The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Sailer in Taki's: "The Trillion-Dollar Question"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

The Trillion-Dollar Question
by Steve Sailer
August 09, 2017

Back in March, I asked in my Taki’s Magazine column “Diversity Versus Debate”:

Does the increasing campus hysteria and anti-rationality portend bad news for Silicon Valley? If students increasingly grow up in a culture in which the person with the most wounded feelings rules, will they be able to code emotionless computers as well as in the past?

With the tech industry already immense, and soon to attempt to take over the auto industry with self-driving cars, those are trillion-dollar questions. …

Let me close with one question about Google’s personnel policy: Compared with how you felt last week, how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 131 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. dearieme says:

    “how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?”

    If programmed by a woman it presumably won’t be much good at reversing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Just pray Asians don't program it.

    Anyway...here's the thing.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn't that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    And even though its search results were better than most, it's become rigged over the yrs.

    Now, I hear there are other search engines that are more fair.

    But there hasn't been a concerted effort to migrate there.

    , @Thomas

    “how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?”
     
    How do you feel today about right now trusting your private information — email, web browsing and search history, passwords, geolocation data, financial transactions, all of it — to Goolag? There ought to be a mass movement to dump Google products and services as much as possible.

    http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/08/i-keep-a-written-blacklist.png
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGy7q-yVYAQxQnV.jpg
    , @Father O'Hara
    But you have to change the oil every month.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /isteve/sailer-in-takis-the-trillion-dollar-question/#comment-1961790
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Weaken the little motherblankers to the point that when the neo-Normans make their move to replace the current ruling class there will be no one left with the integrity to stop them. I see the current levels of lunacy as opportunities to be taken advantage of when the time is right.

    The Globalizers have control of the media, academia, banking, government, corporations and the military. The Globalizers in media and academia are especially showing signs of mental decay. Good! Maybe the strength they seem to have is a weakness that will soon destroy them. The various Battles of Berkeley and the Google and media nonsense that attempts to stifle free speech will ultimately destroy the Globalizers in the corporate media and the universities.

    President Trump and American Patriots must keep the pressure on the mentally deranged scum in corporate America and academia. If anything, American Patriots must intensify their provocations against the evil Globalizers who are using the media and academia to attack White Core Americans.

    Charge the bastards. Charge the bastards and break off the attack. Wait until the Globalizers in the corporate media and academia make a fatal mistake, and then charge them again.

    Attack The Globalizer Rats In Academia and The Media

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. The concern is not that they will be incompetent at making the self-driving car. I wrote a while back in a comment on here that they will code social justice into the car. At best, White men will always have to yield to everyone else. At worst, the trolley problem: in a choice between running over a black youth and swerving the car into a wall or off a cliff, the car will always save the black youth rather than the White male driver.

    Read More
    • Agree: Nico, Senator Brundlefly
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Omg that's terrifyingly plausible.
    , @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.
    , @Pericles
    Self-driving cars with utilitarian ethics, anyone?

    http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/people-want-driverless-cars-with-utilitarian-ethics-unless-theyre-a-passenger
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. timothy says:

    I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not create a better self-driving car than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

    Read More
    • LOL: CK, Harry Baldwin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. AndrewR says:
    @27 year old
    The concern is not that they will be incompetent at making the self-driving car. I wrote a while back in a comment on here that they will code social justice into the car. At best, White men will always have to yield to everyone else. At worst, the trolley problem: in a choice between running over a black youth and swerving the car into a wall or off a cliff, the car will always save the black youth rather than the White male driver.

    Omg that’s terrifyingly plausible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car

    Worried that it take the left turn at every crossing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. JamesG says:

    You are wise beyond your age!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. Jack D says:
    @27 year old
    The concern is not that they will be incompetent at making the self-driving car. I wrote a while back in a comment on here that they will code social justice into the car. At best, White men will always have to yield to everyone else. At worst, the trolley problem: in a choice between running over a black youth and swerving the car into a wall or off a cliff, the car will always save the black youth rather than the White male driver.

    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far. However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem – the number of real life “trolley problems” is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    Read More
    • Agree: reiner Tor
    • Replies: @Nico

    I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.
     
    You're really naïve.

    The most prolific SJW cyberbully doxxers have as the end the annihilation of anyone who might give a whiff of encouragement to someone who may be seen as wanting to legitimate ANY... HINT... OF... racism, sexism and homophobia. They have already proven willingness to break the law (see #CNNblackmail) to shut up opposition and if they have not resorted to murder it is because there is not yet an obvious venue in which they could get away with it.

    I share "27 year old"'s fears, to the "T."
    , @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    In the words of John Wayne, "We'll remember you said that."

    Especially when the argument of humans not up to various industrial jobs when compared to computers (automation). When the US loses even more jobs over the coming decades to automation, oh well, the computers deserve it, they work more efficiently, for longer hrs without breaks, and you don't have to pay them anything either. Hey its great, let the computers do all the work and the humans won't mess it up.

    The exact same argument can easily be applied to all fields, not just mundane ones such as driving.
    , @Beckow
    I have driven around self-driving cars and a fundamental problem is their total adherence to rules. All rules, all the time, middle of nowhere, middle of night, or a busy, badly-defined intersection. They stop for a relatively long, full stop every time it is required. They don't cut corners. They wait when they are kind of supposed to, but an alert driver would move. In other words they are not agile enough for the messy, over-crowded world of traffic. That leads to an extra 20-30% slower, less nimble traffic - as if a number of slow, bad, but 'safe' drivers was increased dramatically. Like driving around a huge number of Asian grandmas that were given a driver's license because they drove 'very safely' during the test; no eye contact, no yielding, no mediating complex situations, just dumb adherence to all rules. And imagine trucks of all sizes on the road driving 'within the rules', no turns, no adjustments - how long would it take for a lot of them to end up in a cul-de-sac somewhere? I am a skeptic.

    There is a reason for aggressiveness, it speeds up life. There is also a reason why a flexible approach to rules is a part of all successful civilisations. Rigid order leads to paralysis. And coding 'flexibility' into self-driving cars is inherently crazy, it doesn't matter who is preferred, these compromises have to be lived in real time.

    By the way, Google might actually benefit from this brou-ha-ha. They are a utility company with an assured stream of income. They have been wasting huge sums on silly, 'break-through' ideas like 3D-glasses, cars, offshore programming ships, etc...they need an excuse to scale that back and just collect their utility money. If they are smart they will use this as the excuse - and that might answer the question what the hell is the 'VP of Diversity' doing all day...protecting share holders value as all utility execs with sinecures and corner offices.

    , @Alec Leamas

    The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.
     
    You're probably right that computers can't drink and when working properly will be both safer and more efficient at interacting with other "motorists" and therefore increasing the efficiency of the flow of traffic, but you can't simultaneously hack a few tens of thousands of human drivers and cause them to commit acts of mayhem either. A computer/cloud based traffic system directing cars isn't antifragile.

    Also, since the criminal docket in your local County Court is about 40% DUI/DUI related (and as a consequence, a similar proportion of Judges, staff, police and attorneys owe their livelihoods to people driving drunk), you don't really think they're going to leave people alone because of driver-less cars, do you? What other mischief will they invent to replace the cash cow of DUIs?
    , @Alec Leamas

    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.
     
    With an assist from LOLbertarians, the Left's current "market based" punishment system would mean that it would not offend their sensibilities for any self-driving car tech company and/or cloud-based driving service not to sell you a car and to refuse to to business with you due to your heterodox beliefs.
    , @27 year old
    >I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    After everything you've seen you still think they "wouldn't do that"? The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    >However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as [the driver] would.

    I think that will be a problem for anyone. Who is going to buy a car that's programmed to kill its passengers for the greater good?
    , @dc.sunsets
    Self-driving cars can likely improve upon the average driver's operation, but as with anti-lock brakes, the superior operator can still outdo the automated "good-enough-for-retail-sale."

    Imagine being in a self-driving car when Jawon pulls up next to you and points a gun in your direction. "The car 'thinks,' but sir, the light is still red."
    , @Rod1963
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn't touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won't.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car's critical systems.

    Right now they aren't worth the hacker community's attention. But when there are millions on the road...

    Here's the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.
    , @Lurker
    If saving lives is the prime mission then why are Somalis or MS-13 types allowed to immigrate?

    I'm trying to think through driverless cars - what's the angle, what do tptb get out of it?

    Greater control over the population? Just part of the wider story of automation?
    , @Bitfu
    Think this through a bit more:

    Will police use computer-controlled cars? How about government officials? If so, will they be using the same algorithm? Of course not.

    If you're comfortable with this, do you think it will stop there...do you think these special driving privileges (a dangerous word, btw) will be restricted to government officials? [As if Larry Page or Elon Musk will have the same algorithm as you and me. Even closer to home, I doubt a high-end BMW purchaser get the same algorithm as a purchaser of a Ford Escort.]

    And in 20 years, we'll have 'Blade Runner' meets ObamaCare. Driving privileges will be tied to the Tax Code and politicians will run on promises of 'You can still keep your algorithm'!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Nico says:
    @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    You’re really naïve.

    The most prolific SJW cyberbully doxxers have as the end the annihilation of anyone who might give a whiff of encouragement to someone who may be seen as wanting to legitimate ANY… HINT… OF… racism, sexism and homophobia. They have already proven willingness to break the law (see #CNNblackmail) to shut up opposition and if they have not resorted to murder it is because there is not yet an obvious venue in which they could get away with it.

    I share “27 year old”‘s fears, to the “T.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    You do meet lots of weird and scary folks on the T:
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gSx1P3BdtTo
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    Amusingly, the liberal elites who financed Obama’s reelection in 2012 had no idea that Obama’s turnout strategy of unifying his ungainly coalition of the fringes by ginning up hatred against cishet white males would rebound against them in the ensuing years.

    Jewish Bolsheviks who helped Stalin to power got destroyed by his minions.

    Poetic justice.

    Same with Giggle.

    But Giggle has too much cash and can buy off the naggers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    That would be noogers, but that's really not their biggest problem. Notice that the recent brouhaha was over gender and not race. In part because Google is already colorful because of all the Asians and Indians but also because blacks don't really want jobs as coders. Blacks fantasize about being doctors and lawyers and CEOs and even scientists, but what black fantasizes about acting like an Asian and coding all day? It's like the dog chasing the truck - what happens if you actually catch it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. I bet this will accelerate outsourcing.

    Google will simply form or contract to shell firms, probably within other shell firms, that do most of the productive work. It’s pointless where the workers physically are. Once there are are a couple more added degrees of separation, it will become increasingly harder to track the labyrinth. Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent. It’s going to be a lot less trouble to have your work done where PC culture is less strong. And it has the benefit of further atomizing employees.

    Read More
    • Agree: Negrolphin Pool
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent."

    It'll also result in a bloody awful product if you're not very very careful.

    It's probably time to break Google up. As a search engine it probably peaked about ten years ago, and now it's going for full-spectrum information dominance - maps, books, email, scholarly articles etc - many of which areas have zilch to do with web searches.
    , @anonymous-antimarxist
    You inadvertently bring up a point I have made before. Corporate Diversity policies have for decades been a key deciding factor in companies saying "Screw it we can not staff project for success then we might as well just outsource them". Believe me I have seen it done numerous times. Of course the majority of outsourced projects are flops too, but it spares you the fatal career disaster of being labeled a racist, sexist hater.
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    Paid-by-the-job contractors can spend their days racking up business-hours double digit post counts on Daily Stormer. As long as they produce, the rest is trivia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    In the words of John Wayne, “We’ll remember you said that.”

    Especially when the argument of humans not up to various industrial jobs when compared to computers (automation). When the US loses even more jobs over the coming decades to automation, oh well, the computers deserve it, they work more efficiently, for longer hrs without breaks, and you don’t have to pay them anything either. Hey its great, let the computers do all the work and the humans won’t mess it up.

    The exact same argument can easily be applied to all fields, not just mundane ones such as driving.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Bravo, Steve. One of your best columns of the year.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EdwardM
    Agreed, and I came here to post the same.

    The point about the left seeing Silicon Valley as the juiciest target to loot is underappreciated. However, if that were their only goal -- just to impose a diversity tax on customers, white male employees, and shareholders -- that wouldn't be as dangerous as their second goal, namely, to radically transform society.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Beckow says:
    @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    I have driven around self-driving cars and a fundamental problem is their total adherence to rules. All rules, all the time, middle of nowhere, middle of night, or a busy, badly-defined intersection. They stop for a relatively long, full stop every time it is required. They don’t cut corners. They wait when they are kind of supposed to, but an alert driver would move. In other words they are not agile enough for the messy, over-crowded world of traffic. That leads to an extra 20-30% slower, less nimble traffic – as if a number of slow, bad, but ‘safe’ drivers was increased dramatically. Like driving around a huge number of Asian grandmas that were given a driver’s license because they drove ‘very safely’ during the test; no eye contact, no yielding, no mediating complex situations, just dumb adherence to all rules. And imagine trucks of all sizes on the road driving ‘within the rules’, no turns, no adjustments – how long would it take for a lot of them to end up in a cul-de-sac somewhere? I am a skeptic.

    There is a reason for aggressiveness, it speeds up life. There is also a reason why a flexible approach to rules is a part of all successful civilisations. Rigid order leads to paralysis. And coding ‘flexibility’ into self-driving cars is inherently crazy, it doesn’t matter who is preferred, these compromises have to be lived in real time.

    By the way, Google might actually benefit from this brou-ha-ha. They are a utility company with an assured stream of income. They have been wasting huge sums on silly, ‘break-through’ ideas like 3D-glasses, cars, offshore programming ships, etc…they need an excuse to scale that back and just collect their utility money. If they are smart they will use this as the excuse – and that might answer the question what the hell is the ‘VP of Diversity’ doing all day…protecting share holders value as all utility execs with sinecures and corner offices.

    Read More
    • Agree: anarchyst
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other - they won't need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that's much better than having to drive yourself.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. res says:

    Some good comments at Taki’s today. Here is the currently top rated comment:

    Felix Krull • 4 hours ago
    A couple of decades back, when all this identity-nonsense was in its infancy, a CEO of a large Danish engineering firm was asked by a journalist why there were so few women on his staff.

    “It is against company policy to hire women”, he replied with a straight face. “We don’t hire blacks, Jews or homosexuals either. We hire engineers.”

    I’m assuming it is just a joke, but if it is real and anyone has a citation (I looked) please post it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    If the quote wasn't authentic, it would still be quite interesting (and thought provoking, and fun)).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that have evolved over decades of trial and error.

    a) If one of the biologically founded differences between man and women is sensitivity vs. rationality and if its true, what you write above, that now sensitvity is turned into a tool to extract payoffs, the whole setting could be looked upon as some sort of compensation for former injustices, done to women. That’d be the historical perspective.

    b) From a phenomenological perspective, the above story is wrong, because it is very insensitive to ask James Damore to deny the scientific truth. If you (women) do so anyway, you destroy your own sensitivity, which means, there’s’ nothing left over, to base your claims on.

    (No Heideggerian God anywhere to be seen at this point, who would help us out. We’re stuck with ourselves. It’s either: Fight over arguments (that’s what Google just resisted) – or get involved in real – and – see Steve Sailer’s caveat – possibly destructive fights).

    ((Since these are earthly matters, you usually don’t get the one sober definite solution. Freedom implies risks. And suspense – – (and the chance, at least, for hope; at the very least if there are enough people like James Damore who have the grit, which is sometimes needed to speak your proper mind (Kant)))).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    If we hadn't known you were Deutsch, we would know now; it is the quintessentially German comment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    You’re probably right that computers can’t drink and when working properly will be both safer and more efficient at interacting with other “motorists” and therefore increasing the efficiency of the flow of traffic, but you can’t simultaneously hack a few tens of thousands of human drivers and cause them to commit acts of mayhem either. A computer/cloud based traffic system directing cars isn’t antifragile.

    Also, since the criminal docket in your local County Court is about 40% DUI/DUI related (and as a consequence, a similar proportion of Judges, staff, police and attorneys owe their livelihoods to people driving drunk), you don’t really think they’re going to leave people alone because of driver-less cars, do you? What other mischief will they invent to replace the cash cow of DUIs?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Good points.
    , @dc.sunsets
    They already convict people for DUI / OWI for being caught asleep in a car with the engine turned off.
    People are being convicted of OWI for riding a bicycle while intoxicated.

    Our society is insane on too many levels to enumerate.
    , @Jack D
    You also won't need as many downtown parking meters or garages because the self-driving car will just go to the next passenger or if it's your own, maybe it will circle the block if it is a quick errand or if it is all day, go home and park itself in your driveway or at some distant lot at the edge of downtown where land is cheap.

    In the past there was a whole infrastructure in big cities for picking up horseshit in the street. A lot of people made their living from it - street sweepers, etc. They figured out other ways to make a living. If nothing else, they can always pass new taxes and registration fees to make up for the lost revenue. They can invent new types of crime to occupy the courts. Government can try to slow down technology or exact a toll from technology, but they usually can't stop it completely.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @res
    Some good comments at Taki's today. Here is the currently top rated comment:

    Felix Krull • 4 hours ago
    A couple of decades back, when all this identity-nonsense was in its infancy, a CEO of a large Danish engineering firm was asked by a journalist why there were so few women on his staff.

