Self driving trucks

[Skink]

In today's NYT is an interesting article about what could be the first commercial use of driverless technology.

What happens when this takes hold and millions of jobs are lost?

One person commented that the decline in talk radio would be enough to make it work.

[RKP5637]

1. In the future jobs will be scarce and obsolete for the most part, but most politicians

don't want to address the future, they are so busy trying to hold up the pilings of a decaying economic infrastructure.

[whatthehey]

2. Few thoughts

It will be slow to transition. It's not like flawless self-drivers are in the showrooms. The trucking labor pool is aging already and the entry level has huge churn/turnover. It's also still quite unionized where seniority rules. Practical upshot is it will simply reduce the demand for thousands of trainees the vast majority of whom crap out to be replaced by more trainees. Veterans will likely last until they retire/die for the most part. A long term driver can always find a job if his firm is an early automater. The training school companies will suffer, and they'll be one less avenue for new folks with limited educational achievement, but it's not going to be a massive immediate shock to current workers.

[RKP5637]

3. Well said IMO!!! n/t

[A HERETIC I AM]

4. The trucking industry "is still quite unionized "?!?

Where the hell do you get that from ?

I'm a Teamster driver and I am telling you that the vast majority of drivers in this country are NOT members of a union or otherwise represented by a labor agreement.

[whatthehey]

5. From the hell data

Overall private sector workers are only 6.7% union. Government workers push up the overall average. Transportation and Warehousing sector workers are nigh three times as likely to be unionized than the average private sector worker at 18.9%. I'm sure that warrants a "quite", which is typically (outside Victorian novels) used as a word akin to "somewhat" or "fairly". Nobody being told it's quite cool would expect antarctic winter.

The words "quite" and "majority" are not synonyms so I'm not sure why the obvious statement that the majority are not unionized is supposed to contradict my statement.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm

[A HERETIC I AM]

8. From your link;

transportation and warehousing (18.9 percent)

Right? That's your figure, correct?

From the section titled "Industry and occupation of Union Members"

Well, here's why that number is seriously skewed. It includes dockworkers, office staff and other, non truck driving occupations within the trucking Industry. It also includes many thousands of United Parcel "Package Car" drivers who may drive what looks like a truck to you, but aren't included in the numbers of Over The Road tractor trailer operators. UPS doesn't even call them trucks. Their name for them is in quotes above.

So it isn't anywhere near 19% of tractor trailer drivers that are unionized. Closer to 10 to 12%. (There's a shitload of UPS Package Car drivers that skew the numbers)

And thanks for the condescending English lesson. I don't think I could have muddled through the rest of the fortnight had I not had it made clear to me the variety which one can use the word "quite"

[whatthehey]

14. Yes - near triple the average private sector unionization

[Nye Bevan]

6. I think there was a lot of concern about blacksmiths' jobs when the automobile arrived.

This is not a new concern.

[Logical]

12. And horse buggy manufacturing! Nt

[bigbrother05]

7. Unlikely to take the "driver" out of the truck anytime soon

The technology to pilot the vehicle down the highway without human input is likely sooner, not later. The tech will be less reliable on local streets due to the variables of human behavior. The current drivers will become the supervisor over the robotics, requiring less hands on control.

Trains running on limited paths (tracks) and set schedules still have on board operators. It's unlikely truckers will be eliminated in the career span of today's entry level drivers.

[CK_John]

9. Spain has been doing for over a year. They have a driver in the 1st

truck and are allowed driveless 6/7 trucks in a convoy.

Volvo testing

[cherokeeprogressive]

11. Didn't hear the audio but I noticed a couple things I thought were important...

Perfectly painted lines and an absolute lack of potholes/cracks in the road.

I have a brand new Toyota Highlander with "lane departure warning" and if the lines aren't painted perfectly I could drift right off the road and not notice it until the tires left the pavement.

[One_Life_To_Give]

10. However they are One major accident from a 20 yr delay

Much like when we first fielded a Nuclear powered submarine. One serious nuclear accident would have doomed the long term prospects of a nuclear fleet. Likewise one of these rigs have an error that kills multiple people or has a number of smaller accidents with injuries will set the idea back decades. So the question becomes is there a modern day Rickover overseeing this implementation or somebody obsessed with the next quarters financial report.

[Logical]

13. I don't agree, 30,000 people a year die in automobile accidents, I am sure....

Driverless vehicles will kill somebody, but the lifes they save will greatly outnumber the ones they take. Remember airlines have had thousands of Fatalities but the Industry survived .

[imanamerican63]

15. As interesting as it maybe?

These trucks will still have to have a driver to maneuver thru out urban areas and back them into unloading docks, fuel, and many other tasks. I have been a truck driver for almost 35 years and I have heard for 25 years that drivers won't need to be used in future trucks. Yes maybe, in time, trucks maybe not need a driver, but not for a long time to come.

[Taitertots]

16. Good. People doing jobs that could easily be replaced is a waste of human life/capital

If productivity increases reduced economic activity, then the last 100 years would be a tale of non-stop economic decreases.

The real question for the future is:
Do we waste our lives in a futile attempt to have prosperity through inefficiency?