I think this comment made me finally understand the AI hate circlejerk on lemmy. If you have no clue how LLMs work and you have no idea where “AI” is coming from, it just looks like another crappy product that was thrown on the market half-ready. I guess you can only appreciate the absolutely incredible development of LLMs (and AI in general) that happened during the last ~5 years if you can actually see it in the first place.

It sounds bad for the city cores though.

I meant that cars would move out of the city, not people. I live in Germany where the statistics is that 57% of people own a car. In my city the percentage is 48% so that’s already lower than average and in the city centre districts it’s only around 30-35% of people owning a car. I would say that is a pretty normal distribution for German cities. That difference between inside and outside the city would just get bigger and I see no problem with that. The reason is already that public transport in the city is decent, people use bikes a lot, and parking is difficult and expensive (my city just increased parking prices in public resident parking zones to 360€/year). We need better public transport and better bike infrastructure and car numbers should go down in total, but I would still appreciate a shift of cars into rural areas. At least there is enough space to park them. In the city they’re just taking up way, way too much valuable space. And they’re loud and they smell (both getting better with electric ones, to be fair).

Very interesting thoughts, thank you. I would guess that the percentage of people owning their car would decline rather than increase, especially in the cities, but I had never considered the factor that the travel time itself will be less inconvenient and people might be okay with longer commute times. I guess it’s possible that overall, these two factors more or less cancel out, and then the number of cars would stay the same but they would move more to the suburbs and rural areas, and out of the cities. That still doesn’t sound so bad.

Any way, I don’t think self-driving cars should replace public transport, but complement it. Politics and society need to steer development in that direction. While I personally look forward to self-driving cars, currently my energy goes into fighting for better bike infrastructure und better and cheaper public transport. If we’re lucky, we’ll find a way for all these modes of transportation to form an intertwined and accessible network that is efficient and sustainable. We should keep trying to make it happen.

Honestly, I want both. I live in Germany and my city has pretty decent public transit. But there are still way too many cars in the city, most streets have parking spaces on both sides, leaving only a small sidewalk. I want people to not be dependent on owning cars anymore. I want personal cars in the city to be replaced by self-driving cabs that you can just order when you need them. Imagine how cool that would be. There would be centralized (underground??) self-driving car storages and if you need a car, you just order one via an app and they just come to wherever you are autonomously and drive you wherever you want to go. You could basically get rid of all public parking spaces, it would be awesome.

No idea why you’re getting downvoted. People here don’t seem to understand even the simplest concepts of consciousness.

What is “actual intelligence” then?

You know, and I think it’s actually the opposite. Anyone pretending their brain is doing more than pattern recognition and AI can therefore not be “intelligence” is a fucking idiot.

I get your point. People walking in bike lanes are annoying but they’re honestly the least of my problems while cycling in the city. And 90% of the time the crappy infrastructure is at fault. I’ve unintentionally walked in bike lanes before as well. It happens, people can be inattentive and make mistakes - I’d much rather have them make mistakes as pedestrians than as drivers.

This. Same with the discussion about consciousness. People always claim that AI is not real intelligence, but no one can ever define what real/human intelligence is. It’s like people believe in something like a human soul without admitting it.

AI isn’t math formulas though. AI is a complex dynamic system reacting to external input. There is no fundamental difference here to a human brain in that regard imo. It’s just that the processing isn’t happening in biological tissue but in silicon. Is it way less complex than a human? Sure. Is there a fundamental qualitative difference? I don’t think so. What’s the qualitative difference in your opinion?

You’re getting downvoted but I absolutely agree. I don’t understand why “AI algorithms are just math, therefore they can’t have consciousness” seems to be the predominant view even among people interested in the topic. I haven’t heard a single convincing argument why “math” is fundamentally different from human brains. Sure, current AI is way less complex and doesn’t have a continuous stream of perceptual input. But that’s something a “proper” humanoid robot would need to have, and processing power will increase as well.

You talk like you know what the requirements for consciousness are. How do you know? As far as I know that’s an unsolved philosophical and scientific problem. We don’t even know what consciousness really is in the first place. It could just be an illusion.