    "It is against company policy to hire women", he replied with a straight face. "We don't hire blacks, Jews or homosexuals either. We hire engineers."
     
    I'm assuming it is just a joke, but if it is real and anyone has a citation (I looked) please post it.

    If the quote wasn’t authentic, it would still be quite interesting (and thought provoking, and fun)).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    With an assist from LOLbertarians, the Left’s current “market based” punishment system would mean that it would not offend their sensibilities for any self-driving car tech company and/or cloud-based driving service not to sell you a car and to refuse to to business with you due to your heterodox beliefs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Perplexed
    "it would not offend their sensibilities for any self-driving car tech company and/or cloud-based driving service not to sell you a car and to refuse to to business with you due to your heterodox beliefs"

    From a statement by Airbnb: "This Saturday, Virginia’s Lee Park is slated to be the meeting place of the Unite The Right rally, a much-publicized gathering of far-right personalities and their sycophants. With less than a week to go, Airbnb has taken active measures to delete the accounts of some members the company believes to be staying in Charlottesville for the rally—making lodging for planned attendees like members of the National Socialist Movement that much more difficult. …

    "In 2016 we established the Airbnb Community Commitment reflecting our belief that to make good on our mission of belonging, those who are members of the Airbnb community accept people regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age. We asked all members of the Airbnb to affirmatively sign on to this commitment. When through our background check processes or from input of our community we identify and determine that there are those who would be pursuing behavior on the platform that would be antithetical to the Airbnb Community Commitment, we seek to take appropriate action including, as in this case, removing them from the platform. …” (http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2017/08/07/airbnb-renting-houses-to-the-alt-right-for-unitetheright-is-a-tos-violation)

    AmRen has to hold their annual conference in a state park because private facilities are intimidated by opposition.

    When I read The Handmaid's Tale, I was struck by the brilliant simplicity of Atwood's device: One day, the women's cash cards stopped working. The women were unable to function independently in civil society.

    Imagine the banks staffed by SWJs.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    >I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    After everything you’ve seen you still think they “wouldn’t do that”? The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    >However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as [the driver] would.

    I think that will be a problem for anyone. Who is going to buy a car that’s programmed to kill its passengers for the greater good?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.
     
    Yes, it will be told that self-driving cars kill way more black than white passers-by (because black passers-by will be more likely to not follow traffic rules), and so it needs to be corrected.

    But as Jack pointed out, these situations are few and far between.
    , @27 year old
    I also think (hey Unz what happened to our edit function) that the benefits of self driving cars might be overstated - especially before they are made mandatory when the roads are a mix between regular and self driving cars.

    And another thing, if you guys recall the Trump Dynasty post, people can't afford new cars today. Unless self driving cars are somehow much cheaper than the kind you have to drive yourself, who is going to buy them?

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.
    , @European-American
    > Who is going to buy a car
    > that’s programmed to kill its passengers
    > for the greater good?

    You won't buy it, you'll rent it. It will be a public service. Too useful not to use it.

    We patronize many services that we don't fully adhere to because we dont really have a choice. You might ask, who would live in a country that kills people in stupid wars? And the answer is, most of us do.

    It looks like the computerization of everything will also mean the politicization of everything. I'm not sure I like this... Can I please get off here? "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. @Alec Leamas

    The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.
     
    You're probably right that computers can't drink and when working properly will be both safer and more efficient at interacting with other "motorists" and therefore increasing the efficiency of the flow of traffic, but you can't simultaneously hack a few tens of thousands of human drivers and cause them to commit acts of mayhem either. A computer/cloud based traffic system directing cars isn't antifragile.

    Also, since the criminal docket in your local County Court is about 40% DUI/DUI related (and as a consequence, a similar proportion of Judges, staff, police and attorneys owe their livelihoods to people driving drunk), you don't really think they're going to leave people alone because of driver-less cars, do you? What other mischief will they invent to replace the cash cow of DUIs?

    Good points.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @27 year old
    >I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    After everything you've seen you still think they "wouldn't do that"? The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    >However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as [the driver] would.

    I think that will be a problem for anyone. Who is going to buy a car that's programmed to kill its passengers for the greater good?

    The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    Yes, it will be told that self-driving cars kill way more black than white passers-by (because black passers-by will be more likely to not follow traffic rules), and so it needs to be corrected.

    But as Jack pointed out, these situations are few and far between.

    Read More
    • Replies: @27 year old
    I think you guys are kind of glossing over this. Sure it may be rare to have that exact scenario where the only options are to run over a kid or crash into a wall, but that was a simplified example.

    In just about any accident, a choice could be made about whether to do A or B, where A is lower risk for the driver at the expense of someone else and B is the reverse, or even a C which distributes the risk evenly.

    It's a lot easier to make choices where a computer with perfect reaction time is controlling every system in the car.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @27 year old
    >I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    After everything you've seen you still think they "wouldn't do that"? The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    >However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as [the driver] would.

    I think that will be a problem for anyone. Who is going to buy a car that's programmed to kill its passengers for the greater good?

    I also think (hey Unz what happened to our edit function) that the benefits of self driving cars might be overstated – especially before they are made mandatory when the roads are a mix between regular and self driving cars.

    And another thing, if you guys recall the Trump Dynasty post, people can’t afford new cars today. Unless self driving cars are somehow much cheaper than the kind you have to drive yourself, who is going to buy them?

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.
     
    Nonsense. There are millions of people who essentially drive for a living. There's a huge dollars and cents motivation to automate their jobs away.
    , @European-American
    > Unless self-driving cars are cheaper,
    > who is going to buy them?

    You won't buy them, you'll rent them from a car-sharing service, the way you use an Uber.

    I rely on a bike-sharing service and love it, but this gave me pause: on a hurricane day, the service was deliberately shut down for the day. Never mind that it was still ok to ride and that people rode their own bikes without trouble. The bike-sharing service decided to aggressively comply with the city's safety guidelines, and if you relied on it to get to work or run errands, you were out of luck that day.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. songbird says:

    At some point the West needs to wake up to the fact that the East is much closer to a meritocracy. If it doesn’t happen sooner, it will happen later. Either economically or militarily.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Clark Westwood

    At some point the West needs to wake up to the fact that the East is much closer to a meritocracy. If it doesn’t happen sooner, it will happen later. Either economically or militarily.
     
    On a smaller scale, I'm looking to see how long it takes for De Blasio and his SJW brethren to return New York City to the cesspool it was before Giuliani started kicking butt.
    , @Jack D
    In some respect the current period feels like the '30s where Germany and Japan and the Soviets were all building up massive forces and getting ready to make their move and the Western democracies just sat on their asses and dithered and did nothing. Maybe they denounced Hitler in the League of Nations as if passing meaningless resolutions was the same as actually doing something. Then when the dictatorships made their move, we were "blindsided" and they swept through Europe and the Pacific in a flash.

    We see now :

    1. N. Korea building nuke tipped ICBMS (while their Chinese allies have "deniability" - we weren't the ones that nuked DC) and

    2. China building artificial islands, carriers, modernizing their military, etc. using the billions of $ of trade surplus they make from being the "workshop of the world".

    These folks aren't building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it. When the Chinese decide that the time is right to make their move (maybe it's in 10 years, maybe it's 50 - they are playing the long game), we won't know what hit us and our transgender army will be in no shape to do anything about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @reiner Tor

    The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.
     
    Yes, it will be told that self-driving cars kill way more black than white passers-by (because black passers-by will be more likely to not follow traffic rules), and so it needs to be corrected.

    But as Jack pointed out, these situations are few and far between.

    I think you guys are kind of glossing over this. Sure it may be rare to have that exact scenario where the only options are to run over a kid or crash into a wall, but that was a simplified example.

    In just about any accident, a choice could be made about whether to do A or B, where A is lower risk for the driver at the expense of someone else and B is the reverse, or even a C which distributes the risk evenly.

    It’s a lot easier to make choices where a computer with perfect reaction time is controlling every system in the car.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I'm not saying you totally convinced me, but it's certainly something to pay attention to.

    However, the absolute number of fatalities will go down anyway, so it'll just be that the spoils will be divided unevenly. Like everything else these days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @dearieme
    "how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?"

    If programmed by a woman it presumably won't be much good at reversing.

    Just pray Asians don’t program it.

    Anyway…here’s the thing.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn’t that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    And even though its search results were better than most, it’s become rigged over the yrs.

    Now, I hear there are other search engines that are more fair.

    But there hasn’t been a concerted effort to migrate there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Doug
    DuckDuckGo is an objectively superior search service. However they'll never overtake Google because

    A) The name is too long. Bing got this right. A page that people are landing on 100 times a day needs a very short URL.

    B) They don't track users, so that means significantly less ad revenue per search. That translates into less money for marketing and technology investments.

    C) Search has become completely tied to defaults set by browsers and devices. Every Android phone and Chrome browser in the world is set to search Google by default. 99% of users won't be bothered to change that setting. (Half of them probably don't know how). You can't capture search market share without a multi-billion dollar software and/or hardware operation.

    , @Johanus de Morgateroyde

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn’t that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.
     
    The Google search engine is insanely complicated. It's a learning machine that learns you and figures out what you're looking for based on what you meant to search for, not just what you put into the search bar.

    It keeps track of what's topical, trending, and related to what you maybe might have meant to ask for. Ever notice that after you do one search it's pretty good at guessing at the next question you're going to ask? Yes, it does that, it "derives context".

    It's the largest and most sophisticated DWIM (Do What I Mean) project in the history of computer science, and it would be very difficult to ground-up something better. There's a huge difference between producing "results" and "good results really, really quickly".

    , @Eagle Eye

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.
     
    Actually, there is a very good reason for Google's sudden ascent to dominance.

    Google has from the beginning existed in SYMBIOSIS WITH THE DEEP STATE.

    Hence the hundreds of meetings between Google's ambassador to DC and Barry Obama.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. peterike says:

    Can’t we just have self-driving cars for highways? I don’t care if I need to drive on a 15 minute neighborhood streets trip to the supermarket. But when I’m getting on a 3 or 4 hour highway jaunt, I would LOVE to drop into auto-pilot. Driving is such a total waste of time.

    The highway driving challenge is significantly easier as well, except maybe during a BLM protest/highway shutdown. Why does it have to be all or nothing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Probably it won't be. For things like driverless trucks, the current plan, at least at first, is for a human to drive the truck as far as a highway on ramp and then the truck will drive just the interstate part of the trip and be met with a human at the off ramp. As you say, an interstate is a far more controlled and less complex environment (and once they have driverless vehicles on them will have to be even more controlled - they will have to take care to do things like keep the stripes correct in construction zones).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @songbird
    At some point the West needs to wake up to the fact that the East is much closer to a meritocracy. If it doesn't happen sooner, it will happen later. Either economically or militarily.

    At some point the West needs to wake up to the fact that the East is much closer to a meritocracy. If it doesn’t happen sooner, it will happen later. Either economically or militarily.

    On a smaller scale, I’m looking to see how long it takes for De Blasio and his SJW brethren to return New York City to the cesspool it was before Giuliani started kicking butt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. I stole this great comment from Monsieur Voltaire over at Takis:

    A Google self-driving car would be programmed to swerve into a White man to avoid a squirrel. To auto-eject the male passenger if it detects that the female had her feelings hurt. To start playing Village People if there are two guys or more in it. To break down if the GPS is programmed to head to a shooting range, titty bar or a NASCAR event. To drive itself off a bridge if it doesn’t detect a minimum level of melanin within the first 1,500 miles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  30. Jack D says:
    @Beckow
    I have driven around self-driving cars and a fundamental problem is their total adherence to rules. All rules, all the time, middle of nowhere, middle of night, or a busy, badly-defined intersection. They stop for a relatively long, full stop every time it is required. They don't cut corners. They wait when they are kind of supposed to, but an alert driver would move. In other words they are not agile enough for the messy, over-crowded world of traffic. That leads to an extra 20-30% slower, less nimble traffic - as if a number of slow, bad, but 'safe' drivers was increased dramatically. Like driving around a huge number of Asian grandmas that were given a driver's license because they drove 'very safely' during the test; no eye contact, no yielding, no mediating complex situations, just dumb adherence to all rules. And imagine trucks of all sizes on the road driving 'within the rules', no turns, no adjustments - how long would it take for a lot of them to end up in a cul-de-sac somewhere? I am a skeptic.

    There is a reason for aggressiveness, it speeds up life. There is also a reason why a flexible approach to rules is a part of all successful civilisations. Rigid order leads to paralysis. And coding 'flexibility' into self-driving cars is inherently crazy, it doesn't matter who is preferred, these compromises have to be lived in real time.

    By the way, Google might actually benefit from this brou-ha-ha. They are a utility company with an assured stream of income. They have been wasting huge sums on silly, 'break-through' ideas like 3D-glasses, cars, offshore programming ships, etc...they need an excuse to scale that back and just collect their utility money. If they are smart they will use this as the excuse - and that might answer the question what the hell is the 'VP of Diversity' doing all day...protecting share holders value as all utility execs with sinecures and corner offices.

    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other – they won’t need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anonym
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.
     
    This project will be managed by a purple-haired fake "woman" and coded by students in Bangalore in a highrise next to an open sewer. Thanks, but I'll pass on your utopia.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.
     
    You can already do this today and without a Google. It's called a 'train'.
    , @Beckow
    None of what you suggest is realistic. I have driven around self-driving cars and it is not the 'experimental' nature that makes them annoying. It is built into the reality of the traffic environment, in other words, the slowness and rigidness are unchangeable. They will never be allowed to take risks and agility comes with taking risks. It will be just like thousands of elderly Asians on over-crowded streets. And the lack of eye contact is the least of our problems.

    If you take the time-comfort trade-off (your last paragraph), and think it is worth it, there are a lot better, more efficient ways to move than in individual slow moving, socially isolated plastic bubbles. Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation? How is sitting in a slow moving box preferable to that? Or more efficient.

    (By the way, on a related subject, we are doing the same with the Amazon supply chain model - we are going back to one-to-one distribution model from a heavily optimized retail model. It is inefficient and soulless.)

    , @Bill

    If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now.
     
    You might be doing it wrong now. ;-)
    , @TWS
    Giving the government or a monopoly control over personal transportation? No. Most Americans would be a little less polite in person.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. @Alec Leamas

    The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.
     
    You're probably right that computers can't drink and when working properly will be both safer and more efficient at interacting with other "motorists" and therefore increasing the efficiency of the flow of traffic, but you can't simultaneously hack a few tens of thousands of human drivers and cause them to commit acts of mayhem either. A computer/cloud based traffic system directing cars isn't antifragile.

    Also, since the criminal docket in your local County Court is about 40% DUI/DUI related (and as a consequence, a similar proportion of Judges, staff, police and attorneys owe their livelihoods to people driving drunk), you don't really think they're going to leave people alone because of driver-less cars, do you? What other mischief will they invent to replace the cash cow of DUIs?

    They already convict people for DUI / OWI for being caught asleep in a car with the engine turned off.
    People are being convicted of OWI for riding a bicycle while intoxicated.

    Our society is insane on too many levels to enumerate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    I believe Tiger was arrested while sleeping in his car,engine off.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    Self-driving cars can likely improve upon the average driver’s operation, but as with anti-lock brakes, the superior operator can still outdo the automated “good-enough-for-retail-sale.”

    Imagine being in a self-driving car when Jawon pulls up next to you and points a gun in your direction. “The car ‘thinks,’ but sir, the light is still red.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cortes
    Like this:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9W5Am-a_xWw
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    There would have to be a driver override or a Detroit mode with tactical countermeasures.

    Maybe if the Google face recognition thinks it sees a gorilla driving it could shoot off a tranquilizer dart or an oil slick.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Jack D says:
    @Alec Leamas

    The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won’t be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it’s being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it’s not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.
     
    You're probably right that computers can't drink and when working properly will be both safer and more efficient at interacting with other "motorists" and therefore increasing the efficiency of the flow of traffic, but you can't simultaneously hack a few tens of thousands of human drivers and cause them to commit acts of mayhem either. A computer/cloud based traffic system directing cars isn't antifragile.

    Also, since the criminal docket in your local County Court is about 40% DUI/DUI related (and as a consequence, a similar proportion of Judges, staff, police and attorneys owe their livelihoods to people driving drunk), you don't really think they're going to leave people alone because of driver-less cars, do you? What other mischief will they invent to replace the cash cow of DUIs?

    You also won’t need as many downtown parking meters or garages because the self-driving car will just go to the next passenger or if it’s your own, maybe it will circle the block if it is a quick errand or if it is all day, go home and park itself in your driveway or at some distant lot at the edge of downtown where land is cheap.

    In the past there was a whole infrastructure in big cities for picking up horseshit in the street. A lot of people made their living from it – street sweepers, etc. They figured out other ways to make a living. If nothing else, they can always pass new taxes and registration fees to make up for the lost revenue. They can invent new types of crime to occupy the courts. Government can try to slow down technology or exact a toll from technology, but they usually can’t stop it completely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DRA
    So then, traffic could get much worse. One trip to take you to work, then another to go home to park?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Your post alludes to the race for driverless cars. This is an area where the culture war can be fought vigorously. State legislatures should outlaw all self-driving vehicles in the name of safety and jobs. There are 3.5 million truck drivers whose jobs are probably on the line, and I’d wager the majority are on “our side” in the culture war.
    With control of most state legislatures and governors mansions, this could be pushed through.

