SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed a bill to require human drivers on board self-driving trucks, a measure that union leaders and truck drivers said would save hundreds of thousands of jobs in the state.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m sorry, but do people actually think human drivers in autonomous vehicles will make them safe?

    Imagine sitting and watching a robot do its job for hours - do you think you’d be attentive to safety problems after all that time?

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      52
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Have you never seen the traffic jams caused by these things getting confused and not being able to figure a way out?.. the drivers there so people don’t get stuck behind them for an hour while someone from fuckyoutech comes out to fix it.

      • Dirk Darkly@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, but I have sat in a traffic jam caused by a human driver who caused a multiple car pile up because they wanted to be slightly ahead.

        • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s almost like more than one thing can be bad. Autonomous cars are just a shitty bandaid solution that doesn’t fix the problem.

            • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Ban all cars. bus, tram and trains need to be so great that you can actually stand driving in them. But they’re only important for winter or when it rains mostly anyway. Otherwise you take the bike, ebike or scooter. We would need to find a solution for carrying lots of groceries obviously. Remember when people hat little trollies behind them when grocery shopping?

              (Obviously in summer a disabled person would still ride them. Not trying to be ableist here)

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ban all cars

                Hard disagree here. Mass transit should win because it’s more convenient, not because it’s the only option.

                I’m in favor of car-free zones, rerouting cars around city centers, tolls in busy areas, and in general making car transit less convenient, but it should still be feasible to get where you’re going in a car. The problem is that we’ve made our cities car-centric so mass transit is forced to be inconvenient, and that should be reversed.

                But I will never accept banning cars, because that’s how you get the worst of both worlds.

                • Haui@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Okay. I agree that i was a bit far with my phrasing. I should have said „in city centers“. I live in a city and I don’t see a reason to use or even own a car 9/10 times (if the transit is good, which it isnt in my city).

                  But I‘d like to address something else here. If we had no cars, we would take a lot longer to do things and become much less productive and less stressed, which is becoming a big problem rn.

                  So, maybe a conpromise between both our ideas would be good. I‘d like to achive throwing a wrench in our capitalist steam machine turning our planet to a pile of shit.

          • Neato@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Autonomous cars are the only viable solution in the near to mid term. Human drivers are awful. Building out mass-transit and transport infrastructure is a generations-long process and very politically unpopular. Autonomous vehicles will have issues that can only be ironed out in live testing. Which sucks but that’s how all innovations go.

            • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Autonomous cars are decades away from hitting any level of meaningful saturation. Might as well work on the more practical solutions…

              • Neato@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                What’s more practical? Redesigning all of US’s cities to work without cars? High-speed cross-country rail? Mass transit in every town?

                That’s more practical than passing regulations that allow the few companies even attempting automation to test it? This is just a “if it’s not perfect don’t do it” mentality that stops any attempts at progress.

                • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re just an angry douche putting words in my mouth. Never said they can’t roll out automated cars. Just said they might as well work on the more practical long term solutions.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I live in the land of bad drivers, and long haul truckers almost NEVER cause accidents. The cause is almost always a passenger vehicle, even if a truck is involved. Truckers get trained.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s fair, but I was more concerned about an accident being caused where the “driver” has seconds to react to a mistake the car is making. After sitting doing nothing for hours there’s no way they’d be attentive until it’s too late.

        • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          They would be more likely to stop the accident from happening if they were there as opposed to not being there.

            • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              At the current level of autonomous vehicle abilities, I agree with you, in a broad sense. Vehicles will need to still be able to differentiate between shapes, even during bad weather. Weather like blizzards, sudden downpours, heavy fog, dust storms, and the like. You still have to be able to see to safely pull off of the road.

              Until we can guarantee with 100% certainty that they can truly drive without aid, I completely agree that these vehicles would not be safe on their own. Weather is very well known for being unpredictable at times. Life in general is also known for being unpredictable at times.

              What happens if the sensors are unknowingly damaged? What happens if someone is wearing a costume that makes them look like a giant cereal box instead of human-shaped? What happens if there’s a software glitch at a bad time? What protections are there to guarantee that it doesn’t happen? Are those protections temporary? How often should they be reviewed?

