If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   Here's how autonomous vehicles will destroy your city and force everyone you love to serve as slaves in the new robot revolution. Or live in utopia. Could go either way   ( forbes.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, autonomous vehicles, Urban area, Real property, Automobile, Parking, Carpool, real estate, local governments  
•       •       •

1192 clicks; posted to Geek » on 22 Oct 2017 at 12:05 AM (38 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



58 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2017-10-21 09:07:20 PM  
No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs
 
2017-10-21 10:04:34 PM  

poorjon: No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs


How much do you think 3D printing will get scaled up?

I mean, there's no reason we couldn't 3D print bridges, or cargo ships once the technology is advanced more.
 
2017-10-21 10:52:52 PM  
Article assumes people will still own automobiles. That's the fatal flaw in their thesis.
 
2017-10-21 11:35:34 PM  

SurfaceTension: Article assumes people will still own automobiles. That's the fatal flaw in their thesis.


Your comment assumes that Ubser style autonomous vehicle services could be the only option -- good luck with that in the Trumpian society we live in now.

Plus the elite will always have their private and more posh means of travel. I think you mean to say that most people will use Uber Style automated cars since the insurance for a fully autonomous robot that can kill lots of people if it farks up will be cost prohibitive

And even if Apple's, Google's and Uber's Car Services were a "thing" and got serious market traction, we would only have them in 3-4 markets for the first 1-2 years for their pilot programs. We could see the majority of households in the major metro markets go 80% self-driving on their own within a decade if the car services were proven safe, reliable and the cost for daily commuting was substantially less expensive than leasing, insuring and maintaining a standard car

But make no mistake, America as a culture will say a big collective "HELLS NO" to any law even hinting at attempting to outlawing private car ownership. That market will always exist in the US in one from or another

Where we might see that sort of system is in Europe where the cost of gas and all the BS around owning and operating a car are so punitive that people would flock to these systems in droves because to them it would mean having a freedom they have never really had, and envy us here in America for having, which is affordable and convenient travel to places well outside their metro areas

Asian Nations would of course look at these systems as well, but would likely do their own local homespun knockoffs
 
2017-10-22 12:15:26 AM  
Good luck learning how to drive in snow, Hal.
 
2017-10-22 12:16:26 AM  
I'm fine with it so long as my prostate gets milked.
 
2017-10-22 12:34:03 AM  
Jumpin' Jesus on a pogo-stick, how much is Forbes paying for greenlights?
 
kab
2017-10-22 12:35:13 AM  
The concept of having our cars drive us while we sit in luxury has an almost universal appeal.

We have that.  They're called buses and trains.   I bought my car so I could enjoy the act of driving (and do).    Sorry, not sorry.
 
2017-10-22 12:37:37 AM  

kab: The concept of having our cars drive us while we sit in luxury has an almost universal appeal.

We have that.  They're called buses and trains.   I bought my car so I could enjoy the act of driving (and do).    Sorry, not sorry.


Your idea of luxury is obviously a lot different than mine.
 
2017-10-22 12:39:58 AM  
"Hey Googlesh... pick ma up at Henry'shhh farken tavern... m' so wasted you sumbiatch".

"OK. Dispatching an autonomous car to pick you up and drive you safely home. Remember to drink some water and take two Alka-Seltzer tablets before you pass out for the evening."


"OK, Siri, I'm finished at the barber shop. Please pick me up and drive me to my wedding at St. Joseph's Anglican Church at 365 West Elm Street"

"The average rainfall in Botswana varies between 250mm and 650mm a year".
 
2017-10-22 12:42:16 AM  

kab: The concept of having our cars drive us while we sit in luxury has an almost universal appeal.

We have that.  They're called buses and trains.   I bought my car so I could enjoy the act of driving (and do).    Sorry, not sorry.


Buses and trains do not come right up to most people's front doors, or drop them off at their place of work, and if so, certainly do not do so in a fast, direct route.  A car gets me to work in 15 minutes. Taking the bus would take over an hour.  There is no train option.  Even with a relatively short commute, I would love to be able to take that time to read the news, chat with friends, or even eat breakfast in the morning.
 
kab
2017-10-22 12:46:21 AM  

Twigz221: kab: The concept of having our cars drive us while we sit in luxury has an almost universal appeal.

We have that.  They're called buses and trains.   I bought my car so I could enjoy the act of driving (and do).    Sorry, not sorry.

