The Ultimate Goal Of Self-Driving Cars

I was just thinking about self-driving cars and it got me thinking about how much data these cars are going to consume and make available to whoever owns access rights. 

These cars will be scanning every single inch of every road that they are driving on, in real-time, every single millisecond of the day.

Thin about this: forget Google maps via Satellite or Google Street Views that both update every few months. Thing about being able to see real-time information, 3D maps of both roads and what’s on those roads. 

We are already subject to location data and travel data today (via your cell phone) so I won’t give that to Self-Driving Cars. But there’s also this hidden benefit, especially for Google, who is the biggest advocate for SDCs; more free time to surf the internet. 

What do you think you’re going to do with the extra 30 to 120 minutes of free time you just got yourself every day? You think you’re going to talk to the people in your car? Nope. You’re going to pull out your smartphone or tablet or use the car’s unit to surf the net, watch shows or listen to podcasts. Maybe even read a kindle. 

That’s the future that Google is pushing with their Self-Driving Car. 

We get more safety & more leisure and they get more information and more profits. It’s probably a pretty good win-win for all. 

nerdology:

No. I’m not flipping you off.
Dan Seifert points out that “Chromebooks will never be successful until they have bigger screens" since 81% of laptop sales are computers with 15 or 17 inch screens.
As a 15 inch MBP owner, I’m honestly very surprised. I can’t think of another person I know with a 15 inch machine. And even now, as I look around the coffee shop I’m sitting in, and all I see are 13-14 inch laptops.
This is really interesting data.

You said you’re a MBP owner… This chart clear states that it’s sales data for WINDOWS laptop sales.
To cut down the data even further, it’s only for the first 6 months of 2014. 
This chart has NOTHING to do with your MBP or any other MBP you see, have seen or will ever seen in your local coffee shop. 

nerdology:

No. I’m not flipping you off.

Dan Seifert points out that “Chromebooks will never be successful until they have bigger screens" since 81% of laptop sales are computers with 15 or 17 inch screens.

As a 15 inch MBP owner, I’m honestly very surprised. I can’t think of another person I know with a 15 inch machine. And even now, as I look around the coffee shop I’m sitting in, and all I see are 13-14 inch laptops.

This is really interesting data.

You said you’re a MBP owner… This chart clear states that it’s sales data for WINDOWS laptop sales.

To cut down the data even further, it’s only for the first 6 months of 2014. 

This chart has NOTHING to do with your MBP or any other MBP you see, have seen or will ever seen in your local coffee shop. 

sagansense:

universalequalityisinevitable:

From this episode of DNews with Laci Green.

I’ve been saying this for quite a long time.

Unforeseen (albeit accurately predicted) disruptive technologies fueled by an unwavering exponential growth curve (Moore’s Law) will lead to technological unemployment amidst a society shackled to the traditional capitalistic platform. We’re here through the processes of evolution by natural selection. And to borrow words from Peter Diamandis, we’re currently in the midst of a transition into the future via evolution by intelligent direction.

Browse my archive of Peter Diamandis posts for more on this…

Ahh, to live life as naive as this would almost be blissful. 

Technology leads to better work (which usually means less hard labor) and it also leads to new work. More people are working today, but working easier jobs and yet we’re all prospering and, guess what, capitalism! 

When we invented “robotic” farming machines, did out-of-work farmers have no where to go? When they invented the calculator, did mathematicians and accountants disappear into thin air? When the cell phone was invented, did the postmen all vaporize? 

If we had such a world where robots did half our work, we’d probably spend more time developing better technology or improving designs of what exists now. We’d probably build more spaceships and try to expand the reach of humanity. All through voluntary exchange (aka capitalism!). 

Heck, you linked to Peter Diamandis, a capitalist, to support your hate of capitalism. Come on now!

Read the Curse of Machinery by Henry Hazlitt if you want to actually learn a thing or two. 

EDIT: fatal-conceit points out that humans suffer from Make-Work Bias. Very true. 

IDEA: An online website or app that lets people all over login and paint copies of famous paintings. Open-sourcing or collectivizing the replication of art. 

Abundance & Exponential Technologies.