    Where the hell is Big Labor on this, by the way? For once they could be doing something useful…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    It's really stupid to think that we should legislate people's jobs as permanent sinecures. "Teamsters" (as in the Teamster's Union) originally drove teams of horses and then made the transition to trucks because there was no one stupid enough to permanently lock them into jobs as wagon drivers. When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel) their employers tend to go bankrupt. You can provide even more jobs by forcing every employer to hire two groups of employees - one group to dig holes (with a shovel - no backhoes allowed) and the other group to fill them in. We could have 110% full employment with this method.

    Although it provides a living to many, over the road trucker is really fundamentally a crappy job and if people don't have to spend their lives doing it maybe we can figure out something better for them to do. Not having hordes of immigrants also competing for the ever shrinking # of jobs might help.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Pericles says:
    @27 year old
    The concern is not that they will be incompetent at making the self-driving car. I wrote a while back in a comment on here that they will code social justice into the car. At best, White men will always have to yield to everyone else. At worst, the trolley problem: in a choice between running over a black youth and swerving the car into a wall or off a cliff, the car will always save the black youth rather than the White male driver.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @27 year old
    I think you guys are kind of glossing over this. Sure it may be rare to have that exact scenario where the only options are to run over a kid or crash into a wall, but that was a simplified example.

    In just about any accident, a choice could be made about whether to do A or B, where A is lower risk for the driver at the expense of someone else and B is the reverse, or even a C which distributes the risk evenly.

    It's a lot easier to make choices where a computer with perfect reaction time is controlling every system in the car.

    I’m not saying you totally convinced me, but it’s certainly something to pay attention to.

    However, the absolute number of fatalities will go down anyway, so it’ll just be that the spoils will be divided unevenly. Like everything else these days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. EdwardM says:
    @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Bravo, Steve. One of your best columns of the year.

    Agreed, and I came here to post the same.

    The point about the left seeing Silicon Valley as the juiciest target to loot is underappreciated. However, if that were their only goal — just to impose a diversity tax on customers, white male employees, and shareholders — that wouldn’t be as dangerous as their second goal, namely, to radically transform society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Thomas says:
    @dearieme
    "how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?"

    If programmed by a woman it presumably won't be much good at reversing.

    “how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?”

    How do you feel today about right now trusting your private information — email, web browsing and search history, passwords, geolocation data, financial transactions, all of it — to Goolag? There ought to be a mass movement to dump Google products and services as much as possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico
    This incident is the straw that breaks the camel's back and your collage is just icing on the cake. We're working on a quick and thorough extrication.
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    I already do all my porn and money laundering searches on Bing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Whiskey says: • Website

    Missing the point. It is now abundantly clear that Google employees are out to purge straight White males.

    Do you trust them with your data? Google docs, Android, Calendar, etc. Do you trust them for search. Every White straight male to the right of Mao and Pol Pot now know Google hates and wants to destroy them.

    Civil war is on, Sinatra My Way vs blue hair lesbians

    Read More
    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
    There's no disputing taste, but I can't help getting slightly irked each time My Way is cited as the sine qua non of Sinatra's repertoire when, in fact, he was responsible for some of the greatest recordings of the 20th century.

    The entire Sinatra and Strings album is exemplary.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKXmqDM4_8k

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. MarkinLA says:

    I doubt Google has to worry about inefficiencies that come about by hiring women and minority affirmative action hires. Google is most likely being pressured and rewarded into hiring them just like the defense contractors were.

    It was said that a black female engineer at those companies made about 125% of the normal engineering salary. I imagine the government secretely directly covered the salaries of the minorities and women so that they were actually a better deal than a white male engineer. I imagine Google has a similar deal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. Hollywood blacklists – BAD

    Silicon Valley blacklists – GOOD

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. @Jack D
    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other - they won't need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that's much better than having to drive yourself.

    On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    This project will be managed by a purple-haired fake “woman” and coded by students in Bangalore in a highrise next to an open sewer. Thanks, but I’ll pass on your utopia.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.

    You can already do this today and without a Google. It’s called a ‘train’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    You can already do this today and without a Google. It’s called a ‘train’.
     
    You must be either a New Yorker or a European. Elsewhere in North America, rapid transit and commuter rail don't run to or from nearly enough of the desirable places to be and one of the major reasons is that the riffraff (i.e., black people) would move to and destroy nice commuter towns if the "natural" controls such as automobile ownership.

    Blue state SWPLs love to sing the praises of European transport. Hell, they love to sing the praises of anything modern that's over 95% white or was until recently. in the past decade I've watched as the demographics have taken their toll on the Parisian metro and white French people now avoid it whenever possible, preferring walking, biking (Vélib'), Über, carshares (Autolib) and even driving their own cars despite the idiot Socialist mayor's attempts to drive them out.

    Mind you, the city is now uninhabitable for normal people or families: you either have to be Third World enough be willing to live like a rat or uppity enough to be able to live large, and this trend is spreading to the outer burbs as well. Much like New York.
    , @Jack D
    1. You already live in a world of code. The motor in your car, the elevator you ride in, your bank balance, the signals on the subway, the plane that you fly on, on and on - they are all run on code.
    You are probably not aware of it half the time - when you press on the gas you may think that you are opening the throttle on the engine like the old days. Nope - the gas pedal is just a toy exactly the same as the gas pedal in a video game. All you are doing is setting a variable in the software and the software is driving your car. You THINK you are driving or flying the plane but what you are really doing is playing a video game and the computer is actually the one driving or flying. And yet you live.

    2. Trains are great but they only go certain places and at certain times. Cars are more popular than trains because they take you anywhere at any time.
    , @Lurker
    I think the car/train combo should be pushed.

    Drive your car onto a car transporter, travel by train for a couple of hours while your car charges, then drive off to complete your journey.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Silicon Valley has a much harder time maintaining the double standard because they are nerds that are far lower on the social totem pole then their immense influence and wealth would indicate.

    Contrast with Hollywood, which has used glamour and more cunning twists of victim identity politics as a brutally effective shield for their hypocrisy. That industry may be run by rich white men, but they are all Jewish or gay or both and they decide whether you are cool or not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Millennial Falcon
    To illustrate this compare and contrast the shows Silicon Valley and Entourage. Both HBO. Both serialized industry comedies. Both follow quartets of up-and-coming guys.

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.

    Entourage is breathless wish fulfillment, worshipping celebrity even in its most idiotic forms. Its laughs come from the slapstick antics of the two wannabe/stowaways along for the fun and the manic, but still glamorized antics of the super-agent (who gets away with murder towards his female/gay Asian supporting characters).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Jack D says:
    @DN Poolside
    Your post alludes to the race for driverless cars. This is an area where the culture war can be fought vigorously. State legislatures should outlaw all self-driving vehicles in the name of safety and jobs. There are 3.5 million truck drivers whose jobs are probably on the line, and I'd wager the majority are on "our side" in the culture war.
    With control of most state legislatures and governors mansions, this could be pushed through.

    Where the hell is Big Labor on this, by the way? For once they could be doing something useful...

    It’s really stupid to think that we should legislate people’s jobs as permanent sinecures. “Teamsters” (as in the Teamster’s Union) originally drove teams of horses and then made the transition to trucks because there was no one stupid enough to permanently lock them into jobs as wagon drivers. When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel) their employers tend to go bankrupt. You can provide even more jobs by forcing every employer to hire two groups of employees – one group to dig holes (with a shovel – no backhoes allowed) and the other group to fill them in. We could have 110% full employment with this method.

    Although it provides a living to many, over the road trucker is really fundamentally a crappy job and if people don’t have to spend their lives doing it maybe we can figure out something better for them to do. Not having hordes of immigrants also competing for the ever shrinking # of jobs might help.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Bill

    maybe we can figure out something better for them to do.
     
    Steelworkers: still waiting.

    There aren't going to be replacement jobs for the Teamsters (though I agree that outlawing self-driving trucks is probably not a good idea). The fact that there are no longer any good jobs for nitwits is a problem. The fact that there soon won't be any good jobs for lower-midwits (other than bartending and prostitution, of course) is a bigger problem. The fact that there may, in a while, not be any jobs for upper-midwits is a really big problem. The Masters of the Universe want to solve this (the upper-midwit one) by employing them all as social workers to maintain the bodily integrity of the nitwits and lower-midwits.

    I can't say I have a significantly better idea, but this doesn't seem all that promising to me. I mean, wouldn't it be more rewarding to band together with the nitwits and lower-midwits to politely ask the Masters of the Universe for a better deal? That job at least you can do outside and in cool costumes.
    , @Lurker

    When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel)
     
    Yes, we had that in Britain. The steam locos went in 1968 but there were still firemen in diesel and electric cabs until the 1970s. They were called the "second man".

    Otoh it wasn't completely without merit. Eg training and route learning, someone on hand in case of emergency, probably made it better for the driver - someone to talk to, not nodding off and so on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    I don’t know much about computer history, but I get the impression that Silicon Valley wasn’t so mavericky in the past.

    So, there were some stable giants like IBM and they offered steady work for those who followed orders and did as told.

    Also, society was more respectful and hierarchical, and young geniuses understood protocol and pecking order.

    And there was a division between science-types and business-types. Geeks might have done research and leave the business up to the suits. Today, we have synergy between geekery and (hand)shakery.

    But with rise of personal computer and then internet, the tech thing became more like the wild west. Every garage could become a startup place. And when it comes to that kind of maverick cowboy behavior, men beat women. Look at most garage bands. Men. Look at most extreme sports. Men. Even when it comes to Stupid New Idea, it’s usually guys.

    If not for personal computers, it’s likely Gates would have just become some suit at a company like IBM or some geek in a lab.

    But computer technology became atomized so that big innovations could come from the outside individuals.

    Unlike some technology where the thing just gets bigger, computer technology just got smaller and nimbler, so that any smart person could do good work in his garage. Can’t do that with rocket science or nuclear technology.

    So, the new crop of tech people was created by a whole new environment. Even though they became corporate giants, they began as freewheeling dwarfs like the adventurers in TIME BANDITS.

    [MORE]

    Women prefer order and structure. They are less willing to wing it and take big risks or do their own thing.

    But as these once mavericky alt-companies became these super-behemoths, the new IBM’s, the stalinists felt more at home and began to take over. (Same in Hollywood. In the beginning, it was like the Wild West with a pioneer like D.W. Griffith as face of film-making. But then, the studios gained control and perfected the formula.)
    It’s like more maverick-minded Lenin and Trotsky made the revolution in a world of creative chaos. But once order was established, the more bureaucratic-minded Stalin(the Daley of USSR) took over with his hive-mind minions.

    It’s like in THE FOUNTAINHEAD. Tooheys of the world lack inspiration and vision. But they understand the structure and systems of power, both social and psychological. That’s their meal ticket.

    https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/f/the-fountainhead/character-analysis/ellsworth-toohey

    Nothing is more precious than talent. It is precious because it can’t be learned(though it can be improved and perfected). You have it or you don’t. Few people have combination of high IQ, ingenuity, and creativity. And this talent is apolitical. It’s like musical talent in AMADEUS. Salieri has greater respect for music, but he lacks genius. Mozart is a goof but gifted with genius.

    Talent is apolitical. However, most talent tends to conform to official ideology out of conditioning or opportunism. It’s like Kepler and Newton grew up in a Christian World, so they were Christian. Today, smartest kids attend PC-dogma schools, so they turn PC. But it has nothing to do with talent per se.
    Some talented people see right thru PC but just want to focus on what they’re good at and don’t want to be bothered or blacklisted, so they pretend to go with PC.

    The untalented feel resentment toward the talented. But they are loathe to admit it since they don’t want to come across as envious, resentful, insecure, inadequate, nasty, petty, etc. So, they try to control the talent(that they themselves don’t have) by binding it to ideology, something ANYONE can learn. Very few people can be Mozart or Bacharach, but ANYONE can learn to speak BLM gibberish or wave a homo flag. Via ideological one-upmanship, the untalented can gain supremacy over the talented who may be accused of being insufficiently committed to the cause of ‘justice’. The talented are always vulnerable since intelligence, when armed with integrity, prefers truth over falsehood, and that will always upset dogma. Truth often runs against ideology of ‘justice’. Also, talent gains success, and this makes it vulnerable to accusations of ‘greed’ and ‘injustice’, the ‘inequality’ stuff.

    Today’s self-righteous chauvinists are especially bitter because, in the end, talent trumps ideology. These talentless hacks went to same schools with talented kids. Most of them are Democrats and profess to espouse same ideology. So, they should all end up equal in social status, right? Nope. Some who majored in bogus social sciences is likely to be far less successful than someone who did well in high-tech or some science field or finance or etc. So, despite same ideology, one person could be riding high while the other is having difficulty affording coffee at starbucks. Will to admit to envy? No, they’d rather lean on their crutch of ‘social justice’.

    At least in the 80s, the yuppies could be derided as Reaganites and crass capitalists. But in the Age of Clinton and Blair, the yuppies turned into bobo’s and took on the attitudes of bohemians and radicals. The hipster age. They hailed Obama. This may partly explain the hairsplitting that’s going on in prog community.

    When it’s a matter of Left vs Right, the left must unite against the right. But when the Power and Privilege now brand themselves as ‘left’, it means BLM and Jewish or Hindu billionaire at Silicon Valley are in the same camp. But are they?
    Traditionally, the Rich and Powerful were seen as part of the Right. But when so much privilege is also part of the ‘left’, the left must make finer distinctions among who is who and what is what.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Back when computers were mostly big mainframes in gov't offices (social security, the Pentagon) computer programming was thought of as women's work. It was a nice clean 9 to 5 job requiring patience and no physical strength. In the pre-digital computer age, large gov. agencies had armies of "computers" - computer was a job title for the people (mostly women) who sat at their desks all day with adding machines doing repetitive calculations like ballistics tables. (The black lady "mathematical/scientific geniuses" in Hidden Figures are "computers" - the gov. needed so many of these during WWII that they even recruited blacks with teaching degrees .) When the shift was made to digital computers, a lot of these women were retrained to be programmers.

    But when everyone could have a computer of his own, the balance shifted to geeky guys who started programming when they were 12 and were willing to stay up all night and work for 3 days straight on pizza and coke until they solved the problem.

    Feynman tells an interesting story about the "computers" at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project. The Army took a bunch of really bright draftees (people who had done well in math in HS) and sent them to Los Alamos to do this job. Because they were concerned with security, they didn't tell them anything about what they were doing - just add these numbers together all day - we can't tell you why or what for. So it wasn't going well - the guys were fidgety and bored and would play pranks on each other, etc. So Feynman got permission to tell them a little - that they were solving differential equations and that the goal was to optimize some variable. Once they were allowed to understand what they were doing, the guys invented all kinds of shortcuts and ways to automate the process and break it up and speed it up - they would run things in parallel, they would color code the punch cards that they used (they didn't have computers but they had IBM mechanical tabulators which also ran on punch cards and had the ability to sort things into order, etc.), They turned it into a game and would compete with each other to see who could get the most done and their productivity went up 10 fold. Probably a room full of female computers would have sat there patiently forever doing exactly what they were assigned to do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @The Millennial Falcon
    Silicon Valley has a much harder time maintaining the double standard because they are nerds that are far lower on the social totem pole then their immense influence and wealth would indicate.

    Contrast with Hollywood, which has used glamour and more cunning twists of victim identity politics as a brutally effective shield for their hypocrisy. That industry may be run by rich white men, but they are all Jewish or gay or both and they decide whether you are cool or not.

    To illustrate this compare and contrast the shows Silicon Valley and Entourage. Both HBO. Both serialized industry comedies. Both follow quartets of up-and-coming guys.

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.

    Entourage is breathless wish fulfillment, worshipping celebrity even in its most idiotic forms. Its laughs come from the slapstick antics of the two wannabe/stowaways along for the fun and the manic, but still glamorized antics of the super-agent (who gets away with murder towards his female/gay Asian supporting characters).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Nico

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.
     
    Is that satire or documentary?
    , @Jack D
    Yes, if say the head of a oil company on a TV show treated his gay/female underlings the way the super agent treats his then by the end of the episode he would be hauled off in chains for his evil ways and the gay/female underling would be promoted to president as a triumph of justice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. Nico says:
    @Thomas

    “how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?”
     
    How do you feel today about right now trusting your private information — email, web browsing and search history, passwords, geolocation data, financial transactions, all of it — to Goolag? There ought to be a mass movement to dump Google products and services as much as possible.

    http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/08/i-keep-a-written-blacklist.png
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGy7q-yVYAQxQnV.jpg

    This incident is the straw that breaks the camel’s back and your collage is just icing on the cake. We’re working on a quick and thorough extrication.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Nico says:
    @The Millennial Falcon
    To illustrate this compare and contrast the shows Silicon Valley and Entourage. Both HBO. Both serialized industry comedies. Both follow quartets of up-and-coming guys.

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.

    Entourage is breathless wish fulfillment, worshipping celebrity even in its most idiotic forms. Its laughs come from the slapstick antics of the two wannabe/stowaways along for the fun and the manic, but still glamorized antics of the super-agent (who gets away with murder towards his female/gay Asian supporting characters).

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.

    Is that satire or documentary?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Jack D says:
    @songbird
    At some point the West needs to wake up to the fact that the East is much closer to a meritocracy. If it doesn't happen sooner, it will happen later. Either economically or militarily.

