Lion of the Blogosphere

Autonomous cars are coming!!!!

“Uber is accelerating its plan to replace its 1 million human drivers with robots as quickly as possible,” Uber Chief Executive Travis Kalanick said in a blog post Thursday. He also announced a partnership with Volvo to work on driverless car development and the acquisition of Otto, a driverless truck technology company (L.A. Times).

Good news for those looking for inexpensive, convenient and safe cab rides! Bad news for those employed as drivers.

The future will go one of three ways:

(1) Dystopian future where the masses are impoverished and unemployed because even though the future brings massive production with minimal human labor, humans were too shortsighted to develop a new economic system to bring those benefits to the vast majority of humans.

(2) Government pays people to play World of Warcraft.

(3) Basic income for everyone.

I can hear a libertarian saying, “Lion, you are STUPID, everyone knows that technology and the free market always creates new jobs!”

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 19, 2016 at 8:49 am

Posted in Robots

117 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Right, and Richard Nixon announced that the war on cancer would be won in a few years. That was sometime before Watergate.

    And did you know that they can make mice in a lab from two daddies, no mommy? What will we think of next?


    August 19, 2016 at 9:13 am

    • And isn’t urban driving the area where autonomous cars are the least functional?


      August 19, 2016 at 7:59 pm

      • There’s actually a new affirmative action program that gives asians priority for purchasing autonomous cars. It’s like “Cash for Clunkers” program but it’s called “Chauffeurs for Celestials” or something


        August 19, 2016 at 11:24 pm

  2. “(2) Government pays people to play World of Warcraft.

    (3) Basic income for everyone.”

    The government already gives people lots of money for nothing, and is already in great debt.


    August 19, 2016 at 9:34 am

    • i’ll believe it when i see it. A car is not an ipad. it can kill people. they will have to be 99.99999% perfect before they’ll even let them on the road w/o a human driver backup.


      August 19, 2016 at 12:45 pm

      • Which is entirely the wrong standard. Autonomous cars only need to be safer than human drivers.

        There’s a generational divide on this issue. Young people say having a phone is more important than having a car. We are headed toward driverless cars whether the old cranks like it or not.

        One way to make the robot future slightly more palatable would be to increase licensing standards. Transition the bad drivers.Regardless, industry will still be a leader because corporations would love to reduce trucking costs.


        August 19, 2016 at 2:15 pm

      • What? Have you seen who is allowed to drive now?

        Hipster slut in Queens

        August 19, 2016 at 2:29 pm

      • they will have to be 99.99999%

        Not good enough.

        They must be 100% accurate, anything less and the injury attorneys will eat Uber alive after the first fatal crash.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        August 19, 2016 at 7:04 pm

    • Problem is the govt gives exactly the WRONG people money for nothing. The worst and most R-selected are subsidized.


      August 19, 2016 at 4:39 pm

      • The problem isn’t that they give them money it’s that they give them money to have kids.


        August 19, 2016 at 8:01 pm

      • The problem is they would have kids anyway. It’s inevitable that your are going to have a segment of the population that is incorrigible.

        In England, and probably elsewhere, there’s a private organization that gives crackhead women money to have an IUD. Liberals complain that drug-addicted women cannot enter into a truly free and voluntary agreement. The group counters that if that’s the case, they’re not having children on their own volition.


        August 19, 2016 at 9:54 pm

      • I think the poor should be put on long term birth control like what you’re discussing as a condition of receiving government assistance. I don’t think you should stop giving the poor more resources based on their number of children. That wouldn’t work because you’re right they would have children anyway and if you don’t give those families more money the children will suffer.


        August 20, 2016 at 12:58 am

      • @ Magnavox

        Suffering is the only thing that might motivate those children to be better than their parents. Without it they are guaranteed to be losers. With it, they have a chance at least.


        August 20, 2016 at 1:17 pm

  3. Regarding autonomous cars, every time I read about it, I learn that there is still a guy in the driver’s seat, just in case. Same with Uber: they are being launched this month, but with ‘supervisors’ in the driver’s seat.

    It is easy to make a car stay within the lines on a highway. Hell, I could program that.

    The challenge is unusual situations. What if there is a piece of trash in the roadway? Does an autonomous car just sit there forever? What if a traffic officer or construction worker is directing traffic? What if there are cones that send you onto a lane that normally goes the other way? What if the intersection is flashing yellow or red and you need to figure out the intentions of other drivers? What if you need to violate the following distance rules in order to merge into heavy traffic? What if there is some standing water in the road? What if another driver is motioning to be let in, or what if you need to motion to be let in?

    Even if the driverless car can handle 99% of stuff that comes up, there will be some new things that stump it. If there is nobody home, then it’s game over.

    Every time I read about ‘driverless cars’ I get interested, until I get to the part where it mentions a ‘supervisor’ sitting right there where the driver goes. I presume that ‘supervisor’ is an engineer making $150K per year.

    If all these ‘self-driving’ cars need ‘supervisors’ sitting in the drivers seats, then I can think of a job ready-made for all these ‘displaced’ drivers. They can become ‘automation test engineers’ paid with venture capital money.


    August 19, 2016 at 10:18 am

    • I presume that ‘supervisor’ is an engineer making $150K per year.

      Not if he’s and H1-B immigrant “engineer.” They’ll work for $60K and take that job from an American-born Engineer.

      E. Rekshun

      August 19, 2016 at 4:48 pm

    • I think it’s pretty obvious. The cars will never be purely robotic. They’ll be drones and every four cars will have one remote operator who can take control as necessary.


