I hear Johnny say "I don't like that"

Or Greenbow, Alabama.

"California it is, Governor. "

lovecrafts AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Lol I was just thinking the same thing.....great minds think alike!

👮 I wonder if Uber will deactivate Johnny Cab if he gets a one-star rating from Arnold? Termination notice reasons given: Driver endangered the life of the passenger. Also, he did not respond to spoken commands in a timely manner.

+Robert Nyhus You need to be brave. If I understand your apprehension, you don't want a computerized car making life and death decisions, because humans are better? Can I point out that the Google self driving cars are already the safest drivers on the road, not even counting the fact that human driven cars kill more people everyday than handguns do. I think the day is not far away, when it will be illegal to drive your own car, because that would be far too dangerous. Lets consider the facts. Humans can only see forwards and only glance for a second into a small rear view mirror. A robot car uses 360 degree radar that never blinks, does not get blinded by oncoming traffic or the sun and also operates in total darkness. Also, humans have much slower reaction times compared to robotic cars, and those times get worse with age and fatigue. Robotic cars will never get drunk, miss an exit, forget to fuel up, stop for axe-murderer hitch-hikers, fall asleep at the wheel or get distracted by a babe jogging down the street in yoga pants. And yet, I agree with you that we good drivers used to being in charge of a vehicle will have trouble getting into the back of a car without a steering wheel, and being taken into traffic, without us in direct control. But I do disagree with you that this tech degrades humans, in fact - once we get used to it, it should relieve humanity from the drudgery of transportation, giving us more precious time to expand our creativity. The real problem I see with this technology involves the displacement of hundreds of millions of taxi , bus and truck drivers. And if you think auto driving autos are creepy, wait until the airlines remove the pilots from the cockpit!

+GirlDevils i understand your point, but on the other hand....who would be responsible in the event of a collision? I work in the automotive collision industry, and i have taken these types of cars apart and repaired and replaced thousands of sensors, computer modules, lenses and blind spot modules literally because the cannot "see" correctly and are making poor judgment calls inside of the cars infrastructure of computerized control features. Sensors become uncalibrated simply because a small rock hits the mirror and moves the sensor thousands of an inch and the sensor cannot understand why it no longer can make sense of its current condition. The car then makes adjustments to its "sight" and counteracts to its problem. The issue with this is that all the cars functions are relitive to this adjustment, i.e. the cars steering angle sensor, blind spot, collision mitigating braking system, and the airbag timing control module. These all lead to the car making fatal errors when a collision may take place, the airbag can deploy incorrectly or the car make an erratic move just before a collision and actually make a collision worse for the occupants inside the vehicle, and or outside. The google car has only safely driven hundreds of thousands of miles in dry, maybe wet conditions. I live in Minnesota where 6-8 months of the year we have snowy, wet, icy, slick, slushy conditions that a computer doesnt yet have the testing hours to correctly make calculations for these scenarios. So once a collision happens when the car is in control, makes a bad judgement call because a sensor is possibly misaligned....should the owner "driving" or i like to call "participating" in the cars actions, be held liable for the collision? or should the software and hardware manufacturer be held responsible for miscalculation? There are to many issues with this tech that still cannot be answered, and for driving being illeagal because its to dangerous, ha id love to see americans not revolt against the government telling them they cant drive their $100,000 audi sports car because its "dangerous". Using my cellphone to write this can possibly give me cancer.... should my cellphone be made illeagal because its too dangerous?