    In some respect the current period feels like the ’30s where Germany and Japan and the Soviets were all building up massive forces and getting ready to make their move and the Western democracies just sat on their asses and dithered and did nothing. Maybe they denounced Hitler in the League of Nations as if passing meaningless resolutions was the same as actually doing something. Then when the dictatorships made their move, we were “blindsided” and they swept through Europe and the Pacific in a flash.

    We see now :

    1. N. Korea building nuke tipped ICBMS (while their Chinese allies have “deniability” – we weren’t the ones that nuked DC) and

    2. China building artificial islands, carriers, modernizing their military, etc. using the billions of $ of trade surplus they make from being the “workshop of the world”.

    These folks aren’t building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it. When the Chinese decide that the time is right to make their move (maybe it’s in 10 years, maybe it’s 50 – they are playing the long game), we won’t know what hit us and our transgender army will be in no shape to do anything about it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR

    Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it.
     
    This phrase (usually attributed to Chekhov)
    did not mean to describe how events develop in real world.
    The phrase meant the guidance how a theatrical play (or a movie script) should be written,
    and/or how it should be directed !
    Script writer should get rid of the details, which will not work in the subsequent part of the play.

    Rachel Bloom cites Chekhov,
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ45f6QCE9A
    not about getting life wisdom, but about the ways to write and to direct plays.
    , @AnotherDad

    These folks aren’t building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it.
     
    The value of what the Chinese are doing is resistance to intimidation now and later dominance.

    The Chinese will never have to "fire" anything. The old America--pre-1965 Immigration Act, pre-1964 Civil Rights Act--would have been a credible competitor to China for generations to come even with our lower population. But the West--with the triumph of minoritarianism--is committing diversicide. All the Chinese have to do is ... wait. (Ok, they need to manage their own demographics better to insure eugenic fertility ... and wait.)

    Then as the sun sets on the West's 500 years of incredible awesomeness, the Chinese can just pick up the pieces wherever the lie. Wouldn't surprise me if they bio-engineer some plagues to clear out the useless Africans from resource rich Africa or the remaining whites from nice temperate zone real estate.

    Who knows? But when your serious competition is has become utterly looney, utterly disconnected from reality, there isn't much to do but sit back and enjoy.
    , @Anonym
    Good points. The US was rather ready though.

    Before Pearl Harbor, it had 7 ( 9 if you count escort carrier Long Island and prototype Langley) carriers and keels laid on 3 more. The second Yorktown and Intrepid were laid about a week before Pearl Harbor. East Wind Rain much? Japan had 10 at war's start.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy

    Note that in service there are 13 carriers, 2 of which are in reserve, with keel laid for another and another planned. Considering the relative populations and GDP of USA 1941 vs 2017 I'd say the USA was not exactly caught with its pants down on Dec 7 1941.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @dearieme
    "how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?"

    If programmed by a woman it presumably won't be much good at reversing.

    But you have to change the oil every month.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Nico says:
    @anonymous coward

    On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.
     
    This project will be managed by a purple-haired fake "woman" and coded by students in Bangalore in a highrise next to an open sewer. Thanks, but I'll pass on your utopia.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.
     
    You can already do this today and without a Google. It's called a 'train'.

    You can already do this today and without a Google. It’s called a ‘train’.

    You must be either a New Yorker or a European. Elsewhere in North America, rapid transit and commuter rail don’t run to or from nearly enough of the desirable places to be and one of the major reasons is that the riffraff (i.e., black people) would move to and destroy nice commuter towns if the “natural” controls such as automobile ownership.

    Blue state SWPLs love to sing the praises of European transport. Hell, they love to sing the praises of anything modern that’s over 95% white or was until recently. in the past decade I’ve watched as the demographics have taken their toll on the Parisian metro and white French people now avoid it whenever possible, preferring walking, biking (Vélib’), Über, carshares (Autolib) and even driving their own cars despite the idiot Socialist mayor’s attempts to drive them out.

    Mind you, the city is now uninhabitable for normal people or families: you either have to be Third World enough be willing to live like a rat or uppity enough to be able to live large, and this trend is spreading to the outer burbs as well. Much like New York.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    You must be either exaggerating or ignorant. Once can commute via train between Los Angeles and San Diego, and anyplace between Olympia and Bellingham, or between Washington and Boston (I worked with a lafy wjl took the train daily from Philadelphia to New York). Likewise anyplace from Chicago to Chambana, between Miami and Fort Lauderdale, and Sacramento and most of the Central Valley north of Merced to and from San Francisco, San José, and Oakland (augmented with buses).

    I recount these examples from personal experience; doubtless many more exist.

    Can one commute via public transit in and around Cheyenne? Likely not. But millions do it every day in the U.S.A. outside of New York (I'm doing it as I type).
    , @ia
    I don't believe that. Property is too expensive in Paris. Blacks and Muslims are violent on RER but metro is still o.k. outside Gare Du Nord and Clignancourt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @dc.sunsets
    They already convict people for DUI / OWI for being caught asleep in a car with the engine turned off.
    People are being convicted of OWI for riding a bicycle while intoxicated.

    Our society is insane on too many levels to enumerate.

    I believe Tiger was arrested while sleeping in his car,engine off.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    So did the car teleport itself to the side of the road or did he drive it there while already drunk/drugged? And why doesn't someone who is worth $700 million + AND has a substance abuse problem have a chauffeur?

    That being said, we should reward drunk/drugged drivers for pulling over and not trying to make it all the way home, but maybe the reward should be some reduction in severity rather than letting them off completely.
    , @David
    If CNN can be believed, the details were:

    ...both tire rims on the driver's side of the Mercedes had minor damage and the front and rear tires on that side of the vehicle were flat.

    Police also observed damage to the bumper on the driver's side, white scrapes and scuffs on the rear bumper, and the passenger side rear taillight was not working, according to the documents.

    Jupiter police discovered Woods early Monday on the side of the road, with his car running, its brake lights illuminated and right turn signal flashing, according to the arrest report released earlier Tuesday. He was by himself and wearing his seat belt.

    The report said Woods had to be awakened and that his speech was slurred.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Jack D says:
    @anonymous coward

    On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.
     
    This project will be managed by a purple-haired fake "woman" and coded by students in Bangalore in a highrise next to an open sewer. Thanks, but I'll pass on your utopia.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.
     
    You can already do this today and without a Google. It's called a 'train'.

    1. You already live in a world of code. The motor in your car, the elevator you ride in, your bank balance, the signals on the subway, the plane that you fly on, on and on – they are all run on code.
    You are probably not aware of it half the time – when you press on the gas you may think that you are opening the throttle on the engine like the old days. Nope – the gas pedal is just a toy exactly the same as the gas pedal in a video game. All you are doing is setting a variable in the software and the software is driving your car. You THINK you are driving or flying the plane but what you are really doing is playing a video game and the computer is actually the one driving or flying. And yet you live.

    2. Trains are great but they only go certain places and at certain times. Cars are more popular than trains because they take you anywhere at any time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @European-American
    > You already live in a world of code

    The big change is that the code is becoming less anonymous and mechanical. It's becoming more like Facebook and AI.

    That's a pretty huge change, and we're just beginning to start to see what it means.

    Its like the difference between seeing your neighbor once a day and saying hi, and living in the same bed as your neighbor and all his family. Do you still like him?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Nico

    I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.
     
    You're really naïve.

    The most prolific SJW cyberbully doxxers have as the end the annihilation of anyone who might give a whiff of encouragement to someone who may be seen as wanting to legitimate ANY... HINT... OF... racism, sexism and homophobia. They have already proven willingness to break the law (see #CNNblackmail) to shut up opposition and if they have not resorted to murder it is because there is not yet an obvious venue in which they could get away with it.

    I share "27 year old"'s fears, to the "T."

    You do meet lots of weird and scary folks on the T:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gSx1P3BdtTo

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Rod1963 says:
    @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn’t touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won’t.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car’s critical systems.

    Right now they aren’t worth the hacker community’s attention. But when there are millions on the road…

    Here’s the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    Everything you say is possibile already. People have demonstrated ways to take control of existing production cars remotely. Your car already has a microphone (or is connected to your phone's via bluetooth) and for all you know is already taping your every word and location and phoning it in to Big Brother.

    Aircraft avionics and mechanics are certified to high standards because if they screw up then hundreds of people die all at once. Or maybe even thousands if the plane crashes into a stadium, skyscraper, etc. Since self driving cars will kill far fewer people / crash, standards will be much lower just as standards for drivers are much (much) lower than those for pilots of jumbo jets.

    , @Dr doomNgloom
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn’t touch a robot car.

    Actually cars will need to be orders of magnitude better. Most avionics is dong very simple things, like controlling servo motors. Autos operate in a very complex environment with uncountable corner conditions . Even Landing a plane is child's play by comparison.

    About 1 software defect per 2000 lines of code works OK in airplanes. Much higher than 1 per 1000 loc creates real problems. Consumer software is closer to 5 defects per 1000 Lines of code.

    Consider the Toyota runaway condition . That is software, not mats. The accelerator is much easier than moving in traffic. Current methods of producing software will not be adequate.
    , @Lurker

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They are big brother on wheels.
     
    It could also enhance all sorts of virtual gated communities. George Soros doesn't want protestors outside his house. Well there won't be a bus to drop you there. Easy, drive there! Nope. Because cars will be automatically routed away from his place. The only way to get there will be to walk.
    , @Anonymous
    The engine and powertrain/body controllers in cars (circa 2017) are in fact much more sophisticated than avionics. GA aircraft are still using VHF Omnirange for navigation, a WWII era analog system that should have been shut down in the 1980s, but is ingrained into the ATC system to this day. The full authority digital engine controllers-FADEC-on aircraft turbines are 199os level car technology: turbines don't have timed ignition or fuel injection and do not have to meet much in the way of emissions control. Automotive electronics are qualified to a slightly less wide temperature range than aircraft systems, but are if anything mechanically more rugged, and are cheap (to the OEM, not necessarily as replacement parts) because they are made in quantity. The heavy Cannon plugs and harnesses in aircraft are "better" than GM Weatherpak only in being more fire resistant for the first 90 seconds or so. And aviation still hasn't figured out to color code wiring harnesses.

    "Aircraft" is not necessarily "better".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. Jack D says:
    @The Millennial Falcon
    To illustrate this compare and contrast the shows Silicon Valley and Entourage. Both HBO. Both serialized industry comedies. Both follow quartets of up-and-coming guys.

    Silicon Valley is gleefully vicious satire, making a town of burgeoning billionaires look like a bunch of socially autistic dorks, vampires and nutjobs, all of whom are locked in perpetual cycles of humiliation and self-destruction.

    Entourage is breathless wish fulfillment, worshipping celebrity even in its most idiotic forms. Its laughs come from the slapstick antics of the two wannabe/stowaways along for the fun and the manic, but still glamorized antics of the super-agent (who gets away with murder towards his female/gay Asian supporting characters).

    Yes, if say the head of a oil company on a TV show treated his gay/female underlings the way the super agent treats his then by the end of the episode he would be hauled off in chains for his evil ways and the gay/female underling would be promoted to president as a triumph of justice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @yaqub the mad scientist
    I bet this will accelerate outsourcing.

    Google will simply form or contract to shell firms, probably within other shell firms, that do most of the productive work. It's pointless where the workers physically are. Once there are are a couple more added degrees of separation, it will become increasingly harder to track the labyrinth. Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent. It's going to be a lot less trouble to have your work done where PC culture is less strong. And it has the benefit of further atomizing employees.

    “Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent.”

    It’ll also result in a bloody awful product if you’re not very very careful.

    It’s probably time to break Google up. As a search engine it probably peaked about ten years ago, and now it’s going for full-spectrum information dominance – maps, books, email, scholarly articles etc – many of which areas have zilch to do with web searches.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Beckow says:
    @Jack D
    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other - they won't need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that's much better than having to drive yourself.

    None of what you suggest is realistic. I have driven around self-driving cars and it is not the ‘experimental’ nature that makes them annoying. It is built into the reality of the traffic environment, in other words, the slowness and rigidness are unchangeable. They will never be allowed to take risks and agility comes with taking risks. It will be just like thousands of elderly Asians on over-crowded streets. And the lack of eye contact is the least of our problems.

    If you take the time-comfort trade-off (your last paragraph), and think it is worth it, there are a lot better, more efficient ways to move than in individual slow moving, socially isolated plastic bubbles. Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation? How is sitting in a slow moving box preferable to that? Or more efficient.

    (By the way, on a related subject, we are doing the same with the Amazon supply chain model – we are going back to one-to-one distribution model from a heavily optimized retail model. It is inefficient and soulless.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    It would be great if American cities were organized like European cities where all the middle class people live downtown a short subway or tram ride from their offices and walking distance to shops. But we didn't develop that way. After WWII, certain dark clouds appeared on the horizon and made our cities mostly unlivable crime ridden hellholes and the middle class fled to the suburbs. So now we are mostly stuck with spread out suburbs where it will never be possible to put everyone on mass transit.

    Maybe Amazon is soulless compared to buying from Pierre the baker and Jacques the butcher, etc. but it beats shopping at Wal-Mart which is the real alternative.
    , @AnotherDad
    Beckow. Jack quite clearly answered your "too slow" argument. (And i'm sympathetic--I'm an "optimizer", as annoyed with extra useless seconds at stop signs or with the left lane happy Asian girls as anyone.) Self-driving cars are at proof-of-concept stage now, the focus is on safety. Optimizations come later. And as more and more self-driving cars are out there the optimizations possible shoot up. Your response just suggests you don't understand the power of software and the revolution that's coming--or for that matter the power of engineering, of humans (human males) to work on problems and solve them.

    Then ...


    Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation?
     
    Seriously? I'm a fan of trains too. But the whole advantage of cars is it's like natural human transportation--point-to-point.

    And then the obvious: the problem with "public transportation" is ... the public.

    As Europe commits diversicide it is going to have the same problems with "public transportation" as the US.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. DRA says:
    @Jack D
    You also won't need as many downtown parking meters or garages because the self-driving car will just go to the next passenger or if it's your own, maybe it will circle the block if it is a quick errand or if it is all day, go home and park itself in your driveway or at some distant lot at the edge of downtown where land is cheap.

    In the past there was a whole infrastructure in big cities for picking up horseshit in the street. A lot of people made their living from it - street sweepers, etc. They figured out other ways to make a living. If nothing else, they can always pass new taxes and registration fees to make up for the lost revenue. They can invent new types of crime to occupy the courts. Government can try to slow down technology or exact a toll from technology, but they usually can't stop it completely.

    So then, traffic could get much worse. One trip to take you to work, then another to go home to park?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. “Engineering does not care about your color, sexual orientation, or your other personal and private attributes,” [Indrek]Wichman believes. Just “do the work well.”

    http://www.joannejacobs.com/2017/08/engineering-or-social-engineering/#comments

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. One of the best articles I’ve read in my life. I just hope some normalish liberals read it because they’re running out of time to save themselves (and the rest of us) from their Frankenstein. They have some serious thinking to do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  62. Jack D says:
    @Anon
    I don't know much about computer history, but I get the impression that Silicon Valley wasn't so mavericky in the past.

    So, there were some stable giants like IBM and they offered steady work for those who followed orders and did as told.

    Also, society was more respectful and hierarchical, and young geniuses understood protocol and pecking order.

    And there was a division between science-types and business-types. Geeks might have done research and leave the business up to the suits. Today, we have synergy between geekery and (hand)shakery.

    But with rise of personal computer and then internet, the tech thing became more like the wild west. Every garage could become a startup place. And when it comes to that kind of maverick cowboy behavior, men beat women. Look at most garage bands. Men. Look at most extreme sports. Men. Even when it comes to Stupid New Idea, it's usually guys.

    https://youtu.be/tXjHb5QmDV0?t=12m43s

    If not for personal computers, it's likely Gates would have just become some suit at a company like IBM or some geek in a lab.

    But computer technology became atomized so that big innovations could come from the outside individuals.

    Unlike some technology where the thing just gets bigger, computer technology just got smaller and nimbler, so that any smart person could do good work in his garage. Can't do that with rocket science or nuclear technology.

    So, the new crop of tech people was created by a whole new environment. Even though they became corporate giants, they began as freewheeling dwarfs like the adventurers in TIME BANDITS.

    Women prefer order and structure. They are less willing to wing it and take big risks or do their own thing.

    But as these once mavericky alt-companies became these super-behemoths, the new IBM's, the stalinists felt more at home and began to take over. (Same in Hollywood. In the beginning, it was like the Wild West with a pioneer like D.W. Griffith as face of film-making. But then, the studios gained control and perfected the formula.)
    It's like more maverick-minded Lenin and Trotsky made the revolution in a world of creative chaos. But once order was established, the more bureaucratic-minded Stalin(the Daley of USSR) took over with his hive-mind minions.

    It's like in THE FOUNTAINHEAD. Tooheys of the world lack inspiration and vision. But they understand the structure and systems of power, both social and psychological. That's their meal ticket.

    https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/f/the-fountainhead/character-analysis/ellsworth-toohey

    Nothing is more precious than talent. It is precious because it can't be learned(though it can be improved and perfected). You have it or you don't. Few people have combination of high IQ, ingenuity, and creativity. And this talent is apolitical. It's like musical talent in AMADEUS. Salieri has greater respect for music, but he lacks genius. Mozart is a goof but gifted with genius.