      August 19, 2016 at 5:01 pm

    • BLM will insist that the supervisors be obese black females.

      tiny blades

      August 19, 2016 at 7:37 pm

  4. Autonomous cars will be an epic failure. The basic problem that the car engineers are not getting is that traffic patterns are the result of a distributed range of driving styles that vary from driver to driver and from time to time. Everyone drives differently from moment to moment.

    Autonomous cars, otoh, are forcing a single type of driving style on every driver as the same algorithm is duplicated across every vehicle. This will cause a massive increase in commute times.


    August 19, 2016 at 10:26 am

    • It would not surprise me if some companies advertise that they have a superior algorithm that will help you arrive at your destination safer and more quickly. In any case, having fewer “driving styles” would in all likelihood increase efficency. They did a test case a couple months ago with autonomous trucks driving across Europe without incident. The reduced the gap between the trucks allowed for more drafting, which saved on fuel costs (come to think of it, that might’ve been posted on this blog).

      One of the problems with transitioning is that an autonomous car will not be as safe if it’s surrounded by human drivers as if it were surrounded by other autonomous vehicles (who are far less capricious). This is a classic Catch-22.

      The only way an autonomous car future will increases commute times is if they’re too successful. An economist said they could reduce the “cost” of driving– financial, the “stress” of driving, now being able to get work done whilst going somewhere, etc. — which pushes up consumption.


      August 19, 2016 at 2:28 pm

      • Company will not be able to advertise this because of regulatory safety standards.


        August 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

      • Consider this basic problem. You’re driving on a large, 4-lane highway, say, I-94. You are in the leftmost lane and you need to get in the right lane to catch your exit. What do you do? You turn on your right turn signal, check to see if there are any cars, and make your turn. Easy, peasy, right?

        The thing about a right turn signal is that it is not a right-of-way. No driver is required to obey my turn signal and let me in. In fact, driver’s have every right to accelerate and cut me off if they see fit, which is why it is incumbent on the driver making the turn to make sure the path is clear. This is because different drivers will respond to my turn signal differently.

        How will a computer respond? The safest way to program the computer is to treat every turning vehicle in an adjoining lane as having a right-of-way, which means the vehicle passively waits until the driver in the adjoining lane moves. Remember, the vehicle will have the distance hard-coded as well, so every self-driving car will respond in the exact same way.

        It gets worse. If having to exit the highway, then every human driver will merge right at different times and at different speeds. Not so for the computer. It will have it’s lane-change-and-exit functions hard-coded, so clusters of self-driving cars will being making these changes at more or less the same time, causing bottlenecks to form.

        What about merging into bumper-to-bumper traffic on a highway? Ever see those? Nobody let’s you in unless you pull in front of a large commercial vehicle that leaves gaps simply by virtue of being too large to accelerate quickly.

        All of this standardized programming that creates uniform behavior among vehicles is going to cause endless problems, not to mention the cost of catastrophic failure like if the radio signal conks out or the machine vision cameras are blocked? No, this self-driving car nonsense is going to be big boondoggle.


        August 19, 2016 at 10:14 pm

      • The only way an autonomous car future will increases commute times is if they’re too successful. An economist said they could reduce the “cost” of driving– financial, the “stress” of driving, now being able to get work done whilst going somewhere, etc. — which pushes up consumption.

        This is the sort of thing that intrigues me about the discussion – the many potential unforeseen consequences. I surprise myself to find that I’m not entirely opposed to autonomous cars, if they really work well – I’d love to see old people who can’t drive able to remain on their country homes and not forced to live in cities.

        A lot of the writing I’ve seen from “visionary”-type people about how autonomous cars are going to alter society seems premised on wrong-headed ideas about human nature. I firmly predict that self-driving cars will make commutes longer than ever (in terms of distance, not because of worse traffic flow), because people won’t mind a bit of a longer commute if they can get some work done on the way and have a better ability to live where they want. Rural density will increase.

        Samson J.

        August 20, 2016 at 10:21 am

      • @map

        No one has the right to accelerate in order deny someone a lane change.


        August 20, 2016 at 1:13 pm

      • Re: I-94 and other scenarios…

        These imagine that we are stuck in the pussified autonomous car, while others zoom around. The more autonomous cars on the road, the more cooperative the vehicles.

        As for bottlenecks, human nature is pretty interesting. When we’re backed up in traffic, we are fighting for every inch of road, but the whole purpose of autonomous driving is that it would limit those bottlenecks in the first place.

        After I had knee surgery, I was dependent on my father to take me to the doctor for a post-op check-up. He asked how to get there, and using my phone, I gave directions. He said, “that’s stupid,” and took a route that’s normally faster — except there was an accident. Oblivious, he commented, “Where did all this traffic come from??”

        He’s another one of those old codgers who doesn’t trust computers. Dad, you mean, like, the computers that tell you when it’s OK to pass through an intersection? Yeah, maybe we should replace those lights with a woman who wears gloves and blows a whistle.

        Anyway, another problem with modern traffic is that people are even MORE easily distracted by their phones, and therefore less responsive. Stop & go is soul-crushing. People shouldn’t tolerate it.


        August 20, 2016 at 7:47 pm

      • Vince,

        The problem gets worse with more autonomous cars on the road. Remember, the problem is standardization. How many car lengths to follow; when to pass; what the speed will be; when to change lanes when exiting; when to allow other cars to pass…all of those factors are going to be programmed to uniform standards. That’s the problem. That’s why traffic will worsen and commute time will get longer as more autonomous cars hit the roads.

        The ones now simply cause accidents.


        August 21, 2016 at 1:38 am

    • Quite the opposite. When the light turns green, all the autocars will accelerate at the same speed at the same time, hugely reducing gridlock.


      August 19, 2016 at 2:54 pm

      • If autonomous cars could communicate with each other, if everything was managed centrally, then no need for the cars to be at a complete stop or for the traffic light to even exist. Vehicles could slow their traveling speed so pedestrians and traffic finishing crossing by the time they make it to the intersection.


