Headlines

How the liberal wish list could bite Democrats

The case of the missing Saudi journalist is causing major worries around the oil market

German press claims Khashoggi a spook ...

Retail sales surprisingly weak, restaurant  sales crash

GOP courts Asian-Americans with drive to end affirmative action

Not everyone is willing to ride as autonomous vehicles take to the road in ever-increasing numbers

Richest 1,409 taxpayers pay more than the bottom 70 million ...

Hillary Clinton: The way that Trump debated me, it was imbued with sexism'

Ambassador says China confused over who speaks for Trump on trade

Global market turmoil could slow flurry of Chinese listings in US [stock exchanges]

Trump reacts to Warren's DNA test [great-great-great-great-grandmother]: 'Who cares, hope she runs' ...

Brennan: Trump 'encouraged' Saudi crown prince

Who's Driving?

One key issue facing the makers of autonomous cars is who is responsible for accidents ... which are bound to happen ... computer algorithms can never be perfect. Fast forward a number of years until we have a large percentage of our auto fleet withou steering wheels and pedals ... just computer screens. What if both cars in these bumpers are self-driving? And what if the cars aren't even owned by their "drivers?" These problems are quite complex and confounding.

To evoke Occam's Razor to this dilemma, it would seem to this observer that, if and when the above scenerio takes place, that the simpler solution is that the responsible parties would and should be the computer algoriths' designers themselves ... even if one party in such an accident isn't automous. Therefore, the purchaser or renter of such transportation can not be responsible and needn't carry insurance. And, if in such a brave new world, automotive accidents are much rarer, the existing auto insurance industry will play a much diminished role.

This, of course, would be quite revolutionary. Again of course, if this brave new world comes to pass?

Complexity

I guess it may be a function of my little grey cells dying off, but I am increasingly revolting against the complexity that technology is forcing upon me.  Recently, my e-mail supplier switched to AOL and, in order to use this new service, I have had to learn a whole new user interface ... one that is clumsy and non-intuitive. And, to do my income taxes this past Spring, I spent too many days trying to decipher the insane complexity of our tax code. Why am I being led by the nose into these labyrinths of what idiosyncratic designers think is the proper way of doing things? And, to place their brand on their designs, old protocols are eschewed for newer but not necessarily better ones.

Part of the genius of Steve Jobs was that he frequently got the user interface right ... one that was naturally intuitive. It didn't require a user manual to understand how things worked. Now end users seldom have manuals to educate them on the ins and outs of a new gizmo ... an unfortunate homage to Jobs.  Features that may be neat to the designers, become a bear to figure out. So I have become a bit of a Luddite. I wont use a smart phone ... an old clam shell works just fine. I do use an IPad, but grit my teeth much of the time. I do not look forward to autonomous cars because I don't really believe that they will simplify my life. When something goes wrong ... and it will ... many of us will be at a loss as to how to fix things.

In a way I am not too unhappy that I may not be around for this brave new world of increasingly complex technology. Matter of fact, I am thinking about buying an old Chevy Bel Air to get around in ... and hire H&R Block to do my taxes next year.