Robert Nyhus I'm not sure there will be any collisions at all between two autonomous cars, unless there is a serious malfunction in one or both. If there is a collision with a human driver, I would inspect the robotic car for a defect, but we must admit the higher likelihood that he fault for the collision is likely to be human error. I know, I see HAL 9000 claiming to be blameless too, in 2001 a Space Odyssey. But humans can get sick, get drunk, get distracted, and cover up their "malfunction" - the autonomous car can't, so in most cases, it will be clear who is at fault. Like you point out, there are similar systems out there already that require proper maintenance and precision alignment, but we are comparing apples to oranges. Autonomous vehicles of tomorrow are totally different. The systems you have been working on do have their faults, mechanical systems typically wear down as a car gets older, like everything else - we can't even make wiper blades that don't wear down at some point. But the new technology is far more advanced than anything you have seen yet, the artificial intelligence is not just programmed, it learns too - its not a list of 'if - then' statements like most computer programs dating back to the 70's. I am willing to bet that a 10 year old autonomous car. properly maintained, can still be safer than an experienced driver with great reflexes of any age. Since autonomous vehicles with maps have an accuracy down to one millimeter, frankly we are totally outclassed, even on snow covered roads. www.wired.com/2016/01/the-clever-way-fords-self-driving-cars-navigate-in-snow/ Thanks for giving me better perspective on the weather issues in your town, I tend to forget my years driving in New York snowstorms and on ice, now that I am driving a convertible in Miami - which has great weather except for the occasional hurricanes. The rain is our greatest hazardous condition here - and sometimes it can be a real bear, other than those motorists that don't use turn signals and carry guns! I hope they don't make cars illegal to drive, on the other hand - if it saves lives and I get an extra 30 or 40 minutes of sleep in the back seat - I may not complain too much. Cellphones and cancer is a stretch, Motorola says the old hand held 2-way radios were putting out 4 watts right next to your ear, and mobile phones are a fraction of a watt. Still, you can keep it in your pocket and use an Bluetooth earpiece as cheap insurance against brain cancer.

+GirlDevils It has begun.....2 seperate deaths now from autonomous vehicles driving without human control. I thouht there wouldnt be any collisions with antonomous cars because they are "better drivers"? like i said, nothing can replace human interaction with a vehicle, as long as the human driver is attentive while driving. Check the link below and see for yourself. m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_577c2b55e4b0416464110cbc?

Robert Nyhus "I thouht there wouldnt be any collisions with antonomous cars because they are "better drivers"? " >> And there still haven't been any, except a fender bender with a bus and a GOOGLE car that both merged at once, same as a human driver would. Tesla cars are not autonomous. >> What I wrote was: "I'm not sure there will be any collisions at all *between two autonomous cars*, unless there is a serious malfunction in one or both." I don't know if you are a good driver, but you don't seem to be a good reader. >> I also wrote " Autonomous vehicles of tomorrow are totally different." The Tesla is not a fully autonomous automobile. See for yourself.: www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-tesla-didnt-really-crash-itself/2016/07/04/88756584-3fc3-11e6-84e8-1580c7db5275_story.html ".2 seperate deaths now from autonomous vehicles driving without human control. ..like i said, nothing can replace human interaction with a vehicle, as long as the human driver is attentive while driving. " >> I suppose you want us to overlook the report from The National Safety Council that estimates 38,300 people were killed and 4.4 million injured on U.S. roads in 2015? >> There are two non autonomous Tesla car crashes, but you are also wrong about two deaths. Both people survived the second crash when the car flipped over. Please be more careful with your accusations. Autonomous cars are far safer than human drivers who kill more people then firearms do. crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Screen-Shot-2015-01-31-at-Saturday-January-31-7.38-PM-1.png

I don't think they were trying to warn us...but prepare us for it.

This is the same level of idiocy from people that think star trek helped invent the cell phone

@Robert Nyhus You are like that guy in American Beauty filming the plastic bag. I don't get why people like you always try to find deeper meaning in things.

The fare is 18 credits please.

Don't forget the wiggle rip technique

+OVI-Wan Kenobi I'm not sure whether he was the original vocalist or not. I thought he might've been a replacement for someone, but I was looking over their Wikipedia page again and it isn't very clear: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gin_Blossoms. As for the audience, I was right behind a VIP sitting area, and there was more of the audience standing to the sides or a bit behind, and even more in stands the venue had a bit back, so there was a larger audience than just who were visible in the camera. It was still pretty small, though, and I'm not entirely sure why.