              It should be OK to acknowledge that we aren’t quite there yet. Yes, it seems cool and all, but it’s silly to risk lives over impatience. If it will happen, it will happen. Forcing it to happen sooner than it should could very well lead to it being banned altogether, especially if enough people die or get injured as a result.

              IMO, anyone who causes serious crashes from using these things in “fully autonomous” mode should be charged as if the vehicle wasn’t autonomous. As if the accident was caused by sleeping behind the wheel or texting while driving. The company should be charged similarly in that scenario, as their programming and marketing would also play a part in the crash.

              Hey, if they’re truly safe, none of these charges would actually happen. If there isn’t an “oops” death in the first place, there won’t be an “oops” death to investigate.

        • spitfire@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Anyone who uses FSD on their Tesla would happily tell you it’s not even close to being safe yet. Hell if anything I’m MORE attentive when using the autopilot because it can be so sketch sometimes.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hell if anything I’m MORE attentive when using the autopilot because it can be so sketch sometimes.

            I doubt you’re more attentive than someone who is literally driving lol

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                And zoning out would be much worse with computer assistance!

                Actually cars should be abolished for this very reason - humans can never be truly safe drivers, they always get bored and zone out.

      • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Self-driving trucks will never be 100% autonomous. They will need a reliable data connection to a control center so humans can figure out how to deal with exceptional situations.

        There will probably be occasional stupid traffic jams until the technology is perfected. As long as they avoid murderous rampages, we should be okay.

        • Dibbix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          We could.

          Might be better to just put the executives of those corporations in prison instead tho. I keep hearing how they’re worth their enormous salaries so they must be the ones responsible.

          • Dem Bosain@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            But you can’t. Corporations are formed specifically to protect the people behind them from legal accountability. The CEO/ board can really only be punished for crimes against the corporation (embezzling, not trying to make money for shareholders, etc.) Even when the corp. very obviously causes deaths, it will just declare bankruptcy and reform under another name. Johnson & Johnson was sued for killing people because there’s asbestos in talcum powder, so they spun off the talc division into a different company, and then had that company declare bankruptcy.

            • Dibbix@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Wasn’t entirely serious. However if “corporations are people” then maybe they should face the same penalties people do.

    • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a real thing, they are called operators and it is their job to oversee the cell, start and stop jobs, resolve bottlenecks, identify upstream problems and gracefully handle them, and emergency stop the system when needed.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, part of my job making car parts is as an operator for a cell. Im constantly moving, troubleshooting, doing minor maintenance, and actively engaged in the process.

        A driver-operator would be sitting down doing mostly nothing. Totally different

      • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I imagine they could do just as well having an operator sit in a cubicle all day flipping between video feeds of a dozen different vehicles. Then when manual control needs to be taken over they could operate it with a joystick or something and play truck simulator.

          • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It still drives on its own, connection is just to monitor or to help get out of situations it might get stuck in so traffic jams don’t occur. If connection fails it would have been no different than having no driver in the cab which Is the plan already.

    • Madison_rogue@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes. Tractors already have a number of built-in visual and audible alarms when the onboard sensors detect things like veering, severe pitch, and traffic. Oh, that and it’s a driver’s job to watch and respond to road conditions.

      Not to also mention that student driver teachers perform a job like this already.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tractors aren’t traffic. That’s clearly very different.

        Student driver teachers, meanwhile, are teaching. That’s more than simply watching for mistakes, which would be an inhumanly boring job that I honestly don’t think anyone could do.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Exactly. And student drivers are only active for like 20-30 min at a time. A truck would be active for hours at a time.

          Instead of trying to build autonomous trucks, we should be building out rail and move more stuff and people that way.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, but they don’t need to react within seconds when there is a problem. They can zone out and nothing bad will happen.

            A driver-operator needs to be hyper vigilant at all times and react within seconds to any problems because at any moment the software could fuck up and kill someone.

    • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a tech sub on lemmy.ml, prepare to be flooded by luddites afraid of all things tech. Eventually you learn subs only exist for the stuff people hates here, not the stuff people love.