    Talent is apolitical. However, most talent tends to conform to official ideology out of conditioning or opportunism. It's like Kepler and Newton grew up in a Christian World, so they were Christian. Today, smartest kids attend PC-dogma schools, so they turn PC. But it has nothing to do with talent per se.
    Some talented people see right thru PC but just want to focus on what they're good at and don't want to be bothered or blacklisted, so they pretend to go with PC.

    The untalented feel resentment toward the talented. But they are loathe to admit it since they don't want to come across as envious, resentful, insecure, inadequate, nasty, petty, etc. So, they try to control the talent(that they themselves don't have) by binding it to ideology, something ANYONE can learn. Very few people can be Mozart or Bacharach, but ANYONE can learn to speak BLM gibberish or wave a homo flag. Via ideological one-upmanship, the untalented can gain supremacy over the talented who may be accused of being insufficiently committed to the cause of 'justice'. The talented are always vulnerable since intelligence, when armed with integrity, prefers truth over falsehood, and that will always upset dogma. Truth often runs against ideology of 'justice'. Also, talent gains success, and this makes it vulnerable to accusations of 'greed' and 'injustice', the 'inequality' stuff.

    Today's self-righteous chauvinists are especially bitter because, in the end, talent trumps ideology. These talentless hacks went to same schools with talented kids. Most of them are Democrats and profess to espouse same ideology. So, they should all end up equal in social status, right? Nope. Some who majored in bogus social sciences is likely to be far less successful than someone who did well in high-tech or some science field or finance or etc. So, despite same ideology, one person could be riding high while the other is having difficulty affording coffee at starbucks. Will to admit to envy? No, they'd rather lean on their crutch of 'social justice'.

    At least in the 80s, the yuppies could be derided as Reaganites and crass capitalists. But in the Age of Clinton and Blair, the yuppies turned into bobo's and took on the attitudes of bohemians and radicals. The hipster age. They hailed Obama. This may partly explain the hairsplitting that's going on in prog community.

    When it's a matter of Left vs Right, the left must unite against the right. But when the Power and Privilege now brand themselves as 'left', it means BLM and Jewish or Hindu billionaire at Silicon Valley are in the same camp. But are they?
    Traditionally, the Rich and Powerful were seen as part of the Right. But when so much privilege is also part of the 'left', the left must make finer distinctions among who is who and what is what.

    Back when computers were mostly big mainframes in gov’t offices (social security, the Pentagon) computer programming was thought of as women’s work. It was a nice clean 9 to 5 job requiring patience and no physical strength. In the pre-digital computer age, large gov. agencies had armies of “computers” – computer was a job title for the people (mostly women) who sat at their desks all day with adding machines doing repetitive calculations like ballistics tables. (The black lady “mathematical/scientific geniuses” in Hidden Figures are “computers” – the gov. needed so many of these during WWII that they even recruited blacks with teaching degrees .) When the shift was made to digital computers, a lot of these women were retrained to be programmers.

    But when everyone could have a computer of his own, the balance shifted to geeky guys who started programming when they were 12 and were willing to stay up all night and work for 3 days straight on pizza and coke until they solved the problem.

    Feynman tells an interesting story about the “computers” at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project. The Army took a bunch of really bright draftees (people who had done well in math in HS) and sent them to Los Alamos to do this job. Because they were concerned with security, they didn’t tell them anything about what they were doing – just add these numbers together all day – we can’t tell you why or what for. So it wasn’t going well – the guys were fidgety and bored and would play pranks on each other, etc. So Feynman got permission to tell them a little – that they were solving differential equations and that the goal was to optimize some variable. Once they were allowed to understand what they were doing, the guys invented all kinds of shortcuts and ways to automate the process and break it up and speed it up – they would run things in parallel, they would color code the punch cards that they used (they didn’t have computers but they had IBM mechanical tabulators which also ran on punch cards and had the ability to sort things into order, etc.), They turned it into a game and would compete with each other to see who could get the most done and their productivity went up 10 fold. Probably a room full of female computers would have sat there patiently forever doing exactly what they were assigned to do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterike

    Once they were allowed to understand what they were doing, the guys invented all kinds of shortcuts and ways to automate the process and break it up and speed it up

     

    That's called "acting white." That's why the best person for almost any task is a white guy, and why America developed the way it once did. Yes, it's better to have a white janitor than a Mexican one, because the white janitor will continually figure out ways to make things better, and lots of little improvements add up.

    I think corporatism has squashed some of this as well. Surely, the slow slow slow lines at Starbucks could be sped up by some creative thinking, but nobody can take action because it's all likely dictated from the top. (One thing: have a separate line for people who want simple coffee that can be poured immediately. I figured that out the first time I was ever in a Starbucks, but I've never seen it implemented anywhere. I guess it would be "discriminatory".)

    When I was barely out of my short pants I got a job as a juice jockey in a health food store. It wasn't a chain and I could run my juice stand (also frozen yogurt) any way I wanted. And I immediately began making modifications to make things move faster and easier. Simple changes like rearranging the order of the various things we needed to use so they were in a logical line. It all added up to a more efficient operation. The dull witted punk girl I worked with had no idea what I was doing or why. I also put out a tip jar, which they made me remove (those bastards).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. So the ideologues either believe that there are sex differences in cognition but man does not contribute to climate change, or that there are no sex differences in cognition but man does contribute to climate change.

    It is sad that it is probably a minority that believes there are sex differences in cognition and that man does contribute to climate change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  64. Doug says:
    @Anon
    Just pray Asians don't program it.

    Anyway...here's the thing.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn't that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    And even though its search results were better than most, it's become rigged over the yrs.

    Now, I hear there are other search engines that are more fair.

    But there hasn't been a concerted effort to migrate there.

    DuckDuckGo is an objectively superior search service. However they’ll never overtake Google because

    A) The name is too long. Bing got this right. A page that people are landing on 100 times a day needs a very short URL.

    B) They don’t track users, so that means significantly less ad revenue per search. That translates into less money for marketing and technology investments.

    C) Search has become completely tied to defaults set by browsers and devices. Every Android phone and Chrome browser in the world is set to search Google by default. 99% of users won’t be bothered to change that setting. (Half of them probably don’t know how). You can’t capture search market share without a multi-billion dollar software and/or hardware operation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jack D
    What if your goal is to provide an objectively superior search service and not overtake Google?
    , @whorefinder
    "Objectively superior" is not true. DuckDuckGo runs (from what I know if it, and I'm not a computer guy) similar to Bing's search, which is competitive with Google but ultimately less satisfying. Trust me, as someone who researches a lot for a living, if I'm in a time crunch I don't bother with futzing around with other searches but instead plug it directly into Google and get the direct answer much faster in a plurality of circumstances.

    DuckDuckGo's selling point precisely is the promised anonymity. Whether it is actual remains to be seen; given that it's a US company, FISA can force it to track and they will never tell you. Also, even without FISA or the alphabet agencies putting pressure on it, DuckDuck's anonymity promise is only as good as the unseen, unknown people running it. Given the company is based in Philadelphia, the local leftism is going to affect them.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Am I the only one who actually wants to keep control of my car, for better or worse? Not just because of the dystopian scenarios but because of the primal urge to be in control of one’s life, even if it’s as trivial as driving?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    What are the odds that the guy who gets hugely rich off inventing self-driving cars will buy Steve McQueen's old Ferrari and drive it everywhere himself?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Jack D says:
    @Rod1963
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn't touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won't.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car's critical systems.

    Right now they aren't worth the hacker community's attention. But when there are millions on the road...

    Here's the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.

    Everything you say is possibile already. People have demonstrated ways to take control of existing production cars remotely. Your car already has a microphone (or is connected to your phone’s via bluetooth) and for all you know is already taping your every word and location and phoning it in to Big Brother.

    Aircraft avionics and mechanics are certified to high standards because if they screw up then hundreds of people die all at once. Or maybe even thousands if the plane crashes into a stadium, skyscraper, etc. Since self driving cars will kill far fewer people / crash, standards will be much lower just as standards for drivers are much (much) lower than those for pilots of jumbo jets.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Anon
    Just pray Asians don't program it.

    Anyway...here's the thing.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn't that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    And even though its search results were better than most, it's become rigged over the yrs.

    Now, I hear there are other search engines that are more fair.

    But there hasn't been a concerted effort to migrate there.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn’t that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    The Google search engine is insanely complicated. It’s a learning machine that learns you and figures out what you’re looking for based on what you meant to search for, not just what you put into the search bar.

    It keeps track of what’s topical, trending, and related to what you maybe might have meant to ask for. Ever notice that after you do one search it’s pretty good at guessing at the next question you’re going to ask? Yes, it does that, it “derives context”.

    It’s the largest and most sophisticated DWIM (Do What I Mean) project in the history of computer science, and it would be very difficult to ground-up something better. There’s a huge difference between producing “results” and “good results really, really quickly”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Over the last 15 years the Google search engine hasn't gotten very good at learning how to make it convenient to search for Steve Sailer material.

    I always type my name in quotes: "steve sailer." Otherwise it autocorrects sailer to sailor and I get back a lot of Sailor Moon stuff.

    Over the last 15 years, Google has solved a lot of inconveniences like that for millions of other common searches, but not for steve sailer searches.

    But, it's their search engine so I very rarely complain.

    , @Anon
    That may be rigged, but the system is rigged overall to favor certain results.

    And some things are totally shadowbanned. I should know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. Jack D says:
    @Beckow
    None of what you suggest is realistic. I have driven around self-driving cars and it is not the 'experimental' nature that makes them annoying. It is built into the reality of the traffic environment, in other words, the slowness and rigidness are unchangeable. They will never be allowed to take risks and agility comes with taking risks. It will be just like thousands of elderly Asians on over-crowded streets. And the lack of eye contact is the least of our problems.

    If you take the time-comfort trade-off (your last paragraph), and think it is worth it, there are a lot better, more efficient ways to move than in individual slow moving, socially isolated plastic bubbles. Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation? How is sitting in a slow moving box preferable to that? Or more efficient.

    (By the way, on a related subject, we are doing the same with the Amazon supply chain model - we are going back to one-to-one distribution model from a heavily optimized retail model. It is inefficient and soulless.)

    It would be great if American cities were organized like European cities where all the middle class people live downtown a short subway or tram ride from their offices and walking distance to shops. But we didn’t develop that way. After WWII, certain dark clouds appeared on the horizon and made our cities mostly unlivable crime ridden hellholes and the middle class fled to the suburbs. So now we are mostly stuck with spread out suburbs where it will never be possible to put everyone on mass transit.

    Maybe Amazon is soulless compared to buying from Pierre the baker and Jacques the butcher, etc. but it beats shopping at Wal-Mart which is the real alternative.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Jack D says:
    @Doug
    DuckDuckGo is an objectively superior search service. However they'll never overtake Google because

    A) The name is too long. Bing got this right. A page that people are landing on 100 times a day needs a very short URL.

    B) They don't track users, so that means significantly less ad revenue per search. That translates into less money for marketing and technology investments.

    C) Search has become completely tied to defaults set by browsers and devices. Every Android phone and Chrome browser in the world is set to search Google by default. 99% of users won't be bothered to change that setting. (Half of them probably don't know how). You can't capture search market share without a multi-billion dollar software and/or hardware operation.

    What if your goal is to provide an objectively superior search service and not overtake Google?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Jack D says:
    @Anon
    Amusingly, the liberal elites who financed Obama’s reelection in 2012 had no idea that Obama’s turnout strategy of unifying his ungainly coalition of the fringes by ginning up hatred against cishet white males would rebound against them in the ensuing years.

    Jewish Bolsheviks who helped Stalin to power got destroyed by his minions.

    Poetic justice.

    Same with Giggle.

    But Giggle has too much cash and can buy off the naggers.

    That would be noogers, but that’s really not their biggest problem. Notice that the recent brouhaha was over gender and not race. In part because Google is already colorful because of all the Asians and Indians but also because blacks don’t really want jobs as coders. Blacks fantasize about being doctors and lawyers and CEOs and even scientists, but what black fantasizes about acting like an Asian and coding all day? It’s like the dog chasing the truck – what happens if you actually catch it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
    You and Hans whack up the bearer bonds.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. peterike says:
    @Jack D
    Back when computers were mostly big mainframes in gov't offices (social security, the Pentagon) computer programming was thought of as women's work. It was a nice clean 9 to 5 job requiring patience and no physical strength. In the pre-digital computer age, large gov. agencies had armies of "computers" - computer was a job title for the people (mostly women) who sat at their desks all day with adding machines doing repetitive calculations like ballistics tables. (The black lady "mathematical/scientific geniuses" in Hidden Figures are "computers" - the gov. needed so many of these during WWII that they even recruited blacks with teaching degrees .) When the shift was made to digital computers, a lot of these women were retrained to be programmers.

    But when everyone could have a computer of his own, the balance shifted to geeky guys who started programming when they were 12 and were willing to stay up all night and work for 3 days straight on pizza and coke until they solved the problem.

    Feynman tells an interesting story about the "computers" at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project. The Army took a bunch of really bright draftees (people who had done well in math in HS) and sent them to Los Alamos to do this job. Because they were concerned with security, they didn't tell them anything about what they were doing - just add these numbers together all day - we can't tell you why or what for. So it wasn't going well - the guys were fidgety and bored and would play pranks on each other, etc. So Feynman got permission to tell them a little - that they were solving differential equations and that the goal was to optimize some variable. Once they were allowed to understand what they were doing, the guys invented all kinds of shortcuts and ways to automate the process and break it up and speed it up - they would run things in parallel, they would color code the punch cards that they used (they didn't have computers but they had IBM mechanical tabulators which also ran on punch cards and had the ability to sort things into order, etc.), They turned it into a game and would compete with each other to see who could get the most done and their productivity went up 10 fold. Probably a room full of female computers would have sat there patiently forever doing exactly what they were assigned to do.

    Once they were allowed to understand what they were doing, the guys invented all kinds of shortcuts and ways to automate the process and break it up and speed it up

    That’s called “acting white.” That’s why the best person for almost any task is a white guy, and why America developed the way it once did. Yes, it’s better to have a white janitor than a Mexican one, because the white janitor will continually figure out ways to make things better, and lots of little improvements add up.

    I think corporatism has squashed some of this as well. Surely, the slow slow slow lines at Starbucks could be sped up by some creative thinking, but nobody can take action because it’s all likely dictated from the top. (One thing: have a separate line for people who want simple coffee that can be poured immediately. I figured that out the first time I was ever in a Starbucks, but I’ve never seen it implemented anywhere. I guess it would be “discriminatory”.)

    When I was barely out of my short pants I got a job as a juice jockey in a health food store. It wasn’t a chain and I could run my juice stand (also frozen yogurt) any way I wanted. And I immediately began making modifications to make things move faster and easier. Simple changes like rearranging the order of the various things we needed to use so they were in a logical line. It all added up to a more efficient operation. The dull witted punk girl I worked with had no idea what I was doing or why. I also put out a tip jar, which they made me remove (those bastards).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. The Corporate Media Must Be Destroyed

    The Corporate Media Is Anti-White

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  73. Jack D says:
    @peterike
    Can't we just have self-driving cars for highways? I don't care if I need to drive on a 15 minute neighborhood streets trip to the supermarket. But when I'm getting on a 3 or 4 hour highway jaunt, I would LOVE to drop into auto-pilot. Driving is such a total waste of time.

    The highway driving challenge is significantly easier as well, except maybe during a BLM protest/highway shutdown. Why does it have to be all or nothing?

    Probably it won’t be. For things like driverless trucks, the current plan, at least at first, is for a human to drive the truck as far as a highway on ramp and then the truck will drive just the interstate part of the trip and be met with a human at the off ramp. As you say, an interstate is a far more controlled and less complex environment (and once they have driverless vehicles on them will have to be even more controlled – they will have to take care to do things like keep the stripes correct in construction zones).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Cortes says:
    @dc.sunsets
    Self-driving cars can likely improve upon the average driver's operation, but as with anti-lock brakes, the superior operator can still outdo the automated "good-enough-for-retail-sale."

    Imagine being in a self-driving car when Jawon pulls up next to you and points a gun in your direction. "The car 'thinks,' but sir, the light is still red."
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Jack D says:
    @Father O'Hara
    I believe Tiger was arrested while sleeping in his car,engine off.

    So did the car teleport itself to the side of the road or did he drive it there while already drunk/drugged? And why doesn’t someone who is worth $700 million + AND has a substance abuse problem have a chauffeur?

    That being said, we should reward drunk/drugged drivers for pulling over and not trying to make it all the way home, but maybe the reward should be some reduction in severity rather than letting them off completely.

    Read More
    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Teleportation via Occam's butterknife?

    The common occurence is for a person to leave a bar, realise he cannot drive but having no money nor transport for hotels, cabs, returns for the vehicle or the risks of its being towed, to sleep it all off i ñn the car he parked whilst sober. It is a very common situation, and has doubtless saved lives. Now, of course, the overreaching statutes cited mean the same sort of person is more likely to try to squeak by driving to the safety of his house and hope to avoid being caught, rather than be exposed to snoopy cops who'll nab him if he is sleeping in the car.

    (Yes, yes; he should have avoided the no-win scenario in the first instance, but that's back to whether we should admit teens are gonna screw notwithstanding the wisdom of abstinence, and make condoms available to them or not....)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Bill says:
    @Jack D
    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other - they won't need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that's much better than having to drive yourself.

