XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science   
   From: dtravel@sonic.net   
      
   On 1/16/2014 10:44 PM, Your Name wrote:   
   > In article <52d8ca73$0$52774$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, Dimensional   
   > Traveler  wrote:   
   >> On 1/16/2014 7:36 AM, Bernard Peek wrote:   
   >>> On 14/01/14 18:25, Doc O'Leary wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>> So while self-driving cars are definitely possible, my point remains   
   >>>> that they'll be ushered in surrounded by a cloud of changes to the way   
   >>>> the world works.  Some of those changes will be easy to predict, and   
   >>>> some with be complete surprises.  It's just outright*wrong*  if all you   
   >>>> do is apply today's thinking to a world where a fanciful technology is   
   >>>> commonplace.   
   >>>   
   >>> I could probably put together a design for self-driving cars that could   
   >>> be built with today's technology.   
   >>   
   >> If you really can, why haven't any of the many companies working on   
   >> doing so been able to?   
   >   
   > They have - sort of. There are already cars which can park themselves,   
   > and cars which can stay in the correct lane (assuming the lanes   
   > actually have paint on the road!), plus cars which drive themsevles in   
   > a "folow-the-leader" / "duck walking" sense are due for release very   
   > soon in some countries. There are also quite a few self-driving "pod"   
   > cars around which run on purpose-built roading systems.   
   >   
   Which a _very_ long way from a car that can guide itself on existing   
   roads in current conditions.   
      
   --   
   The 'Enterprise' crew in the 2009 Star Trek are adrenaline addicted,   
   hyper-active teenagers with ADD whose Ritalin got replaced with   
   methamphetamine, displaying a level of discipline that a Somali pirate   
   wouldn't tolerate.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)