1. "A woman in Tempe, Ariz., has died after being hit by a self-driving car operated by Uber.... The Uber vehicle was in autonomous mode with a human safety driver at the wheel when it struck the woman, who was crossing the street outside of a crosswalk.... Uber said it had suspended testing of its self-driving cars in Tempe, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Toronto" (NYT).
2. "Facebook FB shares were suffering their worst day in more than five years as the social network came under fire for improperly managing user information when it revealed that a company with ties to the 2016 Trump campaign improperly kept data on an estimated 51.3 million Facebook users for years when it had been required to destroy the data. Facebook claims to have more than 2 billion active users" (MarketWatch).
3. ???
March 19, 2018
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
75 comments:
I quit Facebook this morning.
I think Uber's got a driver to fire, tell you what. What's the point of having a supervisory human if the human doesn't supervise?
1. Unexpectedly.
Tank is shocked that they are letting them try this at all.
Maybe these smart guys in the silicon valley will finally come to the conclusion its not good to piss off half of the country or be seen as taking sides in politics?. Who knows you may find yourself needing support from people running Washington or something.
What benefit is a driverless car? Seriously, I see no benefit except to replace humans easier because they have no skills that are needed by the machines.
What's the point of having a supervisory human if the human doesn't supervise?
They were busy updating their Facebook page at the time.
The day the rise of the robots ended?
No. As far as the driverless car, they've most likely already saved lives, in terms of fewer fatal accidents per mile driven. If they haven't done so yet, they will soon.
They have significant limits, in particular driving in snow or other poor visibility situations. But they will keep reducing the limits, and keep getting better.
{Facebook] revealed that a company with ties to the 2016 Trump campaign improperly kept data on an estimated 51.3 million Facebook users for years when it had been required to destroy the data.
"Improperly kept data". Suuuuuuure, FB. Anything you say.
I guess that if Cambridge Analytics was keeping that data "improperly" that somewhere along the line CA signed a contract or terms of usage agreement to that effect. Would you, FB, mind producing that agreement for the public to see?
But I'll spare everyone the trouble. There was never a contract. There was some enormous piece of verbiage Terms of Use that some guy at CA had to click on before he did the download. In those ToU, there was some clause about the disposition of the data that FB never had any intention of enforcing & has never enforced against any other client. The reason? The data goes "stale" on its own over time, & so the end users either re-fresh the data and are thus within compliance again. Or, the stale data is essentially worthless & the clients delete it because it's just taking up space.
No, the truth is FB, like any corporation, sells its wares to all buyers. This time they just got caught selling their wares to Darth Vader & The Dark Side of the Force, & their Lefty Allies have now got their panties in a wad over their belated realization that FB makes its living selling advertising.
The robots beg to disagree. On the contrary, they announced, "All your base are belong to us", as they declared war on pedestrians.
traditionalguy said...
What benefit is a driverless car?
Greater safety at a lower cost. It might be only slightly safer now, but it will be significantly safer in the near future. It is not a lower cost yet, but it will be significantly lower ( than paying a driver ) in the near future.
I'm a very safe driver, but I'm glad that in 20-35 years, when I'm old enough to no longer be a safe driver, that will not be a limitation on my mobility.
"I quit Facebook this morning."
I bought 100 shares of FB when Trump was inaugurated. I wish I'd bought 1000.
She was walking her bike, not in a crosswalk.
Anyone who has done programming knows that users, let along passersby, can screw up any program.
I could see driverless trucks at night on a major highway.
Today's slide represents a nice buy opportunity. I might not buy 1000 shares tomorrow, but I might buy another 100.
”What's the point of having a supervisory human if the human doesn't supervise?”
The task of the “supervisory human” is impossible to perform. You’re not driving the car, yet you must be poised to take over control at a moment’s notice. Anybody who thinks this is possible hasn’t thought it through or has a poor imagination.
"I could see driverless trucks at night on a major highway."
But can they see you?
I was stopped in traffic this morning. A student decided to cross the busy street in the middle of the block, cutting in front of me, and was narrowly missed by a car passing on my left. Not the driver's fault if he'd hit her, so maybe that's all the programmers inputted.