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        The luddites have been proven right, but your strawman of the luddites is absolutely wrong.

            • theluddite@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I like technology. I think it can make our lives better, but some people, notably capitalists, often use technology to make our lives worse. When that happens, we should smash their machines.

        • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Y’know it’s funny because one of the proposed benefits of lemmy was the decentralized nature of the forums meant you could pick from the ones you liked, yet I’ve subbed to 5 tech instances here and they are all exactly the same. Nothing but F.U.D. This will be the last remaining one I unsubscribe from, and even end up blocking because of the nonsense.

          So, yeah, apparently that thing being a benefit was a lie when in reality it will just populate with the same people saying the same things.

          Ah well…enjoy your echo chambers I guess!

            • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Or more likely, the people who hate something the most are more likely to post about it than people who love it or are ambivalent. No worries though, I blocked the forum so we won’t have to trouble each other anymore.

              • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You also can want safety improvements before something becomes widespread without also “hating” it overall, you know.

                The choice doesn’t have to be between “absolutely everything now”, and “never”. There’s a lot of room in between the two, and I see no reason to rush something, when unnecessarily rushing it could cost lives.

  • MooseBoys@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    union leaders and truck drivers said would save hundreds of thousands of jobs

    There might be good reasons to have human drivers in autonomous trucks, at least for a while. But “saving jobs” is not one of them.

    • spitfire@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It certainly is one of them. You can’t virtually close an entire sector of jobs all at once without serious repercussions to the economy.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, if it comes with a tapering requirement over several years I think it’s an excellent idea that saves jobs and also helps ensure safety.

        • spitfire@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Target. Walmart, Amazon, UPS,Lays, Annheiser-Bush …just a few companies who have already begun testing automated replacements. If you think they aren’t all biting at the bit to pull the trigger on this the second they can, you’re naive. They’ll see insane overhead price reductions and increased productivity, all leading to higher profit margins. The slow change already started years ago. You can retrofit an existing big rig for less than half the salary of a driver and utilize 3x the work hours.

          • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            And they’re going to produce thousands of those trucks in a month. And have them unescorted. Makes no sense.

      • blterrible@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s going to be a lot of conservative men clamoring for UBI, or more likely, cutting off their own nose to spite their face.

  • Poppa_Mo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can’t believe they bothered to try to pass it. From an outside quick glance, it seems like a brilliant idea. But then you have to remember WHY they’re doing this. They want to ship 24x7 and not have to pay a person. Slapping a co-pilot in there is counter-intuitive to their end game. Not to mention humans do NOT have the required attention span for this. We can often do stupid shit, completely sober, while driving, with DECADES of experience.

    If the autopilot is even 80% effective, we’re going to get bored, sleep, read, fuck around on our devices. Maybe jerk off? Who knows?

    We’re not ready for this step, not yet.

    Bet they’ll be needing a lot of mechanics when the time comes, though.

    • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Let’s hope they start making it easier for those mechanics then, lmao.

      I used to want to get into the industry, but that stopped when I heard about all of the ridiculous things you have to move around to preform basic maintenance. That was bad before, but now? Woof.

      My buddy had to do a recall replacement, that took many hours. The manufacturer however, decided that it should only take less than half of that time, so they only paid him for the time that they wanted to pay for. Not for the actual number of hours that it physically took to disassemble and reassemble the thing, but instead what was convenient to them. Nope.

    • xkforce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes because theres nothing safer than a truck driver thats been awake for 24 hours because their schedule is so tight they dont really have time for sleep. /s

      The actual issue is that autonomous driving will make millions of peoples’ jobs obsolete not that it couldn’t be as safe as a person driving if not more so.

      • theluddite@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are two issues. First, self-driving cars just aren’t very good (yet?). Second, it will make millions of people’s jobs obsolete, and that should be a good thing, but it’s a bad thing, because we’ve structured our society such that it’s a bad thing if you lose your job. It’d be cool as hell if it were a good thing for the people who don’t have to work anymore, and we should structure our society that way instead.

        • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Self-driving cars have been safer than human drivers for years. There are bugs but nothing like the bugs humans have. The roadblocks to adoption right now are public perception and legislation.