        August 19, 2016 at 6:56 pm

      • “If autonomous cars could communicate with each other, if everything was managed centrally, then no need for the cars to be at a complete stop or for the traffic light to even exist.”

        They have these. They are called trains. Commute times have not changed with trains because the traffic problem has been shifted to loading and unloading passengers. You, too, could do work on a train if you wanted to, but do you?


        August 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

  5. whats the difference between 2 and 3?

    james n.s.w

    August 19, 2016 at 10:33 am

  6. I’d be stoked if #2 were guitar/piano/melodica instead. My personal heaven would be noodling slide guitar of Son House everyday from 9 AM to 11:30 PM.


    August 19, 2016 at 10:43 am

  7. For the die-hard, ideological libertarian, there’s essentially no evidence which could convince him that libertarianism isn’t the better way, in whatever episode is being discussed. There will always become talking point that can’t really be evaluated. It’s not a serious position, because it lacks the conceptual flexibility to fathom that it might ever be wrong.

    I saw this recently in Stefan Molyneux’s interview of Scott Adams. It’s worth watching both for Adam’s insights and as a demonstration of how tiresome libertarian cult is, and what a burden it imposes on the acolyte to always be spinning events to fit in the libertarian box.

    Economic Sophisms

    August 19, 2016 at 11:18 am

    • The interview gives the impression that Molyneux is not used to talking to someone as smart or smarter than he is. Both of them said some very silly things, though.


      August 19, 2016 at 2:43 pm

      • I saw one interview with Noam Chomsky where Molyneux did not come off well at all.


        August 19, 2016 at 7:59 pm

    • Its not called the computer programmer ideology for nothing!

      “All people are like me and follow rules and if everyone worked hard and studied computer programming and didn’t hit anyone and didn’t make fun of me and understood the rules then it would be great because we would not need a government because everyone would work hard and not be a bully and play fair and if they didn’t then other people wouldn’t play with them and swap baseball cards with them. The end. And that is how the world works. la la la la.”

      The Philosopher

      August 19, 2016 at 3:32 pm

      • yes.

        libertarianism is profound developmental disorder also known as autism.

        in an ideal world libertarians would be locked up in mental institutions.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 20, 2016 at 7:46 pm

      • it is also a religion also known as satanism.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 20, 2016 at 7:48 pm

      • There’s a girl with aspergers who comments on this blog. She’s a hardcore marxist as well as catholic.


        August 21, 2016 at 11:37 am

    • Thomas Fleming on libertarians:

      “Libertarians, hearing such a description, run gagging to the sink. There are no nations, no communities, no families. Only self-seeking individuals exist, and the “common good” is a term invented by fascist oppressors. This is the only answer they have for any social question, from drugs to pornography to fast food. This shopworn and counterintuitive platitude from the Enlightenment is so self-evidently stupid as to require no refutation, though David Hume supplied one in his great essay on “The Original Contract.” Nonetheless, people such as Ayn Rand—and the nerds and geeks who cling to her in the naive belief that her rotten novels will turn them into supermen—could never understand the fact that human beings are social animals. This is a part of human nature which no libertarian theory can eradicate, and my advice to them is to find another planet where they can all live in solitary caves, where they can snort coke and watch porn videos to their hearts content. Their ideas are irrelevant, not just to present circumstances, but to the human condition. ”


      August 19, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    • libertarianism could only work on an infinitely large planet where automation was never an issue.

      it may have worked on the frontier/wild west…but that’s it.

      and it’s not as if this dystopian future is in the future.

      the future is now. it’s already the case as can be seen from the BLS’s classification of employment in the US that 75% of the labor force could not show up tomorrow and it would be hard to tell.

      an it’s the same in all developed countries, just not quite as bad.

      Trumpocalypse Now

      August 20, 2016 at 9:30 pm

  8. First of all, as far as Autonomous cars go, Yeah! I want them available and common so that when I get too old to drive, I can still get around.

    Secondly as far as the future goes, number one seems most likely, but number three is about as dystopian as number one, since it turns the entire country into one giant ghetto with all of the pathologies of welfare dependence the new normal.

    If we’re going with basic income, then we will have some people who can’t take care of themselves, and I think they should at least trade away their vote and reproductive options for a lifetime of idleness on the taxpayer’s dime.

    Mike Street Station

    August 19, 2016 at 11:29 am

    • The problem with taking away the vote from the poor is that it ignores the extent to which everyone else is also mooching off the government in their own way.

      I agree about not having kids though and would add that there needs to be some kind of residential restriction to prevent people from using government money on rent and forcing decent people to pay more on housing costs just to keep avoiding them.


      August 19, 2016 at 8:09 pm

      • Well it’s really not so much about taking the vote away from the poor than a recognition that if you have absolutely no value to the job market, and are not trainable to ever BE of value, than you are a permanent ward of the state with nothing to contribute. For a person to accept Basic Income they are admitting they are useless. That’s different from “the poor” in general. Plenty of poor have jobs and some economic use. They’re just poor.

        Mike Street Station

        August 20, 2016 at 6:28 am

      • and yet the US military has the “job” of making the world safe for democracy?

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 21, 2016 at 12:06 am

  9. We don’t need self-driving vehicles. People are perfectly good drivers.



    August 19, 2016 at 11:31 am

  10. You think the Aimish won’t be able to make a living working?


    August 19, 2016 at 11:37 am

  11. on paying people to play WoW — most jobs are fake. E.g., all “Human Resources” jobs, all academic “humanities” “teaching” jobs, all “design consultant” jobs, all gym “trainer” jobs, all talk-therapy-related jobs … So this would just be a matter of Living Honestly.


