| ▲ | shalmanese 6 days ago | |
The analogy is very apt because the first cars: * are many times the size of the occupants, greatly constricting throughput. * are many times heavier than humans, requiring vastly more energy to move. * travel at speeds and weights that are danger to humans, thus requiring strictly segregated spaces. * are only used less than 5% of the day, requiring places to store them when unused. * require extremely wide turning radiuses when traveling at speed (there’s a viral photo showing the entire historical city of Florence fit inside a single US cloverleaf interchange) Not only have none of these flaws been fixed, many of them have gotten worse with advancing technology because they’re baked into the nature of cars. Anyone at the invention of automobiles with sufficient foresight could have seen the intersecting incentives that cars would wreak, same as how many of the future impacts of LLMs are foreseeable today, independent of technical progress. | ||
| ▲ | oblio 5 days ago | parent [-] | |
> Anyone at the invention of automobiles with sufficient foresight could have seen the intersecting incentives that cars would wreak, same as how many of the future impacts of LLMs are foreseeable today, independent of technical progress. Yeah, but where's the money to be made in not selling people stuff? https://imgur.com/few-shareholders-had-good-value-least-jpsP... | ||