Sci/Tech Self-Driving 40k lbs of Butter for 2800 miles

Welcome to our Community
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to Sign Up today.
Sign up

redneck

First 100
First 100
Jan 18, 2015
999
1,513
How hard would it be to rob one of these trucks?

If one was carrying a truckload of whiskey or cigarettes it would be a good haul for some bandits.

I can see these trucks being fitted with weapons in the not too distant future, for "security purposes".

Next thing you know, the Terminator movie becomes a documentary.
 

Toelocku

*I Know What I Know if you Know What I Mean*
Dec 15, 2018
5,694
4,969
How hard would it be to rob one of these trucks?

If one was carrying a truckload of whiskey or cigarettes it would be a good haul for some bandits.

I can see these trucks being fitted with weapons in the not too distant future, for "security purposes".

Next thing you know, the Terminator movie becomes a documentary.
Not to mention the army of out if work truck drivers that will start sabotaging
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
44,116
91,095
but now the resistance to autonomous vehicles will get support from established driving industries, which will slow its adoption.
And wouldn't there be?
1> It still requires a driver. But it sets the driver up for failure when something goes wrong. Deeducation with same liability for less pay.
2> The autonomous driver utopia crowd has failed to lobby simultaneously for policies that will distribute the technology cost saving (ie profit sharing) to those drivers that are still in the cab standing by.
3> Laws are poorly defined regarding liability between driver, tech, and tech purchasers. Again, where is the lobbying from Tesla or others on this? Instead it's always an asterisk that leaves the complacent driver (complacent by design of the tech) on the hook.

It's essentially asking for huge investments to make more profit and leave the guys doing the job right now hung out to dry on income and liability. The resistance is both understandable, but in many ways would be absolutely irresponsible if it doesn't come.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
And wouldn't there be?
1> It still requires a driver. But it sets the driver up for failure when something goes wrong. Deeducation with same liability for less pay.
2> The autonomous driver utopia crowd has failed to lobby simultaneously for policies that will distribute the technology cost saving (ie profit sharing) to those drivers that are still in the cab standing by.
3> Laws are poorly defined regarding liability between driver, tech, and tech purchasers. Again, where is the lobbying from Tesla or others on this? Instead it's always an asterisk that leaves the complacent driver (complacent by design of the tech) on the hook.

It's essentially asking for huge investments to make more profit and leave the guys doing the job right now hung out to dry on income and liability. The resistance is both understandable, but in many ways would be absolutely irresponsible if it doesn't come.
You're lowering the required competency. Manual drivers are over-qualified for the pay.
 

Splinty

Shake 'em off
Admin
Dec 31, 2014
44,116
91,095
You're lowering the required competency
As I said, deeducation with the same liability when shit goes wrong. Car wrecks, death, etc, all the same liability. None of the training. Along with tech creating the complacency that increases the likelihood the human doesn't respond as rapidly as they do when they are actively engaged. Again, tech creating the complacency and then leaving all fingers in the fine print pointing at the driver.

The tech should be held more liable for this dangerous situation it is creating. And until it is via legislation, I hope the drivers do fight tooth and nail against such a perverse arrangement.
 

Leigh

Engineer
Pro Fighter
Jan 26, 2015
10,925
21,293
How hard would it be to rob one of these trucks?

If one was carrying a truckload of whiskey or cigarettes it would be a good haul for some bandits.

I can see these trucks being fitted with weapons in the not too distant future, for "security purposes".

Next thing you know, the Terminator movie becomes a documentary.
If you want to rob a truck with people on it, it's not hard, there's just more risk of someone getting hurt. Drivers aren't paid to be heroes, they'll hand over everything, including the keys. At least AI can't be threatened into opening the locked doors or driving to a hideout.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
As I said, deeducation with the same liability when shit goes wrong. Car wrecks, death, etc, all the same liability. None of the training. Along with tech creating the complacency that increases the likelihood the human doesn't respond as rapidly as they do when they are actively engaged. Again, tech creating the complacency and then leaving all fingers in the fine print pointing at the driver.

The tech should be held more liable for this dangerous situation it is creating. And until it is via legislation, I hope the drivers do fight tooth and nail against such a perverse arrangement.
i challenge you to provide examples of the AI behaving more dangerously or being more prone to accidents than human drivers, especially in long-haul trucking. :)

Humans already suck at responding appropriately to driving conditions, AI is better than people in every way. The human, with all their foibles and inconsistencies, are simply a 'reserve parachute' for situations that a human would probably have screwed up anyway. The tech doesn't create complacency, that's a function of marketing and hype convincing people that their Tesla auto-pilot means they can take a nap while the car navigates lights and rush hour traffic on a divided highway. Properly trained humans are simply a bridge, because the greatest challenges facing AI driving in the present day are:

1) lack of standardized roadways
2) shitloads of idiot humans sharing the road

Maybe there are certain situations that a skilled human would have avoided, but those are miniscule compared to the number of traffic accidents due to human error. AI doesn't make those mistakes.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
60,547
56,268
i challenge you to provide examples of the AI behaving more dangerously or being more prone to accidents than human drivers, especially in long-haul trucking. :)

Humans already suck at responding appropriately to driving conditions, AI is better than people in every way. The human, with all their foibles and inconsistencies, are simply a 'reserve parachute' for situations that a human would probably have screwed up anyway. The tech doesn't create complacency, that's a function of marketing and hype convincing people that their Tesla auto-pilot means they can take a nap while the car navigates lights and rush hour traffic on a divided highway. Properly trained humans are simply a bridge, because the greatest challenges facing AI driving in the present day are:

1) lack of standardized roadways
2) shitloads of idiot humans sharing the road

Maybe there are certain situations that a skilled human would have avoided, but those are miniscule compared to the number of traffic accidents due to human error. AI doesn't make those mistakes.
They haven't been able to make them work here on their own test routes. Your Arizona is showing...
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
They haven't been able to make them work here on their own test routes. Your Arizona is showing...
LoL.

AZ is probably one of the better test beds for Autonomous Driving (AD), but the ROI in human lives and efficiency is to great for it to be a non-starter. If we weren't spending 4 billion PER MONTH in Afghanistan, we'd already have a sufficiently upgraded infrastructure to augment AD. And there'd be a couple hundred thousand fewer deaths and life-altering injuries every year.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
60,547
56,268
LoL.

AZ is probably one of the better test beds for Autonomous Driving (AD), but the ROI in human lives and efficiency is to great for it to be a non-starter. If we weren't spending 4 billion PER MONTH in Afghanistan, we'd already have a sufficiently upgraded infrastructure to augment AD. And there'd be a couple hundred thousand fewer deaths and life-altering injuries every year.
I don't live in Arizona or have any idea what you're on about with Afghanistan.

You know you don't live in the only place they're working on this, right?
 

Hauler

Been fallin so long it's like gravitys gone
Feb 3, 2016
45,414
57,814
Lazy Google search...

There are 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
I don't live in Arizona or have any idea what you're on about with Afghanistan.

You know you don't live in the only place they're working on this, right?

yes, but AZ is one of the places where the government and the infrastructure are conducive to AD.

My point with the Afghanistan reference is that it's not a question of resources to implement the necessary changes immediately, it's a question of priorities in allocating those resources.

Right now, the priority is on blowing up impoverished brown people to secure minerals, petro-access, and control the competition from natural opioids. (IMAO)
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
Lazy Google search...

There are 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S.

only about 600k are long-haul truckers, and that's where AI is competitive. Most long-haulers are owner-operators, and there's a shortage of drivers - mostly because millenials are off racking up college debt instead of out making money. They're not interested in making 100k a year if it means seeing the world through a windshield for weeks at a time.

So that's where the AI comes in. Realistically, you could have one driver at the controls of several AI-augmented vehicles. AI is a force-multiplier.
 

BeardOfKnowledge

The Most Consistent Motherfucker You Know
Jul 22, 2015
60,547
56,268
yes, but AZ is one of the places where the government and the infrastructure are conducive to AD.

My point with the Afghanistan reference is that it's not a question of resources to implement the necessary changes immediately, it's a question of priorities in allocating those resources.

Right now, the priority is on blowing up impoverished brown people to secure minerals, petro-access, and control the competition from natural opioids. (IMAO)
The government is conducive in many places. Ultimately the bulk of the money is and needs to be spent by industry. Blowing up brown people has nothing to do with autonomous cars inability to cope with unpredictable weather.

Granted, I do find your appeal to government intervention kind of hilarious.
 

Hauler

Been fallin so long it's like gravitys gone
Feb 3, 2016
45,414
57,814
only about 600k are long-haul truckers, and that's where AI is competitive. Most long-haulers are owner-operators, and there's a shortage of drivers - mostly because millenials are off racking up college debt instead of out making money. They're not interested in making 100k a year if it means seeing the world through a windshield for weeks at a time.

So that's where the AI comes in. Realistically, you could have one driver at the controls of several AI-augmented vehicles. AI is a force-multiplier.
Will owner-operators be able to compete with AI or will they be priced out of the market?
 

Hauler

Been fallin so long it's like gravitys gone
Feb 3, 2016
45,414
57,814
And if AI still has to be "babysat" by a human, I don't see the point.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
And if AI still has to be "babysat" by a human, I don't see the point.
it only has to be baby-sat until a crossover point of road standardization and AI-comprehensiveness...basically, the insurance companies will see the ROI, and it will be cost-prohibitive to drive manually. Every time the driver takes over, the insurance rates go up (as an example).

but it will be insurance companies and the premiums that they charge which will drive AD adoption - not just in long haul trucking, but also in person-operated vehicles (POVs).

Think of it this way - in the 50s if you wanted to be a long-haul trucker, you needed to know the roads, the speed traps, the weather patterns on the route...lots of proprietary information.

In the AD model, the only thing the driver needs to know is how to slow down and pullover until the rescue vehicle arrives.
 

Filthy

Iowa Wrestling Champion
Jun 28, 2016
27,507
29,834
The government is conducive in many places. Ultimately the bulk of the money is and needs to be spent by industry. Blowing up brown people has nothing to do with autonomous cars inability to cope with unpredictable weather.

Granted, I do find your appeal to government intervention kind of hilarious.
it'd definitely hypocritical from a 'little l' libertarian like me. :)

but it's a big jump to convince people to privatize roads, so I'll settle for using the deficit spending that we're already committed to as a way to save lives locally instead of end lives distantly.

our infrastructure is failing, let's rebuild it in a way that augments AD - that's all I'm saying.