          • rifugee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Thanks for the sources; however, the National Library of Medicine is using data from 1993 and the other doesn’t specify by how much the violations rates are increasing or what the rates even are and the link to the underlying data appears to be dead.

            edit: I had time to look into this further and it appears that it was very common to fudge the paper logbook, but as of 2017 they’re required to use electronic logbook devices (ELD’s), so that is no longer possible. Yes, sleep deprivation due to violating the hours of service regulations was definitely a thing in the past, but I can’t find any data that indicates that it still is.

  • Trev625@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, head of the California Labor Federation, said driverless trucks are dangerous…” Well are they dangerous? Is there any data to back up that claim? And is there data to back up the claim that keeping the driver in the vehicle makes it safe again?

    I hate this “save the jobs” attitude. How about we not save the jobs and pay them to get other jobs or even pay them to stay home?

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This can only end well. I can’t wait for the personal injury lawsuits to start rolling in.

    Also, having worked in a warehouse, who the hell is going to hand over the paperwork? Do you know how many places don’t use electronics that talk to each other? Do you know how many times I, working at a modest size business, had to sign my damn name? Half the time it doesn’t even need to be there, they just use it to make sure somebody looked at the pallet of merchandise to make sure it was correct. This is going to blow up in everyone’s face, literally and metaphorically.

    • tech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the plan for a lot of trucks is for them to do the long haul part without a driver. But the “last mile” is done by drivers that drop the load, do the paperwork and back to the depot to snag another trailer.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Companies will put the staff back in the trucks when it becomes apparent how easy it is to stop them and steal everything from the back.

    • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nobody is stopping trucks on the interstate. You could easily have one human minder escort 12-15 trucks outbound truck and a minder escort inbound trucks and spend most of the time on the interstate. Instead of a dozen drivers x 3 days you could use 1-4 hours of human labor total.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Imagine a system were one driver could transport hundreds of trucks worth of cargo at once on preset routes. What an invention that would be…

        • ours@lemmy.film
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Would be easier if set on its own dedicated track.

          Something like… a slightly slower Hyperloop! At those speeds, the “pods” wouldn’t need to run in a pressurized tube. I’ll name it “OKLoop”.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          You could even have the whole thing start and stop with one set of controls.

          Get this idea to Elon immediately. He’ll have XRails running all over the country by 2050, from San Diego, all the way to, ooh, Los Angeles I suppose. Can’t imagine it would get much further than that before he gets bored of the idea.

        • michaelrose@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes we know trains exist trucks are used in addition for obvious reasons that won’t stop being true when we dont need drivers

        • Umbrias@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          In the context of this discussion, switching to trains isn’t really going to address the idea of people raiding the cargo haulers, in whatever shape they’re in.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re right, but it’s because stealing cargo isn’t an issue. Trains are just a much safer and efficient method of transportation that also requires very few people.

    • Umbrias@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s nothing really stopping people from doing that to human driven trucks either. Besides, if it’s ‘capacity to make the choice of running someone over’ you’re after, just have a dude at a control center watching ten different trucks with remote control overrides. Something arguably they would do regardless for many reasons.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m more thinking it’s a lesser crime to rob a driverless truck. No chance of being shot by a yee-haw Trump trucker while doing so. No need to be armed.

        Just slow to a stop in front, open the back, take what you want. It’s practically a victimless crime.

        • Umbrias@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t think this is likely to happen regardless. Occasionally trucks are raided, though it’s rare in the us. More often in some places where there’s a lot more instability. But I don’t think the reason it’s rare in general is ‘because there’s a human at the wheel’, especially not the concern that they may be armed.

  • Dizzy Devil Ducky@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Having a required human driver in the trucks for if/when the self-driving portion of the truck suddenly bugs out or gets into a situation where it cannot get itself free would probably save them a lot of headache and business when suddenly that truck gets into a situation it cannot correct itself.

    Hell, we’ve already seen times when that would’ve saved lives like the time self driving taxis ended up blocking an ambulance en route.

    • ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder if these vehicles could be remotely piloted by a human when they become gridlocked, rather than have someone sitting in the cabin the entire time. Seems like just sitting in an autonomous vehicle while it drives long distances would be a particularly terrible job.

