• SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    2 days ago

    We should put electric motors on sunken door handles with plastic gears to achieve 0.01% more efficiency.

    Bonus: they stay safely locked in an accident because you should not trust EMTs with your valuables.

  • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    2 days ago

    I can’t believe I need to state the obvious here, but this is over and above all of the other extremely valid objections already raised by others vis-a-vis turning the door you sit right next to into an ersatz Molotov cocktail that weighs an extra fifty pounds.

    How is this going to help gas stations become drive “thru?” (I see we still also haven’t learned how to spell “through.”) It’s going to allow the gas station to do what, exactly, stick a nozzle in the side of your car?

    That’s already how filling a modern car with fuel works.

    (Yes, I specified modern because otherwise at least one pedantic nerd is going to go “well acktshully” and mention any of the various cars from the '60s and '70s which had the filler hidden behind the license plate or brake light or an emblem on the trunk lid or whatever. We already know. Nobody cares.)

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      How is this going to help gas stations become drive “thru?” (I see we still also haven’t learned how to spell “through.”) It’s going to allow the gas station to do what, exactly, stick a nozzle in the side of your car?

      “We need to put mid air refueling rigs on gasoline tankers on the highway” -Elmo Muks.

      • Dejected Warp Core@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Ever see footage of what this looks like from the cockpit? Fuel. Everywhere. The highway would be a gas-stinking oil-slick 24/7.

        Also, Musk?! You’d think he’d jump at the chance to promote Tesla instead of spewing pulled-from-ass gas car concepts.

    • zovits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Also, a door that weighs that much more is going to be fun on any ground that’s not perfectly level.

    • ThunderComplex@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Ok this gave me a good chuckle. I then thought “ oh but you could make it so gas station attendants just stand/sit outside and fill up cars as they come “ but then I realized this would also be possible today, and I started laughing even harder. Besides ensuring that every little fender bender ends in painful death, there’s literally 0 purpose to this.

    • fireweed@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Hate to break it to you, but both “drive-through” and “drive-thru” are considered correct.

      Wikipedia refers to “A drive-through or drive-thru (a sensational spelling of the word through)…”

      As explained on Erin Wright Writing, “According to our primary American-English dictionaries (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Webster’s New World College Dictionary, and The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language), drive-through is the preferred spelling, while drive-thru is an accepted informal variant. However, the use of drive-thru has become so common that using drive-through now feels incorrect.”

      Also keep in mind this is Xitter, where abbreviations are are a normalized (often necessary) part of the lingo.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Thank you! Yeah, this is all downsides for no upside. It’s like saying if I want to stop having my legs show I can wear body paint instead of pants. Like, pants are already doing the proposed goal better than the paint will, and it’s all downhill from there.

  • Dejected Warp Core@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    I mentioned elsewhere that AI is really making people tell on themselves, in terms of how smart they are and how they see the world. It’s handy.

    Hunter here thinks that a piece of real-ish looking conceptual illustration is all it takes to prove that something is a viable concept. It’s like watching a mecha anime and wondering why we haven’t got our shit together to construct building-sized robots.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      2 days ago

      Lmao I was going to say “it could just be a cut-through visualization”, but… No it couldn’t. This is VERY clearly portraying the interior side of a door. On a car with a very weird and obstructive pillar shape, no less.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s so you can check your hair while lane changing. The sleek design doesn’t disrupt AC flow from the side dash. You’ll look and feel cool as you pull in to refill every 50km.

    • tuckerm@feddit.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      Nah, it’s the first vehicle designed for looksmaxxers: all of the mirrors are on the inside, pointing directly at the driver. AI checks your surroundings for you.

    • Laser@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      These luddites will find the smallest details just to complain about AI

      • NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        How about you tell us the benefits of these details, since you’re pro slop;

        Multiple generative ‘AI’ companies were caught using real photos of real people and child abuse victims to generate csam, including musk’s grok. They responded by hiding it behind a paid version and then lobbying to make it legal in the US.

        Entire states are doubling their water and power consumption by running data centers for these llms advertised as ‘AI’ to the general public

        Mass surveillance is being enabled globally by automated facial recognition software, online post tracking/analytics/bot accounts and mass media disinformation campaigns provided by the products these companies push.

        Some of the surveillance software provided by these ‘AI’ companies is being used to support an actively genocial apartheid system.

