There is a battle for our right to drive our cars

There is a battle for our right to drive our cars

Am Sure you can learn successful Blogging secrets through me, am also sure you can learn how to make money online with the help of my updates why not leave your email behind let me show you how.

The Humanitarian Association hopes that autonomous vehicles that develop automotive and IT makers will not become a norm By 2050, autonomous vehicles will become so sure that people will not be allowed to drive their cars alone.

More and more car manufacturers claim to work on their own versions of autonomous vehicles. Some of them are well-known companies in the automotive industry, such as General Motors and Ford; other popular names from the hi-tech industry, such as Waymo; thirds are brand new players, like French Navy. All are unanimous that unpopular cars are the future that inevitably awaits us.

When cars do not have a driver, they will be very sure, all these companies claim. In recent months, however, their messages triggered a massive reaction to retaliation. A “Humanitarian Association” has been set up, which is already preparing for the battle – a fight for the right of people to drive their cars themselves.

The Radwood Exhibition is one of the arena where the hurricane in the upcoming battle is intensifying. This is the car fair where cars are produced from 1980 to 2000. They are different in appearance but have a steering wheel, three pedals, a shift lever.

They are all from the era when engine management was not computerized and when the cars could repair themselves with the usual tools that everyone has at home. These cars show a relationship with technology that will soon disappear – a car in which human engagement is strong, and automation is futile.

The same exhibition was held for the first time in San Francisco in 2017; but this year is already happening in dozens of cities, including Sodegaur in Japan, notes Newyorker. Technical support as a philosopher Political philosopher and mechanic on motorcycles Matthew Browover argues that the ability to independently repair machines and devices in our lives is a matter of worldview.

Knowing that things about us – especially those that create human hands – affect individuality; this allows us to understand the structure of the world we have created. The mass market economy, writes Crawford, produces devices that are “black boxes”. We can not fix our own microwave ovens or printers; Many of today’s cars do not even have oil level checkers.

To drive such a car is similar to a gigantic iPhone: instead of driving directly to the car, drive it through the user interface. More and more people are fighting against “the tons of electronic shit being pushed into the machines.” Many of them visit exhibitions like Radwood.

There is much talk about the position of ACS. It joins them to protect the freedom of movement of people and their right to drive their cars themselves. People in the association do not rule out the possibility that such a situation will happen in the future, where – for safety reasons – the management of a human car becomes unlawful.

Then driving the old car with pedals and manual transmissions would be considered a terrorist act. Anyone who deserves it will be considered robbers. To prevent such a scenario, the Association insists on the laws that require the car makers in each vehicle to turn on the steering wheel; Every future car has the ability to be 100% driven by a person.

For people who car maintenance is a matter of worldview, retro car exhibitions are not an expression of nostalgia, but resistance to excessive automation. Automotive and Freedom Unmanned cars and the possibility of 100% human control undermine human intelligence and human freedom, assured Alex Roy, a 47-year-old man known as a racing car driver, not one or two sets of cars.

He is one of the founders of the association. Roy says that human autonomy – unlike vehicle autonomy – is the only type of autonomy that is really important. “Autonomy = Freedom,” he writes. “Freedom to go anywhere, or anywhere, or to cross the whole country without cause.” Being able to decide and judge yourself must be the right of every person.

Roy is deeply concerned about the appearance of a completely autonomous car future. It blames anyone who quickly accepted the idea of ​​fully autonomous vehicles and the inevitability of the future of this type of vehicle. He is convinced that it is a vision that is driven by only two industries that want to sell their products, and the wider public uncritically accepts this vision.

Roy is categorical that there is a massive sense that autonomous driving technology is far more advanced than it actually is. Come on! Roy asks for a broadly accepted understanding that unmanned vehicles will provide much greater security than those that people control. On the one hand, it should be borne in mind that there is in fact insufficient statistics to confirm this.

Automobile companies developing unmanned vehicles represent different metrics – some focus on mileage without incidents, others on other metrics. Each company selects the information that best represents its product. There is no common standard. Practically, no car seemed safer than the one on the wheel, says Roy.

Many problems that autonomous cars promise to solve have simpler, non-technological solutions. In order to reduce traffic in the urban environment, local authorities should invest in good public transport and high-quality road infrastructure. In order to reduce pollution, the authorities should build more cycling routes and encourage the adoption of electric cars.

According to Roy, safer car movements have nothing to do with technology. It is necessary to raise educational standards for driving licenses and to improve the education of drivers. Attempting the public to believe that autonomous vehicles are the solution to the security problem, the manifestation is “our civic laziness,” said co-founder of ACS.

“It is easier to think that technology can solve the problem, which is actually a matter of education and regulation.” Safety has long been a key argument for accepting a car without a driver. According to most tourist agencies around the world, most serious traffic accidents are a result of human error or deliberate human decisions.

Developing autonomous automotive companies claims that machines can not make such mistakes and cannot make deliberate decisions that are against the rules. According to this logic, the rejection of autonomous automotive technology in the future may be irresponsible – even unethical.

“People may be forbidden to drive cars because it’s too dangerous,” Elon Musk promises at a technology conference in 2015 (Tesla alone has the right people to drive their cars and this has been emphasized many times).

Musk also says that in the long run, when people are convinced that cars that are themselves safer than cars managed by people, “the public can declare it illegal”. In his book “Machines Thinking: The Future of Artificial Intelligence” by 2018, Toby Walsh, Australian researcher AI, predicts that by 2050 autonomous vehicles will become so sure that people will not be allowed to drive their cars themselves.

He believes that society will bring that decision naturally. Techno-vocabulary Insisting that computers can be better than people can be termed a vocabulary, says Meredith Broussard, former software developer and current journalism professor at New York University.

She explores resistance to autonomous vehicles in her book, “Artificial Intelligence: How Computers Do not Understand the World”. “Most autonomous vehicle manufacturers are techno-vocalists,” says Broussard.

According to her, a major problem with the safety of people driven cars is an upset driving – where drivers’ attention hampers phone calls, reading messages, and other factors of that sort. Arguing that the car itself is a problem or that driving alone is not really a matter of fact, says Brusar.

Like Roy, it also strongly provokes the inevitability and security of unmanned cars technology. “There is a moment in which we need to divide the fantasy with reality, and the reality is that autonomous vehicles are double-decker killing machines, which do not work as well as their defenders. , the association is committed to adopting automotive technologies that enhance safety without the restriction of freedom.

Sam Alex Roy is working on car technology for automotive intelligence, says that such decisions must be wise, ie to help the driver without his freedom.

When Roy conceives the perfect a car of the future, speaks of a car with the option of autonomous driving in urban areas and highways, with an integrated disaster relief system, an off-road mode that allows full control of people, and an ideal car will also have a “privacy” button that will shut it down from wireless networks.

Automation should serve It’s about freedom of driving, not for downloading it, says Roy.

There is a battle for our right to drive our cars

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *