<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Posted for Tara:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>[Could you please pass this on to the extropy list for me? I still have my messages bounced by my server when I try to post.]<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Robo-cars will probably start coming with a lot of apps to entertain passengers as they drive. This will probably happen in three ways:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>1. They will integrate with existing tech, i.e. you stick your iPad in the slot and watch it as a tv.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>2. They will have their own integrated tech, i.e. a giant tv/computer already in the car, chairs that massage you, sleep lighting, 360 degree windows for sightseeing, etc.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>3. They will make present day limo perks look tame. Food and alcohol will be commonly available in robo-cars. Driving drunk will be popular again, since there's no reason not to. Fridges may become standard features.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Kelly Anderson wrote: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I suspect autonomous vehicles will also<br>result in a very high measurable increase in productivity. Now all you<br>can do in your car is use your cell phone, which is only so<br>productive. In the future with autonomous vehicles, you should be able<br>to do reasonably passable video conferencing and computer sharing<br>(like <a href="http://gotomypc.com">gotomypc.com</a>) and such that will be way more productive than the<br>uses we put our time in cars to now.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Yes, I think there would be a tremendous gain in productivity. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Right now you have millions of people spending hours per day doing nothing but trying to get from one spot to another without killing anyone along the way. It's tiring, it's stressful, it's a waste of time. On a train or a bus, you can do some work while you ride, but you still have disadvantages. The main one is that they don't pick you up from your house and drop you off at your work, but don't forget the others. It might be too crowded to get out your computer, or you might be afraid of thieves; for women, especially, there is the need to be vigilant about predators, which can make public transportation just as stressful as driving (whenever people trumpet about the supposed virtues of public over private transportation, I cannot help but recall certain unpleasant experiences in this area); and if you forget your stop, or leave behind your bag, you are screwed. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>A robo-car would be like having your own private train, without any of those disadvantages. You could have your workspace all ready for you, without fear of being robbed, crowded, harassed or dropped at the wrong place. I think many people will start their work day as soon as they sit in their robo-car.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>But even the slackers and the students and the folks just on their way to the mall or a movie will still contribute to the economy in their robo-car, because they will probably be surfing the net, buying apps, playing games, reading, watching movies, etc. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If robo-cars made it easier to drive a long way in a shorter period of time, then longer commutes would be possible. Case in point: we would love to move our family further from the city center in order to buy a house with an actual yard. However, the commute to work already wastes two hours a day, an hour each way. Furthermore, that time is completely wasted, since it must be spent avoiding high-impact death, rather than, say, answering emails. Even if a robo-car couldn't make the commute one minute faster, by freeing the driver to do something else (like on a train), that would free up two work hours. And if the robo-car system could reduce traffic and increase speeds safely, then perhaps we could live twice as far away, in a nicer house, with the same over all commute time, which is now also work time. Big win.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Robo-cars could also allow families to safely send kids to their various lessons and games without doing all the "chauffeur" work themselves. I don't know how many parent-hours are spent just driving, but it sure would be nice to use that time otherwise. Even if you went with your kids to the soccer game, you could sit and talk with them in the car rather than spend your time swearing at other drivers. ;)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>On May 16, 2012, at 12:47 AM, BillK wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='color:black'><br></span>Most accident repair shops will close down - more unemployment.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Repair shops might do less repairs (I am actually dubious even about that, since even if robo-cars have less accidents, they can still break), but will still be active. Service shops will include something like the "genius desk" to help all of the older citizens and liberal arts majors actually *operate* their robo-cars, which will be more like operating a computer than a machine, and thus baffle a good portion of the population. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Every new feature the robo-car engineers and app developers add to make it "easier" to use robo-cars will only confuse the tech-challenged portion of the population more. They will need more service assistance. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>On May 16, 2012, at 12:47 AM, BillK wrote:<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Mostly people won't own their own car. They will just specify their<br>journey, number of people, luggage, etc. and an appropriately sized<br>vehicle will turn up on schedule and deliver them to their<br>destination.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I can't think of any reason people wouldn't want their own car. Most people will still commute to work, and so need the car daily. Unless for the reasons some have suggested it is *significantly* cheaper to rent a rob-car daily than to leave it in your garage, and I'm not sure it would be, people would buy and own cars. Maybe this would depend on the city one lived in, since of course there's already a difference in car ownership in, say, Los Angeles vs New York. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>However, maybe this is just my own hang-up. I'm not big on rentals. I don't rent my house, I don't rent my computer, I don't even loan school books if I can buy them. I'd rather own my own vehicle. If it's my own car, I can pack it with a diaper and toy bag for the kids, water bottles and power bars in case I am stuck in a snowstorm or earthquake or alien invasion. The kids can put stickers on the window. And if the baby barfs on the seat, I don't have to worry about paying some company a fine. (And really, would you *want* to be the next customer in the car after me on the day the baby is sick? No, my friend. No, you really wouldn't. You'd want me to own my own car too.)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Unless of course, it was really, really much cheaper and almost as fast to get a rental to my house whenever I needed it. Speed is important. If I live out in the boondocks because robo-cars have made it easy to commute a long way, I don't want to have to wait half an hour every time I call a car to my house. The price difference would have to significant too. Right now, if I wanted, I could ride the bus and train to work, but it would cost me almost as much as my car, and that's just for my commute. It doesn't count all the other trips I make chauffeuring the kids around.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>In that case, sure, you'd have to put up with my baby possibly barfing on your seat. So a lot depends on price point. I guess I just don't see why robo-cars would be more expensive to own compared to always taking taxi-robo-cars. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>By the way, my 3 little boys absolutely LOVE cars. I don't pretend to understand it, but good luck decoupling cars from the American (really? no one else in the world loves cars? really?) psyche. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>On May 16, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Another important side effect of on-demand cars showing up when<br>required is that we de-invest our identity from them. I'm not going<br>to leave 'my stuff' in the car when anyone else might be using it next<br>or (more likely) that I may not see that particular vehicle again for<br>weeks. Assuming these vehicles keep themselves clean (within<br>tolerances agreed-upon by service provider and consumer) there is also<br>less concern for how stylish the vehicle is; for it is no longer a<br>status object to be owned or compared to others'.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Certain people who at present don't care much about cars will buy new cars more often to get the latest features.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I don't really see why people would de-invest their identity from their cars just when the cars get cooler and more awesome than ever. That hardly fits with human nature. A phone was always something of a status symbol, but that has only increased as phones have gotten "smarter" and the gap between the most basic phone and the most feature-loaded phone increases. As robo-cars are likely to increasingly load cars with new apps and features, we are likely to see their status-value increase or at least continue to be of importance. The main change will be that it will no longer be merely speed and style that is important in judging a car, but things like its connectivity to larger systems.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>On May 16, 2012, at 12:47 AM, BillK wrote:<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Eventually people will be banned from driving on public roads as being<br>just too dangerous.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Indeed. Which would open a market for privately owned courses where ordinary people could take their hobby cars to drive. Much as people do with horses. It might even be cheaper than keeping a horse, since you only need to "feed" it when you drive it.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Motor sport will dwindle away as it is much less interesting without<br>the spectacular crashes. And will humans really want to spend the day<br>racing each other when a robo-car can come along and beat all their<br>lap times and show them how it should be done?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Motor sport will split into robo-car racing and human driver racing. It will still be popular. Drivers will still die. Otherwise, they wouldn't do it. Some people crave danger, and the safer the rest of the world becomes, the more they will turn to artificial ways to inject danger into their lives. Fans will love watching it for the same reason on a lesser scale.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>People generally just won't travel nearly as much. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Are you kidding? I would travel a lot more. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Travel time would no longer be wasted time. In fact, if your really enjoyed the feeling of movement, you might even choose to work from your car, as you would probably have full connectivity. You could drive and work four hours in the morning, stop in a brand new city every day for lunch and a bit of sightseeing, then work another four hours on the commute home.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The cruising for no<br>reason will disappear as you won't be doing the fun driving. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Except you could be drunk. And going very, very fast. I imagine some people would indulge in that just for the hell of it. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> problem won't matter so much if people gradually<br>stop needing to use oil at the same time as oil supplies gradually<br>reduce and become more expensive.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Obviously, a lot depends on how cheap it is to buy and run a robo-car vs what we have now. But in general, I think that if robo-cars could go faster in a shorter period of time with less stress for the driver, then we will see an *increase* in mobility, not a decrease.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Just for the record, I think increased mobility is to be welcomed, not feared.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'>Tara Maya<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://goo.gl/My1if">The Unfinished Song: Initiate</a> (Book 1)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://goo.gl/6YT1F">The Unfinished Song: Taboo</a> (Book 2)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://goo.gl/tIr4u">The Unfinished Song: Sacrifice</a> (Book 3) <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>