In a car park? But they will be way more densely packed than cars in car parks, because no humans need access. The cabins get placed there and retrieved from there by autonomous engines.
Here are more use cases.
A specialized cabin for your kid to drive to/from school alone, or for your toddler to drive to/from kindergarten alone. Robotaxis will definitely be used for this because it is super valuable to parents. But a small specialized cabin would be more economical than a standard (typical car size) cabin fitted with child seats.
Visiting dialysis station.
Specialized delivery cabins for particular types of cargo: refrigerated, extra suspension, stuff for transporting animals. We do this with trucks, but trucks are big because they’re optimized to need less human drivers per mass of cargo, and once that restriction is gone the disadvantages of big trucks should incentivize a move to smaller cargo vehicles.
I think these three are major enough that even if we stay with single vehicles, these use cases would merit development of specialized robotaxis to cover them, sooner or later. But a tug and cabin system gets there sooner.
I think I made a mistake using the word “accommodation”. (English isn’t my first language.) What I meant is basically “where the people and cargo are stored safely and comfortably”. That can be something big to live in, but it could also be a single seat cabin for a commute.
The point is you can have several different types for different purposes, because you don’t need to buy an expensive motor and computer with each of them.
Agree about the battery swaps, but swapping a tug would be easier.
Cargo containers are definitely like this, but they’re big because it is more economical to spread the cost of the driver over a large amount of cargo. Cargo wagons/modules could be in a wide range of sizes, including small/fast ones that are more like courier service than like bulk transport.
You don’t need a parking spot—the system can still be used as a robotaxi, it just has additional uses.
You don’t need to be where your wagon is, you can send it places. Because of that, you could even rent out your wagon (say you offer a rental sound system or a mobile massage parlor).
If you’re a first world citizen and able to spend $35k+ on a car, sure. Most of the cars that need replacing are way cheaper, and their replacement needs to be way cheaper too.
There is a Secular Solstice in Berlin, Germany, but it happens in a small apartment so it has to be invitation only and is already full AFAIK.
Frankfurt, Germany might again be doing one but I do not know particulars.
Leipzig, Germany is not having one this year due to the place where the last couple of Solstices happened being currently infested with toddlers.
The text is beautifully condensed. And the handwritten style does help it look casual/inviting.
But the whole thing loaded significantly slower than I read. How many megabytes is this post? I haven’t waited this long for a website to load for years.
What really helps is mortality and our inbred need to leave a legacy. It is better to pick a project with low probability of success than none at all. That can help you stick with something you only estimate to have a low chance of success, at least long enough to have sunk costs kick in. Does for me anyway.
This mechanism may only work for one man projects, or work in tight knit groups like bands of musicians. Your contribution to a big project doesn’t feel like a legacy to the same degree.
That sounds a *lot* like http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/04/01/the-hour-i-first-believed/ .
It does not sound a lot like any existing variant of Panpsychism. Since the word isn’t doing any work here, I suggest you do without it.
No, the degree of outrage also depends on closeness to the victim. In this case Jews will feel closer to Israelis (the victims of Palestinians), and Muslims will feel closer to Palestinians (the victims of Israelis) so that’s what they’re outraged about. Closeness to the perpetrator is a factor I think, but I don’t expect it is stronger than closeness to the victim.
Yes! Thank you!
I’ve had similar ideas for a long time. I’ve translated three books and find that I think of many acts of communication as translations. In particular, I find it useful to think of misunderstandings as mistranslations.
To think of thinking/speaking styles as languages just plain makes sense, and I feel that when people “are on the same wavelength” what is really happening is that they’re (somewhat unusually) actually speaking the same language.
I don’t use this concept for processes inside a single mind, though. Might be worth thinking about, but a term that denotes work with explicit communications does not seem like a good fit for processes that are almost entirely implicit.
#6 is really “we want legal euthanasia” right? Might as well say it like it is.
I think legal prostitution belongs on the list as well.
And maybe an end to tax advantages for churches? Because that’s direct state funding for irrationality.
This fake frameworks thing looks quite clearly like Chaos Magic, and the reference to the Book of the Law quote “wine and strange drugs” is a dog whistle to that effect.
Some chaos magicians like to use drug experiences as ready-made containers for what Val calls the Mythic Mode. Some drugs can both increase the ability to suspend disbelief while inside the experience and make it easier to distance oneself from it when outside of it. A good description of techniques for this, with all non-scientific woo-woo strictly optional, is Julian Vayne’s “Getting Higher—The Manual of Psychedelic Ceremony”.
There’s more where that came from. I like to recommend Philip Farber’s “Meta-Magick—The Book of Atem” with a bunch of visualization-focused techniques very similar to the ones Kaj Sotola has described and demonstrated to great effect. Julian Vayne’s and Nikki Wyrd’s “The Book of Baphomet” is perhaps the best example of an artificial myth created with great artistic and poetic skill and then inhabited with significant personal results.
I posted the idea of installing very bright lights on LW five years ago and Eliezer commented there so I give myself credit for at least making that spontaneous idea more likely. And it happens to be the case I’ve been thinking about the failings of light boxes for SAD in the meantime.
What happened is that a few people experimented with light therapy, got succcess with 2500lux for two hours, decided two hours per day was infeasible outside the lab, found that they could get the same result dividing the time but multiplying the light intensity and then… just… stopped. They did studies with 10000 lux boxes and that’s a relatively expensive study so you better cooperate with a producer of such boxes. So you get some type of kickback and suddenly nobody’s interested in studying whether stronger, cheaper lights are even better. Light boxes became a medical device and magically became just as expensive as medical insurers would tolerate. That they don’t work for everyone was expected, because no depression treatment works for everyone (maybe except electroconvulsive therapy, and Ketamine but that was later). And LEDs only became cheap enough recently (five years ago they still weren’t clearly the cheapest option), so going much beyond 10000 lux presented enough of a technical challenge to make further trials pretty expensive, until recently.
Right now, you could probably do a study with SAD sufferers who have tried light boxes and found them insufficient. Give them a setup that produces like 40000 lux and fits in a normal ceiling fixture so they can have it running while they do things, rather than have to make time to sit in front of it. For a double blind control design, maybe give one group twice the brightness of the other? Have your participants log every day how much time they spent in the room with the lamp running, and how much time they spent outside. Don’t give them money but let them keep the lamp if they continue mailing their fillled out questionnaires. Should be doable at a hundred dollars per participant, and without ever physically meeting them. You still need six figures to run that study at a large enough size, and no light box maker is going to fund you.