Statement of Direction / Trajectory

In the car going back home a couple weeks ago, there was a radio program about driverless cars, it was fun. There are lots of fun ethical questions around driverless cars and because it is such an emergent technology, no one can quite predict how they will impact society. The almost free reign that Tech giants are given these days, because of their power and influence, means that we will likely see a lot of driverless cars before understanding their implications. I also thought I could study the idea in relation to classic car collectors, petrol heads and the likes, people I have access to through a few friends who have restored MGs and similar. They hate the idea of Formula E becoming driverless, one that could impact a sport they all follow closely. I thought it weird that anyone would want to engage with a sport that doesn't even have humans competing, the skill would come from the engineers, though you can already argue that the design of Formula 1 cars is more important than the driver's skill. If in fact the fans cheer the cars as individual objects, backed by engineers, rather than cheering the engineers, then the car is honoured like a human driver. I think is a fun way of aproaching the question of the authority given to a driverless car. One of the big general questions being dicussed between driverless tech firms and government is whether driverless cars should stop for everthing. Tech doesn't want them to stop for everything, because that would mean that generally they will go slower than cars being driven by humans (imagine you recognise a driverless car, you can step out in front of it knowing it will slow down for you and no-one in it is gonna climb out and swear at you.(It is to do with predictablility and trust, how much should driverless cars trust people and how much unpredictablity should they account for. It goes from them assuming that pedestrians will only cross at crossings, to them assuming all pedestrians are suicidal and about to jump infront of them.)). But that idea means that driverless cars are given the same authority on the road as drivers in cars. Cars and humans, equals. There have also been some absurd and laughable concepts for different driverless cars, some looking like toasters, some being beds to sleep in while traveling. Some grand concepts are unashamablely world changing. Some think a good idea is a taxi system, no-one owning their own car and just ordering driverless cars to any spot, a concept that could be arguably socialist or feudal depending on ownership and money, also bringing into light the status of cars as traditional symbols of individuality and liberation. Not sure what I'd make. Maybe I'd do some things to speculate the impact, maybe focus on lifestyle. Maybe look into our trust/distrust of technology. Yeah, that sounds good - investigation into our trust/distrust(mainly trust) in technology and the authority given to tech giants to intergrate technology with unknown implications on society, selling it as the next best life improving thing.