Saturday, July 23, 2016

THE BLESSINGS OF AUTOMATION


The latest word from the self-driving car world is favorable.  Despite the recent fatal crash involving a Tesla Model S sedan during “autopilot” mode tests, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, Anthony Foxx, just proclaimed such vehicles possess great potential to improve safety and advised the federal government will commence “premarket approval steps” for this technology.  Inasmuch as the Transportation Department is extensively involved with Google, BMW, General Motors and other companies in developing driverless autos, is it possible these devices might become part of America’s future?


Let me bring you up to date on the development and progress of what’s known as the autonomous car.  Thus far four states enacted laws permitting operation and testing of such vehicles on public roads.  Nevada’s went into effect in 2012, with the first license issued to a Toyota Prius.  Florida became second, California third, and finally Michigan in December 2013.  In May 2014, Google presented their concept for a fully functioning prototype, with neither steering wheels nor pedals, and plans to offer these cars to the public in 2020.  A spokesmen announced in June 2015 their testing teams drove over one million miles, essentially driverless, with no serious hazardous events.


Despite the rapid development of the technology, there’s opposition from many quarters on the very concept—and understandably so.  Fundamental to the objections is the question as to who controls the code.  The variant goes like this: Your self-driving car realizes it can divert itself in one of two ways.  It may kill you while saving a busload of children, or save you as it kills all the kids.  Which should it be programmed to do?  More importantly, who will decide?  Will it be the likely occupant of the car, or a committee established by the U.S. Department of Transportation?  And whatever the problems, they’ll be worsened by designing the vehicle’s system to treat passengers as hostile interlopers.


There are other things that can go wrong.  All computers have flaws.  Even software used for years and whose source code is considered foolproof may have subtle bugs.  Even when functioning perfectly, the program may malfunction in a variety of ways, such as identifying harmless objects such as trash and light debris, causing the vehicle to veer unnecessarily.  But perhaps most vexing of all will be incessant government demands to be given the right to control vehicles.  It’s not unlikely police departments will petition for authority to send signals to your car to force it to pull over.  You may then expect the same from drug enforcement agencies.  And finally, how long will it be before thieves and other outlaws successfully impersonate law enforcement agencies?


I admit to having mixed emotions over the concept of a moving vehicle with no driver behind the wheel.  The potential benefits are obvious.  Persons whose physical limitations prevent them from driving will suddenly enjoy mobility.  A lone commuter in a car need no longer devote full attention to traffic or staring at the centerline of the highway.  And if safety of the system can be insured, the elimination of injury and death caused by careless drivers will become a thing of the past.


It seems axiomatic that every single benefit technology bestows upon us will come with some sort of offsetting disadvantage.  I recall an earlier time when, as a Los Angeles teenager, I made my livelihood setting pins in a bowling alley.  It’s true the introduction of the Brunswick automatic pin-setting machines eased problems for my boss, the bowling alley owner. There was, of course, a downside; I lost my job.  And this brings back even more memories . . . and questions to go with them. How would the self-driving car have affected me many years ago when I drove a Yellow Cab?  It takes no imagination to figure the answer.


While we’re on the subject of the professional driver, there are a few facts you might take into consideration.  There are 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S., with average annual salaries of $40,000.  Add yet another 5.2 million employed in support of the industry, those who don’t drive trucks.  When you then consider the many businesses built around the trucking industry, such as motels and restaurants, you realize how dependent our economy is on the persons who operate trucks.  What may we expect if self-driving trucks put these millions of persons out of work?  This is particularly crucial, for truck driving is one of the few remaining trades to provide middle class incomes to persons with no more than a high school education.  Never forget middle income manufacturing jobs of the once gainfully employed masses of Americans no longer exist.  Those not automated away by the computer or robotic machines were mostly shipped overseas to countries whose employees subsist on three dollars per day salaries.  Yet, despite the economic misery facing us as a nation, it appears we’re about to do it to ourselves again.  My question: Who shall we blame?


I’ll conclude this critique on the economy with a testimonial.  Several days ago I purchased a pair of Skechers leather sandals from a local discount shoe outlet, at the particularly attractive price of $39.95.  As you’d expect, Made in China.  If we all resolve to purchase only American made sandals, at a cost probably topping $150, our domestic industry will prosper.  I’ll repeat my concluding question—now rhetorical—from the prior paragraph, relative to our coming economic misery: Who shall we blame?  Perhaps we should all look in the mirror. To quote Walt Kelly’s character, Pogo Possum, nearly a half-century ago: “We have met the enemy and he is us.”


                                       

If you enjoy this weekly Straight Talk by Al Jacobs, you’re invited to check out my monthly Financial Newsletter, as well as my new book, The Road to Prosperity


                                       

 

No comments:

Post a Comment