Buses and trains do not come right up to most people's front doors, or drop them off at their place of work, and if so, certainly do not do so in a fast, direct route.  A car gets me to work in 15 minutes. Taking the bus would take over an hour.  There is no train option.  Even with a relatively short commute, I would love to be able to take that time to read the news, chat with friends, or even eat breakfast in the morning.


Call an uber then. ;)
 
2017-10-22 12:55:11 AM  
You're not going to live in luxury.  Automobiles will be priced out of the grasp of the majority of people, and you'll be stuck paying some wealthy job creator for the privilege of using an automated car.
 
2017-10-22 01:04:41 AM  

arrogantbastich: Good luck learning how to drive in snow, Hal.


Because they can't have 24/7 autonomous snowplows?
 
2017-10-22 01:25:20 AM  
The objections raised by article are pretty trivial, as are the solutions

Freeways won't be clogged, for two reasons. AVs will travel at speeds, close together (both distance apart and side-to-side), so the carrying capacity of freeways will be orders of magnitude greater. But also, access can be rationed - you will pay a fee to use that stretch of road (part of rental of the commuter AV) and the system will constantly vary that fee to maximise the efficiency of traffic density.

And article frets about the hypothetical possibility that AVs will 'circle' streets waiting for pickups. Again, there will be an algorithm controlling the whole system, predicting demand  and feeding cars into an area as required.
 
2017-10-22 01:34:19 AM  

Shazam999: I'm fine with it so long as my prostate gets milked.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-10-22 01:34:48 AM  

rcain: arrogantbastich: Good luck learning how to drive in snow, Hal.

Because they can't have 24/7 autonomous snowplows?


Whatever you say. Mr. San Francisco.
 
2017-10-22 01:40:25 AM  
I'm buying a new car on Monday and hopefully that will be the last car I have to drive myself.

Driving sucks.
 
2017-10-22 01:41:22 AM  
Only the rich will be ferried around in autonomous cars. You hoi polloi will get around the same way you've always gotten around: The bus.
 
2017-10-22 01:45:04 AM  

Vash's Apprentice: rcain: arrogantbastich: Good luck learning how to drive in snow, Hal.

Because they can't have 24/7 autonomous snowplows?

Whatever you say. Mr. San Francisco.


My car's traction compensation system already corrects for loss of control before a person even knows the thing has worked. I'd love a truck with the torque and motor control that an electric engine could give it. With a self driving/manual operation switch option.... and a manual transmission too please.
 
2017-10-22 01:45:42 AM  

rcain: But make no mistake, America as a culture will say a big collective "HELLS NO" to any law even hinting at attempting to outlawing private car ownership. That market will always exist in the US in one from or another


You're simply simply saying "I really like cars" and extrapolating that to think that there will be widespread resistance to the AV takeover.

There is a tiny minority that really loves cars and driving (that includes me). Most people just want a ride to their destination.

It's the freeways that will quickly change minds. You need to understand that govts and regulators love AVs bc they know they will save them a shiatload of money. So when AVs become available for the masses, freeways will be set up to favour them - two lanes for AV only, one lane for human driven cars. The human lane will do it's usual 2 hour crawl down I405, watching the packed lanes of AVs tear down the fast lanes at 70mph.

It won't take many days of that before the "you can take my car when you pry my cold dead hand off the steering wheel" types decide that maybe taking an AV to work is a good idea.
 
2017-10-22 01:46:57 AM  

MillionDollarMo: Vash's Apprentice: rcain: arrogantbastich: Good luck learning how to drive in snow, Hal.

Because they can't have 24/7 autonomous snowplows?

Whatever you say. Mr. San Francisco.

My car's traction compensation system already corrects for loss of control before a person even knows the thing has worked. I'd love a truck with the torque and motor control that an electric engine could give it. With a self driving/manual operation switch option.... and a manual transmission too please.


And I'm located in northern Canada
 
2017-10-22 02:28:20 AM  

Ishkur: Only the rich will be ferried around in autonomous cars. You hoi polloi will get around the same way you've always gotten around: The bus.


Small autonomous buses, 6-10 passengers, summoned to ferry on optimized routes on demand as you punch in destinations from your digital monitoring device.
 
