• LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I believe small single seat robo-taxies would allow a lot of the gaps to be closed and resistance removed.

    But more than this you need to plan cities to be smaller urban areas with high density that have everything you need in walking distance. Which also means “less efficiency” in the capitalist sense.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        I wanted to search for video that talks about megataxis, gigataxis and MetroVagonMash’s gigataxies. You did it first. Thanks.

      • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yawn, obviously privately owned monopoly would be bad. I can imagine China doing this well as a public utility.

        • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          The fact that it’s a private monopoly only addresses, like, half of the problems. Why would China do this better? They have just as much incentive to prioritize the rich as Amazon does. Why would they do anything different?

          • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Why would China do this better?

            China is ruled by a single party in an authoritarian regime. They have corruption and politicking but they still have remnants of a planned economy and can still make rational decisions for the benefit of their country. For example they have massive projects to build high speed rail and nuclear power.

            The US can only make decisions for the benefit of profit maximization. That’s overexaggerated of course but you get the gist.

            Imagine a whole city converted to public transport, bicycles/quadricycles and robo-taxies to fill the gaps. They could be single seat the size of a velomobile (podbike is an interesting example) and only weigh 100kg and use like 250-500 watt to drive up to 50kmh. Or maybe two seats face to face so you have space to stretch your legs or put your groceries.

            • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              How would central planning solve problems like vandalism? And what benefit would this have over bikes and trains?

              Autonomous vehicles seem to be literally an unsolvable problem, as covered in depth in the video. What magic would China bring that would make a problem even humans can’t solve somehow solvable by AI?

              • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                They are not an unsolvable problem. What is your argument for this? And no I’m not watching the whole video lol

                • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  I work in computer security. It’s just obvious if you have even the slightest awareness of the industry. Attacks on AI are Wiley Coyote shit like drawing circles around them. In an active environment they’re even worse. With mountains of technology everyone who has ever tried it, the most advanced and well funded companies in the world, have all failed utterly and miserably. They’ve failed even though there’s an emesne opportunity for profit. At a certain point, you have to start providing evidence that it’s possible and there hasn’t been any. It’s a scam.

                  But here, I guess I have to do this for you:

                  https://gprivate.com/69dw4

                  • LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Oh how funny, how clever! It’s SELF EVIDENT they are impossible lol. Didn’t think of that killer argument.

                    Obviously you’re wrong because they already exist. They are just not yet good enough. I suspect you’re some kind of religious nutjob who thinks there is something supernatural about human brains that computers can just never do lol.