        Multiple war crimes, such as the bombing of Minab school and multiple targets in Lebanon were facilitated by these products sold to the American military as infallible target designators.

        Multiple llms are also directly responsible for actively leading users into suicide, to which the companies responsible for the chatbots said “they signed the terms of use”

        Which of these details do you agree with?

        Edits- Leaving this up because I stand by what I said, but I now know Laser was taking the piss, so bravo to them for getting me good.

        • Axolotl@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          I hope it’s some irony we didn’t get because i am gettin disappointed from lemmy

          • Laser@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah, it was. I just don’t like putting “/s” or something on posts because what good is sarcasm if you’re not upsetting anyone?

            If someone thinks getting substantial aspects, like the side of a car door a mirror is on, wrong, are “smallest details” (which my post implies), they’re dumb. Simple as

            I was kind of expecting people to misunderstand it (no offense to anyone, I kept my stance somewhat vague on purpose) but I was hoping that it was so absurd the majority would get it :D

            • NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              Ohhhhhhhhh. In that case excuse the previous tirade.

              Unfortunately I’m one of those people who needs the ‘/s’ because this level of absurdity is nothing compared to some of the ‘you just dont like the new technology’ arguments I’ve seen online from slopsuckers.

              • Laser@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                It’s fine, these Internet points aren’t doing anything except help with sorting

            • Axolotl@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Hehe, sadly people like this do exist so i wouldn’t be surprised, welp, you get an upvote now

  • tazeycrazy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 days ago

    Ignoring all the safety concerns. Wouldn’t this make the door heavier and rase the center of gravity. Also where is the window going to retract to. There would need to be multiple tanks all balanced. I don’t think the tank placement is an issue for car designers.

    Issue was solved and someone is trying to find a novil idea from AI to justify the cost. LLMS don’t understand what a car door is or what filling the car involves.

    • 🧟‍♂️ Cadaver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Those are perfect valid concerns but I believe the first one would be that you would have a hose running down through a hinge. Over time, leaks are to be expected, that is if you don’t get your car door torn off and end up covered in gasoline.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Also in automobiles doors are expected to absorb the impact of side-collisions, which are very common.

        The more one merelly thinks about it beyond the purelly superficial first order perspective, the more reasons pop-up not to have a fuel tank on a door.

        • wewbull@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          Tanks full of liquid do quite well a dispersing energy. Think of water barrels on the US highway. The liquid just needs to be able to escape.

          So we just need to make it an open fuel tank. Problem solved.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Wouldn’t it be better to make the fuel tank purposefully explode in case of a collision and direct the energy of the explosion outwards, like reactive armor?

            I mean, what could ever go wrong with that idea???

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Or, hear me out, add some nozzles that require very high pressure to activate that shoot flames at the thing trying to crash into you to scare it off or burn it up before it has a chance to get through the door. Then accidents will have to think twice–maybe even three times–before they pop up out of nowhere while you’re doing normal everyday things like sneaking through a red light (if you roll slowly enough, you can try to argue that you were pretty much stopped the whole time. It’s not a crime, it’s a great way to save time.)

      • moopet@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        The first concern would be “why are we designing things for ICE vehicles at all?” There’s no reason to make general-purpose cars any more that aren’t electric.

        • tazeycrazy@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          There is still issues with the electric grid and how people don’t know if they will find a charger. Fast charging and availability at service stations has helped but I would say it takes a while to fully convert a population to a new technology. Ice cars also have issues like wild pricing and availability in some remote areas but people have settled themselves with them.

          • kestrel7_7@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Do you think modern ICE cars don’t have the same surveillance features? Surveillance isn’t an inherent part of electric cars

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not even novel, in a sense. On planes the fuel is stored mainly in the wings. This feels like an extrapolation of that.

      • Anarch157a@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Difference is, the wings don’t have hinges, which means airplanes doesn’t need flexible hoses that can fail and leak between the wings and engines. Another issue are impacts. Airplanes are required by law to keep from hundreds to thousands of meters apart, something that cars doesn’t.

        And it’s not like placing the tank in the doors would save any space. My previous car had the fuel tank right under the rear seat for example, which saved space for the trunk and kept it safe from collisions.

      • tazeycrazy@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        True but the wings are still structural and have the engines on them. Considering how much fual a jet needs you would struggle to find another place to put it. For a car there isn’t the same struggle to find a space and if it’s a small car you can make a smaller tank and stop more.

