GM plans to release cars with no steering wheel next year - Sensationalist Headlines

i want a wheel in my car so i can tear up the backcountry my self

I see how I would want my own car if I lived somewhere rural, but for somewhere urban I could envision a person never needing their own car.

People didn't seem to make too much of a fuss when Waymo did this not too long ago and this one isn't even coming this year.

[QUOTE=phygon;53050441]I honestly look forward to the day when non-autonomous vehicles are not permitted on public roads.[/quote] I would rather watch mushroom clouds rise over the horizon than live in a world where I was not legally allowed to drive. Far as I'm concerned my life is over the instant I can't control a car directly, and you can bet I'll push as hard as I can to preserve that right. Dead serious, if I found myself a quadriplegic with no solution in sight I'd *very* strongly consider euthanasia over trying to live a life where I couldn't drive, and any end-goal of recovery from partial paralysis/amputation would not be being able to walk, but being able to drive again. I couldn't care less if I was wheelchair bound as long as one of my wheelchairs had a V8 in the front, that all of them were powered somehow. Outdoor one? Tank treads, briggs motor, yeboi. To me it's not a means to get around, it's a hobby, it's therapy, it's a way to calm my nerves and a way for me to relax and de-stress. It's fun to me, even if the vehicle I'm driving is 32 years old and has 85HP to its name. Doesn't matter how fucked up the day was, within 15 minutes of getting behind the wheel I'm about as chipper and calm and collected as I'll ever get. I'm wired strangely, I know, but that's how it is. Some people unwind with video games, some people unwind with imgur memes, reddit shitposting, crochet, whatever. I unwind by driving. And now you know why I'm so vehemently opposed to autonomous cars, why I'm so stubborn about it that I will never support mandating people use them, why I won't even entertain arguments for mandating everyone use one. I see it as a direct assault on my right to happiness. You know, that third part of the American creed. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. Yeah, to me that last bit involves driving something. You want the option for one, sure, your dime your choice. But try to force me into one and the fangs come right out. [quote] It you could only kill yourself by being a jackass behind the wheel, I'd have a different opinion. But that's not the case.[/QUOTE] That's...kinda sorta how it happens. You don't die in a car crash because of freak occurences. Accidents are exceedingly rare, one a million scenarios that just don't play out often enough to matter. [I]Crashes[/I] are what kills, and crashes are invariably caused by someone being a jackass. Texting, drinking behind the wheel, not paying attention, going too fast, driving aggressively, these are jackass moves, and they don't cause accidents. Grinds my gears a bit when I hear someone refer to the results of that jackassery as an accident, as that implies there was no fault, that it was unavoidable. You can't avoid being struck by lighting while driving down the road, that's one of the things that would constitute an accident, but you can avoid driving like a jackass. And if everyone avoided driving like a jackass we wouldn't be discussing autonomous cars. We'd see a similar reduction in road fatalities by enforcing stricter testing and licensing requirements(IE stop treating holding a license like a god-given right and extend it only to those who prove they are competent at the task) as we will with these self-driving pipe dream cars. Best part? Stricter licensing shows up faster in crash statistics, and it works whether the person's in one of these new GM cars or a '34 Ford A sedan! It applies to literally every car ever made, not just bleeding edge tech that only works for certain segments of the population!

[QUOTE=TestECull;53050558]-cars-[/QUOTE] First off, [quote] public roads [/quote] Nobody is trying to take away track day. Secondly, no! You're completely wrong. My point was that [I]people driving safely get hit by jackasses[/I], as do civilians. You do not need to be the one being a jackass behind the wheel to cause an accident. Moreover, you're double wrong, because human beings are literally incapable of giving something absolutely perfect attention resulting in a [I]lot[/I] of fatal crashes that are truly accidents. If everyone avoided driving like a jackass, we would absolutely still be discussing autonomous cars. More than that, we would still be building them, since they're not exactly a theoretical concept. People driving like jackasses are absolutely not the only things that cause road fatalities, nor are road fatalities the only reason to have autonomous cars.

