Hacker News Reader

Comment by pasquinelli | Hacker News Reader

the infrastructure will gradually shift from making roads safe for humans to making it safe for robots, meaning it will gradually become hostile to humans. as it gradually gets hostile to humans, they will have to use robots to get around, and so private capital will be able to extract rent from public infrastructure, and the public will still be responsible for maintaining and upgrading that infrastructure, at least until the body is killed by its parasites. isn't that the vision of über, and why so much investment has gone to it? isn't that all big tech does?

View on HN

Roads are already hostile to humans. We need to make human islands, areas where the roads have been converted into gardens or grassy areas, where people can walk freely without cars. And then make safe, robot friendly ways to transport humans between them.

Sounds like trains, street cars.

"train good, car bad"

Or we could just get rid of a lot of cars and use trains for most of our travel.

Relatedly, have you ever looked at the urban planning of Brasilia? Concepts similar to yours have been tried under the high modernism of the mid 20th century.

Foot paths, bicycle paths and trains are much more friendly to humans and also cheaper.

So, parks?

This already happened a long time ago when the automobile became prevalent.

>isn't that all big tech does?

Obviously no. Most modern conveniences - electricity, planes, abundant food etc came partly from some form of big tech.

Self driving tech has a chance to fix the 1m+ annual road deaths. Not there yet but give it a while.

Sure some CEOs can the rent seeking etc but that's what competition and regulation are for.

I think what you are trying to say is that future will look bleak for drivers. It does not mean humans in general though. Drivers will be replaced by more cost efficient and often more reliable robots. But the upside is lower prices, more free time, less stress, less accidents. So it would be a net gain for most of the humans.

> lower prices

Isn't the USA still waiting for that low price insulin shot?

That sounds like a good business model if you ask me!

It sounds like 'public transport' to me. Which I consider a great idea, and something valuable. But certainly not a good business model.

The entire purpose of infrastructure is to enable commerce that makes life better for the tax payers who fund it.

Horse and buggy enthusiasts hate semis but people who shop at Amazon love them.

The same goes for people who want self driving cars and the infrastructure they will be supported by. If the world goes that way, it's because the people want it.

It feels like we mostly focus on "to enable commerce" and have completely forgotten "makes life better".

Commerce only happens when people buy things they want.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com