Re:S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are...
by xp84 on Saturday July 15, 2023 @10:53AM
(#36737327)
SF anti-tech “activists.” I was going to post a sarcastic description, but I’ll just say they tend to have a lot of student debt and are frequently devoted Marxists. They also tend to sincerely believe that if tech imploded, the homeless would all suddenly be able to afford apartments.
Re:S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are...
by uoaei on Saturday July 15, 2023 @07:50PM
(#36741996)
It's always funny to see people so openly display their lack of effort in understanding the arguments of the people they're supposedly opposed to. The lack of self-awareness is disappointing but not surprising considering the way it is expressed.
Re:S.F. says incidents by Cruise, Waymo driverless taxis are...
by xp84 on Sunday July 16, 2023 @11:55AM
(#36748404)
I’m just describing the arguments I’ve heard straight out of people’s mouths. Their arguments come from a place of deep, deep passion, but they lack no understanding of economics nor apparently human behavior. They want to buy into an easy story that a certain group is the source of all ills. In that way they are just like the radicals on the other side who are their sworn enemies.
> their terrible public safety record
whose public safety record? the politicians'? or, who would even be materially interested to lobby against robocars and Google? honest q.
automakers seem to be generally onboard with robocars and trying their own. Cabbies have been wiped out as a force by Uber. Even Uber seems generally onboard with robocars. So who is this mysterious powerful Luddite villain?