You can't improve a jackass, but you can improve his car.

[QUOTE=phygon;53050638]First off, Nobody is trying to take away track day. Secondly, no! You're completely wrong. My point was that [I]people driving safely get hit by jackasses[/I], as do civilians. You do not need to be the one being a jackass behind the wheel to cause an accident. Moreover, you're double wrong, because human beings are literally incapable of giving something absolutely perfect attention resulting in a [I]lot[/I] of fatal crashes that are truly accidents. If everyone avoided driving like a jackass, we would absolutely still be discussing autonomous cars. More than that, we would still be building them, since they're not exactly a theoretical concept. People driving like jackasses are absolutely not the only things that cause road fatalities, nor are road fatalities the only reason to have autonomous cars.[/QUOTE] re: public roads. yeah good luck banning people from driving themselves on public roads. in fact, where I live it's a necessity (hell yeah for dirt driveways), and I don't forsee a future where the infrastructure in this town is going to be advanced enough to support any sort of self-driving car.

[QUOTE=phygon;53050638]Nobody is trying to take away track day.[/QUOTE] Who gives a shit, maybe he enjoys driving to places rather than just spinning around on a circuit. Because I sure do. I've had the greatest times of my entire life on road trips across literal thousands of kilometers through the absolute middle of bumfuck, and I'm 100% with Test when he says that forbidding non-autonomous vehicles from public roads may as well be considered a violation of human rights. If my country ever pulls some shit like that I'm moving to some rural nowhere, fuck everything else. I'd rather risk being bumped off a cliff by some drunk gopnik, than live in a place where people are [i]forbidden to go wherever they like whenever they feel[/I] and instead have to be chaperoned by some god damn nanny-bot.

[QUOTE=bdd458;53050665]re: public roads. yeah good luck banning people from driving themselves on public roads. in fact, where I live it's a necessity (hell yeah for dirt driveways), and I don't forsee a future where the infrastructure in this town is going to be advanced enough to support any sort of self-driving car.[/QUOTE] What, [I]ever?[/I] You [I]never ever[/I] see self driving cars being able to navigate dirt roads? Seriously? [QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53051002]Who gives a shit, maybe he enjoys driving to places rather than just spinning around on a circuit. Because I sure do. I've had the greatest times of my entire life on road trips across literal thousands of kilometers through the absolute middle of bumfuck, and I'm 100% with Test when he says that forbidding non-autonomous vehicles from public roads may as well be considered a violation of human rights. If my country ever pulls some shit like that I'm moving to some rural nowhere, fuck everything else. I'd rather risk being bumped off a cliff by some drunk gopnik, than live in a place where people are [i]forbidden to go wherever they like whenever they feel[/I] and instead have to be chaperoned by some god damn nanny-bot.[/QUOTE] You realize that such a shift would not happen within your life, right? I'm talking a theoretical long term goal here. Also, I'm sorry, but I just don't think that [I]37,000[/I] people dying [I]every single year[/I] is an even price to pay for how fun driving is, in the theoretical face of a future with self driving cars and near 0 fatalities. It's just an irresponsible mindset, especially since driving doesn't just endanger the driver. Remember, I'm not at all saying that driving is something that we should stop doing unless there is a completely viable alternative... but a viable alternative is beginning to come over the horizon.

I imagine that within a few years of self driving cars being widely available insurance companies will simply start to charge a premium for driving yourself, and driving yourself will become a premium option for the rich.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53051002]Who gives a shit, maybe he enjoys driving to places rather than just spinning around on a circuit. Because I sure do. I've had the greatest times of my entire life on road trips across literal thousands of kilometers through the absolute middle of bumfuck, and I'm 100% with Test when he says that forbidding non-autonomous vehicles from public roads may as well be considered a violation of human rights. If my country ever pulls some shit like that I'm moving to some rural nowhere, fuck everything else. I'd rather risk being bumped off a cliff by some drunk gopnik, than live in a place where people are [i]forbidden to go wherever they like whenever they feel[/I] and instead have to be chaperoned by some god damn nanny-bot.[/QUOTE] Manual driving likely isn't going to disappear for a VERY long time, it'll just become a bit more difficult and expensive as autonomy becomes the norm. Insurance premiums, license, vehicles etc.

