A big part of the actual value of "driverless" to :porky-happy: is using it as an extension of the privatized surveillance state. I've even had bazingas tell me directly that they want their future magic car to be "rented out" when they aren't using it so it's constantly making revenue for them as some wasteful version of mass transit with extra steps. They seem to want centralization through corporations and seem to want to be monitored and directed through the same but want that "freedom" illusion all the while because mass transit that does better for cheaper with a lot less waste involves being around the poors, and they can't have that.

Is that really all it is? Some techbro hangup about seeing poor people?

    • cilantrofellow [any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Very true yes though the same rule applies somewhat - individual transit that can be publicly run and prob autonomous for less populated areas is critical and cannot easily be filled by traditional public transit. Be it a car or lorry or tuk tuk, people need to move heavy things to specific places sometimes.