Ignorance is bliss if you fall for hypothetical saved lives statistic. And don't tell anyone but the can be turned off by an honest and noble Big Brother secret agent if you seem suspicious like by wanting to elect Deplorables.
OK, I am in favor of driverless Harley Davidsons. The computer will keep them from reving their motor.
"But can they see you?"
Not if they're texting.
The great benefit of a driverless car is to permit fleet operations without expensive labor costs. If the cost of an Uber ride boils down to amortization of the initial cost of the car and its upkeep, variable expenses (principally gas or electricity), a pro rata share of g + a, and profit, they'll be able to lower their prices considerably and for a lot of people make it unnecessary to have second, third and for some, even first cars. Driverless trucks also have the potential to disrupt the freight industry.
"I could see driverless trucks at night on a major highway."
I can't. My son is regional manager of operations for a major trucking firm, has hundreds of drivers and trailers in his region. Every time I bring up driverless trucks - with a wink - he just rolls his eyeballs. People don't have enough understanding what truckers do; it's more than just driving the truck. I can certainly see driver-assisted trucks, much like the driver assist tools my wife has in her new 2018 Honda Pilot - collision avoidance, lane keeping assistance, adaptive cruise control, cross-traffic monitoring. Some trucks may already have them. I have tried them on the Pilot on a couple of recent trips to our GA home and they are pretty cool. Certainly are a big help while driving and actually reduce fatigue quite a bit. But they have their faults and quite often I have to intervene when they can't quite adapt to the situation on the road. You still have to remain alert. Obviously this Uber driver didn't.
Here is a brief post from Marginal Revolution about why driverless trucks are pie in the sky.
"3. ???"
Sex robot chews 25 times before it swallows after man celebrating an inheritance imitates his late mother in gruesome emasculation incident at high tech brothel.
I'm guessing the Cambridge Analytics story is going to be hyped more and more as the Russian Collusion(TM) theory collapses. If they time it right, the shift in gears could be imperceptible.
GNR. The Singularity is near, and there is no stopping it. Adapt or die.
Facebook=Russians. Zuckerberg, doesn't that sound like a Russian (or at least Soviet Socialist Republic) type? A 2d or 3rd generation mole. Possibly in league with the Rothschild's in their devious plotting to change the weather. Luckily, the Nation of Islam is all over it.
What benefit is a driverless car?
Cars sit idle 90% of the time. The only current method to increase the utilization percentage requires an expense (driver wages) greater than the cost of the car. Once cars are driverless public transport costs drop to 25% of what they are now. At that point owning a car is replaced by driverless Uber bringing mobility to just about everyone and eliminating statist boondoggles like streetcars and bus mandates.
Plus it frees up massive amounts of space currently used for parking.
Wasn't there another story just this morning that claims that Facebook let Obama use their data to gain unprecedented access to users for targeted political advertising and campaigning, because they were "on Obama's side"? Funny that these two stories come out at almost exactly the same time, but yet the only one getting airplay is the anti-Trump piece... It's almost as if there was a grand conspiracy among the 4th estate to distract people from the truth and control the narrative in order to bring down a duly-elected President... What a weird coincidence...
/sarc
I’m ready to put in my order for the killing machines that are on every military drawing board. What could go wrong?
People don't have enough understanding what truckers do; it's more than just driving the truck.
Maybe so, but driverless is still coming. I've seen predictions of less than ten years which I think are bunk. There might be prototypes or driverless within certain constraints by then, but not general use. But within the lifetime of some people alive today pretty much all vehicles will be driverless.
Some percentage of drivers will convert to those other functions. For example there are loading/unloading coordination issues. So the staff at both points needs to beef up and former drivers will be a natural available labor pool. But the driver part of the job is headed for extinction. The economics are to powerful to ignore.
National Review mentioned about Obama's data slurp. It's the same thing that Cambridge Analytical did. I'm not sure why such a big thing is being made about it now. I guess that Silicon Valley is not seen as so friendly to the left, so they no longer have a get out of jail card. Especially when they give help to a non Left company.