    August 19, 2016 at 11:38 am

    • WoW is a stand-in for makework jobs which can be supervised by computer, thus can easily be scaled to the entire population. Turning millions of unemployed into gym trainers would be logistically extremely difficult.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 19, 2016 at 1:30 pm

      • I’m saying that being payed to play WoW would be a more honest way to live than being payed to do most of the fake “work” that’s being done now, such as gym-training and HR stuff. So I like your idea of paying people to explicitly play. But now I’m thinking that the playing should be social in real space, because we’re social animals that need to interact in real space. So maybe board games? Smarter people can be paid to play more complicated board games.


        August 19, 2016 at 2:24 pm

      • Its amazing how in a world of millions of 130IQ+ plus people we cannot figure out a productive endeavour for people to do that the government can pay them for….Its almost like we have lost the ability to brainstorm a wishlist of all the problems we could solve by paying make belief money to people. Unbelievable.

        McKinsey would be horrified.

        Oh wait, tuning in, off the top of my head:

        1. Mass tree planting schemes
        2. Multiple multinational trawler expeditions to clean the plastic junk vortex in the Pacific ocean.
        3. Social workers for the alienated elderly.
        4. Border security agents
        5. High net worth tax auditors and investigators
        6. Infrastructure construction workers
        7. Recycling plant helpers
        8. Public space cleaners
        9 Neighborhood watchmen
        10 Survey recipients for Big Data and Academics
        11 Mental Health social workers and nurses
        12 People to beat up journalists
        13 People to raid underage sex parties of politicians
        14 Investigative bloggers/journalists
        15 Community childcare workers
        16 Charity workers
        17 Urban renewal workers

        Gosh, it just hit me Batman, if we paid millions of people to do community work, gave them a purpose and a stake in the collective good, do you think we could have the 1950s again?

        – No don’t be stupid Robin, cuckolds can’t make money from solving community problems unless there’s a war! Don’t you understand we live in the free market paradise of Kinshasa, where we print money and hand it to butler creators. Butlers and fine art auctioneers are more important to print money for. la la la la la dee dee dee

        The Philosopher

        August 19, 2016 at 7:42 pm

      • I can see the advantage of the “supervised by computer” part, though — if it were board games a lot of people would just end up showing up at the game hall and not actually playing. This would be okay if they were just quietly spacing out. But lots of them would be loud and annoying, and the nerds would get bullied. So you’d need tough game-hall monitors. It would end up being like a high school cafeteria, I guess. People would probably be peeing on the walls and blowing each other in the corners. Okay, this is a bad idea.


        August 19, 2016 at 8:06 pm

      • “ts amazing how in a world of millions of 130IQ+ plus people we cannot figure out a productive endeavour for people to do that the government can pay them for….Its almost like we have lost the ability to brainstorm a wishlist of all the problems we could solve by paying make belief money to people. Unbelievable.

        McKinsey would be horrified.

        Oh wait, tuning in, off the top of my head…”

        So your great idea is government make work programs and government employment for the newly unemployable? That’s not really the new economic model I was expecting from the 130 IQ set.

        Mike Street Station

        August 20, 2016 at 6:51 am

      • Gosh, it just hit me Batman, if we paid millions of people to do community work, gave them a purpose and a stake in the collective good, do you think we could have the 1950s again?

        Indeed we could, comrade. Indeed we could.


        August 20, 2016 at 11:22 am

      • The Philosopher on August 19, 2016 at 7:42 :

        Excellent comment. I wouldn’t remove a single item from your list.

        Mike Street Station — The thing is, if you’re going to give people money anyway (which we are doing as it is) you might as well get something useful out of it. Letting people starve is not viable, politically.


        August 20, 2016 at 4:17 pm

      • @the Philosopher

        For jobs 3, 4, 5, 9, 10-15, those are jobs where either a lot of people can’t do them or there are a lot of people you don’t want to be doing them, because they’d create negative value.

        The others will be sufficient only for a period. Eventually, roads get built and then what?

        “Turning millions of unemployed into gym trainers would be logistically extremely difficult.”

        That’s the beauty of it, you create jobs for the gym trainers, and you create jobs for those to oversee the gym trainers. Paying people to play world of warcraft is too efficient. In real life, it’ll take the form of a maze of bureaucracy. For instance, there’s my university’s student employment programs. I’ve heard from multiple people that the students don’t do much and that the programs just exist to give jobs to the administrators who supposedly oversee the students.


        August 20, 2016 at 4:34 pm

      • us military and military contractors = the mother of all govt make work programs. and yet 85% of officers are republicans. contradiction? and the military academies are over-run with “christians”. it’s a joke.

        two reasons why the us military is so huge, (the US spends more on its military than all other countries combined):

        1. corruption of congress and the president

        2. ww ii worked when everything else failed. the military is a permanent stimulus program.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 20, 2016 at 8:08 pm

      • the world agrees…an it’s not even close.

        the greatest threat to world peace is the US.

        Trumpocalypse Now

        August 20, 2016 at 8:09 pm

      • @ Dan “Mike Street Station — The thing is, if you’re going to give people money anyway (which we are doing as it is) you might as well get something useful out of it. Letting people starve is not viable, politically.”

        Well my point was that the great new idea that could ONLY come from people with a 130 plus IQ is simply the New Deal; the CCC, CWA, and the PWA. So yes, we could simply just give everyone a government make work job, but that’s an idea that doesn’t take a 130 IQ; a 70 IQ could come up with that too. And of course that doesn’t solve the problem of where that money is coming from in the first place.

        Mike Street Station

        August 21, 2016 at 7:37 am

    • My employer recently got smart and de-funded a $90K/yr fake “Green Sustainability” job and replaced it with two $45K code monkey positions.

