Not Again... Americans who can't afford their mortgage up 145%

Fogdog said:

I'm dubious about the idea that self driving cars are nigh. Even trucks. I wouldn't trust my computer to drive my car. It's one thing when Zelda doesn't play or Netflix stops running due to a "known bug" and quite another when traveling down the interstate and a recent upgrade literally crashes. The computer industry is always hyping the next big thing. Do you remember Apple's Newton? We have hand-helds that sort of work now but in the early '90's that was all hype.

Click to expand...

AI is the difference,smart machines are here and advancing at a very fast pace and all the sensors that guide them. Robotics and automation are here now, one small example is 1000 Wendy's locations will add automated kiosks this year alone. I
think by 2025 there will be major changes.

captainmorgan said:

AI is the difference,smart machines are here and advancing at a very fast pace and all the sensors that guide them. Robotics and automation are here now, one small example is 1000 Wendy's locations will add automated kiosks this year alone. I
think by 2025 there will be major changes.

Click to expand...

Yep, the self driving cars aren't a fad, major companies like Intel are investing billions in them. As far as trusting computers to drive, I trust them more than the drunken fool,or 90 yr old to drive. With all their imperfections the death rate would go down significantly when self driving cars are common. At some point it the future it will be illegal to drive your own cars, at least in the cities and on the interstate.

twostrokenut said:

couple years payments, way cheaper than rent

Click to expand...

no, you lost more than just a "couple years payments", if that's all you paid on it (you are a known liar so i have to account for this).

you lost all those payments, the 20% down payment you claimed you made, the property taxes you paid, any and all improvements you put into the home, and the home itself.

but hey, at least your trailer will depreciate to $0.00 as well.

save the fucking trailernomics, you inbred racist retard.

captainmorgan said:

AI is the difference,smart machines are here and advancing at a very fast pace and all the sensors that guide them. Robotics and automation are here now, one small example is 1000 Wendy's locations will add automated kiosks this year alone. I
think by 2025 there will be major changes.

Click to expand...

what I think about all of this is really not based on anything special that I know about. I'm probably making the old "past performance is indicative of future results" mistake. But really, we were supposed to have flying cars by now. Also jet packs and intelligent presidents. So, maybe I can be forgiven if I'm dubious about self driving cars being mainstream in 8 years.

Fogdog said:

what I think about all of this is really not based on anything special that I know about. I'm probably making the old "past performance is indicative of future results" mistake. But really, we were supposed to have flying cars by now. Also jet packs and intelligent presidents. So, maybe I can be forgiven if I'm dubious about self driving cars being mainstream in 8 years.

Click to expand...

the difference is that flying cars and jet packs aren't a good idea to start with and major companies arent putting billions into research. Most of the problems will be regulatory and resistance of people at first to trust it. The timeline is debatable, but there coming in less than 20 yrs. As far as past performance, who predicted the internet in a hand held device 30 yrs ago?

jonsnow399 said:

the difference is that flying cars and jet packs aren't a good idea to start with and major companies arent putting billions into research. Most of the problems will be regulatory and resistance of people at first to trust it. The timeline is debatable, but there coming in less than 20 yrs. As far as past performance, who predicted the internet in a hand held device 30 yrs ago?

Click to expand...

People are funny, if a computer causes a fatality in a crash, people will point to that and say "See that? I would never trust a computer to drive" ignoring the thousands of deaths caused by human error.

I enjoy driving. We often go for a weekend drive. Id hate to live in a society where you had to use a self driving vehicle. Dont get me wrong id like the option if you could be drunk and stoned in the back seat whilst getting drivin home by a computer. But I dont hold much hope on that being legal.

Lucky Luke said:

I enjoy driving. We often go for a weekend drive. Id hate to live in a society where you had to use a self driving vehicle. Dont get me wrong id like the option if you could be drunk and stoned in the back seat whilst getting drivin home by a computer. But I dont hold much hope on that being legal.

Click to expand...

I used to enjoy driving, but now I would rather jump in a self driving car and let it take me wherever. I don't see why it would be illegal to be drunk or high in a computer driven car, its not illegal to be drunk passenger in a human driven car.

jonsnow399 said:

the difference is that flying cars and jet packs aren't a good idea to start with and major companies arent putting billions into research. Most of the problems will be regulatory and resistance of people at first to trust it. The timeline is debatable, but there coming in less than 20 yrs. As far as past performance, who predicted the internet in a hand held device 30 yrs ago?

Click to expand...

jonsnow399 said:

People are funny, if a computer causes a fatality in a crash, people will point to that and say "See that? I would never trust a computer to drive" ignoring the thousands of deaths caused by human error.

Click to expand...

I haven't been in an accident in decades. If you've ever looked at reliability statistics for most information systems, my driving record in terms of hours between failure beats them by a wide margin. You assume that the new tech will be better and eventually it will probably be better than people. Just saying that with all the people on the roads and all the hours people spend driving, a "few thousands of deaths" is remarkable reliability.

So, yeah, given my driving record and the general record of automobile safety today, if I had an accident while my car was being driven by AI, damn right I'd blame it.

With anything new, especially when statistics of safety with people at the wheel is so good, before anybody tells me this new tech "will be better", I say, show me that it is better and I'll believe it.

Right now it's all theoretical. AI is the new buzz word.

It isn't real until it can be proven. It has not been proven that driverless cars are safer than people in all conditions and all states of car maintenance currently on the road. Therefore, it's not real.