My guess on what actually happened - it's not actually giving access to your friends data, it is just allowing to see who your friends are. This way they can be targeted for advertising. FaceBook tries to make it very hard to actually see individual customer data. I could be wrong, the explanations I have heard so far have been vague.
”Cars sit idle 90% of the time.”
My car sits idle 90% of the time just waiting for me to use it at a moment’s notice.
I like that.
There is a lot of effort being made on driverless cars, and even general use cars are getting more and more automated. The industry seems to be moving very quickly. It has a lot further to go before an automated driver is better than the average human driver.
And there is a question of insurance / liability - that is a huge issue.
And hacking.
And automated trucks have the issue of theft.
"Anyone who has done programming knows that users, let along passersby, can screw up any program."
As far as I know, the law simply demands that drivers never permit their vehicles to strike anything, yet some accidents (such as the every-driver's-nightmare of a small child chasing a ball out into the street from between parked cars) truly are unavoidable. Unless one avoids them by not driving, of course.
"What benefit is a driverless car? Cars sit idle 90% of the time."
And if you drove your car 18 hours a day, every day, you'd use it up within a year. It's certainly true that a car depreciates even if it's not used, but it'll depreciate a whole lot faster if it's in near-constant use. That is, cars (like just about everything) have both fixed and variable costs, and the variable costs here are high enough so that using a car 100% of the time instead of 10% won't reduce the per-mile cost by anywhere near 90%
My car sits idle 90% of the time just waiting for me to use it at a moment’s notice.
I like that.
In a driverless uber world there will be a car at the end of your block just waiting for you. It can be in your driveway before you can get there, plus you get to do something with the 2-3k / year you save. While anyone can still have their own car most people aren't going to make that choice.
Some people own vacation homes but more rent a home or a hotel room for the period they want it.
”In a driverless uber world there will be a car at the end of your block just waiting for you. It can be in your driveway before you can get there, ...”
I know that’s the claim, I just fundamentally don’t believe it will be reliably true. I will be reliant on the future version of the public bus company.
Nor do I need it. I can afford that 2-3k/yr to be the captain of my own ship.
As to people being able to own their own car, I don’t believe that either. Once it’s possible, the statists will go all in to ban that.
Once it’s possible, the statists will go all in to ban that.
I don't see why. The only cars available will be driverless, why would they care if you own or use Uber?
I will be reliant on the future version of the public bus company.
(1) It won't be public, and
(2) Since there won't be drivers the system reliability should be vastly increased.
Nor do I need it. I can afford that 2-3k/yr to be the captain of my own ship.
Oldtimers kept their horses, but their grandkids didn't.
”why would they care if you own or use Uber?”
Why do they want to make it illegal for me to pay for my own health care?
And BTW, why will the only cars available be driverless?
"Cars sit idle 90% of the time."
A given car sits idle because there's not a demand for it at that time. And when there is a demand, like before and after work, every one else needs one too.
"plus you get to do something with the 2-3k / year you save"
You'll still have to pay to get yourself from A to B by the mile. It takes energy and the car gets used up.
A robocop would have apprehended the woman before she got far into the street.
Have they figured out how to insure these contraptions ?
I think they want you to be responsible for whatever your driverless car hits. And what other choice is there?
And, that has the side benefit (from their point of view) of driving people away from owning their own car.
AllenS@3:40pm/
I never joined (although my son has) As an old ex fighter pilot I'm an "under the radar" kinda guy. (I suppose If I'd been a submariner my motto would have been "Run Silent, Run Deep." :) )
Old Glory Ins Co says robot insurance premiums just went way up.
I am not a robot. Ha!
Why are people such sheep?
You don't have to go to Facebook, if all you want to do is share photos with family/friends and chit chat.
What's worse, all these morons go on Facebook and stay there and get all their news there. Even googling is too much trouble for them - nope, better stay on Facebook and be safe.
"But the driver part of the job is headed for extinction."