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sure, but cars are more easily designed to accommodate weird aesthetics that make room for spare tires, gas tanks, etc. It’s a low bar.

          It would make just as much sense to fill the trunk lid or door pillars with gas. But they’re all too small to make it worth the effort. One 16 gallon jug is fine.

    • antiR@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think AI should know that already because they basically just use all previous human knowledge unless a weak model was used for this

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        LLM’s don’t know anything.

        They have no capacity for thought or introspection. It receives an input and selects tokens that match an expected output. That’s it. Yes it has been fed the entirety of human knowledge to be able to do this. But that’s like a human memorizing the entire mandarin alphabet but never learning mandarin. An Al just makes a sentence that looks right, or generates an image that matches the tokens in a prompt. I could make a mandarin sentence with random symbols, and it might even say something. Doesn’t mean I speak mandarin.

        • antiR@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Aren’t we the same though? We don’t really know anything until we learn or train ourselves with knowledge? It’s just that LLMs only do this per prompt.

          • LwL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yesn’t. What LLMs lack and causes these idiotic suggestions is context from mediums other than language. If you get down to it humans talking are also just trying to predict what should come next, but we predict this from more input than just text. Particularly with something like design, we come up with the design and then the text and maybe concept art to describe it. The llm comes up with a description that seems likely and then feeds it to a diffusion model to make an image to go with the text.

            • antiR@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Basically, the problem is input, but AFAIK a lot of AIs now are multi modal. Yes they can make up stuff but if you steer it to the right direction with proper context or inputs, it can help build. Maybe what you’re talking about is AIs can’t choose rather than think. They can think. Albeit, they can’t choose only because of the guardrails. So, you are the user chooses to steer it to what you want

            • boonhet@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              LLMs can be multimodal now. You can chuck a screenshot into claude code or whatever you use and the image generation process can also be done by the LLM itself rather than an external tool call as far as I know

  • shyguyblue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    2 days ago

    put the gas tank your car inside

    How is babby formed?

    Edit: Also, how do you roll down the window?

  • Nasan@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    2 days ago

    Batteries in the doors for EVs act as explosive reactive armor.

    - military tech bros

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days ago

    All this negativity… I, for one, for endorse this for those who love Ai. Don’t listen to the nay-sayers, guys! Go build this for your car, and do it soon!

    This is like when people said the Cybertruck wasn’t amphibious. What a bunch of idiots. Of course it is, and everyone who listened to those idiots missed out on a primary feature of that vehicle for the gods. That finisher car.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s like the famous saying, “If you want to do something that might be dangerous, it’s best to do it very quickly so that the danger doesn’t have enough time to pop up.” Einstein gave his life proving this principle, so the least we can do is quote it as much as possible because big danger is trying to bury it so they can stay relevant in today’s economy.

  • paultimate14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    2 days ago

    The problem I have with these “natural selection” jokes is that shit like this will kill other people.

    And like, yeah it’s funny and all until it actually happens. We are currently witnessing the results of DOGE gutting regulations and agencies in the US. Food getting recalled left and right They just extended the hours truckers can drive in a day. They’ve been slowly rolling back child labor laws sunce Trump’s first term.

    • tazeycrazy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Was it ford that had a car that exploded on fenderbender due to fuel placement. The executives and designers where not the ones that where removed from the geen pool. I’ve seen Darwin awards said about people who already have children.

  • ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    2 days ago

    How is this different from having the gas cap on the side of the car?

    Is the idea you don’t have to get out?

    • MintyFresh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      88
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The idea is that you keep that volatile, explosive, toxic liquid into as close proximity yourself as possible, while still blocking egress with same. Some scientists say under the seat is best, but putting the tank in a crumple zone has proven to be the most intelligent design.

      • Schmoo@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 days ago

        Imagine a firefighter prying you out of your cAIbertruck ICE (double entendre) edition with the jaws of life after the Full Self Driving^tm barrels off a cliff, only for both of you to be engulfed in flames when they puncture the gas tank conveniently nestled in the handle-free gull wing door.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes, that’s what was implied by drive-thru.

      Now if you REALLY wanted to do this, you could even do it without relocating the gas tank. Just run a flexible hose the way they run cables into car doors. Not a bad idea in any way shape or form, I promise