2017-10-22 02:37:38 AM  
I predict economic forces and market forces, promoted by things like insurance rates, will have most people keeping or using a personal car just for weekend and occasional use,  and as a hobby, while they rely for transport the rest of the week on a mix of public trans and hired cars/ automated cars. It will br great when the elderly can give up their keys  without giving uo their freedom and mobility. My mom and MIL are both too old and frail to be driving any more, they're a potential hazard to everyone. But they have no affordable options in their areas besides personal cars, unless they hire a driver.
 
2017-10-22 02:41:34 AM  

poorjon: No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs


I will tell you this much. Pumpkin spice shall never touch my tongue. Ever.

On a more serious note, we need to figure out what to do with louts whose jobs were eliminated by automation. Not after the automation is put in place, not during the process - yesterday. We need to have answered that question yesterday.

This deadline having been passed, I'm not sure what to say. I am fully open to suggestion. I'm particularly fond of Star Trek: Next Generation style utopia.
 
2017-10-22 02:58:36 AM  

casual disregard: poorjon: No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs

I will tell you this much. Pumpkin spice shall never touch my tongue. Ever.

On a more serious note, we need to figure out what to do with louts whose jobs were eliminated by automation. Not after the automation is put in place, not during the process - yesterday. We need to have answered that question yesterday.

This deadline having been passed, I'm not sure what to say. I am fully open to suggestion. I'm particularly fond of Star Trek: Next Generation style utopia.


Ehh, I think most of the people on Star Trek were engaged in servicing the machines. It always seemed a false utopia. We only saw the philosopher kings who could be entrusted with the massive resources involved in building these warships masked as science vessels.
 
2017-10-22 03:02:13 AM  

Any Pie Left: I predict economic forces and market forces, promoted by things like insurance rates, will have most people keeping or using a personal car just for weekend and occasional use,  and as a hobby, while they rely for transport the rest of the week on a mix of public trans and hired cars/ automated cars. It will br great when the elderly can give up their keys  without giving uo their freedom and mobility. My mom and MIL are both too old and frail to be driving any more, they're a potential hazard to everyone. But they have no affordable options in their areas besides personal cars, unless they hire a driver.


The horse to auto transition is not a perfect example, but illustrative enough to serve.

At beginning of C20, cities had a huge problem - horse manure - that was solved for them by the advent of the auto. Horses began the transition to where they are today - relegated to private property:  race tracks and gymkhana settings. Can see the same thing happening to old cars - race tracks and private roads on special occasions.

The difference will be the speed of transition. Autos arrived in first few years of C20; horses still around on main streets in 1920s'

But transit from old cars to AVs will be far quicker. Firstly bc the regulators want them (for financial reasons) and secondly bc Joe Public will see that all the accidents caused by old cars, and will refuse to share the roads with them.
 
2017-10-22 03:11:32 AM  

wildcardjack: casual disregard: poorjon: No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs

I will tell you this much. Pumpkin spice shall never touch my tongue. Ever.

On a more serious note, we need to figure out what to do with louts whose jobs were eliminated by automation. Not after the automation is put in place, not during the process - yesterday. We need to have answered that question yesterday.

This deadline having been passed, I'm not sure what to say. I am fully open to suggestion. I'm particularly fond of Star Trek: Next Generation style utopia.

Ehh, I think most of the people on Star Trek were engaged in servicing the machines. It always seemed a false utopia. We only saw the philosopher kings who could be entrusted with the massive resources involved in building these warships masked as science vessels.


He means the Replicator

The optimistic view of future AI is that after all the jobs disappear, people will be able to get whatever they want by pushing feedstock into the Replicator and out will come whatever you need - food, clothes, Faberge Easter Eggs etc etc.

So your basic needs will be catered for - food and shelter - which just leaves a need to find some way of passing the time.

For some that will be soma + sex dolls, for others it will be a search for a higher purpose, such as scientific research/exploration aiming for the betterment of mankind
 
2017-10-22 03:16:26 AM  

mjjt: The objections raised by article are pretty trivial, as are the solutions

Freeways won't be clogged, for two reasons. AVs will travel at speeds, close together (both distance apart and side-to-side), so the carrying capacity of freeways will be orders of magnitude greater. But also, access can be rationed - you will pay a fee to use that stretch of road (part of rental of the commuter AV) and the system will constantly vary that fee to maximise the efficiency of traffic density.

And article frets about the hypothetical possibility that AVs will 'circle' streets waiting for pickups. Again, there will be an algorithm controlling the whole system, predicting demand  and feeding cars into an area as required.