[QUOTE=Lime-alicious;53046594]Not having manual controls just seems inconvenient. How do they handle large driveways or specific parking?[/QUOTE] Honestly with this generation, just toss being able to use a controller on there, people have already done this to a tesla I think?

[QUOTE=phygon;53051617]You realize that such a shift would not happen within your life, right? I'm talking a theoretical long term goal here.[/QUOTE] And? You're still advocating a future where people are [I]forbidden from going places[/I] unless they are under total control and oversight by corporations, governments, and the like. "It's not gonna happen soon" doesn't stop it from being a dystopia. [QUOTE]Also, I'm sorry, but I just don't think that [I]37,000[/I] people dying [I]every single year[/I] is an even price to pay for how fun driving is, in the theoretical face of a future with self driving cars and near 0 fatalities. It's just an irresponsible mindset, especially since driving doesn't just endanger the driver. Remember, I'm not at all saying that driving is something that we should stop doing unless there is a completely viable alternative... but a viable alternative is beginning to come over the horizon. [/QUOTE] You could make that exact same argument to try and entirely prohibit [I]anything remotely dangerous[/I] from cars to sharp sticks, but my answer would remain the same: fuck that with the rustiest of all rakes. I'd rather live in a riskier world than in a perfectly safe one where everything is bubblewrapped and people's freedom of agency and choice has been gradually ground into dust. Also, I love how earlier you dismissed Test's arguments entirely by just going "no no no, there's no other way to reduce the number of deaths on the road, we [I]must absolutely[/I] start working now towards a future where only autonomous cars are allowed". Not only what he proposed (along with a ton of other possible proposals that I won't bother list because they'd turn this post into a multiple page document) would have GREATLY helped saving a lot of lives, it would also be implemented much more quickly and easily than waiting for a technological solution that a) is still in its infancy, b) will be ready [I]eventually[/I] and c) [B]will fuck everyone's freedom right in the ass.[/B] Now, should we still develop this tech for those who want to make use of it? Sure, why not, it would definitely help a lot. Should we force EVERYONE to use it, no ifs and no buts? HELL FUCKING NO. What you call a safe and ideal future, we call a gross violation of some of the best ideals the western world was built upon, and a victory for totalitarianism. I'm neither joking nor exaggerating when I say I consider your proposals akin to a crime against human rights.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53051721]s.[/QUOTE] You know that you are already unable to go places that the government doesn't want you to, right? I'm really not sure what you're getting at here. Cars could be fully autonomous and still let the "driver" play navigator, they just wouldn't be in direct control of the vehicle for completely legitimate safety reasons. It wouldn't be even remotely comparable to a violation of rights, and it wouldn't restrict you from going literally anywhere that you can go now. It would just prevent people from getting behind the wheel drunk and then piloting their vehicle directly into a SUV/pedestrian.

