Logic — let alone reasonableness — is not one of government’s stronger suits. There are many examples of this, but here’s a newsie one: The use of public roads as test tracks for Tesla (and Google) self-driving car technology.
On the one hand, government rigidly persecutes “speeders” on the basis (so it is claimed) that driving faster than a number on a sign might increase the chances of having an accident. This being unsafe and hence “speeding” being illegal.
On the other, it gives the green light to Tesla racketeer Elon Musk to sell cars that encourage the driver to take not just both hands but also both eyes off the road — trusting in the infallibility of Tesla’s technology.
People have died as a result of this — which isn’t very safe.
With more to come, inevitably.
Inevitably, because technology — like the human beings who create it — is fallible. Things break, stop working. Or they don’t work exactly the way we were told they would.
Especially things controlled by a computer.
How reliable is your desktop PC? And it just sits on your desk. Do you like the idea of a PC being in charge of your car — your life — at 70 MPH?
The government does.
Understanding motives — as opposed to stated reasons — will help you understand policies that seem on the face of it idiotic or at least inconsistent. If “safety” truly is the object of everything the government does to us — for our own good, of course — then the government would never have allowed Musk to use public roads to Beta test his auto-driving technology, with you and me in the role of guinea pigs.
But “safety” is not the end goal. It is the excuse.
What the government wants is more control of our cars; ideally, absolute control. Musk is the five-star general in charge of this operation.
He’s not coy about it, either.
Has publicly said that allowing (his word, very revealing) you and me to be in control of our cars is not acceptable. It is “too dangerous.” His technology — funded by milking the taxpayers, who get to pay for their own replacement as drivers — will see to it that we are not allowed to control “our” cars in the probably not-too-distant future. When it will be “illegal” for us — rather than his software — to drive the car. That software, incidentally, written by people like Musk or those who work for Musk.
The “self-driving” car is in fact a car driven by Musk and his minions.
Many people are unaware of it, but Tesla cars narc out everything done behind the wheel (no matter who or what is behind the wheel) to the Tesla Hive Mind, where — for now — it is merely pored over and recorded. If you own a Tesla, it tells Tesla — the company — when/where and how you drive. As you (or it) drives.
And the reverse is just as technologically possible.
This is a three-leap jump over the in-car narcing technology pushed by the insurance mafia (which is another arm of the pincer movement encircling what’s left of our driving autonomy) that uses a plug-in device to feed data about your speed and brake inputs to the mafia, in order to suss out “dangerous” driving practices such as accelerating too rapidly (be a good Clover, now!) and charge you accordingly.
Tesla’s operation is much more sophisticated, for one. It is not only real-time (Tesla, the company, knows what you are doing right now, as you are doing it) the technology embedded in the car can be used to control what the car does, right now.
Your speed, for example.
Or, your movement.
A car with Tesla Tech could be rendered inert (perhaps Because Climate Change, or a “lock down” situation) at the whim of Tesla, which — like every other rent-seeking corporate entity — is effectively an arm of the government itself. Musk is a kind of modern-day take on Francis Drake, except without the élan. Drake worked as a privateer for Elizabeth I — performing valuable services, ex-officio. He wasn’t the government, per se. But what he did was done with the government’s active connivance.
The two worked together.
Elizabeth later knighted Drake — who became Sir Francis Drake.
The fawning by government over Musk trends in the same direction.
He is — like Sir Francis — funded directly (via subsidies) and indirectly (via a scam called selling “carbon credits,” which force real car companies to give him money to fund his operations building “zero emissions” electric cars) by the government. Or — via insider /“no bid” contracts (the latest worth an estimated $112 million) that profit his other crony capitalist operations, like SpaceX. Which also suffer from embarrassing — and expensive — “glitches.” Last year, a SpaceX-provided rocket crashed and burned — taking an expensive NASA payload with it.
Instead of sending Sir Elon a bill, he was awarded a new contract.
The government, in turn, uses him as its front man, allowing him to do things that serve the Agenda, even when those things are palpably not “safe.”
Like putting self-driving cars on public roads that miss a Kenworth making a left turn in front of it — the “driver” meanwhile preoccupied with Pokeman.