[ExI] self-driving cars again
pharos at gmail.com
Sat Jul 14 18:07:14 UTC 2012
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 6:37 PM, spike wrote:
> Slate ran a short article on a feature of auto-autos that I had thought of,
> but they take it a step further. The software will drive only at the legal
> speed limit. I doubt they will program them to go faster. I went a
> different direction than Slate. I reasoned that if auto^2s will only go the
> speed limit tops always, this obviates the need for capability of going
> faster. I took the typical mechanical engineers approach: speed limits are
> very low compared to even slow cars, so we can save a lot of weight in
> drivetrain and structure, as well as simplifying the control software and
> Slate went off in a different direction. They reason that when auto^2s hit
> the market, they will be expensive, and so they will be for rich people, and
> rich people don’t want to poke along at the legal speed limit which wastes
> time and has its own risks: it blocks traffic. The human occupants run the
> risk of being shot by irate human drivers stuck behind the reprehensible
> copulating couple in the auto^2.
> Slate reasons this is a show stopper for auto^2s: they only go the speed
> limit always, and no one wants to go that slow:
Another article I read referenced this article and took another view.
They agreed that initially these cars will be for rich people. So the
rich people, as usual, will either ignore the laws or get the laws
changed to suit themselves. They will tune the cars to go as fast as
is safe, depending on the conditions, and probably just treat the
speeding fines as a business expense.
Alternatively, they will get their tame senators to create special
lanes for these cars. So when you are stuck in the traffic, the
masters of the universe will be hurtling past at 200 mph.
More information about the extropy-chat