      • Drigo@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        You could get payed to just sleep or play games, seems like a dream job for some people.

        But remote controlled driving also seems like a pretty good idea, if it works reliably

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          that’d be the dream, but the pessimist in me sees the boss installing Spyware, eye tracker software, a sensor in my seat, twice a day video call check ins and a series of beaurocratic tasks that turn it into an 11 hour shift 6 days a week, and in their downtown offices rather than WFH.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d love it, I’d go back to school for one

          Play so many video games

          I think sleeping would negate the purpose though, you need to be able to see when something is wrong and take control of the vehicle

          • Drigo@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I guess you’re right on the sleeping part, might not be the best idea. But I’m sure if the trucking companies could skip sleeping time for trucks and allow the person to sleep while driving. They would 100% do it.

            A loud siren/alarm or something could wake you up I guess if something goes wrong or if you’re nearing your destination

          • Patches@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah yes the ol “It’s cheaper sometimes to kill a couple people than employ a few more people” argument.

            Haven’t heard that one in a while.

            What is the going rate for a human life these days? 3 Full time employees? 4?

              • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Historically speaking, it’s sadly far from uncommon.

                They just cross their fingers and hope that it never happens. Companies have a bad habit of deciding that they would keep more money paying for a lawsuit than they would keep by paying employees. If a company is worth billions, a few million is a drop in the bucket.

                There’s a VERY good reason for many safety regulations. A lot of these regulations have been paid for with blood and death.

                I wish we were better as a species, but here we are.

    • ButtCheekOnAStick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Companies who make alarms clocks should have to pay for all the knocker-upper jobs lost! Automation has been affecting the workforce for centuries, and it isn’t going to stop any time soon.

      • justastranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        However the effects are becoming increasingly dramatic as more and more of the population finds themselves in an economy with no jobs for them. Eventually UBI will become necessary once we hit the tipping point.

    • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have little trust or faith in modern governments (and even less in corporations), but I would think they are in the perfect position to facilitate retraining programs. In fact it sounds like that’s kind of what the US is doing with the recently announce ‘Climate Corps’ or whatever, a training program to help a certain number of people get employed in targeted industries.

  • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Funny to see the argument being made here that this idea is crazy because people “don’t have the attention span” to monitor the robot driving the car. Like yes, that’s exactly the point, people suck at driving and maintaining constant attention, and they are worse than they were 10-20 years ago thanks to cell phones and screens. One in every hundred people you know will literally die due to this problem. For most people that means several people you knew in high school are dead because of people’s inability to drive perfectly all the time. That’s just deaths, many more will get injured or maimed. It doesn’t have to be this way. The only way out of it aside from somehow designing better humans is self-driving cars. They are already orders of magnitude safer than humans and have been so for years. Do they have bugs? Yes. But if we replaced every car on the road with a self-driving car right now we’d see the death and maiming rate plummet.

    For context: we shut down the global economy for a virus with an estimated 1% mortality rate. It was necessary to avoid hospital overwhelm and give us time to develop countermeasures. That’s the same mortality rate as driving. Obviously drivers are not overwhelming hospitals because the deaths are spread out over a longer time period. But nonetheless I think it’s an interesting comparison.

    • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      TuSimple’s fleet of 40 autonomous trucks has been hauling goods between freight depots in Phoenix, Tucson, Dallas, El Paso, Houston, and San Antonio. These routes are about 95 percent highway, but the trucks can also autonomously handle surface streets, bringing their cargo the entire distance, from depot driveway to depot driveway. Its vehicles join a growing fleet of robotic trucks from competitors such as Aurora, Embark, Locomation, Plus.ai, and even Waymo, the Alphabet spin-off that has long focused on self-driving cars.

      https://spectrum.ieee.org/this-year-autonomous-trucks-will-take-to-the-road-with-no-one-on-board

      • huskypenguin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think this is a pretty important point in practice. These trucks are hauling between depots and primarily on the highway, which is easy to map and fairly predictable without many obstacles like pedestrians and traffic lights. I would feel differently about an autonomous truck driving in the city.