Why would you block them? Are they causing issues or something?
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2026
478 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
88848 readers
3824 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Steal one and inject a virus into it and then make it run into a wall a bunch of times, ensuring the complete destruction of the device.. π Call the nearest news outlet and claim that the robot was suicidal-homicidal and was trying to smash you and it into a wall and wait for a news report. The robots get pushed back by skepticism of safety towards humans.
i see you don't know how the news works recently...
"I know they're taking the jobs of human delivery workers and so, I have been protesting them whenever I saw them by standing in front of them and preventing them from going forward," Marvin said.
I mean fuck. Do we want people working as delivery drones? Really? The other post in fuckai about this doesn't even mention she's been doing this for month which obscures why she's been arrested.
And climate change is real you know? A small robot takes little energy compared to a full sized car.
Ideally delivery robots should be state owned and accountable to democratic processes. They are a valuable and useful innovation to solve logistic problems. A way to reshape how neighborhoods are build and planned and make them more energy efficient.
This dogmatic opposition to anything AI is really becoming more and more irrational, less and less grounded in facts and rational arguments. AI needs to be regulated. Like China currently does AI regulations best, but we can't even imagine things like that any more because people just accept neoliberalism as the new world order and screaming is the only thing left to do apparently instead of demanding regulations or nationalization of certain AI infrastructure. Maybe this is linked to some kind of anti-democracy propaganda campaign. Divide and conquer, and don't even let talk about regulation enter the public discussion.
More important make it fair. Robots or anything with ai has to pay the same amount of taxes as a human.
This dogmatic opposition to anything AI is really becoming more and more irrational, less and less grounded in facts and rational arguments.
It's almost like a religious movement. Like a... jihad. A Butlerian Jihad. If you think RAM prices are high, imagine the price of a Mentat. I'm saving my pennies.
I think that to trully give urgent delivery services a purpose we need:
- Abandon 0-day delivery services unless they serve a significant purpose, e.g. for immobile persons, delivering medicine, etc. That would erase like 95% of required labor;
- Reclassify the rest as a communal service, mostly on a regular schedule between known clientelle;
- Optimize paths between vendors (or hubs) and delivery targets for the remaining fleet. At this point a minimal system is upheld by a minimum number of members of community who don't need to hurry and use motor vehicles;
- Create an option to offload some delivery task to other community members who live nearby and go this route anyway, probably via some app;
- Allow for less urgent delivery jobs being posted, but always served by the members of the same community. Community collectively defines what non-critical deliveries hold value, e.g. delivering flowers for a birthday celebration can be seen as okayish to do.
Fetch quests, when optimized, provide some persons with meaningful labor that keeps up their physique, and their, and then others' involvement ties the community together and makes personal connections between people in it. Drones navigating the sidewalks humans use are irrelevant if the amount of labor needed is not overwhelming to begin with, and doesn't need to be optimized by producing expensive robots and computer vision models.
or like someone sets a ride, you accept , you pick them up, drop them off, collect pay and move on to the next person...... file taxes at the end of the month..... make a federal minimum and rely on deliveries to make up the rest like servers/waiters who make the majority of their paycheck based on tips...... make it so anyone anywhere with a car and clean driving background can do the job as long as they're over a certain age and have a license and a car to use........
Maybe we just like make it make sense and leave them all as gig economy services that people can make money from.....
Like maybe we just leave it the fuck alone and take drones out of the equation?
i wish there was "quest board" system for small tasks irl :/
Those are some very interesting ideas! I'd love to see this for city planning. Maybe China lol. The "Urban planning in communist states" had similar benefits but our current technology e.g. just smartphone apps could also help or optimize or solve a lot of these issues for free.
But I don't think these robots actually need to be expensive. I believe a local model on a smartphone could basically do this already and then you just have an RC car with a different gearing and a box. Like if a country had state owned facilities with regular open optimization challenges this would cost basically nothing.
