[mmcdermott]

> It’s time to find out what value our values really have.

Which is exciting, as long as the net results are better for human beings. I really don't want to see us make human experience worse to ensure that AI is able to be more successful. That defeats the purpose of any technological invention.

[marricks]

Touchscreens in cars is a great example of making the human experience worse for the sake of tech.

Everyone prefers physical tactile buttons for a set interface, but that stands in the way of progress for cars! Guess where the industry is going...

[ElevenLathe]

I think that saying this phenomenon is change "for the sake of tech" or for "progress" elides the fact that it is good for some people. Specifically, it is good for auto executives and their shareholders (in their capacity as executives and shareholders, though presumably many of them are drivers as well). It's a cost measure that makes customers' lives worse (and more dangerous) for the entire life of the car in exchange for pennies in their pocket now. This isn't technology getting its way or anything, but people using their power to further their own interests with indifference to the interests of others. That's not new, just the details are.

[NoLinkToMe]

Personally I really love the combination of both. I want to use physical buttons for things like signalling, lights etc. And I want to use software on screens for things like navigation, music, analytics etc.

[insane_dreamer]

That's a marketing issue "look OUR car has this shiny big touchscreen now!" which car manufacturers think -- or thought -- users would prefer and buy (with Tesla leading the way). That may change if there is user blowback. (Just drove a new BMW Series 4 the other day and it had the big touch screen but retained the buttons/controls because they're better for settings you change often or while driving. Touchscreen is better for settings you change less frequently or while not driving (like charging).