I was going to say some of this. Forbes says:

Autonomous vehicles on their own won't change traffic congestion, particularly if they are primarily used to take a single passenger from one place to another.

But they don't consider that humans slamming on the brakes and changing lanes is a big part of what creates traffic jams. Even if the vehicles are ONLY able to maintain proper distance, speed, and lane of travel, they'll improve congestion. If the vehicles are networked ad-hoc or centrally there may be further benefits like automatic rerouting once a road or route is near saturation. The only problem with networking is that some riders personally might not benefit as much as other riders taking other routes so they'll think the improvements weren't worth not being able to weave through traffic to get to work 200% faster than the cars in front of them. Also someone will hack the system so you and 500 other commuters are taken off route to form a real-time animated ejaculating penis when visualized in the traffic monitoring system.
 
2017-10-22 03:33:43 AM  
Two words. Voice recognition. If you want to trust your roads and your life to the technology that when you call the airlines and a robot says "tell me how I can help you" and you really want to talk to a human that understands you.
 
2017-10-22 03:35:53 AM  
If ypu are going to have autonomous cars, they may as well be flying cars. The flying cars that have been proven work by the same concept. Except they fly.
 
2017-10-22 03:36:01 AM  

Kevin72: Two words. Voice recognition. If you want to trust your roads and your life to the technology that when you call the airlines and a robot says "tell me how I can help you" and you really want to talk to a human that understands you.


You probably don't know how either works so you're right to be afraid. Be very afraid.
 
2017-10-22 03:50:28 AM  

Kevin72: If ypu are going to have autonomous cars, they may as well be flying cars. The flying cars that have been proven work by the same concept. Except they fly.


Flying cars are an elitist fantasy about keeping separate from the hoi palloi or having the need to pay for better roads.
 
2017-10-22 04:08:12 AM  

SurfaceTension: Article assumes people will still own automobiles. That's the fatal flaw in their thesis.


They will because no company is going to maintain a fleet of cars that can completely cover rush hour yet of which 50% sits idle in the lot for the other 8 hours. There will be a lot less second cars, but the primary car won't disappear for a very long time yet, even with autonomous cars.
 
2017-10-22 04:41:49 AM  
UsikFark:Autonomous vehicles on their own won't change traffic congestion, particularly if they are primarily used to take a single passenger from one place to another.

But they don't consider that humans slamming on the brakes and changing lanes is a big part of what creates traffic jams. Even if the vehicles are ONLY able to maintain proper distance, speed, and lane of travel, they'll improve congestion. If the vehicles are networked ad-hoc or centrally there may be further benefits like automatic rerouting once a road or route is near saturation. The only problem with networking is that some riders personally might not benefit as much as other riders taking other routes so they'll think the improvements weren't worth not being able to weave through traffic to get to work 200% faster than the cars in front of them. Also someone will hack the system so you and 500 other commuters are taken off route to form a real-time animated ejaculating penis when visualized in the traffic monitoring system.


That's the sort of thing that the system will learn to cope with as soon as it happens once.

But given that there will be an AI controlling the whole traffic network, it will be debatable exactly how it works. Will it be a rigid schoolmaster punishing the smallest transgressions, or will it be a benevolent uncle turning a blind eye to minor shenanigans that don't have much impact? (The problem with a rigid system is that it stimulates unnecessary resentment and sabotage for the sake of protest.)

Want a Havelock Vetinari running the show
 
2017-10-22 04:53:23 AM  

wildcardjack: Kevin72: If ypu are going to have autonomous cars, they may as well be flying cars. The flying cars that have been proven work by the same concept. Except they fly.

Flying cars are an elitist fantasy about keeping separate from the hoi palloi or having the need to pay for better roads.


Used to think so, given that in the past all the attempts have been to concoct hybrids that could drive on highways and fly as well. And they were always compromises - you got a second rate car and a second rate plane for the price of a new house.

But now they are starting from a different direction - building on drone technology to make something that can carry payloads. Fairly obvious that this will end up with personal transport.

This is classic Clayton Christensen, where innovators start with something small which doesn't seem to threaten established industry, but then keeps improving both tech capability and price until they overwhelm the leaders
 
2017-10-22 05:01:23 AM  

DerAppie: SurfaceTension: Article assumes people will still own automobiles. That's the fatal flaw in their thesis.

They will because no company is going to maintain a fleet of cars that can completely cover rush hour yet of which 50% sits idle in the lot for the other 8 hours. There will be a lot less second cars, but the primary car won't disappear for a very long time yet, even with autonomous cars.