    If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now.

    You might be doing it wrong now. ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. @27 year old
    I also think (hey Unz what happened to our edit function) that the benefits of self driving cars might be overstated - especially before they are made mandatory when the roads are a mix between regular and self driving cars.

    And another thing, if you guys recall the Trump Dynasty post, people can't afford new cars today. Unless self driving cars are somehow much cheaper than the kind you have to drive yourself, who is going to buy them?

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.

    Nonsense. There are millions of people who essentially drive for a living. There’s a huge dollars and cents motivation to automate their jobs away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. @Rod1963
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn't touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won't.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car's critical systems.

    Right now they aren't worth the hacker community's attention. But when there are millions on the road...

    Here's the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.

    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn’t touch a robot car.

    Actually cars will need to be orders of magnitude better. Most avionics is dong very simple things, like controlling servo motors. Autos operate in a very complex environment with uncountable corner conditions . Even Landing a plane is child’s play by comparison.

    About 1 software defect per 2000 lines of code works OK in airplanes. Much higher than 1 per 1000 loc creates real problems. Consumer software is closer to 5 defects per 1000 Lines of code.

    Consider the Toyota runaway condition . That is software, not mats. The accelerator is much easier than moving in traffic. Current methods of producing software will not be adequate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Well said. For those who disagree, lookup the development of the Space Shuttle software.

    I am not getting in any self driving car anytime soon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. Bill says:
    @Jack D
    It's really stupid to think that we should legislate people's jobs as permanent sinecures. "Teamsters" (as in the Teamster's Union) originally drove teams of horses and then made the transition to trucks because there was no one stupid enough to permanently lock them into jobs as wagon drivers. When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel) their employers tend to go bankrupt. You can provide even more jobs by forcing every employer to hire two groups of employees - one group to dig holes (with a shovel - no backhoes allowed) and the other group to fill them in. We could have 110% full employment with this method.

    Although it provides a living to many, over the road trucker is really fundamentally a crappy job and if people don't have to spend their lives doing it maybe we can figure out something better for them to do. Not having hordes of immigrants also competing for the ever shrinking # of jobs might help.

    maybe we can figure out something better for them to do.

    Steelworkers: still waiting.

    There aren’t going to be replacement jobs for the Teamsters (though I agree that outlawing self-driving trucks is probably not a good idea). The fact that there are no longer any good jobs for nitwits is a problem. The fact that there soon won’t be any good jobs for lower-midwits (other than bartending and prostitution, of course) is a bigger problem. The fact that there may, in a while, not be any jobs for upper-midwits is a really big problem. The Masters of the Universe want to solve this (the upper-midwit one) by employing them all as social workers to maintain the bodily integrity of the nitwits and lower-midwits.

    I can’t say I have a significantly better idea, but this doesn’t seem all that promising to me. I mean, wouldn’t it be more rewarding to band together with the nitwits and lower-midwits to politely ask the Masters of the Universe for a better deal? That job at least you can do outside and in cool costumes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. David says:
    @Father O'Hara
    I believe Tiger was arrested while sleeping in his car,engine off.

    If CNN can be believed, the details were:

    …both tire rims on the driver’s side of the Mercedes had minor damage and the front and rear tires on that side of the vehicle were flat.

    Police also observed damage to the bumper on the driver’s side, white scrapes and scuffs on the rear bumper, and the passenger side rear taillight was not working, according to the documents.

    Jupiter police discovered Woods early Monday on the side of the road, with his car running, its brake lights illuminated and right turn signal flashing, according to the arrest report released earlier Tuesday. He was by himself and wearing his seat belt.

    The report said Woods had to be awakened and that his speech was slurred.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Obviously, Woods has some bad problems, but, at least, before any cops saw him, he'd gotten himself off the road and was no longer driving.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. whorefinder says: • Website
    @Doug
    DuckDuckGo is an objectively superior search service. However they'll never overtake Google because

    A) The name is too long. Bing got this right. A page that people are landing on 100 times a day needs a very short URL.

    B) They don't track users, so that means significantly less ad revenue per search. That translates into less money for marketing and technology investments.

    C) Search has become completely tied to defaults set by browsers and devices. Every Android phone and Chrome browser in the world is set to search Google by default. 99% of users won't be bothered to change that setting. (Half of them probably don't know how). You can't capture search market share without a multi-billion dollar software and/or hardware operation.

    “Objectively superior” is not true. DuckDuckGo runs (from what I know if it, and I’m not a computer guy) similar to Bing’s search, which is competitive with Google but ultimately less satisfying. Trust me, as someone who researches a lot for a living, if I’m in a time crunch I don’t bother with futzing around with other searches but instead plug it directly into Google and get the direct answer much faster in a plurality of circumstances.

    DuckDuckGo’s selling point precisely is the promised anonymity. Whether it is actual remains to be seen; given that it’s a US company, FISA can force it to track and they will never tell you. Also, even without FISA or the alphabet agencies putting pressure on it, DuckDuck’s anonymity promise is only as good as the unseen, unknown people running it. Given the company is based in Philadelphia, the local leftism is going to affect them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @27 year old
    I also think (hey Unz what happened to our edit function) that the benefits of self driving cars might be overstated - especially before they are made mandatory when the roads are a mix between regular and self driving cars.

    And another thing, if you guys recall the Trump Dynasty post, people can't afford new cars today. Unless self driving cars are somehow much cheaper than the kind you have to drive yourself, who is going to buy them?

    Self driving cars is sort of fighting the last war. We can telework and allow housing to be segregated again and reduce time spent driving significantly.

    > Unless self-driving cars are cheaper,
    > who is going to buy them?

    You won’t buy them, you’ll rent them from a car-sharing service, the way you use an Uber.

    I rely on a bike-sharing service and love it, but this gave me pause: on a hurricane day, the service was deliberately shut down for the day. Never mind that it was still ok to ride and that people rode their own bikes without trouble. The bike-sharing service decided to aggressively comply with the city’s safety guidelines, and if you relied on it to get to work or run errands, you were out of luck that day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Dieter Kief

    The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that have evolved over decades of trial and error.
     
    a) If one of the biologically founded differences between man and women is sensitivity vs. rationality and if its true, what you write above, that now sensitvity is turned into a tool to extract payoffs, the whole setting could be looked upon as some sort of compensation for former injustices, done to women. That'd be the historical perspective.

    b) From a phenomenological perspective, the above story is wrong, because it is very insensitive to ask James Damore to deny the scientific truth. If you (women) do so anyway, you destroy your own sensitivity, which means, there's' nothing left over, to base your claims on.

    (No Heideggerian God anywhere to be seen at this point, who would help us out. We're stuck with ourselves. It's either: Fight over arguments (that's what Google just resisted) - or get involved in real - and - see Steve Sailer's caveat - possibly destructive fights).

    ((Since these are earthly matters, you usually don't get the one sober definite solution. Freedom implies risks. And suspense - - (and the chance, at least, for hope; at the very least if there are enough people like James Damore who have the grit, which is sometimes needed to speak your proper mind (Kant)))).

    If we hadn’t known you were Deutsch, we would know now; it is the quintessentially German comment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    "...it is the quintessentially German comment."

    Thank you! - and, - - you've guessed it already - - I can't help it (I love it).
    Not even being a tad Irish (Kief= O'Keeffe) can help it, as it seems.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @27 year old
    >I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.

    After everything you've seen you still think they "wouldn't do that"? The spin will be something like AI reaches racist conclusions (which is already a talking point) and therefore it will need to be guided in the Correct direction.

    >However, I don’t doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as [the driver] would.

    I think that will be a problem for anyone. Who is going to buy a car that's programmed to kill its passengers for the greater good?

    > Who is going to buy a car
    > that’s programmed to kill its passengers
    > for the greater good?

    You won’t buy it, you’ll rent it. It will be a public service. Too useful not to use it.

    We patronize many services that we don’t fully adhere to because we dont really have a choice. You might ask, who would live in a country that kills people in stupid wars? And the answer is, most of us do.

    It looks like the computerization of everything will also mean the politicization of everything. I’m not sure I like this… Can I please get off here? “I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lurker
    Who's going to buy a self-driving car at all?

    Not all the people who used to drive cars for a living for a start. And I'm sure there will be self-driving trucks, buses, trains etc. So all those people will be out of work too. And so on and so on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Jack D
    So did the car teleport itself to the side of the road or did he drive it there while already drunk/drugged? And why doesn't someone who is worth $700 million + AND has a substance abuse problem have a chauffeur?

    That being said, we should reward drunk/drugged drivers for pulling over and not trying to make it all the way home, but maybe the reward should be some reduction in severity rather than letting them off completely.

    Teleportation via Occam’s butterknife?

    The common occurence is for a person to leave a bar, realise he cannot drive but having no money nor transport for hotels, cabs, returns for the vehicle or the risks of its being towed, to sleep it all off i ñn the car he parked whilst sober. It is a very common situation, and has doubtless saved lives. Now, of course, the overreaching statutes cited mean the same sort of person is more likely to try to squeak by driving to the safety of his house and hope to avoid being caught, rather than be exposed to snoopy cops who’ll nab him if he is sleeping in the car.

    (Yes, yes; he should have avoided the no-win scenario in the first instance, but that’s back to whether we should admit teens are gonna screw notwithstanding the wisdom of abstinence, and make condoms available to them or not….)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. @Jack D
    In some respect the current period feels like the '30s where Germany and Japan and the Soviets were all building up massive forces and getting ready to make their move and the Western democracies just sat on their asses and dithered and did nothing. Maybe they denounced Hitler in the League of Nations as if passing meaningless resolutions was the same as actually doing something. Then when the dictatorships made their move, we were "blindsided" and they swept through Europe and the Pacific in a flash.

    We see now :

    1. N. Korea building nuke tipped ICBMS (while their Chinese allies have "deniability" - we weren't the ones that nuked DC) and

    2. China building artificial islands, carriers, modernizing their military, etc. using the billions of $ of trade surplus they make from being the "workshop of the world".

    These folks aren't building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it. When the Chinese decide that the time is right to make their move (maybe it's in 10 years, maybe it's 50 - they are playing the long game), we won't know what hit us and our transgender army will be in no shape to do anything about it.

    Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it.

    This phrase (usually attributed to Chekhov)
    did not mean to describe how events develop in real world.
    The phrase meant the guidance how a theatrical play (or a movie script) should be written,
    and/or how it should be directed !
    Script writer should get rid of the details, which will not work in the subsequent part of the play.

    Rachel Bloom cites Chekhov,

    not about getting life wisdom, but about the ways to write and to direct plays.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    It's mentioned in Haruki Murakami's 1Q84, in a bit of meta-fiction.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Vinteuil says:

    Quite possibly your best TakiMag column ever.

    It all seems to be coming to a head, lately.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. Coemgen says:

    What would Hal do?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  89. @Jack D
    1. You already live in a world of code. The motor in your car, the elevator you ride in, your bank balance, the signals on the subway, the plane that you fly on, on and on - they are all run on code.
    You are probably not aware of it half the time - when you press on the gas you may think that you are opening the throttle on the engine like the old days. Nope - the gas pedal is just a toy exactly the same as the gas pedal in a video game. All you are doing is setting a variable in the software and the software is driving your car. You THINK you are driving or flying the plane but what you are really doing is playing a video game and the computer is actually the one driving or flying. And yet you live.

    2. Trains are great but they only go certain places and at certain times. Cars are more popular than trains because they take you anywhere at any time.

    > You already live in a world of code

    The big change is that the code is becoming less anonymous and mechanical. It’s becoming more like Facebook and AI.

    That’s a pretty huge change, and we’re just beginning to start to see what it means.

    Its like the difference between seeing your neighbor once a day and saying hi, and living in the same bed as your neighbor and all his family. Do you still like him?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @yaqub the mad scientist
    I bet this will accelerate outsourcing.

    Google will simply form or contract to shell firms, probably within other shell firms, that do most of the productive work. It's pointless where the workers physically are. Once there are are a couple more added degrees of separation, it will become increasingly harder to track the labyrinth. Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent. It's going to be a lot less trouble to have your work done where PC culture is less strong. And it has the benefit of further atomizing employees.

    You inadvertently bring up a point I have made before. Corporate Diversity policies have for decades been a key deciding factor in companies saying “Screw it we can not staff project for success then we might as well just outsource them”. Believe me I have seen it done numerous times. Of course the majority of outsourced projects are flops too, but it spares you the fatal career disaster of being labeled a racist, sexist hater.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Beckow
    None of what you suggest is realistic. I have driven around self-driving cars and it is not the 'experimental' nature that makes them annoying. It is built into the reality of the traffic environment, in other words, the slowness and rigidness are unchangeable. They will never be allowed to take risks and agility comes with taking risks. It will be just like thousands of elderly Asians on over-crowded streets. And the lack of eye contact is the least of our problems.

    If you take the time-comfort trade-off (your last paragraph), and think it is worth it, there are a lot better, more efficient ways to move than in individual slow moving, socially isolated plastic bubbles. Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation? How is sitting in a slow moving box preferable to that? Or more efficient.

    (By the way, on a related subject, we are doing the same with the Amazon supply chain model - we are going back to one-to-one distribution model from a heavily optimized retail model. It is inefficient and soulless.)

    Beckow. Jack quite clearly answered your “too slow” argument. (And i’m sympathetic–I’m an “optimizer”, as annoyed with extra useless seconds at stop signs or with the left lane happy Asian girls as anyone.) Self-driving cars are at proof-of-concept stage now, the focus is on safety. Optimizations come later. And as more and more self-driving cars are out there the optimizations possible shoot up. Your response just suggests you don’t understand the power of software and the revolution that’s coming–or for that matter the power of engineering, of humans (human males) to work on problems and solve them.

    Then …

    Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation?

    Seriously? I’m a fan of trains too. But the whole advantage of cars is it’s like natural human transportation–point-to-point.

    And then the obvious: the problem with “public transportation” is … the public.

    As Europe commits diversicide it is going to have the same problems with “public transportation” as the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    The other optimization will be fuel economy (i.e. aside from speed). Not racing to stop lights, instead timing it so you coast through (perhaps integrated with radio communication from the stop lights themselves as to when they turn green). Tailgating to lower drag (consider if each car has a link to the one in front, they can coordinate braking). Accelerating at peak fuel economy. Just some of the possibilities of automatic hypermiling. If a chess algorithm can beat me at chess a hypermiling algorithm can likely beat me at driving for economy. In the city there is marginal difference between driving for economy and driving for speed.

    If I can sit there and read/reply to iSteve in transit, I don't care if it takes an extra minute to arrive at my destination. It saves me money. It saves my wife money, who can't/won't hypermile.

    I am not going to be a pioneer adopter but likely after a few of the guinea pigs have sorted out what works acceptably and what doesn’t, I'll read the reviews and buy a car with a better fatality rate than my demographic.
    , @Negrolphin Pool
    I agree that the efficiency ceiling is potentially much higher than some people might at first estimate. For example, cars being able to safely travel at 200 miles per hour without driver input would put private-jet-like capabilities in the hands of everyone for trips below about 500 miles, and you could still probably get close to airline times out to 1,000 miles. That could make for incredible productivity increases and allow urban employees vastly more housing options.
    , @Beckow
    It would help our discussion if you would refrain from patronizing. I do understand the software, but whatever.

    Some of Europe is indeed committing a 'diversicide', but not all. And that is a different issue.
    Point-to-point is inherently inefficient and isolating. You might like the isolation, to each his own, but the inefficiency cannot be engineered out of the system. I am more than willing to let people try, but the shortcomings are already obvious, let's at least be open-minded enough to discuss them.

    Automation works well in normalized environmets. The world is not normalized, and it will be hard to normalize it. Important parts of it can be adapted - freeways, maybe some cities, well structured suburbs, etc... - but as with most technology, to make it ubiquitous, you have to be fairly comprehensive. That is a lot harder for self-driving cars than their advocates admit.

    Traffic has in interesting feature - the mode of transportation that works best gets oversubscribed over time. Better self-driving cars work, more of them there will be. That tends to suppress their effectiveness. It is like today: when if traffic drops, some people abandon public transportation for cars, that leads to over-crowding, traffic gets worse, people look back at alternatives, etc... self-limiting is built into the system.

    Let's see how it plays out, but a bit of skepticism doesn't hurt. Too much optimism about everything is how we got where we are today ('mass migration will make everything better...have you had that great tandoori taco? let's do more of it, let them all come, it will all work out...'). So easy on that euphoric optimism, you could end up with 2 billion Asians in self-driving cars. And that would be just northern California. Physical limits matter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Lurker says:
    @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    If saving lives is the prime mission then why are Somalis or MS-13 types allowed to immigrate?

    I’m trying to think through driverless cars – what’s the angle, what do tptb get out of it?

    Greater control over the population? Just part of the wider story of automation?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
    One benefit is the potentially huge increase in productivity of white collar commuters.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Lurker says:
    @European-American
    > Who is going to buy a car
    > that’s programmed to kill its passengers
    > for the greater good?

    You won't buy it, you'll rent it. It will be a public service. Too useful not to use it.

    We patronize many services that we don't fully adhere to because we dont really have a choice. You might ask, who would live in a country that kills people in stupid wars? And the answer is, most of us do.