[QUOTE=phygon;53052498]You know that you are already unable to go places that the government doesn't want you to, right?[/QUOTE] Congrats, you missed the point so hard it's not even funny. It's not about the government putting limits on where I can go, it's about the government [B]literally holding the remote control to a major part of my life[/B]. [QUOTE]I'm really not sure what you're getting at here. Cars could be fully autonomous and still let the "driver" play navigator, they just wouldn't be in direct control of the vehicle[/QUOTE] And that is the major problem I addressed as a violation of freedom. I'm not suddenly going to change my mind if you keep repeating what you already said over and over again. [QUOTE]for completely legitimate safety reasons.[/QUOTE] My ass. You want to see vehicle-related deaths plummet? Make driving exams and driver license renewals less of a joke, crack down [I]hardcore[/I] on retarded chucklefucks driving while browsing facebook or whatever, add another colossal list of measures that, once again, I won't post for page-stretching reasons, and you'd see all of a sudden that roads would be a massively goddamn safer place to be. While people are still driving. [QUOTE]It wouldn't be even remotely comparable to a violation of rights[/QUOTE] It sure as fuck would. I want to drive because I like it, [I]I have proven myself worthy to do so[/I] after taking lessons and exams my government deemed sufficient to be all like "yup, this dude knows his shit and should be allowed to drive" (although once again there's plenty of room for improvement in this process), and I [B]demand[/B] to be treated like an adult human being fully responsive for his own actions, instead of like a five year old kid with various extra chromosomes. [QUOTE]and it wouldn't restrict you from going literally anywhere that you can go now.[/QUOTE] It's not about where. It's about how. It's, once again, about who is in control of my goddamn life. (and good luck getting an autonomous car through the trips I love to take. Five bucks say the damn thing would be in a ditch awfully quickly) [QUOTE]It would just prevent people from getting behind the wheel drunk and then piloting their vehicle directly into a SUV/pedestrian.[/QUOTE] Because as we all know, the vast majority of drivers worldwide are irresponsible retards who keep plowing into things. No, just no. I'm done here, it's like yelling at a brick wall with worrisome control-freak tendencies and ultra-statist mentality. I'll never stop seeing your vision of a ~better future~ as a dystopian nightmare and I'll keep fighting it in any way I can, as long as I can draw breath.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052569]-cars-[/QUOTE] My entire point was that [I]far in the future[/I] when [I]this technology has been perfected[/I] that it would be a responsible idea. However, you're deciding to treat it as some sort of personal attack on your liberties, for some reason. As an individual you may be responsible, but the simple fact of the matter is that cars are statistically really dangerous. You're acting like I'm freaking out here or like I'm acting like a [quote]worrisome control-freak tendencies and ultra-statist mentality[/quote] when literally all that I said was that in a future where self driving cars are a viable option, we should probably not have people driving on the road just given how extremely high accident rates are. So, have fun with that, I guess. Cars clearly mean a ton to you if you're willing to pretend that me wanting graph A to eventually look like graph B is somehow as fucking retarded as you're pretending that it is. [IMG]https://i.imgur.com/IEPBvMK.png[/IMG] (Citation [URL="https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/overview/key_data.html"]here[/URL] and [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year"]here[/URL] Also, the state already controls literally everything that you're pretending that it doesn't, so have double fun with that denial.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53051721]And? You're still advocating a future where people are [I]forbidden from going places[/I] unless they are under total control and oversight by corporations, governments, and the like. "It's not gonna happen soon" doesn't stop it from being a dystopia.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052569]Congrats, you missed the point so hard it's not even funny. It's not about the government putting limits on where I can go, it's about the government [B]literally holding the remote control to a major part of my life[/B].[/QUOTE] You need to jump through hoops to get a license to drive. You need to follow inspection and registration requirements to operate a motor vehicle. You need to obey posted signs and traffic laws set by the government. The state [I]already[/I] 'holds the remote control to a major part of your life'. You are [I]already[/I] subject to intense governmental and corporate regulation and oversight any time you're on the road, and if you don't comply with the rules, no matter how arbitrary or asinine, they can and will take your license away or even throw you in jail. Since you're already under intense regulation this is just a matter of degrees. Now, we can have a reasonable discussion over those degrees and how much government control is warranted, but to act like mandating driverless cars represents unprecedented control over your freedom of movement, let alone a [I]violation of human rights[/I], is absolutely ridiculous. [editline]14th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53051002][I]forbidden to go wherever they like whenever they feel[/I][/QUOTE] Like how you're forbidden from driving right after downing a six-pack? Or how you're forbidden from going on the road if the state hasn't OK'd your car? Or how you're forbidden from driving after an arbitrary period of time, when your license expires? Even just the fact that you're saying 'whenever they feel' as an objection makes no sense; if you owned a self-driving car the only difference between that and a conventional one would be how it navigates to the location. So really, what you're reacting so strongly to is the state mandating a technical characteristic of any vehicle used on public roads- something that is [I]already done[/I] to extremely stringent degrees. Plenty of hobbyists have project cars that don't meet the requirements to be road-legal, there is absolutely no right whatsoever to drive whatever you want on publicly-funded roads. Unless you support allowing horses on highways or allowing people to drive drunk, you accept at least some governmental restriction on your use of public roads, making this insistence on being free from government control just reactionary rhetoric, not a consistent argument.

