Petrol/Diesel ban from 2040

[nickso]

It's an interesting conundrum that the likes of Google are designing self drive cars, rather than the normal car manufacturers, so either they are waiting for Google to licence the software and technology, or they know that it's never going to catch on properly.

But as so many drivers are complete and utter idiots that don't actually know how to drive, driverless cars would get rid of a lot of the bad driving, and so speed up the traffic flow. You also could do away with trafic lights etc, as the cars would neatly avoid each other - have to think about pedestrians though.

A mate had an interesting theory at the pub the other day.

If driverless cars do become a big thing then for a long time there will be both driver and driverless ones on the road together. The driverless ones will be constantly looking for an accident and braking, stopping or waiting for other traffic. Could actually slow the roads down a fair bit.

On the plus side you can carve them up on the roads or just drive out in front of them at junctions and they will have to give way meaning your own journey around town could be a good bit quicker.

 

[Roger928]

On the plus side you can carve them up on the roads or just drive out in front of them at junctions and they will have to give way meaning your own journey around town could be a good bit quicker

Human driven cars by then will have digital tracking systems (black boxes) that will send that info back to the police, who will duly fine you for careless/wreckless driving.
And send a series 800 Terminator (hunter killer) to your home to immobilize your vehicle/s.

 

[Doggit]

And send a series 800 terminator (hunter killer) to your home to immobilize your vehicle/s

Also know as busybody council emplyees. But I suspect they already view themselves under your description as it is.

 

[noseall]

So who mentioned money

only certain things have an intrinsic value. This was shown in Germany after the war, where the the currency was devalued so much, that people had to take a wheelbarrow full of money just to buy a loaf of bread. Every time the banking system fails, you then get rampant inflation, then you get worthless money

Take away money from your argument and you are left with what people need to survive. EVERYTHING that people need for survival has a value.

 

[Doggit]

I agree completely, and I'll leave it at that.

 

[nickso]

Human driven cars by then will have digital tracking systems (black boxes) that will send that info back to the police, who will duly fine you for careless/wreckless driving.
And send a series 800 Terminator (hunter killer) to your home to immobilize your vehicle/s.

I am going to get one of those alsatian dogs that bark at terminators for the sewer I will be living in by then.

 

[Aquaheat]

Take away money from your argument and you are left with what people need to survive. EVERYTHING that people need for survival has a value.

OK, let's take away "money".

You're example of food, gems, shelter, spices etc etc must have a value yes?

Now if I were to barter with you and get what I need to survive would that be acceptable provided we had an equal value?

Now what would happen if I bartered with you. We agree on a deal, let's say 3 Ruby's for a week in your shelter and 3 meals a day, meat based, and running hot and cold water. Would that be acceptable? Who creates the value?

Now what if we agreed this deal but rather than us changing hands with gems for services I gave you a promissory note (an IOU if you will) and said that my note is good for it as a third party benefactor will be covering all my expenditure. Would you trust me and them to pay my/their debt to you?

EDIT: crap auto correct

 

[Aquaheat]

Basically money and value is an illusion open for corruption as and when those in control of it feel like. I think this needs to be a separate thread to be fair as this is way of tangent from the OP.

I'm starting to feel like Ross Noble!

 

[wobs]

If driverless cars do become a big thing then for a long time there will be both driver and driverless ones on the road together. The driverless ones will be constantly looking for an accident and braking, stopping or waiting for other traffic. Could actually slow the roads down a fair bit.

This makes no sense. Why would driverless cars purposely look for an accident etc?

 

[Doggit]

They are designed to keep an eye out for any potential accidents, so they are in effect "looking for an accident", but only so they can avoid them.

Nickso made a very interesting point in that you could pretty much drive with almost complete abandonment, but I suspect the real world would take over, and the cameras on overy street corner would soon have you off the road; plus there'd be manadatory cameras in all cars by then, but sticking your nose up to the system sounds fun.

 

[Roger928]

I look forward to driverless cars and electric cars. Less fuel, less power, less speed and drive control computers that are not programmed to be egomaniac nutters.
A young girl in my locality was mown down and killed last year whilst out jogging by an un licenced, uninsured teenage maniac whilst undertaking a vehicle racing another maniac.
Both are up in court shortly.

 

[noseall]

A young girl in my locality was mown down and killed last year whilst out jogging by an un licenced, uninsured teenage maniac whilst undertaking a vehicle racing another maniac.

Where about was that Norcon?

 

[DaveHerns]

2 driverless cars going down a narrow road. Which one gives way to the other or do they both stop? Will one be politer and let the other come through?

 

[Doggit]

Now that made me laugh. I'm sure there'll be a protocol for it though; they'll either both work out which one is closer to a layby, or they'll invent a coin tossing program.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Maybe their computers will crash - even if the cars don't.