    It looks like the computerization of everything will also mean the politicization of everything. I'm not sure I like this... Can I please get off here? "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"

    Who’s going to buy a self-driving car at all?

    Not all the people who used to drive cars for a living for a start. And I’m sure there will be self-driving trucks, buses, trains etc. So all those people will be out of work too. And so on and so on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Thomas

    “how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?”
     
    How do you feel today about right now trusting your private information — email, web browsing and search history, passwords, geolocation data, financial transactions, all of it — to Goolag? There ought to be a mass movement to dump Google products and services as much as possible.

    http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/08/i-keep-a-written-blacklist.png
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGy7q-yVYAQxQnV.jpg

    I already do all my porn and money laundering searches on Bing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Lurker says:
    @Rod1963
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn't touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won't.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car's critical systems.

    Right now they aren't worth the hacker community's attention. But when there are millions on the road...

    Here's the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They are big brother on wheels.

    It could also enhance all sorts of virtual gated communities. George Soros doesn’t want protestors outside his house. Well there won’t be a bus to drop you there. Easy, drive there! Nope. Because cars will be automatically routed away from his place. The only way to get there will be to walk.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Anonym says:

    The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.

    It may be self perpetuating but it is not a perpetual motion machine. It grows stronger on the blood of the whites who fund it involuntarily through wealth transfers of various types (AA, discrimination lawsuits, shakedowns, parents paying SJW college tuition etc.), and through the brains of our children should they succumb to the propaganda.

    When that spigot gets turned off…

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.

    It may be self perpetuating but it is not a perpetual motion machine. It grows stronger on the blood of the whites who fund it involuntarily through wealth transfers of various types (AA, discrimination lawsuits, shakedowns, parents paying SJW college tuition etc.), and through the brains of our children should they succumb to the propaganda.
     
    Yes, exactly.

    The leftist utopia project is fueled by burning the cultural capital western culture has built up over centuries. Leftists, in their arrogance and self-deceit, see that resource as limitless.

    But it's not.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Jack D
    In some respect the current period feels like the '30s where Germany and Japan and the Soviets were all building up massive forces and getting ready to make their move and the Western democracies just sat on their asses and dithered and did nothing. Maybe they denounced Hitler in the League of Nations as if passing meaningless resolutions was the same as actually doing something. Then when the dictatorships made their move, we were "blindsided" and they swept through Europe and the Pacific in a flash.

    We see now :

    1. N. Korea building nuke tipped ICBMS (while their Chinese allies have "deniability" - we weren't the ones that nuked DC) and

    2. China building artificial islands, carriers, modernizing their military, etc. using the billions of $ of trade surplus they make from being the "workshop of the world".

    These folks aren't building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it. When the Chinese decide that the time is right to make their move (maybe it's in 10 years, maybe it's 50 - they are playing the long game), we won't know what hit us and our transgender army will be in no shape to do anything about it.

    These folks aren’t building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it.

    The value of what the Chinese are doing is resistance to intimidation now and later dominance.

    The Chinese will never have to “fire” anything. The old America–pre-1965 Immigration Act, pre-1964 Civil Rights Act–would have been a credible competitor to China for generations to come even with our lower population. But the West–with the triumph of minoritarianism–is committing diversicide. All the Chinese have to do is … wait. (Ok, they need to manage their own demographics better to insure eugenic fertility … and wait.)

    Then as the sun sets on the West’s 500 years of incredible awesomeness, the Chinese can just pick up the pieces wherever the lie. Wouldn’t surprise me if they bio-engineer some plagues to clear out the useless Africans from resource rich Africa or the remaining whites from nice temperate zone real estate.

    Who knows? But when your serious competition is has become utterly looney, utterly disconnected from reality, there isn’t much to do but sit back and enjoy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Lurker says:
    @Jack D
    It's really stupid to think that we should legislate people's jobs as permanent sinecures. "Teamsters" (as in the Teamster's Union) originally drove teams of horses and then made the transition to trucks because there was no one stupid enough to permanently lock them into jobs as wagon drivers. When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel) their employers tend to go bankrupt. You can provide even more jobs by forcing every employer to hire two groups of employees - one group to dig holes (with a shovel - no backhoes allowed) and the other group to fill them in. We could have 110% full employment with this method.

    Although it provides a living to many, over the road trucker is really fundamentally a crappy job and if people don't have to spend their lives doing it maybe we can figure out something better for them to do. Not having hordes of immigrants also competing for the ever shrinking # of jobs might help.

    When we do lock people into obsolete jobs by law or union pressure (locomotive fireman in the age of diesel)

    Yes, we had that in Britain. The steam locos went in 1968 but there were still firemen in diesel and electric cabs until the 1970s. They were called the “second man”.

    Otoh it wasn’t completely without merit. Eg training and route learning, someone on hand in case of emergency, probably made it better for the driver – someone to talk to, not nodding off and so on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @David
    If CNN can be believed, the details were:

    ...both tire rims on the driver's side of the Mercedes had minor damage and the front and rear tires on that side of the vehicle were flat.

    Police also observed damage to the bumper on the driver's side, white scrapes and scuffs on the rear bumper, and the passenger side rear taillight was not working, according to the documents.

    Jupiter police discovered Woods early Monday on the side of the road, with his car running, its brake lights illuminated and right turn signal flashing, according to the arrest report released earlier Tuesday. He was by himself and wearing his seat belt.

    The report said Woods had to be awakened and that his speech was slurred.
     

    Obviously, Woods has some bad problems, but, at least, before any cops saw him, he’d gotten himself off the road and was no longer driving.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Lurker says:
    @anonymous coward

    On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.
     
    This project will be managed by a purple-haired fake "woman" and coded by students in Bangalore in a highrise next to an open sewer. Thanks, but I'll pass on your utopia.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that’s much better than having to drive yourself.
     
    You can already do this today and without a Google. It's called a 'train'.

    I think the car/train combo should be pushed.

    Drive your car onto a car transporter, travel by train for a couple of hours while your car charges, then drive off to complete your journey.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Why can’t Google, with all its money, find as many women as men?

    For one reason, because coding doesn’t much appeal to women. My wife, for instance, used to be a computer programmer. She was good at it, but it’s a boring job if you find people more interesting than things. Further, American programmers used to be rather well paid, but then the H-1B visa program allowed employers to substitute cheaper Asian men for American women.

    Yes and women are capable of fixing cars too.

    But is a certain level of testosterone a must when the inevitable problems occur that would lead some to quit in boredom or frustration? Instead testosterone seems to help men sum up the gumption to power through such obstacles.

    Women it seems would prefer to move on to other more interpersonal activities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. @Lurker
    If saving lives is the prime mission then why are Somalis or MS-13 types allowed to immigrate?

    I'm trying to think through driverless cars - what's the angle, what do tptb get out of it?

    Greater control over the population? Just part of the wider story of automation?

    One benefit is the potentially huge increase in productivity of white collar commuters.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. @Jack D
    That would be noogers, but that's really not their biggest problem. Notice that the recent brouhaha was over gender and not race. In part because Google is already colorful because of all the Asians and Indians but also because blacks don't really want jobs as coders. Blacks fantasize about being doctors and lawyers and CEOs and even scientists, but what black fantasizes about acting like an Asian and coding all day? It's like the dog chasing the truck - what happens if you actually catch it?

    You and Hans whack up the bearer bonds.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @Dr doomNgloom
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn’t touch a robot car.

    Actually cars will need to be orders of magnitude better. Most avionics is dong very simple things, like controlling servo motors. Autos operate in a very complex environment with uncountable corner conditions . Even Landing a plane is child's play by comparison.

    About 1 software defect per 2000 lines of code works OK in airplanes. Much higher than 1 per 1000 loc creates real problems. Consumer software is closer to 5 defects per 1000 Lines of code.

    Consider the Toyota runaway condition . That is software, not mats. The accelerator is much easier than moving in traffic. Current methods of producing software will not be adequate.

    Well said. For those who disagree, lookup the development of the Space Shuttle software.

    I am not getting in any self driving car anytime soon.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    I wonder at what point will self-driving cars become the norm, and old cars won't be allowed to drive in the newly automated traffic?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. Anonym says:
    @AnotherDad
    Beckow. Jack quite clearly answered your "too slow" argument. (And i'm sympathetic--I'm an "optimizer", as annoyed with extra useless seconds at stop signs or with the left lane happy Asian girls as anyone.) Self-driving cars are at proof-of-concept stage now, the focus is on safety. Optimizations come later. And as more and more self-driving cars are out there the optimizations possible shoot up. Your response just suggests you don't understand the power of software and the revolution that's coming--or for that matter the power of engineering, of humans (human males) to work on problems and solve them.

    Then ...


    Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation?
     
    Seriously? I'm a fan of trains too. But the whole advantage of cars is it's like natural human transportation--point-to-point.

    And then the obvious: the problem with "public transportation" is ... the public.

    As Europe commits diversicide it is going to have the same problems with "public transportation" as the US.

    The other optimization will be fuel economy (i.e. aside from speed). Not racing to stop lights, instead timing it so you coast through (perhaps integrated with radio communication from the stop lights themselves as to when they turn green). Tailgating to lower drag (consider if each car has a link to the one in front, they can coordinate braking). Accelerating at peak fuel economy. Just some of the possibilities of automatic hypermiling. If a chess algorithm can beat me at chess a hypermiling algorithm can likely beat me at driving for economy. In the city there is marginal difference between driving for economy and driving for speed.

    If I can sit there and read/reply to iSteve in transit, I don’t care if it takes an extra minute to arrive at my destination. It saves me money. It saves my wife money, who can’t/won’t hypermile.

    I am not going to be a pioneer adopter but likely after a few of the guinea pigs have sorted out what works acceptably and what doesn’t, I’ll read the reviews and buy a car with a better fatality rate than my demographic.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @yaqub the mad scientist
    I bet this will accelerate outsourcing.

    Google will simply form or contract to shell firms, probably within other shell firms, that do most of the productive work. It's pointless where the workers physically are. Once there are are a couple more added degrees of separation, it will become increasingly harder to track the labyrinth. Having a bunch of coders working in India, China, or wherever, or at least legally domiciling those companies will help shake off the hounds to some extent. It's going to be a lot less trouble to have your work done where PC culture is less strong. And it has the benefit of further atomizing employees.

    Paid-by-the-job contractors can spend their days racking up business-hours double digit post counts on Daily Stormer. As long as they produce, the rest is trivia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. gregor says:

    I really wonder how much of this corporate diversity militancy and free speech suppression is just a reaction to potentially costly legal risk and to what extent these companies are true believers. Because some of them are pretty convincing. I suspect it all started as purely defensive, but over time companies get lots of true believers in authority. If the government gutted discrimination enforcement tomorrow, I imagine most companies would initially signal their continued commitment to diversity and then proceed to quietly neglect their diversity programs over time, though some entrenched leadership would keep it going pretty eagerly at more culturally liberal companies (in their decline phases, heh). New companies would probably give it a lot less thought. And there would be greater respect for free speech.

    It is a great point about the government hiding behind a very thin separation between private and government spheres to claim there’s no free speech issue with any of this. (The libertarian right in particular tends to fall for such arguments). People are beginning to see the “hostile work environment” for the backdoor censorship that it is. Your opinions are “hostile” and we judge hostility according to the whims of hypersensitive leftists.

    Read More
    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I suspect it all started as purely defensive, but over time companies get lots of true believers in authority.

    There is a selection effect going on. You saw it with mortgage lending. Kerry Killinger of Washington Mutual got to be one of the top ten banking executives in the country by getting federal approval for a couple of dozen acquisitions over the years. With some of them he won minority lending pledge bidding wars over more cautious rivals. The government wasn't forcing him to lend more to minorities, but it was facilitating the rise of an executive who was very optimistic about Hispanic lending and discouraging the rise through mergers of more pessimistic CEOs.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Johanus de Morgateroyde

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn’t that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.
     
    The Google search engine is insanely complicated. It's a learning machine that learns you and figures out what you're looking for based on what you meant to search for, not just what you put into the search bar.

    It keeps track of what's topical, trending, and related to what you maybe might have meant to ask for. Ever notice that after you do one search it's pretty good at guessing at the next question you're going to ask? Yes, it does that, it "derives context".

    It's the largest and most sophisticated DWIM (Do What I Mean) project in the history of computer science, and it would be very difficult to ground-up something better. There's a huge difference between producing "results" and "good results really, really quickly".

    Over the last 15 years the Google search engine hasn’t gotten very good at learning how to make it convenient to search for Steve Sailer material.

    I always type my name in quotes: “steve sailer.” Otherwise it autocorrects sailer to sailor and I get back a lot of Sailor Moon stuff.

    Over the last 15 years, Google has solved a lot of inconveniences like that for millions of other common searches, but not for steve sailer searches.

    But, it’s their search engine so I very rarely complain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @oddsbodkins
    We dream of the day when Sailor Moon is autocorrected to Sailer Unz.
    , @Dieter Kief
    I too saw, that it's not as easy as in other cases to find a Steve Sailer link via Google. And I thought: That's interesting.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @Nico

    You can already do this today and without a Google. It’s called a ‘train’.
     
    You must be either a New Yorker or a European. Elsewhere in North America, rapid transit and commuter rail don't run to or from nearly enough of the desirable places to be and one of the major reasons is that the riffraff (i.e., black people) would move to and destroy nice commuter towns if the "natural" controls such as automobile ownership.

    Blue state SWPLs love to sing the praises of European transport. Hell, they love to sing the praises of anything modern that's over 95% white or was until recently. in the past decade I've watched as the demographics have taken their toll on the Parisian metro and white French people now avoid it whenever possible, preferring walking, biking (Vélib'), Über, carshares (Autolib) and even driving their own cars despite the idiot Socialist mayor's attempts to drive them out.

    Mind you, the city is now uninhabitable for normal people or families: you either have to be Third World enough be willing to live like a rat or uppity enough to be able to live large, and this trend is spreading to the outer burbs as well. Much like New York.

    You must be either exaggerating or ignorant. Once can commute via train between Los Angeles and San Diego, and anyplace between Olympia and Bellingham, or between Washington and Boston (I worked with a lafy wjl took the train daily from Philadelphia to New York). Likewise anyplace from Chicago to Chambana, between Miami and Fort Lauderdale, and Sacramento and most of the Central Valley north of Merced to and from San Francisco, San José, and Oakland (augmented with buses).

    I recount these examples from personal experience; doubtless many more exist.

    Can one commute via public transit in and around Cheyenne? Likely not. But millions do it every day in the U.S.A. outside of New York (I’m doing it as I type).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @yaqub the mad scientist
    Am I the only one who actually wants to keep control of my car, for better or worse? Not just because of the dystopian scenarios but because of the primal urge to be in control of one's life, even if it's as trivial as driving?

    What are the odds that the guy who gets hugely rich off inventing self-driving cars will buy Steve McQueen’s old Ferrari and drive it everywhere himself?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. ia says:
    @Nico

    You can already do this today and without a Google. It’s called a ‘train’.
     
    You must be either a New Yorker or a European. Elsewhere in North America, rapid transit and commuter rail don't run to or from nearly enough of the desirable places to be and one of the major reasons is that the riffraff (i.e., black people) would move to and destroy nice commuter towns if the "natural" controls such as automobile ownership.

    Blue state SWPLs love to sing the praises of European transport. Hell, they love to sing the praises of anything modern that's over 95% white or was until recently. in the past decade I've watched as the demographics have taken their toll on the Parisian metro and white French people now avoid it whenever possible, preferring walking, biking (Vélib'), Über, carshares (Autolib) and even driving their own cars despite the idiot Socialist mayor's attempts to drive them out.

    Mind you, the city is now uninhabitable for normal people or families: you either have to be Third World enough be willing to live like a rat or uppity enough to be able to live large, and this trend is spreading to the outer burbs as well. Much like New York.

    I don’t believe that. Property is too expensive in Paris. Blacks and Muslims are violent on RER but metro is still o.k. outside Gare Du Nord and Clignancourt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @gregor
    I really wonder how much of this corporate diversity militancy and free speech suppression is just a reaction to potentially costly legal risk and to what extent these companies are true believers. Because some of them are pretty convincing. I suspect it all started as purely defensive, but over time companies get lots of true believers in authority. If the government gutted discrimination enforcement tomorrow, I imagine most companies would initially signal their continued commitment to diversity and then proceed to quietly neglect their diversity programs over time, though some entrenched leadership would keep it going pretty eagerly at more culturally liberal companies (in their decline phases, heh). New companies would probably give it a lot less thought. And there would be greater respect for free speech.

    It is a great point about the government hiding behind a very thin separation between private and government spheres to claim there's no free speech issue with any of this. (The libertarian right in particular tends to fall for such arguments). People are beginning to see the "hostile work environment" for the backdoor censorship that it is. Your opinions are "hostile" and we judge hostility according to the whims of hypersensitive leftists.

    I suspect it all started as purely defensive, but over time companies get lots of true believers in authority.

    There is a selection effect going on. You saw it with mortgage lending. Kerry Killinger of Washington Mutual got to be one of the top ten banking executives in the country by getting federal approval for a couple of dozen acquisitions over the years. With some of them he won minority lending pledge bidding wars over more cautious rivals. The government wasn’t forcing him to lend more to minorities, but it was facilitating the rise of an executive who was very optimistic about Hispanic lending and discouraging the rise through mergers of more pessimistic CEOs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Escher says:

    Let me close with one question about Google’s personnel policy: Compared with how you felt last week, how do you feel today about someday entrusting your life to a Google self-driving car?

