Re: [Vo]:[OT] Nevada doesn't need drivers anymore
But of course! who wouldn't want one? However, I want a vehicle that can travel the stars w/o trouble or fail, detect a dust-sized particle a million miles in advance, bring me back to life, or enable me with immortality, and/or leave all other spacecraft in the dust... no 'ifs' 'ands' or 'buts' about it. The problem is that it already exists, and is so very sophisticated that noone of this time can recognize, perceive, and/or conceive of it. Something can perform what we tend to consider phenomenal, extraordinary or unbelievable, and/or hover motionless w/o a sound, tends to leave one only in disbelief, confused, and maybe feeling abit downright BS'd. > And second, who wants a car that has a mind > of it's own, that can potentially determine that it doesn't like the way > it's been treated lately, and decides to crash itself, thus ridding itself > of > the owner? > *I* would want a car like this. As I pointed out in my book, for thousands of years everyone had cars like this. They were called "horses." Horses have minds of their own; they know the way home as well as you do; and they are far more likely to shake you off and run away than any computer controlled car will be. Orders of magnitude more likely. Some are downright ornery. See my book, chapter 17: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf Note that Arthur Clarke made the point about horses before I did. He thought of everything. - Jed >>
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Nevada doesn't need drivers anymore
wrote: > And second, who wants a car that has a mind > of it's own, that can potentially determine that it doesn't like the way > it's been treated lately, and decides to crash itself, thus ridding itself > of > the owner? > *I* would want a car like this. As I pointed out in my book, for thousands of years everyone had cars like this. They were called "horses." Horses have minds of their own; they know the way home as well as you do; and they are far more likely to shake you off and run away than any computer controlled car will be. Orders of magnitude more likely. Some are downright ornery. See my book, chapter 17: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf Note that Arthur Clarke made the point about horses before I did. He thought of everything. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:[OT] Nevada doesn't need drivers anymore
Oh boy, I can't wait not to own one. No really, this car sounds like an owners dream come true. There's just a few questions that automatically come to mind First, it will likely have to drive people to & fro for fares in-order to earn an income, resulting in high maintenance costs, so, how will it afford to maintain itself? And second, who wants a car that has a mind of it's own, that can potentially determine that it doesn't like the way it's been treated lately, and decides to crash itself, thus ridding itself of the owner? << Nevada has issued the first license for a self driving car: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SELF_DRIVING_CAR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-05-07-16-58-47 at the moment only for testing purposes. mic >>
[Vo]:[OT] Nevada doesn't need drivers anymore
Nevada has issued the first license for a self driving car: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SELF_DRIVING_CAR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-05-07-16-58-47 at the moment only for testing purposes. mic
