Not really: your quote "get a new job" implies that doing that is easy.
Again, I'm not proposing or looking for a solution. I know it will be hard for those who make their living by driving. I'm just pointing out that it's not as rosy as the docu made it out to be, and that people are going to get hurt. That's progress of course, but I just wish they had addressed it properly in the programme, which they did not.

To give my own personal view, it would be super cool to call a car, get in and basically be driven where I want to go without needing any sort of interaction from me. It will also obviously (or hopefully anyway) cut down on or cut out entirely the many thousands of deaths that result from traffic accidents, and the many more life-changing injuries. I'm just trying to represent a balanced view, and say that while it is exciting and interesting, there will be those who will get burned by it. Of course, that's the same with any major change, but for instance sailboat captains in the nineteenth century could adapt to steamships, and those who flew propellor aircraft could learn to fly a jet. But this cuts out all human intervention, leaving those who drive for a living with nowhere to go.

There is no solution I can see. Hopefully some will be able to make a seismic shift and get into another business, but one major effect of this technology will be surely to lengthen the dole queues. Let's not forget petrol stations either: all these cars will be electric, so no longer any need for your roadside gas station and all its accoutrements and staff.

Oh well let me set the record straight then: no it is not ****ing easy. Leave the inferring to other people from now on, you've proven yourself unfit for it.

**** not automating everything. I want to live in a world with robot slaves doing everything for us so we can spend our time talking about music and drinking beer.

It's a pity you have to be such an annoyance even when I'm trying to have a proper debate with you. Anyone reading what you wrote would likely infer the same as I did. However, in the interests of peace and fairness, if that was not what you were saying, then I apologise. But please try not to level snarky insults at me just because it's me. I guarantee if this were anyone else other than Chula you'd be a lot more accommodating.

Anyhoo... maybe one day I'll actually get to "drive" one of these cars, though knowing my luck I'll probably be the first/only person to be run over by one! :laughing:

Incidentally, in that docu one woman who's involved in F1 takes a trip in an automated F1 car which ends up hitting 200 mph! Now I don't think that's something I want to be doing without a driver present! :yikes:

It would help if you took my word for it the first 3 times I told you that that wasn't what I was implying.

Hey, you don't have to tell ME twice! Or, um, three times.
:shycouch:

.

The robo-guards?
https://images.rapgenius.com/0e7bf9a....643x432x1.jpg

Driverless doesn't necessarily mean passengerless. It is interesting to consider all the scenarios that driverless will have to be programmed to deal with. Trolley experiment type ****. Algorithms. Crazier than flying Back to the Futures, man. Say, you wouldn't know where I could get some weed, would you?

.