      E. Rekshun

      August 19, 2016 at 4:53 pm

    • Never forget comrade, if we didn’t pay Nazi scientists and engineers to design rockets and do fundamental astrophysics research we would not have satellite football coverage or if we didn’t have DARPA, no debate involving eyewateringly funny soviet analogies. Our best minds could instead be thrown at the intractable problems of making food more addictive (hint: more addictive substances), financial engineering and the sine qua non of great plastic surgery.

      Thankfully, that never happened and all the fundamental advances in science and engineering in the 20th century have happened in the private sec….la la la dee dee dee.

      Government employment tackling obvious social issues is preferable to underemployment, unemployment and Soma addictions (in this ludicrous fantasy world where automation’s surplus generation would actually be shared with the masses without any violence or revolution hahaha).

      The Philosopher

      August 20, 2016 at 5:03 pm

      • TP — Don’t deflect. What you advocated was communism. So it’s not surprising you would bash libertarians. Not because libertarians are wrong about economics. But because you want to use the power of the state to confiscate wealth and impose your agenda. No thanks. I don’t care for your agenda.


        August 21, 2016 at 7:19 am

      • You really went to town on mr straw-man there. Hes is certainly a hurtin.

        The Philosopher

        August 22, 2016 at 2:53 pm

  12. Lion, the Libertarians have been working for a robot-based leisure economy and core income for all for decades since 1969–please catch up with current events. They call it SMILE. See


    August 19, 2016 at 11:55 am

  13. A huge number of people work as truckers and commercial drivers. This could be like the steel mills again.


    August 19, 2016 at 11:58 am

    • A huge number of Muslims work as cab drivers. What’s gonna happen to these Muslims when they’ve been “dishonored” by having no job?


      August 19, 2016 at 2:56 pm

      • Muslims cab drivers are already getting displaced by ride-sharing apps.


        August 19, 2016 at 7:00 pm

  14. How about paying people to watch TV? You can easily determine how many hours a day they are watching by using monitoring cameras built in the sets, with facial recognition and eye movement scanners.


    August 19, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    • I foolishly let my Progressive auto insurance trick me into plugging their “Snapshot” device to track my driving habits for six months. I’m supposed to get a discount off my rate. I think I made a big mistake.

      E. Rekshun

      August 19, 2016 at 4:58 pm

      • How much is your insurance now?


        August 21, 2016 at 10:32 am

  15. The future will be bikes. The appearance of poor, which is actually chic, and sexy legs.

    Hipster slut in Queens

    August 19, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    • pics?

      Otis the Sweaty

      August 19, 2016 at 10:29 pm

  16. “Autonomous cars are coming!!!!”

    Sounds like a terrible problem.

    Uber is one of the is one of the few fields that the post college millennial generation is fit for. Barrista and Chipolte you have to be interviewed and show up for. Uber you just have your parents co-sign a car loan and you can turn on or off whenever you want.

    If millennials lose this outlet it will free up time for that many more politics and feminists blogs and social media comments. You want to talk Unsustainable? The political conversation cant handle anymore nitwits being amplified.

    Thomas More was smart enough to limit pure academics in Utopia to a small set and those had to get approval. Everyone else had to keep busy at least 6 hours a day.

    Lion of the Turambar

    August 19, 2016 at 3:57 pm

  17. No way, unless all roads get replaced by Shabbat elevators.

    My Two Cents

    August 19, 2016 at 4:06 pm

  18. …partnership with Volvo to work on driverless car development and the acquisition of Otto, a driverless truck technology company…”technology and the free market always creates new jobs!”

    Gonna need more H-1B tech visas for Indian immigrants to write the software for these driverless cars and trucks. So, yes, I guess tech does create new jobs.

    E. Rekshun

    August 19, 2016 at 4:43 pm

  19. This makes no business sense. The Uber/Lyft model is that capital investment (the car) is borne by the contract driver, not the company. This makes sense to the driver only because he already owns the car, and its expenses, and the fares are income he would not otherwise have. Owning/leasing driverless cars only if the costs are less than the drivers fees, which seems very unlikely for thebfirst generation of such vehicles, because the development costs will be part of their price, and the initial production runs will be small.


    August 19, 2016 at 4:46 pm

    • This has always been the end-game for Uber because a professionally maintained fleet of cars has a huge cost advantage. For example, it’s been a few months since I’ve checked my tire pressure. I know my car is a little low, but it’s a pain, and I don’t want to bother. That will not be the case for the cab-service, which will no longer have to pay people to drive. It also loses out on all of the money people are willing to tip.


      August 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm

    • Bob Bob Bob… you don’t understand Science. Systems analysis does not need to be done. It’s like that robot dog they tried to sell to the military that was rejected because it was too noisy or the burger-making machine where no thought was put into how to clean it.

      Capital cost of a self-driving car? Why, people will simply buy the cars and the cars will run around autonomously making money…24/7.


      August 19, 2016 at 10:40 pm

  20. The robotic hyper-automated “player piano” vision of the future is not going to happen. Those ideas are predicated on cheap energy and resources, which is over. The future is going to look more like the past in many ways. There aren’t going to be millions of robot cars because there simply isn’t the energy to justify something so wasteful as cars, regardless of whether they have computer drivers or not. People will be walking and riding bicycles.


    August 19, 2016 at 5:44 pm

    • I doubt it. Electric cars already exist. Nuclear power already exists. France exists.

      Sure, it’ll take more workers(and thus more money) to mine and refine uranium and build reactors than it is to drop a pipe in the ground and pump out oil, but, hey, you’ll have a lot of newly employed workers.