I don’t know if we can truly eliminate the scarcity problem in the future (there are still translation and delivery costs) but the future looks oh so promising. 

hard-lighter:

Pratt & Whitney F100, used on McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle

Go back 200 years and show this to the top scientists and engineers on the planet and they’ll label you a witch!

hard-lighter:

Pratt & Whitney F100, used on McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle

Go back 200 years and show this to the top scientists and engineers on the planet and they’ll label you a witch!

(via priceofliberty)

jaredwade:

Hiring Algorithms Outperform Humans (via @HarvardBiz)

Technology makes us better. 

jaredwade:

Hiring Algorithms Outperform Humans (via @HarvardBiz)

Technology makes us better. 

fastcompany:

Google’s Self-Driving Car Is Real, And It Looks Like A Tiny Bubble-Car

We’ve known Google has been working on self-driving cars for awhile now, but all of a sudden, the project is real: last night, Google revealed a working prototype of its self-driving car. It’s a two-seater that looks something like a mashup of a Fiat 500Steve Urkel’s car, and a cartoon smiley face.

Read More>

SIGN ME UP!

Solar panel roads are a good idea if you think that cars and transportation will forever be stuck in the 2000s. 

The problem with solar panel roads is that it forgets to take into consideration the one very big and obvious change that’s taking place today: Autonomous Cars. 

In a world where people drive themselves and need to keep a distance between their surrounding cars and themselves, there will always be large areas of road that are uncovered and capable of absorbing and processing sunlight. 

However, in the world of the autonomous car, vehicles will drive side-by-side and in a train-like orientation, leaving no real open road space. That’s like building a solar panel group under a group of closely packed, large trees. 

Now if you wanted to build a solar panel canopy over all of the roads, that would be a great idea!

Net Neutrality Doesn’t Matter and Why It’s Time To Move On

sugashane:

My take on Net Neutrality is simple: I don’t care if the FCC allows the existing ISPs to control speeds or not.

Actually, what I really think is that these companies laid out these pipes and lines and have maintained them and that means that it’s their property and their business on how they divide up bandwidth. This means that in my view, enforcing net neutrality through the gov’t is wrong. 

Personally, I think that slowing down some sites and speeding up others as well as having “tiered pricing” for “segregated internet access is a TERRIBLE thing for the web, society and humans in general. Probably one of the WORST things. The internet is the single biggest threat to the establishment/government/corrupt parties and they are trying to shut it down (albeit, they’re 10 years too late).

So why do I not care what the FCC does? And why would I actually be in favor of the cable companies messing with bandwidth? Well, because I think that this bottleneck will give way to better, faster and smarter gateways to the internet & web. Something that everyone’s wanted but not had the motives to deliver.

We’ll see Google’s Project Loon, Google Fiber, Facebook’s Internet broadcasting Drones, PCell, 5G wireless, 10G wireless (SOON!). Everything’s going mobile, it’s going handheld and it’s going wireless/cellular. So who cares what the antiquated land-line companies want to do? Just like how the print media and the television companies are desperately clinging on to what’s left. Why? No one even wants that’s obsolete crap anymore. We have blogs and youtube!

And we’ll soon have an even better way to internet!

I got a reply back on this on Facebook that was worth a response, here it is along with my answer. 

You know what I think? Ultimate, no-holds-barred seizure of their entire infrastructure by the public sector for the purpose of constantly building, improving, and expanding internet at absurd speeds and availability for everybody, everywhere, all the time, forever, because it’s arguably /the/ biggest human rights issue since the dawn of civilization. We’re talking about fundamental communication between all of humanity and how to best facilitate it. Seriously, there is frankly no other right more important to humanity than connectivity. The “exchange of ideas” is on such a philosophically higher level than anything else within human capability, and nothing, especially something as superficial and artificial as capital, should stand in its way.

My reply:

E, I guess the best way to tackle this is one by one. 

I think that I’m clearly in the NO FUCKING WAY to “seizure” of private property. You know what’s JUST as important as the right of free speech? The protection of property rights. Imagine if you
 are okay with gov’t seizing pipelines for “the good of people” then what’s stopping them from seizing your house and turning it into a park. Or seizing you and turning you into a laboring slave to work on some “great for the public” project. (Yes, the gov’t does such disgusting things currently, doesn’t make it right and certainly shouldn’t grant them the right to do the same to the internet). 

Is communication important? YES. Is free speech a corner stone of freedom and liberty? Fuck yes. Do people have a “right” (natural or otherwise) to the internet? NO. HELL NO actually. 