More likely to see an end to personal ownership.

Think about how long your own car spends sitting doing nothing - most people use their car less than 5% of the time. For most people, it's there for convenience. If you are confident that you can order up an AV that will arrive in 5 minutes, you'll cheerfully forego all the negatives of car ownership (maintenance, garaging, insuring, permitting, cleaning)

That's not even an opinion - toady's youths are choosing Uber type services over car ownership, even given the problems with Uber. Most people would prefer to do without the hassle of car ownership if they had a choice
 
2017-10-22 05:16:26 AM  

DerAppie: They will because no company is going to maintain a fleet of cars that can completely cover rush hour yet of which 50% sits idle in the lot for the other 8 hours. There will be a lot less second cars, but the primary car won't disappear for a very long time yet, even with autonomous cars.


Likely that it will be corporates that own fleets. The commuters will be leased out at full price, then during off-peak they will ferry kids to school, oldies/disabled/housewives/unemployed to supermarket/library etc

All they have to do is deliver a service that is cheaper than owning your own.

That will work for 95% of population.

I think that the rich will own their own transports for lux travel and as status symbols. These will be mobile lounges/offices. Double width so pay twice as much in road tax. But you travel in total comfort.

There will also be a market for people who want to live a long way from where they work. So you finish workday, jump in your mobile cabin, eat, drink and be merry while it takes you to a lake or beach a couple of hours away. You spend your evening in paradise then in morning, while you're sleeping, your cabin starts the trek back to the Big Smoke.
 
2017-10-22 05:31:26 AM  

mjjt: DerAppie: SurfaceTension: Article assumes people will still own automobiles. That's the fatal flaw in their thesis.

They will because no company is going to maintain a fleet of cars that can completely cover rush hour yet of which 50% sits idle in the lot for the other 8 hours. There will be a lot less second cars, but the primary car won't disappear for a very long time yet, even with autonomous cars.

More likely to see an end to personal ownership.

Think about how long your own car spends sitting doing nothing - most people use their car less than 5% of the time. For most people, it's there for convenience. If you are confident that you can order up an AV that will arrive in 5 minutes, you'll cheerfully forego all the negatives of car ownership (maintenance, garaging, insuring, permitting, cleaning)

That's not even an opinion - today's youths are choosing Uber type services over car ownership, even given the problems with Uber. Most people would prefer to do without the hassle of car ownership if they had a choice


Which only works because most people own their own cars. If everyone switched to an automated "ride sharing" program there would need to be a shiatload of cars that sit idle 90% of the day because outside of rush hour there just isn't the demand to keep them all busy. So which company would own and maintain a few hundred thousand cars that are sitting idle just because people need them 7:00 - 8:30 and 16:30 - 17:30? Demand will outstrip supply, which will drive up waiting times. People will get annoyed and get their own once they realise that getting to work on time isn't a guarantee.

Plus instead of the hassle of owning, now people would have the hassle of dealing with the company, the all the insurance and maintenance costs that are included in the rental price, the overhead, and profit margins. Not owning is nice if you live somewhere where you can't decently park the car and everything is easily accessible (like where I live, the time benefit of taking a car instead of the bike to work would be lost on the walk to the car), but otherwise owning would both be cheaper (in the same way that owning a car is cheaper than leasing one) and more practical.
 
2017-10-22 05:37:46 AM  

mjjt: Likely that it will be corporates that own fleets. The commuters will be leased out at full price, then during off-peak they will ferry kids to school, oldies/disabled/housewives/unemployed to supermarket/library etc

All they have to do is deliver a service that is cheaper than owning your own.


Yes, but that requires but a faction of the fleet needed during rush hour as, except for school, those activities are distributed over the day instead of peak moments.
 
2017-10-22 06:33:49 AM  

mjjt: UsikFark:Autonomous vehicles on their own won't change traffic congestion, particularly if they are primarily used to take a single passenger from one place to another.

But they don't consider that humans slamming on the brakes and changing lanes is a big part of what creates traffic jams. Even if the vehicles are ONLY able to maintain proper distance, speed, and lane of travel, they'll improve congestion. If the vehicles are networked ad-hoc or centrally there may be further benefits like automatic rerouting once a road or route is near saturation. The only problem with networking is that some riders personally might not benefit as much as other riders taking other routes so they'll think the improvements weren't worth not being able to weave through traffic to get to work 200% faster than the cars in front of them. Also someone will hack the system so you and 500 other commuters are taken off route to form a real-time animated ejaculating penis when visualized in the traffic monitoring system.

