108
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,475 Times
in
1,836 Posts
Everything happens in the present except for things which happen in the imagination ... which don't happen, like the conversations you respond to sometimes.
#109
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
See posts #100 and #101
[/quote]Everything happens in the present except for things which happen in the imagination ... which don't happen, like the conversations you respond to sometimes. [/QUOTE]
Please don't insult me like this. I try to avoid getting lured into bickering.
[/quote]Everything happens in the present except for things which happen in the imagination ... which don't happen, like the conversations you respond to sometimes. [/QUOTE]
Please don't insult me like this. I try to avoid getting lured into bickering.
#110
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,491
Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE
Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7652 Post(s)
Liked 3,475 Times
in
1,836 Posts
Let me take you through this step by step since sequential trains of logical thought aren’t your thing sometimes .....
Do we agree?
I reply:
The point here .... I will go slowly .... He will only wear a sensor if he is guaranteed a salary and payoff in case of failure.
Otherwise he will not wear it.
He is saying that he thinks he might die, but won’t wear a sensor unless it comes with a paycheck and insurance. So what .... if he thinks he is going to die but won’t get paid ... he will just die/ But ... wouldn’t the sensor improve his odds? Wouldn’t he be safer with a sensor than without, even if it was not 100 percent guaranteed?
Replace “sensor” with “tail light” and you might grasp my point.
He wouldn’t dream of riding at night in traffic without a tail light, even though the sort of driver who might hit a cyclist at night would be the sort to overlook a tail light (obviously.) So ... why wear one? Because it ups the odds. Just like wearing a sensor would.
And the sensor might not have 100 -percent insurance ... the tail light has None ... yet he depends on it.
His “logic” is lacking ... sorely. He is the one who thinks AI cars are a threat, yet he is the one who refuses to take a safety measure unless compensated with cash. Seems pretty silly, doesn’t it? (Are you with me so far?)
To mock him, since he was apparently willing to choose what he sees as the real risk of death by AI car over wearing a sensor, I joked about the death he was imagining.
Clear?
I know there are a lot of ideas floating around there.
Notice .. NO ONE has mentioned pre-paying funeral expenses At All.
Notice also I am ridiculing the notion that AI cars are inherently dangerous and have been throughout the thread... I know, it is hard to read a whole page or even more ... but you apply yourself. You have capacities the like of which you cannot imagine.
Then Mobile155 posts:
If you can read the thread (I know ... so many posts) you will also see that Mobile 155 is not opposed to AI cars. In fact, the one person who is opposed to AI cars, is Roody, who is also opposed to wearing or having in his bike a sensor to make his bike work better with the AI cars around him.
Still following? I know, irony and humor make things confusing.
Also, see posts #89 where cooker mentions that cyclists, dogs, and pedestrians might need to wear sensors which the AI vehicles can detect. Cooker is opposed to the idea.
Then read post #90 where I speak in favor of chips in bikes to work better with the AI system.
See the trend? Someone says AI is not safe, I joke “Yes, the cars will surely kill you,” someone else jokes that it is best to prepay .... and you cannot tell who means what because you would have to actually try to read and digest with an unbiased mind, many posts across many threads.
Since you choose not to make that effort, you make your misunderstanding plain to all ... and people take you even less seriously.
Please ... stop shooting yourself in the foot. Toes don’t regenerate.
Oh, and this .....
"He tempted me" is not a valid defense.
I just showed you where you responded to a conversation which never happened.
Besides that ... Everything happens in the present. It is Now, the only instant of which we are aware.
Even when I think of “then” I am doing it Now.
Got it?
Things you make up don’t happen Now because they don’t ever “happen.” When you say that people say we should all prepay for our funeral expenses because AI cars are going to kill us ... but As I Showed, No One Said That ...........
So ... it is not an “insult.” It is a Fact.
Don’t complain to me. Stick to facts and no one can successfully attack you. But when you force your meaning onto situations and then attack others for the things you invented ... yeah people might respond to that.
Look, I in no way dislike you, but you do say some silly things ... like trees are not affected by petroleum. There are a lot of dead trees across the Northeast and the Rust Belt which were killed by acid rain which cannot point out to you the folly of that statement ... because they were killed by petroleum.
If you take a little more time to think before you post ... and yes, I Will Also Take That Advice ... and I thank you for it .....
But seriously ... if you don’t understand what someone means, it is better to ask than decide. If you make a mistake and someone points it out, don’t consider it an insult, consider it a learning opportunity.
I will try to treat you better ... That I can do .... but you need to up your game. I cannot do that for you.
If you don’t want to bicker, do whatever else. I sometimes don’t come back for a few days so I don’t get too emotionally invested and say the kinds of things I have said in the past ... or that you sometimes say.
But don’t blame the world. Your job is to deal with the world. It is not for the rest of the world to adapt to you. Whatever else you take from your time here .... felling that everyone is out to get you is Not healthy. Sometimes life hurts, sometimes interacting with people hurts. Find what in you, you need to change so you are not vulnerable.
If some complete stranger at some random website, a person who you do not know and about whom you do not care, can get you upset .... maybe you want to change that?
Have a grand evening and a good night, or whatever it is you want or are supposed to have. I am late for my ride.
#111
Prefers Cicero
His “logic” is lacking ... sorely. He is the one who thinks AI cars are a threat, yet he is the one who refuses to take a safety measure unless compensated with cash. Seems pretty silly, doesn’t it? (Are you with me so far?)