So, how extinct are airline pilots? Who would get on a commercial aircraft without a pilot or co-pilot? Can we have a show of hands? And pilot and aircraft automation is far easier than automating the driving of a truck on a public highway. Jimmy Doolittle made the first completely "blind", instrumented flight almost 90 years ago and we still have pilots. Who wants truckloads of hazardous materials (and almost all chemical tank trucks are usually carrying something that is hazardous in some way) out on the open road with no responsible human aboard? We will still have humans on the trucks for the same reason we have pilots in the aircraft: shit happens. And there is currently no AI technology that I know of that could successfully handle the infinite situations an over-the-road truck would have to handle. It's not just going from Point A to Point B; lots of other activities that only a human will handle.
"plus you get to do something with the 2-3k / year you save"
You'll still have to pay to get yourself from A to B by the mile. It takes energy and the car gets used up.4k on
2-3k is the net savings. Even a small sedan costs almost 6.5k / year, average of all car types is ~8.5k / year.
http://newsroom.aaa.com/auto/your-driving-costs/
Hillary has long contended that the super targeted Russian Facebook ads could only be directed by someone with extensive knowledge of the US. It's pretty clear they are going to attempt to say that the someone is Cambridge Analytics. How else would they know to whom to send the Bernie coloring books?
And BTW, why will the only cars available be driverless?
In part because standard insurance will require it 98% of vehicle sales will be to people who desire driverless features. Sure, maybe there will be a Tesla type specialty offering but that won't fit the price model you mentioned. There won't be sufficient non-driverless demand for larger companies to offer that option on standard vehicles.
I think most people would want to own their own car and will be willing to pay. Think of how disgusting the public ones will be. People just don't take care of public property. Think of all the things people will be doing in there, from eating to partying to having sex, pissing and shitting, bleeding, vandalism, graffiti etc. Who's going to clean these cars and inspect them? How many rides between checks? They are going to gross. What are you going to do when the thing comes to take you to work and it's full of vomit? Call another, sure, but it's rush hour. Are there any available?
People switched from horses to cars because they had more freedom, more speed, more power, more prestige, not just convenience.
Virgil, the only reason that I joined Facebook is because I was invited by a sister of a man that I went to Vietnam with who was KIA over there.
It seemed so safe back then, now, there seems to be more and more information coming forward that they are not to be trusted. It was time to get out.
And when there is a demand, like before and after work, every one else needs one too.
Lots of people are retired, many also have a vehicle for each driver in the home. I'd be surprised if the percentage of vehicles in use compared to the owned population is ever much over 50% (in America at least).
”People switched from horses to cars because they had more freedom, more speed, more power, more prestige, not just convenience.”
The car was a better horse. Public cars are not a better car.
”In part because standard insurance will require it”
Yeah...
Joshua Barker said...
Wasn't there another story just this morning that claims that Facebook let Obama use their data to gain unprecedented access to users for targeted political advertising and campaigning, because they were "on Obama's side"?
3/19/18, 4:39 PM
When you're a democrat party member, they just let you do it!
"Cars sit idle 90% of the time.”
My car sits idle 90% of the time just waiting for me to use it at a moment’s notice."
Dave Hughes says that while everyone knows that 20% of fishermen catch 80% of fish,
most people (like Rick) don't realize that's because 80% of fish are in 20% of the water (ISBN-10: 081173644X)
Some people will see how this relates to morning commutes.... Others won't
What kind of soulless paste-eating, zombafied, sorry-ass mutherfucker wants to sit in little box and wait for it to slowly creep itself from his company dorm room to his company cubicle? If my kid turned out like that, I'd smother him with a pillow for his own good.
This driverless car thing is a sickness of the soul. Sure, I can see the advantage for the old and disabled, but I don't want a wheel chair either.
It's another long held Prog dream of control. They hate the freedom cars represent and they can't wait to force us all into into these horrors. It's evil.
Death before driverless!
Driver-less cars.
Would you trust your life to a computer?
Well, what about a taxi? Except the Taxi driver doesn't want to crash either.
A significant component of the driverless car dream is about control. I don’t know if Rick is being coy or is naive when he asks “why would they care if you own or use Uber?”
”Except the Taxi driver doesn't want to crash either.”
I’ve always found significant comfort in the fact that my plane is being flown by a real, live human.
I don’t know if Rick is being coy or is naive when he asks “why would they care if you own or use Uber?”