I admit that I'm a tough sell. In my defense, I'd like to point to exhibit A: There have been many accidents that many technologists claimed were not possible. Like the Exxon Valdez. Before the accident, oil industry pointed at all the safety procedures to make the case that an accident like that would never happen. After the accident they said you can't make anything perfectly safe. The fuckers were covering their asses while entire ecosystems were irrevocably changed. Same with Deepwater Horizon. I'm sure it's exasperating to a true believer to hear, but having worked in tech all my career, I'm not exactly impressed by the people and companies behind the machines.

Not that I'm against research and field trials. Not that I think it will never happen. I think eventually driverless cars will be safer than today's driven vehicles. Just saying, it's going to take longer than 8 years to safely implement. Triple that number. Would be my guess.

Automation and AI in the manufacturing and services sectors is in fact reshaping our economy and it is a cause of lost jobs and lower wages. So, no disagreement with @captainmorgan on his main point.

jonsnow399 said:

I used to enjoy driving, but now I would rather jump in a self driving car and let it take me wherever. I don't see why it would be illegal to be drunk or high in a computer driven car, its not illegal to be drunk passenger in a human driven car.

Click to expand...

Im guessing it will be because your still in charge of the vehicle.

jonsnow399 said:

We basically agree.You have a good record, you're not the problem what about the 5 time convicted drunk driver? Old people? I was walking across the street one time and was almost ran over by an old lady, she did manage to sideswipe my buddy's car, I got her tag number and called it in, the cop said she didn't even realize she had hit anything. Not denying that the AI will probably kill a lot of people, just a lot less than people drivers on average.

Click to expand...

Hasn't been shown to be true. So, it's not true. Your belief is real to you. I'll grant you that.

jonsnow399 said:

As is yours.

Click to expand...

AI driven cars have not been shown to be safer than people. This is a fact and not a belief. I believe driver less cars will eventually make it to mass production. This is my belief and not necessarily true.

Fogdog said:

AI driven cars have not been shown to be safer than people. This is a fact and not a belief. I believe driver less cars will eventually make it to mass production. This is my belief and not necessarily true.

Click to expand...

I'd be happy with driverless cars replacing the worst drivers first, if only there was some way to do that...

jonsnow399 said:

As far as past performance, who predicted the internet in a hand held device 30 yrs ago?

Click to expand...

Plenty of people. There was a fad around 1990 and some products were released that claimed it was all just about to happen.

Remembering the Apple Newton’s Prophetic Failure and Lasting Impact
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/remembering-the-apple-newtons-prophetic-failure-and-lasting-ideals/
Newton, Apple didn’t just set out to create a new device. It wanted to invent an entirely new class of computing. Computers that could slip into pockets and go out into the world. In fact, the pocket was a core design requirement.

just because you don't know things doesn't mean they didn't happen.

Not to anyone in particular but everything we see invented has been thought of before. Dick Tracy with his phone watch for eg. Even Maxwell Smart with his shoe phone.

Science Fiction is a wonderful thing. Get out and read some.

jonsnow399 said:

http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/googles-self-driving-car-is-ridiculously-safe
14 incidents in 1.8 million miles mostly human error caused, just because you don't know something snowflake doesn't mean it isn't true.

Click to expand...

I listened to the video and read the article. Not one firm bit of information in any of it. It wasn't a fake, but it was just a bit of soft and exuberant vision of what driverless cars will do for us. I have no issue with any of this. Maybe the prediction of all major car companies releasing driverless cars by 2020 surprised me. It hasn't happened yet and I'm not aware that all technical issues have been solved but there you have it. They predict driverless cars by 2020. OK. As the narrator said, Brin predicted he will have these cars in people's hands by 2016. oooookay.

Lucky Luke said:

Not to anyone in particular but everything we see invented has been thought of before. Dick Tracy with his phone watch for eg. Even Maxwell Smart with his shoe phone.

Science Fiction is a wonderful thing. Get out and read some.

Click to expand...

I'd sure like people to start checking their enthusiasm for things that haven't happened yet. This, to me, is one of the reasons science no longer has a place in public policy decisions. Not that science is to blame but the technical and science writers talk of future tech as if it's already there. When it's not, the blame is on science and not the people who in good faith but also in their ignorance were naive about the yet unknown problems remaining to be solved.

Build it, test it, analyze results fix the problems and build anew.

Build-Test-Fix is expensive and takes time. It is an event driven process and not schedule-driven one. There are no shortcuts. This is why r&d is not for the faint of heart and requires deeper pockets than one can imagine at the outset.

Fogdog said:

Plenty of people. There was a fad around 1990 and some products were released that claimed it was all just about to happen.

Remembering the Apple Newton’s Prophetic Failure and Lasting Impact
https://www.wired.com/2013/08/remembering-the-apple-newtons-prophetic-failure-and-lasting-ideals/
Newton, Apple didn’t just set out to create a new device. It wanted to invent an entirely new class of computing. Computers that could slip into pockets and go out into the world. In fact, the pocket was a core design requirement.

just because you don't know things doesn't mean they didn't happen.

Click to expand...

About the same time, Compac had a handheld computing device that would connect to the internet (at 28.8k!) And had a shot in the back for a cell phone chip. I still think of it as the first 'smart phone'.

Fogdog said:

I listened to the video and read the article. Not one firm bit of information in any of it. It wasn't a fake, but it was just a bit of soft and exuberant vision of what driverless cars will do for us. I have no issue with any of this. Maybe the prediction of all major car companies releasing driverless cars by 2020 surprised me. It hasn't happened yet and I'm not aware that all technical issues have been solved but there you have it. They predict driverless cars by 2020. OK. As the narrator said, Brin predicted he will have these cars in people's hands by 2016. oooookay.

Click to expand...

Technically, Brin wasn't wrong; Tesla had their 'beta' self driving technology in cars last year.

Several fatalities ensued, but the timing was right.

Laser radar has really brought the possibility of self driving cars into reality.