      August 20, 2016 at 4:38 pm

  21. Autonomous cars would never work. People would kill them, literally. If I saw a driverless car driving around my town, and there was no passenger, I wouldn’t hesitate in taking it out with a rifle, slashing its tires or smashing its windshield. Note the resentment against drones flying around neighborhoods. People take pot shots at them all the time. They will never go commercial, that is unless the drones are equipped with firepower to take out their attackers, which could come to pass in Silicon Valley-can-do-no-wrong America.

    I read somewhere that in Japan, where engineers like to tinker with all sorts of things, engineers had developed some robotic mannequins that had a simulacrum of human personality. Testers working with the robots, not the engineers, killed them all. There is something ingrained in our species to eliminate proximate anthropomorphic competition. Why do you think we exterminated Neanderthal man?


    August 19, 2016 at 6:00 pm

    • Do we destroy computers, do we destroy the robots that manufacture most of our crap?

      You sound like a maniac, thankfully most people aren’t like you so we can live in a civil world.


      August 19, 2016 at 9:42 pm

    • Smash it? People will just steal it. Set up a wireless frequency jammer to block all signals and drive them into a semi truck. Even easier than stealing a regular car. The cars come to you with a fake account and a stolen credit card.


      August 19, 2016 at 10:46 pm

    • I agree that people would be inclined to kill the robotic cars. Aren’t we Lion-commenters 5% Neanderthal, though? My speculation about this is that stray Neanderthal men were adopted into African (non-Neanderthal) groups as magical wildmen who’d give your group extra wildman-magic-healthpoints. So maybe we’re programmed to “eliminate proximate anthropomorphic competition” from SMOOTHER anthropomorphs, such as as humanoid robots, but not from rougher ones, such as Neanderthals. We’d loathe Elves, but want to keep the Orcs alive in reservations. This may explain the Suicide of Europe! — the Nordics are see THEMSELVES as smooth humanoid simulations, and the invading hordes as the rough real thing.


      August 20, 2016 at 5:28 am

      • Our ancestors probably occasionally mated with a few passably pretty or sexually attractive Neanderthal females while killing the men and boys. The issue of such liaisons were allowed to survive and thrive because they probably resembled homo sapiens enough. Neanderthals may have been as intelligent as or even more intelligent than homo sapiens. If such issue kept their noses clean, demonstrated homo sapien solidarity, didn’t cause trouble, they lived and mated with homo sapien females removing their issue further from their Neanderthal origins, and on an on.


        August 20, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    • Aren’t we Lion-commenters 5% Neanderthal, though?

      That ‘Neanderthal’ DNA signature may not be Neanderthal in origin. One major problem with that theory is Asians have the same amount of the signature when they should have much less of it because Neanderthals never populated Asia as widely as they did Europe.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      August 20, 2016 at 10:46 am

      • UJ, you mean it might be from the common ancestor of Neanderthals and Denisovans? But it’s distinct from the Denisovan “signature” isn’t it? (I have trouble following the discussion of this stuff at Westhunter.) Don’t Chinamen have Denisovan stuff in them that we don’t have, as well as the Neanderthal stuff? Or no, is that wrong? Anyway, whatever it is, it’s the stuff that purely Sub-Saharan Africans don’t have, but that we (including Jimi Hendrix and Jayman) have, which makes us space out and look at trees rather than constantly jabbering about Who Said What To Whom and Who Was Wearing What. And Lion-commenters have even more of it, since even their jabbering is just a form of spacing out. And it must have gotten into the Africans who migrated out of Africa into the NearEast and onwards via the magical-wildman-healthpoints mechanism that I suggest, because obviously this is the simplest and moreover the only possible explanation. (American Blacks see Whites as magical wildmen!)


        August 20, 2016 at 12:44 pm

      • “Neanderthals never populated Asia as widely as they did Europe.”

        We haven’t found any east of the middle east. It doesn’t prove they weren’t there. There’s a lot less money in Asia for archaeological digs. The Denisovan found in Siberia had 17% Neanderthal DNA.


        August 20, 2016 at 4:44 pm

      • UJ, you mean it might be from the common ancestor of Neanderthals and Denisovans?

        It could be from another hominid or originate with the common ancestor of Caucasians and Asians from 20,000 years ago. In the latter case Africans wouldn’t have the signature because it evolved in non-African humans about 30,000 years after they left Africa.

        Btw, I will have a link to my blog by next Wednesday and open it for comment registration next Thursday.

        We haven’t found any east of the middle east. It doesn’t prove they weren’t there. There’s a lot less money in Asia for archaeological digs.

        It’s unlikely they were. Archeologists find dinosaur fossils in Asia all the time. If they haven’t been found yet, then they either never lived there or were there in only small numbers compared to Europe.

        Even if Neanderthals did live there, the odds are against Asians and Europeans having the same proportion of the signature. Statistically the odds greatly favor one group would have somewhat more or less than the other.

        The Denisovan found in Siberia had 17% Neanderthal DNA.

        Then 83% of the signature should cluster with Denisovans.

        Neanderthal origin is possible, but still not proven definitively yet.,

        The Undiscovered Jew

        August 21, 2016 at 1:51 pm

    • Wow. So much craziness in such a small space. Where to begin?

      “Testers working with the robots, not the engineers, killed them all.”

      Never heard about this. Citation needed. All the tests of people interacting with automatons that I’ve seen showed that people, young and old, loved them. No uncanny valley needed. Robot pets are already popular for people who can afford them.

      However, when I was I kid I did murder all my G.I. Joes and so did all my elementary school friends. Oh. Wait. That never happened because we weren’t insane like you.

      “If I saw a driverless car driving around my town, and there was no passenger, I wouldn’t hesitate in taking it out with a rifle, slashing its tires or smashing its windshield.”