People have a right to free speech, but not a right to a device or medium of free speech. Before the internet, people were able to communicate and they will long after the internet is a relic in some virtual museum. Just like people have a right to life and a right to peruse health but no one has a right to healthcare. If the internet disappeared today, you wouldn’t lose your free speech with it. 

I agree that the internet is the single greatest invention of man and the most crucial, vital, blah blah blah to ever happen to us. And whatever happens to us in the future will all be because we created digital distance communication. 

Capital isn’t artificial. I mean, it is, in a way, but it’s very real. It’s a place holder. Money isn’t a thing in and of its self. It’s a representative of very real goods and services. Money is just a storer of value for future use. Nothing more and nothing less. 

Money doesn’t stand in the way of things any more than it produces things. 

Now, how important is the internet? The MOST important? Probably not. Water, Air, Earth, Humans, all probably a little more important. But it’s certainly very important; important enough that’s it’s worth preserving and improving. 

I just don’t think Net Neutrality does that. Why? Internet companies already limit bandwidth, shift it around, give priority, etc. This is before any ruling on NN. Are cable companies and big media teaming up with big politics to fuck us over? Yes. Will it be the end of us? No. 

Humans find a way to get what they want. Always and forever. That’s why black markets exist, that’s why competition exists, that’s why we see progress, that’s why we put humans in space. Nothing can stop us from getting what we want, especially in the long run. The only things that limit us are technology and resources, and the scarcity of both of those are decreasing by the second. Exponentially. 

So when they take the internet as you know it and lock it in a cage or even destroy it. I guarantee that someone will make a new internet. New lines will be laid, especially wirelessly, new protocols will be developed, new hubs, nodes, data centers. People will find a work around. 

Why? Because of the one thing that you think is stopping it, the pursuit of capital. There is SO MUCH MONEY tied into the internet being accessible and without a “catch” that all of these people will group together to find a work around. 

The way the internet works now, central nodes/data hubs, is archaic and needs to be fixed anyway. There are already people out there working on a decentralized internet. Not because they fear losing the current net and the web along with it, but because a decentralized net, much like how bitcoin works (when I tell people that the blockchain is the MOST important piece of tech ever, this is what I’m talking about), will ensure that everything and everyone will always be connected to the system (because they ARE the system). 

Like I said, nothing to worry about. 

http://motherboard.vice.com/…/bitcoin-internet-the-plan…

https://projectmeshnet.org/

http://www.newyorker.com/…/the-mission-to-decentralize…

http://www.techdirt.com/…/building-more-decentralized…

http://www.techdirt.com/…/building-more-decentralized…

Sorry for the LONG ass post. I’m a rambler.

Net Neutrality Doesn’t Matter and Why It’s Time To Move On

My take on Net Neutrality is simple: I don’t care if the FCC allows the existing ISPs to control speeds or not.

Actually, what I really think is that these companies laid out these pipes and lines and have maintained them and that means that it is their property and their business on how they divide up bandwidth. This means that in my view, enforcing net neutrality through the government is wrong. Plain and simple.

Personally, I think that slowing down some sites and speeding up others as well as having “tiered pricing” for segregated internet access is a terrible thing for the web, for society and humans in general. Probably one of the worst things. The internet is the single biggest threat to the establishment/government/corrupt parties and they are trying to shut it down (albeit, they’re 10 years too late).

So why do I not care what the FCC does? And why would I actually be in favor of the cable companies butchering bandwidth? Well, because I think that this bottleneck will give way to better, faster and smarter gateways to the internet & web. Something will come about that everyone’s wanted, and now needs, but no one had the motives to deliver. Necessity is the mother of invention. 

We’ll see Google’s Project Loon, Google Fiber, Facebook’s Internet broadcasting Drones, PCell, 5G wireless, 10G wireless (SOON!). Everything’s going mobile, it’s going handheld and it’s going wireless/cellular. So who cares what the antiquated land-line companies want to do? Just like how the print media and the television companies are desperately clinging on to what’s left. Why? No one even wants that’s obsolete crap anymore. We have blogs and youtube!

And we’ll soon have an even better way to internet!

Rent 3D PrinterPrint 3D PrinterReturn 3D Printer????Profit!

Rent 3D Printer
Print 3D Printer
Return 3D Printer
????
Profit!