A lot of things should be rethought. And thanks to climate change and migration we will have to build a lot of cities.
Ideally delivery robots should be state owned and accountable to democratic processes. They are a valuable and useful innovation to solve logistic problems. A way to reshape how neighborhoods are build and planned and make them more energy efficient.
Gig economy. You're saying that the state(s) should be making all the money and that they should have control over when people can order goods by saying that they should be the owners of the drones.
Currently, the owners of the vehicles are the delivery drivers. Uber, GrubHub, Seamless, DoorDash, Lyft, UberEats and InstaCart, are all outlets for people who have downtime to make extra money and it's also a great starter job to get experience for a resume.
I think that drones taking jobs is going to push people to disrupt another market and sorry not sorry but fuck anyone who brings up the car thing when you and I know go damn well who ever is reading this uses rideshare services and delivery services. You also got people who don't drive and use rideshare services and people who use them to cut the cost of getting somewhere if you don't want to spend money on fuel from traffic in the inner cities.
Act surprised when it's revealed Uber sells the camera feed to flock.
Broke: "Uber should hire real humans, not robots!"
Woke: "Uber is a complete rip-off with a deceptive pricing model that is doing nothing but fueling obesity rates, regardless. Never use it."
Uber Eats has fucking robots?
No, just delivery ones
I think hungry people are going to start stopping these because they have food in them.
I predict they will begin to arm the robots.
We are closer to skynet every day.
The robots have food AND GUNS IN THEM! THE REVOLUTION WILL BE PAID FOR BY UBER EATS
load more comments
(1 replies)
What is the charge? Blocking a meal? A succulent Chinese meal?!
This. Is. Democracy. Manifest!
Police exist to protect capital, not people.
load more comments
(9 replies)
Ah see thatβs where she went wrong, making a scene standing there.
Just spray paint the sensor and move on with your life. Or tip it over. Or put a cone over the sensor. Then disappear.
That's not legally protected activity
Your rights are being slowly pulled tighter around your neck, and the legal system is not your friend anymore.
When communicating online, like we are right now, is longer considered a legally protected activity, do you roll over like a good puppy and stop communicating with others online in information free forums?
It was legal to kill Jews. Does that mean it was okay, since that was a legally protected activity? Does that mean living as a Jew, no longer being a legally protected activity, requires that you turn yourself in because you are no longer allowed to exist where you are?
Almost no activity is a legally protected activity in a society and government hellbent on control.
The law did actually use to mean something, as it was, to some degree, written and enforced with care and consideration.
The law means considerably less now that it has been captured and written by those in power without consideration and simply as a tool to selectively enforce their power and target undesirable sub cultures.
Just like flock cameras, no one cares if someone goes and spray-paints or vandalizes some wandering piece of corporate equipment from corporations that are abusing their power and cuddling up to the current regime. It being a legally protected activity or not doesn't matter, because what is considered a legally protected activity no longer matters. The law is no longer something that applies based off the will of the people, but instead is something that applies and is built based off the will of a select few (many of whom are loyal and funded by the same corporations).
Welcome to actual protests
Respectfully, you're missing a key piece.
You're making the point that you can't stand up to oppressive powers like Uber while operating within the law.
Crucially: so is she.
This woman is an academic expert on law and our rights, and what she's doing is exploiting a loophole in Uber's control scheme in public and forcing everyone to watch what happens.
She is creating a problem for Uber while denying them a legally justifiable reason to wield law against her. Which will either demonstrate to more people an action that allows protestors to impose harm on a powerful company while remaining out of reach of their ability to impose punishment, or force them to reveal that their ability to impose punishment isn't actually based on law, it's based on power.
In doing so, she helps analyze the strength of various legal rights that can still be used and unmasks which ones no longer exist.
Thatβs irrelevant.
There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part! You can't even passively take part! And you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels ... upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop! And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!
β Mario Savio
load more comments
(3 replies)
view more: next βΊ