[wolverine876]

> A lot of people in the autonomous driving industry are driven by exactly what Vogt describes (little girl in the stroller etc.). See also Chris Urmson of Waymo fame's TED talk, he talks about a similar motivation[1].

To me, that's evidence that it's performative. First, it's a talking point; it looks, smells, walks and talks just like typical corporate/industry framing and messaging, with even a 'think of the children!' line, and the redirection (from the safety of autonomous cars, the topic, to whatabout something else). Second, its repetition by Urmson is further evidence - that's how talking points work. Third, the public's reptition of it, in surprising detail, such as in your comment, is also what we'd expect. Finally, throw in some tears, 'I get emotional' lines, etc. (per the NYT article), and I don't know how it can be missed.

Could it all be legit? Anything is possible - including fully autonomous cars!

[kelipso]

The culture of Silicon Valley dictates that any performative charade be taken completely sincerely. It is just what it is. People like Holmes and SBF naturally arising from this from the obvious incentives are just the cost of doing business is this cultural environment.

[pj_mukh]

Whether the corporate honchos are "sincere" or not is wholly irrelevant to me (and frankly unknowable).

"Think of the children" is usually a vapid misdirect, except of course in the objective measurable leading cause of death right? So in terms of issues where "something must be done", this should be objectively pretty high.

Either we drastically reduce the number of cars on the road and restructure American society around public transit (I wholly support this), or we take the humans out of the equation by making things autonomous. Or some combination of both.

I dont care if this happens under some grand socialist program if we so hate corporations/industries, but it needs to happen yesterday.

The rest is just status quo protection which is unacceptable.