[QUOTE=catbarf;53052606]Since you're already under intense regulation this is just a matter of degrees. [...] to act like mandating driverless cars represents unprecedented control over your freedom of movement, [...], is absolutely ridiculous.[/QUOTE] You best be having a fucking giggle. It's literally "you get to drive" versus "you don't". It is [b]very much[/b] an unprecedented form of control over my freedom of movement. And regarding licensing and the rest of the paperwork, yes. They exist. They're very much needed. A person wants to be in control of a 1+ ton chunk of steel and flammable liquids that can travel at speeds up to and exceeding 130kph, it's common fucking sense he goes through an evaluation and licensing process but guess what? After that is done, [b]that person is the one making decisions and assuming direct control at all times[/b]. To think mandating autonomous vehicles is "just a minor degree" away from actual driving and not at all a restriction of movement, now that is beyond fucking ridiculous. [editline]14th January 2018[/editline] [quote]Like how you're forbidden from driving right after downing a six-pack? Or how you're forbidden from going on the road if the state hasn't OK'd your car? Or how you're forbidden from driving after an arbitrary period of time, when your license expires?[/quote] [QUOTE]Unless you support allowing horses on highways or allowing people to drive drunk, you accept at least some governmental restriction on your use of public roads, making this insistence on being free from government control just reactionary rhetoric, not a consistent argument.[/QUOTE] Sorry for thinking those restrictions were equal parts rhetorical and common sense. I guess I should also specify the driver must have at least two working limbs, one eyeball, and an internal organ or two. [editline]14th January 2018[/editline] [quote]if you owned a self-driving car the only difference between that and a conventional one would be how it navigates to the location. So really, what you're reacting so strongly to is the state mandating a technical characteristic of any vehicle used on public roads- something that is already done to extremely stringent degrees. [/quote] Oh wow, at last I see the truth. I guess there literally is zero differences between DRIVING and NOT DRIVING. Wow. Sure opened my eyes. [editline]14th January 2018[/editline] [quote]there is absolutely no right whatsoever to drive whatever you want on publicly-funded roads.[/quote] As long as it's not inherently destructive for the road and its occupants, why the fuck not? I could understand a tank with asphalt-wrecking metal treads or a vehicle in such horrid disrepair that its driving speed and direction risk becoming completely random, but other than that? If someone goes through all the checks and processes to be allowed to drive, let them. Make driver licenses tougher if you feel like, but stop pretending that TAKING AWAY THE POSSIBILITY TO DRIVE AT ALL is in NO WAY a restriction of movement freedom. [editline]14th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=phygon;53052601]Also, the state already controls literally everything that you're pretending that it doesn't, so have double fun with that denial.[/QUOTE] Oh fuck you're right, all this time my car has been navigating, steering, and accelerating by itself and I just hadn't noticed until now. Oh, fucking please.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052665]It's literally "you get to drive" versus "you don't".[/QUOTE] So? We're still talking about you being able to fulfill the purpose of transportation in either case, which is the sole purpose of publicly-funded roads, not the hobbyist interest of driving your own car. A few months ago I was out on the highway when a group of sports cars were deliberately slowing down traffic so two of their number could drag race. Cops showed up and pulled them over. Those drivers were fined by the government for enjoying their hobby on public roads, because in the process they were causing disruptions and posing unnecessary risk to people just trying to get from point A to point B. You have the right to drive whatever you want on your own property, but you have no right to needlessly endanger others in public spaces for the sake of hobbyist interest. So where public roads are concerned, 'but I want to drive' has no relevance. If you can convince your state to build some publicly-funded raceways or other roadways intended for recreation, then that's one thing, but public roads and highways in particular primarily exist for transit. Safety and efficiency are paramount. [QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052665]And regarding licensing and the rest of the paperwork, yes. They exist. They're very much needed. A person wants to be in control of a 1+ ton chunk of steel and flammable liquids that can travel at speeds up to and exceeding 130kph, it's common fucking sense he goes through an evaluation and licensing process[/QUOTE] So basically, because driving a car can be dangerous in irresponsible hands, you're okay with the government putting significant restrictions on the use of public roads, which can include barring potential motorists who represent an undue risk to others. Common sense. But when someone suggests putting new, significant restrictions on the use of public roads, in a hypothetical scenario where self-driving cars have advanced to the point where human drivers represent an undue risk to others, suddenly it's a violation of your fundamental human rights? You're not being consistent here. Your argument seems to basically boil down to the fact that you enjoy driving for fun, and therefore it's an [I]attack on your human rights[/I] to not allow you to use public roadways for recreation.