To mock him, since he was apparently willing to choose what he sees as the real risk of death by AI car over wearing a sensor, I joked about the death he was imagining.
To mock him, since he was apparently willing to choose what he sees as the real risk of death by AI car over wearing a sensor, I joked about the death he was imagining.
#112
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
Notice .. NO ONE has mentioned pre-paying funeral expenses At All.
Notice also I am ridiculing the notion that AI cars are inherently dangerous and have been throughout the thread... I know, it is hard to read a whole page or even more ... but you apply yourself. You have capacities the like of which you cannot imagine.
Notice Mobile 155 never says AI cars will kill anybody. Mobile 155 understands that this is all a joke on the irrational fear and the irrational response of Roody ... clear so far?
If you can read the thread (I know ... so many posts) you will also see that Mobile 155 is not opposed to AI cars. In fact, the one person who is opposed to AI cars, is Roody, who is also opposed to wearing or having in his bike a sensor to make his bike work better with the AI cars around him.
Still following? I know, irony and humor make things confusing.
Still following? I know, irony and humor make things confusing.
Also, see posts #89 where cooker mentions that cyclists, dogs, and pedestrians might need to wear sensors which the AI vehicles can detect. Cooker is opposed to the idea.
Then read post #90 where I speak in favor of chips in bikes to work better with the AI system.
See the trend? Someone says AI is not safe, I joke “Yes, the cars will surely kill you,” someone else jokes that it is best to prepay .... and you cannot tell who means what because you would have to actually try to read and digest with an unbiased mind, many posts across many threads.
See the trend? Someone says AI is not safe, I joke “Yes, the cars will surely kill you,” someone else jokes that it is best to prepay .... and you cannot tell who means what because you would have to actually try to read and digest with an unbiased mind, many posts across many threads.
Since you choose not to make that effort, you make your misunderstanding plain to all ... and people take you even less seriously.
"He tempted me" is not a valid defense.
I just showed you where you responded to a conversation which never happened.
Besides that ... Everything happens in the present. It is Now, the only instant of which we are aware.
Even when I think of “then” I am doing it Now.
Got it?
Besides that ... Everything happens in the present. It is Now, the only instant of which we are aware.
Even when I think of “then” I am doing it Now.
Got it?
Things you make up don’t happen Now because they don’t ever “happen.” When you say that people say we should all prepay for our funeral expenses because AI cars are going to kill us ... but As I Showed, No One Said That ...........
Don’t complain to me. Stick to facts and no one can successfully attack you. But when you force your meaning onto situations and then attack others for the things you invented ... yeah people might respond to that.
Look, I in no way dislike you, but you do say some silly things ... like trees are not affected by petroleum. There are a lot of dead trees across the Northeast and the Rust Belt which were killed by acid rain which cannot point out to you the folly of that statement ... because they were killed by petroleum.
If you don’t want to bicker, do whatever else. I sometimes don’t come back for a few days so I don’t get too emotionally invested and say the kinds of things I have said in the past ... or that you sometimes say.
But don’t blame the world. Your job is to deal with the world. It is not for the rest of the world to adapt to you. Whatever else you take from your time here .... felling that everyone is out to get you is Not healthy. Sometimes life hurts, sometimes interacting with people hurts. Find what in you, you need to change so you are not vulnerable.
If some complete stranger at some random website, a person who you do not know and about whom you do not care, can get you upset .... maybe you want to change that?
#113
Bicyclerider4life
Once AV take off, car light (will be the norm), meaning, people will start, to NOT actually own the car they are using... IMO, why.? because of cost, and regulations ... I suspect it will actually be (in effect) started to be basically "mandated", meaning, licencing will be harder and harder to get, for personally driven vehicles... JMO
Most people over the last couple decades Lease "their" car. They do not own it.
I agree that a drivers license for a non-driverless car will become more difficult to obtain in the years to come. However, that is a minor point or concern. The insurance costs for a non-driverless car will be prohibitive for all but those who have a comperable income in that day above that of Bill Gates today.
Heck, by 2025 ~ 2030 non-driverless cars, trucks, and vans may be outlawed or prohibited on public roads. It is likely that driverless commercial vehicles will replace the commercial vehicles that are on our roads today. They may well have a "driver" but their responsibilities will be to make sure the load is properly secured, all the paperwork is in order, and putting fuel in the tanks; not actually driving.
Until the cost of private ownership of a vehicle becomes prohibitive for the "average working person" cars will always be most people's first choice in transportation.
#114
Prefers Cicero
It would be different in that they wouldn't possess and monopolize their cars, they would use and share independently owned cars, much like cabs and uber today. (If it happens).
#115
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 103
Bikes: 2012 Surly Karate Monkey SS, 2012 Surly Cross Check, 2016 Litespeed T3, 2015 Niner RLT 9SS
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
https://www.bikerumor.com/2018/02/07...-see-cyclists/
Bikerumor did a nice article about the challenges AI cars face. This is worth the read.
Bikerumor did a nice article about the challenges AI cars face. This is worth the read.
#116
Senior Member
"The same problems exists with regular drivers who don't always react properly to seeing cyclists on the roads. (Not helped by some cyclists not obeying the rules of the road to start with)" Last paragraph in that article.