No one was inside a Waymo car as it was destroyed.

A crowd destroyed a driverless Waymo car in San Francisco::A Waymo car was destroyed in San Francisco as a crowd began vandalizing it and ultimately set the car on fire. Nobody was in the vehicle at the time.

  • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
    11·
    9 months ago

    If you think I’m a tech bro I will repeat what I’ve already said, learn how to fucking read. Jesus fucking Christ you’re an idiot.

    From what I’ve read from you you’re fanboying automated driving quite a lot. See it as the one and true thing to solve all the issues even though I gave you plenty of examples of things it can’t solve, even if it did work. You addressed none of them in a convincing manner, instead dug your head in the sand, indicative of a closed world-view.

    “techbro” is simply shorthand for that.

    Um, they’re called LED light bulbs, and you only have to change them once every 10-15 years instead of a couple times a year.

    Good job missing the point. Then I’ll fall off the ladder cleaning windows or shoving winter clothes onto the top shelf of the cabinet. Changing a smoke alarm battery. Point is: Household accidents aren’t exactly rare: In 2022, 2.776 people died in Germany due to traffic accidents. Domestic accidents: 15.551.

    There are also these little things called fall arrests harnesses.

    …and you’re going to make people use them how? Put a police officer in every household to make sure people are sticking to occupational safety principles?

    I’d say if those companies put even just a tenth of the money they spend on automated driving research into domestic safety, even just ad campaigns, they could save a lot more people. But they of course won’t you can’t make money with that unless you’re the state.

    so present your plausible plan for getting all of the world to give up cars in the next let’s say even 20 years,

    As soon as you give an actually good argument how you’re going to replace every car we currently have with an automated one, sure. As soon as you tell me how to square the circle of automated cars not running over pedestrians but still being reliable enough to actually go where you want them to go. As soon as you admit that you’ve been constantly ignoring those problems because they contradict your faith.

    And thanks for the reminder that even people with extremely similar political views to me, can be arrogant dickbag idiots.

    I very much doubt we have the same opinion on whether capital should be running basic infrastructure.

    • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
      1·
      9 months ago

      Good job missing the point. Then I’ll fall off the ladder cleaning windows or showing winter clothes on the top shelf of the cabinet. Point is: Household accidents aren’t exactly rare: In 2022, 2.776 people died in Germany due to traffic accidents. Domestic accidents: 15.551.

      300 people died falling from ladders in the US, while 35,000 died from traffic fatalities. So shut the fuck up with your cherry picked stats and shifting from a single problem (ladders) to all household accidents once you tried to look up stats and realized you were a fucking idiot.

      …and you’re going to make people use them how? Put a police officer in every household to make sure people are sticking to occupational safety principles?

      WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You asked for a technology that helps prevent ladder falls, THATS WHAT A FALL ARREST HARNESS IS. YOU FUCKING IDIOT. Here’s another one: light bulb changing poles!

      I very much doubt we have the same opinion on whether capital should be running basic infrastructure.

      Yeah, because you’re an idiot who can’t fucking read and keeps slotting in a tech bro stereotype. You’re a judgemental, inaccurate, dumbass.

      • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
        11·
        9 months ago

        So shut the fuck up with your cherry picked stats and shifting from a single problem (ladders) to all household accidents once you tried to look up stats and realized you were a fucking idiot.

        You’re doing it again: I readily admit that I used the statistics loosely, I didn’t even look up numbers, I said “ladder” and meant with that “household accidents”, which I knew to be much higher than traffic deaths (at least over here, dunno about the US).

        What did you do? Instead of correcting me on the fuzziness but acknowledging that household safety is a bigger issue than traffic safety, you go on “lol you dumb I don’t have to engage with your point because you made a spelling mistake”.

        That’s not being smart, that’s being a smart-ass. It’s not engaging with the argument in honest discussion, but using cheap tricks to deflect. Ben Shapiro would be proud of you.

        You asked for a technology that helps prevent ladder falls, THATS WHAT A FALL ARREST HARNESS IS.

        A safety technology which doesn’t get used doesn’t increase safety. Or is the existence of autonomous cars making non-autonomous cars safer? Hmm? Basic logic? If you want a technology to solve something, part of the design requirements for that technology is its acceptance, its price, which will dictate how ubiquitous its use will be. Technology cannot be understood apart from its social context.

        • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          You’re doing it again: I readily admit that I used the statistics loosely, I didn’t even look up numbers, I said “ladder” and meant with that “household accidents”, which I knew to be much higher than traffic deaths (at least over here, dunno about the US).

          Yeah, and you were fucking wrong about that too, and just focused on your own area and extrapolating what’s going on in your fucking village to the realities around the world. Like I said, arrogant.

          What did you do? Instead of correcting me on the fuzziness but acknowledging that household safety is a bigger issue than traffic safety, you go on “lol you dumb I don’t have to engage with your point because you made a spelling mistake”.

          It wasn’t a spelling mistake, you didn’t bother looking up stats and made an argument based on incorrect information. Even the stat you thought you had in your head was for your tiny region of the world only, not the world on global scale.

          A safety technology which doesn’t get used doesn’t increase safety. Or is the existence of autonomous cars making non-autonomous cars safer? Hmm? Basic logic? If you want a technology to solve something, part of the design requirements for that technology is its acceptance, its price, which will dictate how ubiquitous its use will be.

          Yes, and when we’re talking about a problem that causes 35,000 deaths a year on top of billions in damages and hundreds of thousands injured and maimed (in the US alone), then there are many avenues to have regulators encourage or enforce the use of that technology. It’s also not very expensive. First generation Waymo hardware costs ~$100k, that’s easily in the range for autonomous taxi services to pay back within a year of use, give it 10 years for the compute and sensors costs to come down and to get the benefits of manufacturing at scale and it will be easily affordable by average individuals. Another 10 years from then and it will have filtered down into the used and low end markets.

          • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
            11·
            9 months ago

            Yeah, and you were fucking wrong about that too, and just focused on your own area and extrapolating what’s going on in your fucking village to the realities around the world. Like I said, arrogant.

            US, 2021: 128,200 household accident deaths, 42,939 traffic.

            Those numbers took like 30 seconds to find.

            It wasn’t a spelling mistake, you didn’t bother looking up stats

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4bIXVTsJck

            • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
              1·
              9 months ago

              US, 2021: 128,200 household accident deaths, 42,939 traffic.

              You said ladder, now you’re saying “household accidents”, so how are you going to prevent people from falling and hitting their heads on the floor, or falling down their stairs, or poisoning themselves?

              Also, in your made up fantasy world, is “whataboutism” still a valid way to argue? In your society are they only allowed to solve one problem at a time? If we’re having hundreds of thousands of lives changed and ruined every year by something it’s totally not worth solving or addressing because more people are dying in Ukraine right? We need to solve all bigger problems first, and ONLY then can we work on solving traffic fatalities right?

              Appropriate that you used the song famous for not understanding what irony actually is.

              • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
                11·
                9 months ago

                You said ladder, now you’re saying “household accidents”,

                I already addressed that. I meant household accidents as a whole. You’re trying to deflect from the fact that you failed to look up statistics while accusing me of the same.

                We need to solve all bigger problems first, and ONLY then can we work on solving traffic fatalities right?

                Have you noticed something about those statistics Germany vs. USA? How the ratio is approximately 3:1 vs. 5:1? And that’s with the Autobahn having long stretches with no speed limit? What does Germany do that the US doesn’t, that could be copied as tried+true approach to drastically reduce traffic accidents?

                Why are you so focussed on self-driving? It’s unproven technology, at best. Level 4 tech does not exist, all those accreditations are in places with very questionable regulatory regimes. Audi and Honda have proper Level 3 cars, allowing autonomous driving while in a traffic jam, that’s it. That’s it, the rest is wishful thinking and “trust us bro we have venture capital” which works in Palo Alto and Shenzen but nowhere else.

                • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
                  1·
                  9 months ago

                  Have you noticed something about those statistics Germany vs. USA? How the ratio is approximately 3:1 vs. 5:1? And that’s with the Autobahn having long stretches with no speed limit? What does Germany do that the US doesn’t, that could be copied as tried+true approach to drastically reduce traffic accidents?

                  AGAIN, because you can’t get it through your skull apparently, I am in favour of building more transit and actively vote and letter write and campaign for it. Jesus fucking christ, if you respond one more time without understanding that I’m just blocking you and fucking off because this is insufferable at this point.

                  But the point is that regardless of what we want, reality is still reality, American suburbanites are still American suburbanites, and 20 years from now there will still be cars on the road, a lot of them.

                  Why are you so focussed on self-driving?

                  Because hundreds of thousands of people die from human drivers and far more are injured and maimed, every single year. How is that so fucking hard to understand?

                  Level 4 tech does not exist, all those accreditations are in places with very questionable regulatory regimes.

                  Waymo has driven millions of miles in Phoenix and San Francisco with three incidents that produced minor injuries. Are those extremely limited conditions? Yes, intentionally so. But level 4 driving does exist within those conditions, and the cars training in those conditions are preparing for them to expand to less limited conditions.

                  And because 20 years from now the public transit utopia that we both want won’t exist in the US, but self driving cars might be ubiquitous.

                  • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
                    11·
                    9 months ago

                    I am in favour of building more transit and actively vote and letter write and campaign for it.

                    Then why don’t you argue in favour of it? I’m not opposed to automated driving, all I’m saying is that it doesn’t address what you think it addresses. It mostly addresses money billionaires have burning in their pocket.

                    Because hundreds of thousands of people die from human drivers and far more are injured and maimed, every single year. How is that so fucking hard to understand?

                    That’s not an answer. Why, among all the gazillion of approaches to reduce traffic deaths, are you focussed specifically, and quite pin-pointedly so, on self-driving? What makes it so more effective, so more realistic, so more existing, than raised intersections? What makes the rest of the US so fundamentally more backwards than, of all the people, the Mormons?

                    I’ll tell you: Because there’s an illness that has befallen US progressivism, and that is to confuse “new” with “good”, and “already exists” with “not worth it”.

                    And because 20 years from now the public transit utopia that we both want won’t exist in the US,

                    Not with that attitude certainly not, no, it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Stop talking to me, convince your local city council to build a raised intersection you will have done more for humanity.