Who said anything about racing or whatever? Those dudes blocked a road so they could race? Fine, arrest them, take away their licenses, they get what they earned by being obnoxious, dangerous wankers. Now tell me when have I ever encouraged street racing. I find driving relaxing. I find it, like many others in the world do, extremely therapeutic. I miiiiight push the gas pedal a little more when there's absolutely nobody around and I'm 100% sure the only risk I pose is towards myself. Now, you're acting like DISALLOWING PEOPLE FROM DRIVING is a minor and inconsequential restriction compared to the ones already in place, and the only thing I'm going to say before hopping out of this thread for good is: it's fucking not and you damn well know it. And if you really think driving is, and should only be, about getting from A to B, I will pity you and ignore what else you may have to say about this subject. Have a good day.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052665]Oh fuck you're right, all this time my car has been navigating, steering, and accelerating by itself and I just hadn't noticed until now.[/QUOTE] Navigating and steering? The state is telling you exactly what lanes to drive in, when you have to stop, where you can go. When you're stuck in traffic it would be really convenient to drive onto the shoulder and use it to overtake everyone, wouldn't it? But the state says you can't do that. Would navigating up that one-way street be convenient? Tough shit. Accelerating? Only up to a limited top speed, any higher and you're in violation. When you're on public roads, the state's already dictating your navigation, steering, and acceleration to you, and failure to comply can result in losing your privilege of driving at all. Yet here you are talking like you currently have absolute freedom, and that having your car follow those rules directly instead of using you as an intermediary would take that assumed freedom away.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052736]Who said anything about racing or whatever? Those dudes blocked a road so they could race? Fine, arrest them, take away their licenses, they get what they earned by being obnoxious, dangerous wankers. Now tell me when have I ever encouraged street racing. I find driving relaxing. I find it, like many others in the world do, extremely therapeutic. I miiiiight push the gas pedal a little more when there's absolutely nobody around and I'm 100% sure the only risk I pose is towards myself. Now, you're acting like DISALLOWING PEOPLE FROM DRIVING is a minor and inconsequential restriction compared to the ones already in place, and the only thing I'm going to say before hopping out of this thread for good is: it's fucking not and you damn well know it. And if you really think driving is, and should only be, about getting from A to B, I will pity you and ignore what else you may have to say about this subject. Have a good day.[/QUOTE] As long as you continue to hyperbolize opposing statements and flip out, it's not really possible to have an actual discussion about the topic. "I'm right and you know it" isn't an argument, because if we agreed with you, we would [I]not be having the discussion in the first place.[/I] Your arguments make it incredibly clear that more than anything, what you're doing here is defending your hobby, completely disregarding evidence that is arguing that your hobby endangers not only yourself, but those around you. The government already places extremely heavy restrictions on how you drive, to the point where you are effectively already in an "autonomous" car- you have to follow the pre-defined tracks and the pre-defined set of safety rules or you're going to get a huge ticket or jail time. Autonomous cars just prevent these laws from being broken, making the roads safer.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052736]And if you really think driving is, and should only be, about getting from A to B[/QUOTE] Mate, I have a fondness for non-road-legal dune buggies and enjoy driving my GTI on the track. I believe you should have the absolute freedom to drive whatever you want on your own property, and the property of others who grant you permission. I don't consider myself a gearhead but I do enjoy driving. But, public highways aren't there for you to enjoy driving. They're designed and intended solely for transportation, and the government imposes heavy restrictions on allowable vehicles and allowable behavior. If you treat public highways like anything but a means of safely going from point A to point B, you get hit with citations or even charges. As far as the vehicles themselves go, there's decades of precedent for the government deciding that certain characteristics are unsuitable for use on public roads. Now, I never implied you support street racing, I raised it as an example of a hobbyist use of public roads that puts the public in danger. You seem to recognize that it represents an unnecessary risk to bystanders, and that 'but I want to have fun and race my friends' is not a valid justification for screwing up traffic and putting others in danger. But in our hypothetical future where self-driving cars are ubiquitous and safer, where human-driven cars would screw up traffic and put others in danger, you are using 'but I want to have fun and drive my car' as a justification. That's not consistent, and you keep making these big emotional reactions instead of addressing the inconsistency. I never said anything like it being 'a minor and inconsequential restriction'. It would absolutely be a massive change, and [I]frankly[/I] I'd probably be opposed to it for decades to come, simply on account of self-driving cars likely being out of financial reach of poor Americans. But in principle, in light of all the other restrictions already on the books, it's a matter of degrees rather than a wholly unprecedented thing like you're making it out to be, let alone an abridgment of your human rights.