That's the sort of thing that the system will learn to cope with as soon as it happens once.

But given that there will be an AI controlling the whole traffic network, it will be debatable exactly how it works. Will it be a rigid schoolmaster punishing the smallest transgressions, or will it be a benevolent uncle turning a blind eye to minor shenanigans that don't have much impact? (The problem with a rigid system is that it stimulates unnecessary resentment and sabotage for the sake of protest.)

Want a Havelock Vetinari running the show


And yeah I know you're talking about fiction but why not muse out loud about a topic I've pondered since learning more about the limits of this specific task. How do you make a machine navigate a world designed for a organ that's spent years, even at sixteen, learning the building blocks of piloting a vehicle successfully (usually) down a road despite changing visual cues as to where to go and when something's out of place and a probable danger?
 
2017-10-22 10:10:17 AM  

gnosis301: You're not going to live in luxury.  Automobiles will be priced out of the grasp of the majority of people, and you'll be stuck paying some wealthy job creator for the privilege of using an automated car.


With THAT attitude that's what's going to happen and you'll continue to take it in the rear from your "betters."
 
2017-10-22 10:12:06 AM  

mjjt: The objections raised by article are pretty trivial, as are the solutions

Freeways won't be clogged, for two reasons. AVs will travel at speeds, close together (both distance apart and side-to-side), so the carrying capacity of freeways will be orders of magnitude greater. But also, access can be rationed - you will pay a fee to use that stretch of road (part of rental of the commuter AV) and the system will constantly vary that fee to maximise the efficiency of traffic density.

And article frets about the hypothetical possibility that AVs will 'circle' streets waiting for pickups. Again, there will be an algorithm controlling the whole system, predicting demand  and feeding cars into an area as required.


These are some of the beautiful possibilities. Just imagine no more stoplights even since cars can be programmed to let each other pass
 
2017-10-22 10:15:02 AM  

wildcardjack: casual disregard: poorjon: No matter what, you'll all be drinking 3D printed circumcised pumpkin-spice IPAs

I will tell you this much. Pumpkin spice shall never touch my tongue. Ever.

On a more serious note, we need to figure out what to do with louts whose jobs were eliminated by automation. Not after the automation is put in place, not during the process - yesterday. We need to have answered that question yesterday.

This deadline having been passed, I'm not sure what to say. I am fully open to suggestion. I'm particularly fond of Star Trek: Next Generation style utopia.

Ehh, I think most of the people on Star Trek were engaged in servicing the machines. It always seemed a false utopia. We only saw the philosopher kings who could be entrusted with the massive resources involved in building these warships masked as science vessels.


We also saw the legions of sex offenders press ganged into 5 years hitched to commute their sentences. Why else in a post scarcity economy would anyone be a redshirt?
 
2017-10-22 10:17:35 AM  
My uncle has a country place that no one knows about
 
kab
2017-10-22 11:16:04 AM  

jimpapa: My uncle has a country place that no one knows about


What an annoying lyric.   If that statement were true, then the writer wouldn't be aware of it either.
 
2017-10-22 11:57:11 AM  

kab: jimpapa: My uncle has a country place that no one knows about

What an annoying lyric.   If that statement were true, then the writer wouldn't be aware of it either.


It's his uncle you putz
Of course he knows
No one else does
 
2017-10-22 12:03:53 PM  
Enjoy having that automated car service inundate you with intrusive advertising "personalized" based on data they mined about your lifestyle, and drive you past stores you're statistically likely to stop and buy things at.

Unless you pay extra.
 
2017-10-22 12:04:12 PM  

DannyBrandt: I mean, there's no reason we couldn't 3D print bridges, or cargo ships once the technology is advanced more.


Why would we need to 3D print cargo ships or bridges? Just 3D print whatever is moved by those ships! You want to see a friend? 3D print your friend! Once technology is advanced enough...
 
kab
2017-10-22 12:41:45 PM  

jimpapa: kab: jimpapa: My uncle has a country place that no one knows about

What an annoying lyric.   If that statement were true, then the writer wouldn't be aware of it either.

It's his uncle you putz
Of course he knows
No one else does


The singer isn't the uncle.  Hence, 2 people know of it.
 
Displayed 50 of 58 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report