Weekend links

Texas can’t legally leave … that issue was settled by the 600,000 deaths you mentioned. The treaty of Guadalupe was killed when Texas joined the Confederacy and lost … treaties with defeated powers are all automatically void. Japan no longer complains about the Washington naval treaty.

I would like to see them just leave, regardless. Just to watch Washington DC squirm.

Many of the laws re: secession strike me as asking for permission. Of course no one wants another civil war, but technically no one has to ask either, even though fedgov thinks it settled that question 150 years ago.
—-

“Indeed, as people learn more about autonomous vehicles and how they work, it’s likely that public opinion will come around. And if not, that’s when auto manufacturers, the government, the law, and the insurance industry will all step in.”

So self-driving cars are inevitable, right – whether “public opinion” wants them or not? But if the public didn’t buy them, what then…

My question is, Will it recognize animals in its path (larger than a certain size), or attempt to miss them also? What is its built-in criteria? If we’re that busy that we can’t pay attention to where we’re going, maybe multi-tasking is not what it’s cracked up to be.

Why not put a manual override on the car, like automatic speed control?
—-

Job Culture, get out of the way! But among other things, telecommuting would take the pressure off the traffic problem of big cities, lessen the need for gasoline and America’s excuse to be in the Middle East, and might even decrease texting. (How often do you text someone while rushing to the grocery store two blocks away?)

This subject relates to the one above: If we’re living/working in small towns or sub- and ex-urbia and buying from Amazon.com with no reason to travel far from home, the automobile industry is going to feel the pressure – including the need for few self-driving cars. Another example of technology not thinking the problem through, and often shooting itself in the foot – usually with “government” money, at our expense.)

So self-driving cars are inevitable, right – whether “public opinion” wants them or not? But if the public didn’t buy them, what then?
When the author says, “the government, the law…will step in” it means, “You want to go on my highway, you get yourself a self-driving car.”

If we’re that busy that we can’t pay attention to where we’re going…
But in a self-driving car you would be a passenger. Do you pay attention to driving when riding in a bus or van?

Why not put a manual override on the car, like automatic speed control?
Because even drivers in control of an auto too often get distracted. If the car is driving itself you won’t be paying close enough attention for an emergency override to do any good.

How often do you text someone while rushing to the grocery store two blocks away?
Well, I’m too old to text, but I’d think that while telecommuting would decrease commuting miles, working from home would almost certainly increase the “rushing to the grocery store” type trips.

If we’re living/working in small towns or sub- and ex-urbia and buying from Amazon.com with no reason to travel far from home, the automobile industry is going to feel the pressure…
Small towns and ex-urbia tend to have very limited public transportation, mainly because population density won’t support bus systems or expensive taxi services, so people have more need for a personal auto than in cities. When my daughter lived in Honolulu she and her husband did very well with one car, which they left parked much of the time. They either walked or took the bus. Here where I live, a town of 25,000, the only people who don’t have cars are people who cannot drive. That includes elderly, vision-impaired, folks who get seizures, and other disabled.

Those are the folks who really need a self-driving vehicle.

Out in the real hinterlands, of course, a self-driving vehicle that would safely deliver your teen kids to school, eliminating an hour-and-a-half bus ride each way, might be very popular.

“That includes elderly, vision-impaired, folks who get seizures, and other disabled.”

I don’t get seizures, but I sure as hell qualify for some of the rest, and wouldn’t trust a car to drive for me. Besides, they’re too vulnerable to hacking, and (I’m sure, built-in) government control.

Every town and city and surrounding areas have their own unique conditions which may or may not apply to some of what I said. But generally there are a lot of small towns and outlying areas where stores have come to residential areas, where one could walk, bike or drive short distances to their destination that, seems to me, might eliminate the need for self-driving cars.

As for public transportation, I didn’t/don’t even think of that. (The reasons I don’t pay attention to how a bus driver drives is because 1) I can’t see the driver, and 2) I never take a bus anyway. But I do pay attention to how drivers drive when I’m in a car’s passenger seat.) I’m not saying people shouldn’t have cars, I’m saying they don’t need self-driving cars, *especially* in busy areas or on short trips. I doubt a self-driving car could read all the information coming into it on a busy street without overloading at some point.

“Because even drivers in control of an auto too often get distracted. If the car is driving itself you won’t be paying close enough attention for an emergency override to do any good.”

By encouraging the ignorance of drivers, it would result in poor driving technique, and in fact encourage more distraction. Soon teenagers, e.g., wouldn’t know how to drive at all, any more than they know how to write these days. And like a welfare recipient who relies on his money “fix,” s/he would come to expect the car to do the work for him/her. What happens when the car breaks down? (I once had a Toyota hybrid, and the computer went out on the highway. Suddenly I was without power, and barely got off the road fast enough before coming to a dead stop. Toyota put another computer in and it worked fine, but I never trusted it thereafter. I bought a gas-eater as fast as I could trade it in.) The teenager may never learn to drive; an adult may soon forget. (What percentage of drivers know what to do with a stick shift anymore?)

There may be some good to self-driving cars, but nothing I’ve heard yet overrides the negatives. Like some drugs with more dangers than benefits, the self-driving car should be studied from all angles – especially the political – before it’s put on the road. Yet I’m sure it’s the political angle that is pushing this technology. And that in itself is suspect.

Perhaps even worse than self driving cars, AT&T DigitalLife ads tout the convenience of being able to use your cellphone to unlock your home. I’m astounded, though I probably shouldn’t be by now, that enough people would like this idea to make it commercially profitable on a large scale.

And while we’re encouraged by things like Brexit, worrisome facts still exist. http://www.theamericanmirror.com/photos-un-tactical-vehicles-seen-rolling-virginia-interstate/

I will trust a computer driven car when the people that program it are legally held liable for every accident and they pay for every accident, not the owner of the car. until then, Not a snowball’s chance in hell.

LarryA – I didn’t say that government should do the studies; I’m saying that the studies should be done – complete studies, from every angle *including* political influence that may be lurking, and who would most gain by it. Perhaps a private, objective (UL-type ?) organization could determine the feasibility for this technology but, as Wikipedia states about GPS, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System, “The United States government created the system, maintains it, and makes it freely accessible to anyone with a GPS receiver.” And therein lies the problem; even if the car was made physically safe for the user, it could never be made safe FROM THE CONCEPT ITSELF because the controller is technology that’s out of the driver’s hands.

I personally don’t see the need for, and do see disadvantages to, a self-driving car. But my major objection is the surveillance and control that government would have over it – as is apparently your concern. I think we’re on the same side there, just talking from different directions. (Though I did think you were opting for the car as a practical means of locomotion, thus my arguments against it.)

And an older article on global police in the U.S. (found on Drudge Report, as were the other two articles I’ve linked in comments). http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/02/obama-administration-and-un-announce-global-police-force-to-fight-extremism-in-u-s/