[QUOTE=jimhowl33t;53052736] And if you really think driving is, and should only be, about getting from A to B, I will pity you and ignore what else you may have to say about this subject.[/QUOTE] Yeah generally I think driving is about transportation. :V It's cool that you're into driving, don't get me wrong, but a huge percentage of people would rather be doing something else with their time spent commuting.

One thing I'll give you lads, it's time to calm down a little. This shit gets me way more heated than it should. Now, to avoid quoting multiple people. You seem to be under the impression that "enjoying driving on public roads" means barreling down that shit like a sick cunt. That is the literal opposite of what I'm arguing. There's plenty of fun to be had even if you stick to the speed limit and the designated lanes. Not all public roads are 50kph max straights in the middle of the city with traffic everywhere and not everyone follows the same pace or line, even staying within legality. I'm perfectly content doing my daily 6am commute around the twisties at the exact speed the limits allow for, on the car I picked, maintained, cared for, and lowkey modified to my liking, and that's the sort of control that I'd rather fight and die to keep, even if it may not seem much to those of you who fail, or refuse, to understand such simple joys and think I, or any other enthusiast, won't see any difference should this little tidbit of freedom into an otherwise tied-down and overly controlled existence disappear one day.

[video=youtube;eWgrvNHjKkY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWgrvNHjKkY[/video] Was instantly reminded of this. Anyways, while I support automation, I do not think the entirety of driving should be completely automated with no override. Stuff like helping stay in one lane, or automatically turning on blinkers when coming to an intersection with GPS on, etc. I can support, but completely trusting your life to a machine seems a bit much. At the very least there should be a way to override the computer and take over if something unexpected happens.