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
    21·
    10 months ago

    No. Railcar suburbs once existed and existing car-dependent single-home suburbs can be turned into them by, as I already explained, densifying around the stations. Which has been done, and is being done, and would come soon also to your city if you bothered to argue for it.

    Learn how to read.

    Yeah that’s not how to argue. What am I supposed to read in that context? You’re deflecting.

    As to me personally: I never owned a car. Never needed one.

    I didn’t ask and I don’t care.

    You said this:

    You literally have to wait for every suburban stick in the mud to be willing to move out of their home or die before you can achieve your car-free dream.

    No, it’s not a dream. No, I’m not living in the city centre, either. You’re, again, deflecting in a desperate attempt to deny reality, denying the change that’s happening even in places that are culturally extremely car-centric.

    Touch grass.

    • masterspaceEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      Yeah that’s not how to argue. What am I supposed to read in that context? You’re deflecting.

      It means reread what you wrote and then reflect on what might have already been explicitly contradicted. Maybe reflect on what I’ve said about my political views instead of injecting the car loving stereotype you’ve made up.

      No, it’s not a dream. No, I’m not living in the city centre, either.

      Congratulations bro. There are still cars all around you and you would still be safer if they were autonomous.

      • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
        11·
        10 months ago

        Maybe reflect on what I’ve said about my political views instead of injecting the car loving stereotype you’ve made up.

        Nah I don’t think you’re a petrol head, I think you’re a techbro. I’ve accused you of it amply, and you have never even tried to give off any other impression.

        Congratulations bro. There are still cars all around you and you would still be safer if they were autonomous.

        Statistically speaking I’m vastly more likely to fall off a ladder changing a lightbulb than getting hit by a car. But I’m sure you have a technology for that, too… don’t you? Because you want to focus on the issues that actually affect people?

          • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
            11·
            10 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.

              • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
                11·
                10 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.

                • masterspaceEnglish
                  1·
                  10 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·
                    10 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