How am I naive? I'm the one who realizes they'll be getting the data they want either way.
Others won't
Still others won't realize this point was already addressed and will remain smug in their ignorance.
gilbar: It's called fishing, not catching for a reason.
I think that driverless cars will first be operational on limited access roads (ie freeways) where they will allow cars to be spaced closer together at speed.
if you do the math, you're currently spending as much on gas,oil,tires as you are on your car. These robo cars will be spending much more time driving back and forth instead of resting in a garage. I'll believe the numbers will work when I see it. Not that I will ...
Cars are like Houses, not like Vacation houses. I don't use my house very often, but I sure like not having to pack up every morning (and I'm sure glad I could leave my fishing poles sitting in my car while I was at work, in case I wanted to stop on the way home. If I had to clean out my car every time I left it, I would not have time to retire. These fish won't catch themselves
Re: Facebook ~
@JaimeRoberto ... appreciate your clever humor, but hold up. RUSSIA! is already happening, and it isn’t from the Onion. The “whistleblower” at Cambridge Analytica is already trying to form links between CA and Russia. I sh*t you not. Samantha Guthrie didn’t seem to be buying much of his story, but whether this Chris Wylie guy becomes the next Michael Wolffe media pariah remains to be seen. He looks like the villain Syndrome (from “The Incredibles”), but skinnier, so he just might gain some traction. In his interviews — Channel 4 (UK) in particular (he’s all over YouTube; just search for Cambridge Analytica), Wylie essentially claims that he was THE designer of the evil algorithm that brainwashed America into electing monster Trump. But he’s a changed man now, stepping forward to blow the whistle, full of remorse.
Here’s his interview w/Guthrie:
https://youtu.be/VOxbqM1meuk
Wait till a driverless car mows down a child. Acres of political hay to be reaped.
”Wait till a driverless car mows down a child.”
If it’s your car, you will ne held responsible. Think about that.
”How am I naive? I'm the one who realizes they'll be getting the data they want either way.”
I don’t think they’re after data, they’re just after control. Because the world would just be a better place if they only had control.
Complete. Control.
"The Day the Rise of the Robots Ended".
I await the Don MacLean version.
I'm not a robot.
I will be reliant on the future version of the public bus company.
(1) It won't be public, and
(2) Since there won't be drivers the system reliability should be vastly increased.
I'm an Amazon Prime user. When I signed up 3+ years ago, it worked as advertised. I put in an order, it got assigned "two day delivery", and it showed up on my doorstep two days later.
I put in an order last (Monday) night. Selected two day "prime" delivery (which is now an "option", not "just the way Prime always works"). Expected delivery date: Friday. Granted, "Monday night" is "Tuesday morning" in the business world, but (1) Amazon's shipping centers run 24/7, not banker's hours, and (2) Tuesday-to-Friday is still 3-day delivery.
And it's not like I live in East Podunk, Montana (population 17, counting the 4 dogs)... I'm in the Minneapolis suburbs.
Prime has worked like this for over a year. I'll probably drop it.
I see no reason that any Uber-ish "we'll get you a car in 5 minutes or your next one's free" startup gimmick won't wind up the same way. (Maybe, like Prime, they'll give you some free streaming content to watch while you wait.)
Jaywalking with her bicycle "at least 60 yards from the crosswalk" at 10 p.m. People like that are a menace to traffic and by doing something stupid, not only are they endangering themselves but also causing emotional harm to innocent drivers who accidentally hit them in the dark. In this case, it was an autonomous vehicle but also had a human backup driver who probably didn't have time to react. I really am annoyed by people who bicycle at night, especially if they don't have on reflective stuff that makes them visible.
Use the damn crosswalk! Don't be a victim of stupidity!
traditionalguy said...
What benefit is a driverless car? Seriously, I see no benefit except to replace humans easier because they have no skills that are needed by the machines.
Driverless cars will enable people who might otherwise be a danger to others on the road to get around safely. This includes both elderly drivers with bad vision/poor reflexes as well as people who like to drink. When driverless cars become the norm, DUIs will become a thing of the past.
Post a Comment