      Of course you would, because you’re a violent, unstable lunatic (by your own admission). How would you “take it out with a rifle”? What are you aiming at? The car’s neck? It’s brain? It’s heart? What if you miss or the round goes through the vehicle and it kills a little kid? “It’s okay, officer, I was just trying to kill that driverless car.”

      Feel free to choose your own headline:

      “Rifle-wielding madman shot dead by police while he attacks car”

      “Violent man involuntarily committed to mental ward for attacking vehicle, claimed he “had to kill all the cars”

      “Mental patient responsible for recent spate of car attacks arrested”

      When was the last time you attacked a vending machine?

      You really are crazy. If you don’t believe me, just tell the next 10 people you encounter that you plan on “killing” all the driverless cars and see how they react.

      Also, humans did not exterminate Neanderthals, humans bred with them. Do try to keep up.

      Robert the Wise

      August 20, 2016 at 3:08 pm

  22. I can hear a libertarian saying, “Lion, you are STUPID, everyone knows that technology and the free market always creates new jobs!”

    Did blacks not recover from the invention of the mechanical cotton picker? Okay. Bad example. But most people found employment after mechanization reduced the number of people working in agriculture from 90% only 200 years ago to less than 2% today. That’s not to say there won’t come a point where the bar is raised too high for the least capable to find employment. That scenario is definitely plausible. After all, there will come a day that anything a human can do could be done better for less by a machine. One need not be a Luddite to think so. Just as one need not be a libertarian to think new jobs are created as old ones become obsolete. Do you really have so little imagination that you can’t conceive of both possibilities?


    August 19, 2016 at 8:46 pm

    • The reason I think automation will cause mass unemployment, 20 to at most 50 years from now, is that, if you look at the “new” jobs people found in the last 200 years, few of them were truly new. Some, like the computer programmer, were. But most were either the same jobs or were close replacements for older jobs.(as the bus driver replaced the horse carriage driver) We were alright because consumption increased. New construction technology allowed the same building to be built with fewer people, but we wanted more buildings and bigger houses, so construction workers were alright. This has worked so far, but how much longer can it work? Will houses get bigger forever?

      One may think humanity’s natural, and somewhat irrational, consumerism and desire for status will solve this problem. But a desire for status need not involve consuming a greater quantity of products. It can just as easily be “quality” perceived or otherwise. The modern real estate market is based not on competing for six bedroom houses, but houses in the “best” neighborhood.(location, location, location!) And companies like this, the ideal luxury product for a company to sell would be some positional product which takes minimal labor to produce. Companies don’t like paying workers, in addition to the cost of their wages, there is the cost of complying with all the labor regulations and the possibility of workman’s comp or sexual harassment lawsuits.


      August 20, 2016 at 5:01 pm

  23. Way (2) reminds me of your post about PC gaming from earlier this summer. You mentioned in a comment that your hardware was struggling to keep up with the minimum specifications for modern games. Have you taken steps to correct your situation, for example by purchasing a new RX 470 or 480?

    On the subject of AMD, did you see how close it came to $8.00 today? I hope you and your readers bought many thousands of shares when it was at $1.70.


    August 19, 2016 at 9:07 pm

  24. We just need to chill back on immigration a bit and we’ll have enough work for people.

    We have plenty of work that can improve human lives, we would have even more work if money wasn’t constantly reallocated in less productive ventures..


    August 19, 2016 at 9:46 pm

  25. I propose the following bet for the anti Trumpers here:

    If Trump is ahead of Crooked Hillary in the polls by the time of the first debate, you admit that you were wrong about Trump and that you are subhuman scum and you then vote for Trump and never post here again.

    If Trump is not ahead of Crooked Hillary in the polls you will not be give 100% of the blame if Trump does indeed end up losing.


    Otis the Sweaty

    August 20, 2016 at 12:22 am

    • Can scum be SUPERhuman? I wonder whether there are science fiction novels, or at least stories, featuring superhuman scum. Or old movies: The Scum from Planet X. As for your practical proposal, it seems kinder and gentler to require merely that said anti-Trumpers, in case of said poll-lead, always preface comments with “[I was wrong about Trump]”.


      August 20, 2016 at 5:38 am

      • Well, I would wager Mark Zuckerburg considers himself superhuman.

        2 Minute Alpha

        August 20, 2016 at 10:42 am

  26. > autonomous trucks driving across Europe without incident


    Thank you for bringing up this incident to allow me to illustrate how stupid people are, especially Millenials. At the time this news item came out, I read a whole comment page where people were going off on all sorts of tangents discussing the pros and cons of self-driving trucks, as if it were somehow possible. Only one commenter out of 60 mentioned the key fact, that THE TRUCKS WERE NOT ACTUALLY SELF DRIVING. And even then the comment was pretty much ignored.

    “The trucks used in Wednesday’s test however are still semi-automated and despite computers allowing them to drive by themselves, human drivers were still required on board.”

    “Six convoys of semi-automated “smart” trucks arrived in Rotterdam’s harbour on Wednesday after an experiment its organisers say will revolutionise future road transport on Europe’s busy highways.”

    Smart trucks… so basically a step up from cruise control. Wowee

    This is the next Theranos/ “fracking will make USA the next Saudi Arabia”/ insert whatever bullshit. If truly self-driving cars are available on a commercial scale in the next couple of decades, I’ll eat my hat.


    August 20, 2016 at 4:37 am

    • This is like Bush’s debate response to Kerry mocking our grand coalition, “Uh, he forgot Poland.”

      No, this situation is more like the bet between Julian Simon and Paul Ehrlich, or the now quaint notion that a computer would never defeat a grandmaster at chess.