    The same way I feel (often unfair to the other person) when I meet a NAM engineer or doctor.
    Not to mention the car may be programmed to preferentially save the life of the most ‘oppressed’ party in the event of an impending collision.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  114. @Whiskey
    Missing the point. It is now abundantly clear that Google employees are out to purge straight White males.

    Do you trust them with your data? Google docs, Android, Calendar, etc. Do you trust them for search. Every White straight male to the right of Mao and Pol Pot now know Google hates and wants to destroy them.

    Civil war is on, Sinatra My Way vs blue hair lesbians

    There’s no disputing taste, but I can’t help getting slightly irked each time My Way is cited as the sine qua non of Sinatra’s repertoire when, in fact, he was responsible for some of the greatest recordings of the 20th century.

    The entire Sinatra and Strings album is exemplary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Anonym
    The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.

    It may be self perpetuating but it is not a perpetual motion machine. It grows stronger on the blood of the whites who fund it involuntarily through wealth transfers of various types (AA, discrimination lawsuits, shakedowns, parents paying SJW college tuition etc.), and through the brains of our children should they succumb to the propaganda.

    When that spigot gets turned off...

    The New Sensitivity is a perpetual motion machine for extracting payoffs that has evolved over decades of trial and error.

    It may be self perpetuating but it is not a perpetual motion machine. It grows stronger on the blood of the whites who fund it involuntarily through wealth transfers of various types (AA, discrimination lawsuits, shakedowns, parents paying SJW college tuition etc.), and through the brains of our children should they succumb to the propaganda.

    Yes, exactly.

    The leftist utopia project is fueled by burning the cultural capital western culture has built up over centuries. Leftists, in their arrogance and self-deceit, see that resource as limitless.

    But it’s not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Anonym says:
    @Jack D
    In some respect the current period feels like the '30s where Germany and Japan and the Soviets were all building up massive forces and getting ready to make their move and the Western democracies just sat on their asses and dithered and did nothing. Maybe they denounced Hitler in the League of Nations as if passing meaningless resolutions was the same as actually doing something. Then when the dictatorships made their move, we were "blindsided" and they swept through Europe and the Pacific in a flash.

    We see now :

    1. N. Korea building nuke tipped ICBMS (while their Chinese allies have "deniability" - we weren't the ones that nuked DC) and

    2. China building artificial islands, carriers, modernizing their military, etc. using the billions of $ of trade surplus they make from being the "workshop of the world".

    These folks aren't building all this stuff for fun. Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it. When the Chinese decide that the time is right to make their move (maybe it's in 10 years, maybe it's 50 - they are playing the long game), we won't know what hit us and our transgender army will be in no shape to do anything about it.

    Good points. The US was rather ready though.

    Before Pearl Harbor, it had 7 ( 9 if you count escort carrier Long Island and prototype Langley) carriers and keels laid on 3 more. The second Yorktown and Intrepid were laid about a week before Pearl Harbor. East Wind Rain much? Japan had 10 at war’s start.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy

    Note that in service there are 13 carriers, 2 of which are in reserve, with keel laid for another and another planned. Considering the relative populations and GDP of USA 1941 vs 2017 I’d say the USA was not exactly caught with its pants down on Dec 7 1941.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. @Steve Sailer
    Over the last 15 years the Google search engine hasn't gotten very good at learning how to make it convenient to search for Steve Sailer material.

    I always type my name in quotes: "steve sailer." Otherwise it autocorrects sailer to sailor and I get back a lot of Sailor Moon stuff.

    Over the last 15 years, Google has solved a lot of inconveniences like that for millions of other common searches, but not for steve sailer searches.

    But, it's their search engine so I very rarely complain.

    We dream of the day when Sailor Moon is autocorrected to Sailer Unz.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. BB753 says:
    @Jim Don Bob
    Well said. For those who disagree, lookup the development of the Space Shuttle software.

    I am not getting in any self driving car anytime soon.

    I wonder at what point will self-driving cars become the norm, and old cars won’t be allowed to drive in the newly automated traffic?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Johanus de Morgateroyde

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn’t that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.
     
    The Google search engine is insanely complicated. It's a learning machine that learns you and figures out what you're looking for based on what you meant to search for, not just what you put into the search bar.

    It keeps track of what's topical, trending, and related to what you maybe might have meant to ask for. Ever notice that after you do one search it's pretty good at guessing at the next question you're going to ask? Yes, it does that, it "derives context".

    It's the largest and most sophisticated DWIM (Do What I Mean) project in the history of computer science, and it would be very difficult to ground-up something better. There's a huge difference between producing "results" and "good results really, really quickly".

    That may be rigged, but the system is rigged overall to favor certain results.

    And some things are totally shadowbanned. I should know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @AnotherDad
    Beckow. Jack quite clearly answered your "too slow" argument. (And i'm sympathetic--I'm an "optimizer", as annoyed with extra useless seconds at stop signs or with the left lane happy Asian girls as anyone.) Self-driving cars are at proof-of-concept stage now, the focus is on safety. Optimizations come later. And as more and more self-driving cars are out there the optimizations possible shoot up. Your response just suggests you don't understand the power of software and the revolution that's coming--or for that matter the power of engineering, of humans (human males) to work on problems and solve them.

    Then ...


    Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation?
     
    Seriously? I'm a fan of trains too. But the whole advantage of cars is it's like natural human transportation--point-to-point.

    And then the obvious: the problem with "public transportation" is ... the public.

    As Europe commits diversicide it is going to have the same problems with "public transportation" as the US.

    I agree that the efficiency ceiling is potentially much higher than some people might at first estimate. For example, cars being able to safely travel at 200 miles per hour without driver input would put private-jet-like capabilities in the hands of everyone for trips below about 500 miles, and you could still probably get close to airline times out to 1,000 miles. That could make for incredible productivity increases and allow urban employees vastly more housing options.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @dc.sunsets
    Self-driving cars can likely improve upon the average driver's operation, but as with anti-lock brakes, the superior operator can still outdo the automated "good-enough-for-retail-sale."

    Imagine being in a self-driving car when Jawon pulls up next to you and points a gun in your direction. "The car 'thinks,' but sir, the light is still red."

    There would have to be a driver override or a Detroit mode with tactical countermeasures.

    Maybe if the Google face recognition thinks it sees a gorilla driving it could shoot off a tranquilizer dart or an oil slick.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. Dave Pinsen says: • Website
    @Immigrant from former USSR

    Chekov says that in a play if you hang a pistol on the wall in Act I, then in Act II someone is going to fire it.
     
    This phrase (usually attributed to Chekhov)
    did not mean to describe how events develop in real world.
    The phrase meant the guidance how a theatrical play (or a movie script) should be written,
    and/or how it should be directed !
    Script writer should get rid of the details, which will not work in the subsequent part of the play.

    Rachel Bloom cites Chekhov,
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ45f6QCE9A
    not about getting life wisdom, but about the ways to write and to direct plays.

    It’s mentioned in Haruki Murakami’s 1Q84, in a bit of meta-fiction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. TWS says:
    @Jack D
    Self-driving cars are still at an experimental stage so that they are being extra cautious.

    Ultimately the goal is for all cars to be self driving and communicating with each other - they won't need eye contact, they will negotiate entering into intersections, lane changes, etc. with each other. If it is late at night and there is no traffic approaching they will blow right thru stop signs and so actually save time vs. the way we do it now. On highways they will tailgate to increase the density possible during rush hour and if the one in the front has to make an emergency stop they whole pack will stop at the same time.

    Also even if your commute takes slightly longer if you can sit in the back seat and do work or read that's much better than having to drive yourself.

    Giving the government or a monopoly control over personal transportation? No. Most Americans would be a little less polite in person.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Perplexed says:
    @Alec Leamas

    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it – that would be going too far.
     
    With an assist from LOLbertarians, the Left's current "market based" punishment system would mean that it would not offend their sensibilities for any self-driving car tech company and/or cloud-based driving service not to sell you a car and to refuse to to business with you due to your heterodox beliefs.

    “it would not offend their sensibilities for any self-driving car tech company and/or cloud-based driving service not to sell you a car and to refuse to to business with you due to your heterodox beliefs”

    From a statement by Airbnb: “This Saturday, Virginia’s Lee Park is slated to be the meeting place of the Unite The Right rally, a much-publicized gathering of far-right personalities and their sycophants. With less than a week to go, Airbnb has taken active measures to delete the accounts of some members the company believes to be staying in Charlottesville for the rally—making lodging for planned attendees like members of the National Socialist Movement that much more difficult. …

    “In 2016 we established the Airbnb Community Commitment reflecting our belief that to make good on our mission of belonging, those who are members of the Airbnb community accept people regardless of their race, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or age. We asked all members of the Airbnb to affirmatively sign on to this commitment. When through our background check processes or from input of our community we identify and determine that there are those who would be pursuing behavior on the platform that would be antithetical to the Airbnb Community Commitment, we seek to take appropriate action including, as in this case, removing them from the platform. …” (http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2017/08/07/airbnb-renting-houses-to-the-alt-right-for-unitetheright-is-a-tos-violation)

    AmRen has to hold their annual conference in a state park because private facilities are intimidated by opposition.

    When I read The Handmaid’s Tale, I was struck by the brilliant simplicity of Atwood’s device: One day, the women’s cash cards stopped working. The women were unable to function independently in civil society.

    Imagine the banks staffed by SWJs.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Rod1963
    Unless the coding and testing standards are at the level of aircraft avionics and sensors. I wouldn't touch a robot car.

    And I know Google won't.

    Then there is the hacking issue. Given the propensity of software developers to make everything accessible via the internet. They are literally building a back door into the robot car's critical systems.

    Right now they aren't worth the hacker community's attention. But when there are millions on the road...

    Here's the other problem. Very few mechanics would even touch because of liability issues. It would be the equivalent of working on a passenger jet. Auto shops would have to have a variety of certs from the manufacturers, hire QA inspectors to verify every step a mechanic takes(for liability reasons). etc. Just getting such a car worked on will easily be 3-5 more expensive than your conventional auto.

    If damaged the car would have to be thrown away. Again liability issues.

    Lastly. Do you want a car that monitors everything you say, where you go and who you are with? Because those robot cars have voice activation, On-Star, probably interior cameras as well. All ostensibly for your safety. They ar e big brother on wheels.

    The engine and powertrain/body controllers in cars (circa 2017) are in fact much more sophisticated than avionics. GA aircraft are still using VHF Omnirange for navigation, a WWII era analog system that should have been shut down in the 1980s, but is ingrained into the ATC system to this day. The full authority digital engine controllers-FADEC-on aircraft turbines are 199os level car technology: turbines don’t have timed ignition or fuel injection and do not have to meet much in the way of emissions control. Automotive electronics are qualified to a slightly less wide temperature range than aircraft systems, but are if anything mechanically more rugged, and are cheap (to the OEM, not necessarily as replacement parts) because they are made in quantity. The heavy Cannon plugs and harnesses in aircraft are “better” than GM Weatherpak only in being more fire resistant for the first 90 seconds or so. And aviation still hasn’t figured out to color code wiring harnesses.

    “Aircraft” is not necessarily “better”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Eagle Eye says:
    @Anon
    Just pray Asians don't program it.

    Anyway...here's the thing.

    The Core Google service, the search engine, isn't that complicated, at least for geeks and gorks.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    And even though its search results were better than most, it's become rigged over the yrs.

    Now, I hear there are other search engines that are more fair.

    But there hasn't been a concerted effort to migrate there.

    There is no reason for Gaggle be so dominant.

    Actually, there is a very good reason for Google’s sudden ascent to dominance.

    Google has from the beginning existed in SYMBIOSIS WITH THE DEEP STATE.

    Hence the hundreds of meetings between Google’s ambassador to DC and Barry Obama.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Bitfu says:
    @Jack D
    What if the situation is reversed? I really doubt that they are going to be so bold as to code race preference into it - that would be going too far. However, I don't doubt that the software might not choose in favor of the driver as much as you would. Honestly that is a marginal problem - the number of real life "trolley problems" is tiny compared to other causes of accidents.

    Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. Everyone thinks that THEY are great drivers but chances are that the computer is going to be a better driver than you. The computer will never have had a couple of drinks at dinner or be really tired, etc. Self-driving cars won't be perfect but the standard is not perfection, it's being significantly better than human drivers and humans are such lousy drivers that it's not going to be hard for them to cut accident rates in half or better.

    Think this through a bit more:

    Will police use computer-controlled cars? How about government officials? If so, will they be using the same algorithm? Of course not.

    If you’re comfortable with this, do you think it will stop there…do you think these special driving privileges (a dangerous word, btw) will be restricted to government officials? [As if Larry Page or Elon Musk will have the same algorithm as you and me. Even closer to home, I doubt a high-end BMW purchaser get the same algorithm as a purchaser of a Ford Escort.]

    And in 20 years, we’ll have ‘Blade Runner’ meets ObamaCare. Driving privileges will be tied to the Tax Code and politicians will run on promises of ‘You can still keep your algorithm’!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob

    Will police use computer-controlled cars? How about government officials? If so, will they be using the same algorithm? Of course not.
     
    Good point. And how will we even know what algorithm is in our car? Are we to trust the automakers who will be under the thumb of the SJWs in government? Hahahahahaha.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. Beckow says:
    @AnotherDad
    Beckow. Jack quite clearly answered your "too slow" argument. (And i'm sympathetic--I'm an "optimizer", as annoyed with extra useless seconds at stop signs or with the left lane happy Asian girls as anyone.) Self-driving cars are at proof-of-concept stage now, the focus is on safety. Optimizations come later. And as more and more self-driving cars are out there the optimizations possible shoot up. Your response just suggests you don't understand the power of software and the revolution that's coming--or for that matter the power of engineering, of humans (human males) to work on problems and solve them.

    Then ...


    Have you been to better parts of Europe with their excellent public transportation?
     
    Seriously? I'm a fan of trains too. But the whole advantage of cars is it's like natural human transportation--point-to-point.

    And then the obvious: the problem with "public transportation" is ... the public.

    As Europe commits diversicide it is going to have the same problems with "public transportation" as the US.

    It would help our discussion if you would refrain from patronizing. I do understand the software, but whatever.

    Some of Europe is indeed committing a ‘diversicide’, but not all. And that is a different issue.
    Point-to-point is inherently inefficient and isolating. You might like the isolation, to each his own, but the inefficiency cannot be engineered out of the system. I am more than willing to let people try, but the shortcomings are already obvious, let’s at least be open-minded enough to discuss them.

    Automation works well in normalized environmets. The world is not normalized, and it will be hard to normalize it. Important parts of it can be adapted – freeways, maybe some cities, well structured suburbs, etc… – but as with most technology, to make it ubiquitous, you have to be fairly comprehensive. That is a lot harder for self-driving cars than their advocates admit.

    Traffic has in interesting feature – the mode of transportation that works best gets oversubscribed over time. Better self-driving cars work, more of them there will be. That tends to suppress their effectiveness. It is like today: when if traffic drops, some people abandon public transportation for cars, that leads to over-crowding, traffic gets worse, people look back at alternatives, etc… self-limiting is built into the system.

    Let’s see how it plays out, but a bit of skepticism doesn’t hurt. Too much optimism about everything is how we got where we are today (‘mass migration will make everything better…have you had that great tandoori taco? let’s do more of it, let them all come, it will all work out…’). So easy on that euphoric optimism, you could end up with 2 billion Asians in self-driving cars. And that would be just northern California. Physical limits matter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. @Steve Sailer
    Over the last 15 years the Google search engine hasn't gotten very good at learning how to make it convenient to search for Steve Sailer material.

    I always type my name in quotes: "steve sailer." Otherwise it autocorrects sailer to sailor and I get back a lot of Sailor Moon stuff.

    Over the last 15 years, Google has solved a lot of inconveniences like that for millions of other common searches, but not for steve sailer searches.

    But, it's their search engine so I very rarely complain.

    I too saw, that it’s not as easy as in other cases to find a Steve Sailer link via Google. And I thought: That’s interesting.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. @Autochthon
    If we hadn't known you were Deutsch, we would know now; it is the quintessentially German comment.

    “…it is the quintessentially German comment.”

    Thank you! – and, – – you’ve guessed it already – – I can’t help it (I love it).
    Not even being a tad Irish (Kief= O’Keeffe) can help it, as it seems.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Bitfu
    Think this through a bit more:

    Will police use computer-controlled cars? How about government officials? If so, will they be using the same algorithm? Of course not.

    If you're comfortable with this, do you think it will stop there...do you think these special driving privileges (a dangerous word, btw) will be restricted to government officials? [As if Larry Page or Elon Musk will have the same algorithm as you and me. Even closer to home, I doubt a high-end BMW purchaser get the same algorithm as a purchaser of a Ford Escort.]

    And in 20 years, we'll have 'Blade Runner' meets ObamaCare. Driving privileges will be tied to the Tax Code and politicians will run on promises of 'You can still keep your algorithm'!

    Will police use computer-controlled cars? How about government officials? If so, will they be using the same algorithm? Of course not.

    Good point. And how will we even know what algorithm is in our car? Are we to trust the automakers who will be under the thumb of the SJWs in government? Hahahahahaha.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation