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.

  • 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.

              • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
                1·
                9 months ago

                Then why don’t you argue in favour of it?

                I do, frequently, but we’re in a thread discussing the merits of autonomous vehicles vs normal car, not the merits of public transit.

                Why, among all the gazillion of approaches to reduce traffic deaths, are you focussed specifically, and quite pin-pointedly so, on self-driving?

                Because that’s what this fucking thread is about. You want to start a thread on the merits of roundabouts vs cross intersections and you’ll see me arguing for roundabouts.

                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?

                You clearly have not been to the US if you think the Mormons are the most stubborn and backwards part of it. Go to Florida, go to any Trump supporting county, drive from a city to the various suburbs and country homes and see how spread out they are. Look at how half the US votes. Utah and the Mormons are an exception and odd sect that isn’t remotely representative of America at large, they also mass built housing for the homeless, something that nowhere else in America has done. And guess what? Utah still has a ton of cars.

                And you know what makes self driving cars different from every solution that you mention? They have the potential to be an exact drop in replacement for existing cars and can work absolutely everywhere they do, including all edge cases.

                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.

                Bruh, you can’t fucking read. I’ve already told you I’m not American and that I do that. Jesus fucking christ your brain is incapable of not just thinking “haha I’m arguing with generic tech bro dufus, let me clown on how tech bro dufus he is ha ha ha”

                • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
                  11·
                  9 months ago

                  I do, frequently, but we’re in a thread discussing the merits of autonomous vehicles vs normal car, not the merits of public transit.

                  And the merits are “people don’t like it”. As evidenced by the very title. You asked me why anyone would destroy an automated car, I gave you an answer, you didn’t accept it but neither provided an alternative. Maybe ponder about it a bit more.

                  Because that’s what this fucking thread is about.

                  No, this thread is not about how cool autonomous driving it, but about a crowd destroying an autonomous car. Why did they do that?

                  Overall, nice try at diversion, as if any discussion on the internet had ever been limited to the original topic, wait, let me prove it: Hitler! Godwin!. Really you should try to employ less rhetorical tricks. They may work on you, they rarely if ever work on me.

                  You clearly have not been to the US if you think the Mormons are the most stubborn and backwards part of it.

                  Point taken, but if the Mormons can do it, why can’t California? They at least were smart enough to abolish single family home zoning and didn’t blink when Musk tried to torpedo California HSR (which is what his hyperloop nonsense is about), but that was the state forcing the municipalities to enact a bare minimum of zoning sanity that they themselves were unwilling to do. I think Portland leads the pack in that regard, at least among the more prominent locations.

                  Maybe that’s exactly the issue: Things like streetcar suburb aren’t new. They are what existed until they got outlawed by a failed innovation. Mormons might be conservative enough to look back and say “yep that was better”, while California liberals are, just as you, saying “muuuuuuh but we need something shiny and new, old solutions can’t fix anything”.

                  They have the potential to be an exact drop in replacement for existing cars and can work absolutely everywhere they do, including all edge cases.

                  And I have the potential to be an exact drop in replacement for Jesus Christ. Why do you insist the fix to the issues be a drop-in replacement? Conservative, afraid of change, much?

                  I’ve already told you I’m not American and that I do that. esus fucking christ your brain is incapable of not just thinking “haha I’m arguing with generic tech bro dufus, let me clown on how tech bro dufus he is ha ha ha”

                  Apparently doesn’t stop you to be car-brained like an American. As to techbro: Don’t act and argue and talk like one and I’ll stop calling you that.

                  • masterspace@lemmy.caEnglish
                    1·
                    9 months ago

                    And the merits are “people don’t like it”. As evidenced by the very title. You asked me why anyone would destroy an automated car, I gave you an answer, you didn’t accept it but neither provided an alternative. Maybe ponder about it a bit more.

                    Lmfao, so your answer at the end of all this, is “automated cars won’t happen because people don’t like them”??

                    And yet your alternative is for every American to give up their car and take public transit. lmfao.

                    And I have the potential to be an exact drop in replacement for Jesus Christ. Why do you insist the fix to the issues be a drop-in replacement? Conservative, afraid of change, much?

                    Learn how to read.

                    Apparently doesn’t stop you to be car-brained like an American. As to techbro: Don’t act and argue and talk like one and I’ll stop calling you that.

                    Apparently doesn’t stop you to be car-brained like an American. As to techbro: Don’t act and argue and talk like one and I’ll stop calling you that.

                    Learn how to read.