      August 20, 2016 at 7:31 pm

  27. Since population cannot keep increasing indefinitely, the problem is going to have to be dealt with eventually. I think as idle and dumb people become more of a problem then the elite will turn against them and reduce their numbers. In other words, I think the problem of technology displacing the need for people is going to be solved by reducing the number of people.


    August 20, 2016 at 6:30 am

    • The elite is mainly interested in reducing the numbers of (well, eliminating them actually) dumb & idle AND irrelevantly intelligent might-as-well-be-idle Whites (like me; they want me dead!), because the existence of sub-elite Whites doesn’t fit the Racist Elite Vision of a Pure White Overlord Caste governing/caring-for the colored masses of the Global System.


      August 20, 2016 at 12:51 pm

      • If that is true then the elite’s plan will fail because of the Asians.


        August 21, 2016 at 8:36 am

    • Comment of the day.

      The world would be better off with fewer people. Period.

      Notice, the Chinese who are intelligent and decisive have not only figured this out, stated it directly, and promoted it as a policy, they also enforce it.

      It always comes down to enforcement.

      If Europe and the USA just enforced their own laws, we would not be in this situation.

      not too late

      August 20, 2016 at 1:29 pm

  28. Bravo, Lion!

    We needed a new economic system yesterday.

    Also, I would favor a government program that pays males not to get arrested. So, a guy would get something like $10 a month for the first month, $20 for the second, $30 for the third, etc., from age 16-22. Likewise women could get the same program for not getting pregnant.

    not too late

    August 20, 2016 at 1:06 pm

    • I’m not saying paying people to not get arrested is a terrible idea, but one thing that jumped out at me instantly is that you give EVERY SINGLE PERSON a reason to resist arrest. A traffic stop for speeding becomes deadly often because the driver is on probation, or has weed or a gun in the car; sometimes all three. Those guys run or engage in shoot outs with cops because they don’t want to go in jail. Add a financial incentive to it and it makes sense to leave the cop dead with no witnesses so you can continue to draw your subsidy.

      Mike Street Station

      August 21, 2016 at 7:49 am

  29. On the internet, there are three anti-Trump groups.
    1. TruCon anti Trumpers. These people are evil, stupid and delusional and lack any even remotely redeeming characteristics. They are all destined for complete extermination.
    2. DailyKos type liberal retards
    3. NeoGaf type, “woke”, liberal retards

    All groups are despicable, all are vermin who will be destroyed. But their reaction to the last week of Trump news is interesting:

    -all 3 groups are ignoring the clearly converging Trump/Clinton poll numbers. I guess we’ll have to wait two more weeks before we finally start getting the “it’s just Rasmussen” spiel, since Trump won’t be ahead in Ras until then. Trump is already ahead in the LA Times but nobody cares about that poll, not even me, so we’ll have to give them some more time on this one.

    -“woke” liberals are still 100% confident of victory. They are just mocking Trump because they think that the election is already over.

    -TruCons and DKos types, however, are showing the first signs of panic. Notice how Lion of the Turmbar and Magnavox are even more annoying than usual, and have been joined by a slew of new #NeverTrump trolls. Members of both subhuman, destined for extermination, groups keep repeating some variation of “The new Trump won’t last”, as if they are attempting to convince themselves. What’s interesting is the hidden admission within this statement that if the the “new Trump” does last, Hillary is doomed.

    -Of the two groups, the TruCons are more just angry whereas the DKos types are already veering towards outright hysteria. This could be because Leftist retards tend to just be more mentally unbalanced than TruCon vermin.

    -The Leftist pundits have made a noticeable change, although only super observant people like me have noticed it. Ever since the Dem convention, the pundits had been encouraging the GOP to dump Trump, speculating that Trump might just drop out himself and claiming that the Trump camp is in utter disarray. That has all stopped now. While they are still confident of victory, they are no longer in euphoria and are resigned to a hard and bitter fight for the next 2.5 months.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 20, 2016 at 2:37 pm

  30. Idiot, middle aged, Jew-woman declares that whites should help Hillary get elected by getting raped/robbed/murdered:

    The stupidity of true believing liberals never ceases to amaze.

    Otis the Sweaty

    August 20, 2016 at 2:40 pm

  31. The Z Man’s comments on this subject are interesting:


    August 20, 2016 at 3:20 pm

  32. afaik marx is the only economist who knew that economics is techne. in fact marxism is better termed “technism”. but of course conservatives are too dumb to even understand marx, so they’ve never read him and think he was just a SJW on steroids.

    how many economists have any background in engineering? any?

    “economics was invented to make astrologers look good.”

    universal basic income and helicopter money were advocated by milton friedman.

    and this is the way it will go in the developed world…helicopter money and basic income will be “paid for” not with taxes but by “printing” money…and there will still be no inflation.

    Trumpocalypse Now

    August 20, 2016 at 5:48 pm

  33. lion has forgotten that in this dystopian future mass poverty in the developed world will be explained as resulting from a change in gene frequencies for the populations in just a few decades, and thus no worries. when 99% of people live hand to mouth it will be their fault…all their fault.

    btw, why does steve forbes never blink?

    Trumpocalypse Now

    August 20, 2016 at 7:51 pm

  34. religions of the world in order of ridiculousness:

    1. scientology

    2. libertarianism/randianism

    3. islam

    Trumpocalypse Now

    August 20, 2016 at 7:53 pm

    • Christianity is far more ridiculous than Islam.


      August 21, 2016 at 9:54 am

  35. Tyranny of autonomy will lead to sodomy!


    August 21, 2016 at 2:52 am

  36. What do you mean, one of three ways. Those three are perfectly compatible. The future will be a dystopian place where humanity never invented a good mass economic system so the government pays basic income to its impoverished population on condition that said population plays world of warcraft (~ 40 hours a week, minimum)


    August 23, 2016 at 3:29 am

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: