You are ugly?
I don’t need to say if I would possibly have a handful of bumps or unsightly bumps, or if the paint is flaky and faded.
I’m talking about the ugliness of the center and the ugliness of the bones.
So ugly that when the car drives down the street, young people are surprised and the dogs bark in front of the vehicle.
So ugly that the car would win the most productive ugliness contest (or is it the worst?) For cars.
Are you disappointed if your style is in the headlines as one of the ugliest on the road?
Some car owners are brayally proud of the fact that their selected car logo is indexed as one of the ugliest cars ever made.
It is an innate irritating spirit that drives these car owners to deliberately oppose what exists in society.
Having an ugly car can be a sign of courage and independence for some. Let the rest of the world complain and complain about ugliness, while only reinforcing the fact that the logo of the selected car is a lovely thing (in the brains of anguish).
Honestly, most people tend to scratch their heads when they publish an annual list of “the ugliest cars” for new car models every year, losing words and losing words as a result (rightly, they think) wondering the veracity of those lists, to begin with.
Some are skeptical about who can make those lists.
These alleged “authorities” seem arrogant and exercise their superior and harsh authority, proclaiming that a logo is ugly and a seductive and catchy logo, as if a divine spirit had given them wonderful real powers.
Certainly, some list creators use surveys to gather public opinion, while employing sales figures as a replacement to have an effect on the car’s appearance, rather than making their own idiosyncratic judgments alone.
If you’re curious about which cars have been on those great lists, here are some examples.
Auto Trader has this list of the five ugliest cars ever seen:
1. Fiat Multipla
2. VW Type 181
3. Nissan Cube
4. Cadillac Sevilla
5. Sbarro Autobau (concept)
Sixth Chrysler PT Cruiser
For greater accuracy, I indicated the first six due to the fact that one of them was a concept car (the Sbarro Autobau), which turns out to have somewhat inappropriate compatibility in the box of the ugliest cars on the way to the true global world. (you can compare the millions of concept cars that have ever been proposed), so I chose to reach the 6th position of privilege because it is a car that you can possibly see on the streets.
Speaking of being on the street, some of the cars on the ugliest lists are the ones you’d probably never have noticed on the highways and roads near you, of course, because the number of cars sold for some of the ugliest “winners” weren’t smart sellers.
We also take a look at the other lists of the ugliest cars, providing a broader attitude than may have resulted in the worst of the worst.
By Edmunds, your list:
1. Lamborghini Veneno
2. Lincoln Versailles
3. Acura ZDX
4. Cadillac Deville
5th Aztek Pontiac
6. Fiat Multipla
Once again, I indicated the six most sensitive, this time I did it to show that the Fiat Multipla has controlled to reach this list and also to be on the Auto Trader list (like the Cadillac Deville), and therefore potentially ugliness is perceived through more than one authorized evaluator at a time.
Some take a look at the same cars on those lists to recommend that those who expand the top lists of ugly cars be lemmings and simply align with each other. Of course, one can counteract that ugliness is ugly, and we expect the same set or a similar set of ugly cars to form those lists.
Another list, unclassified, offers its own set of ugliest cars and adding one of the ones on the list can lead some of you to a fever crisis:
· Pontiac Aztek
· Nissan Cube
· Pontiac Trans Sport
· Ford Edsel
· Tesla Cybertruck
Take a look at the list and notice that Elon Musk’s new creation has come to the list, the Tesla Cybertruck (see my wonderful revelation canopy in this link).
For those of you who are Tesla enthusiasts, I’m sure you were subsidized by the inclusion of the recently introduced Tesla Cybertruck for making the list of ugliest cars.
On the other hand, going back to the past point about being upset, there are many Tesla lovers who like the Cybertruck to list the ugliest cars.
They certainly think that he could also allow the rest of Tesla’s “hateful” idiot to believe as such (i.e., erroneously that the Cybertruck is ugly, whole, natural and hard), until the Cybertruck must be picked up to be carried by the global through the storm, so too.
Is there a science interested in finding out which cars are ugly?
Of course, some would say that the curves of the car, the overall shape of the body, the simplified look compared to the combination, are difficult and fast measures to determine whether a vehicle deserves to be classified as ugly or not.
Others avoid this as a false science that desperately tries to do something tangible and quantitative that is otherwise quite subjective and purely based on opinion.
Does it look good in the viewer’s eye?
Similarly, is ugliness in the eye of the viewer?
Some have tried to combine an unwavering metric or a set of measures to make it an unwavering and universally appropriate way for cars to be ugly and even how ugly they penetrate.
Balderdash, others say, point out that it is all based on their cultural immersion and their social predisposition to what constitutes ugly to un feo.
Here’s an interesting question to ponder: Will AI-based true self-driving cars eventually make their way onto the ugliest car lists, and if so, does it matter?
I bet you had no idea about it.
Gradually we will see the emergence of authentic self-driving cars on our streets and roads, driving between us and a daily mode of transport.
When this happens, are they likely to be classified as an ugly car?
Will you make a if you’re on such a “vanilla” list?
Let’s see what’s going on and let’s see.
That of self-driving cars
It’s to explain what I mean when I communicate about genuine self-driving cars based on AI.
True self-driving cars are ones that the AI drives the car entirely on its own and there isn’t any human assistance during the driving task.
These driverless vehicles are considered a Level 4 and Level 5, while a car that requires a human driver to co-share the driving effort is usually considered at a Level 2 or Level 3. The cars that co-share the driving task are described as being semi-autonomous, and typically contain a variety of automated add-on’s that are referred to as ADAS (Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems).
There is not yet a true self-driving car at Level 5, which we don’t yet even know if this will be possible to achieve, and nor how long it will take to get there.
Meanwhile, Level Four efforts gradually seek to gain some strength by undergoing very close and selective road tests, there is controversy over whether those evidence deserves to be compatible with itself (we are all guinea pigs of life or death indies in inconsistent reluctance on our roads and roads, some point out).
Since semi-autonomous cars require a human driver, adopting such cars will not be much different from driving traditional vehicles, so there is not much new in itself for the canopy on this issue (however, as you will see at a time, the following problems apply).
For semi-autonomous cars, it is vital for the public to be aware of a disturbing facet that has emerged lately, despite the human driving forces that continue to publish videos of themselves sleeping behind the wheel of a point 2 or In 3 cars, we will have to avoid being fooled by thinking that the driving force can divert their attention from the task of driving while driving a semi-autonomous car.
You are to blame for driving the vehicle, regardless of the automation point that may be thrown at point 2 or 3.
Self-Driving Cars And Ugly Lists
For true point four and five autonomous vehicles, there will be no human driving force involved in the driving task.
All occupants will be passengers.
The AI is driving.
Experts who, in general, the use of driverless cars will be to share the trip (see my research of this point, see this link).
It is assumed that a new era of mobility will arise, allowing a mobility-for-all advent. Those today that are mobility hampered or disadvantaged will finally be able to readily and inexpensively have access to car transportation.
A boon for society.
If that’s going to be the case, ask yourself a pointed question.
Do you think it’s what a car looks like to an elevator?
In other words, a car shared, whether human driving or AI, selects it, and once it arrives, the maximum will indicate that the look of the vehicle makes no difference as to whether you are or not. in a position to pass.
All you care about is that the car is operational, in sufficient condition to deliver reliable shipments and arrives at its destination safely.
Have you ever traveled in a car shared just because it’s blue, red or orange, or maybe because of the overall shape of the car?
Unlikely.
To be clear, if the car appears to be in poor condition and has gone through roulette, I think we will all suspect the way the driving force takes the car from the vehicle and would rightly avoid taking the car for a carpool. unless you’re probably desperate for a ride.
Only in terms of appearance, if a specific car pass is ugly through the manager’s list, would that replace your willingness to take a walk when you request a shared height elevator?
Probably not.
The fact is that if driverless cars are not going to belong to Americans (which, in my opinion, is a misleading and false claim, see my research in this link), and exist in fleets of motor vehicles, the appearance of the car is no longer relevant.
Presumably, the explanation for why ugliness makes the difference is because consumers who buy cars would possibly or would not have to have the stigma of owning and driving in a car called ugly.
Eliminate the consumer from the equation, and ugliness falls to the edge of the road.
Period, end of story.
Well, maybe.
Why do you fall down the road?
One theory is that other people will feel inherently intelligent or bad about themselves because of the appearance of a car they drive in, even if they don’t own the car consistently with themselves.
Immerse yourself in the future, when there are almost driverless cars, while traditional human-powered cars are as rare as bird teeth.
You’ll have a first date and impress the other person.
Using your smartphone, you request a ride-sharing vehicle to come and get you and will have it to take you to your date’s place, and then the driverless car will take you two to the movies.
Worried about the look of the self-driving car?
That’s possible.
You should impress your date, so take one of those “ugly” cars and instead be sure to order a car that is known to be beautiful.
Here’s another reason that looks might make a difference.
If you agree that self-driving cars will be predominantly a part of large fleets, the odds are that the fleet owner would want to get pretty much the same brand and model for their fleet, leveraging sensibly any potential economies of scale (the fleet owner could more readily perform maintenance and care on one selected brand or model, versus dealing with a multitude of brands and models).
I’ve previously pointed out that we are possibly heading toward a world wherein you can’t tell one self-driving car from another (see the link here).
What I mean is that if fleets have thousands upon thousands of the same brand and model of a driverless car, you’ll see that particular brand and model all the time, and not be able to readily discern one driverless from another.
When a driverless car comes to pick you up, there is likely to be a lot less variety of models and brands of cars, thus, you’ll statistically see the same brand or model each time.
Eventually, this can push fleet owners to differentiate themselves from other fleets of driverless cars, so they can buy their next logo and style depending on the look of the car.
Then, once again, the perception of being an ugly car returns and may be just a strategic differentiator of why other people decide on a specific ride-sharing service for the driverless car fleet (in which other people believe that driverless X cars are less or hotter to drive. Driverless cars, just for hunting alone).
Now, keep in mind that the above refers to a remote future.
For now, it will take years and years for self-driving cars to enter the market, decades.
Turning our attention to the new times, let us read in more detail about ugliness.
Autonomy and ugliness today
Self-driving cars tend to have a sensor on the roof, adding cameras, radars, lidar and other sensory devices.
In fact, you’ve noticed videos or images of driverless cars, or others that were on the roads near you.
In the early days of the dreams of driverless cars, the idea that a self-driving car would be a new type of car, completely redesigned from the most sensitive to the bottom. Although this happens and many are moving stridently in this direction, the quickest way to upgrade is to take a traditional car and modernize it to have driverless technology.
When you see a car that has been augmented with autonomous driving technology, what do you think?
Does the roof of all those devices and devices do the ugly?
Chances are there are other fixed devices and devices on the sides and at the ends of the vehicle.
I guess other people think they just saw Frankenstein’s car take to the streets.
Now you can notice that driverless cars have a stack of electronic devices stuck in them, which appear to be rotation and suspension.
Ugly!
Ugly?
I bet other people are fascinated to see a car like this and aren’t convinced that the driverless car looks ugly.
It looks, well, like the future.
The new has a tendency to minimize appearance and attract our interest in interest and wonder.
Okay, once those driverless cars are en masse, and we see them every day, and we get close to them in traffic, and get used to them as “comrades,” we probably won’t see them anymore. such ordinary cars.
In that case, the looks are playing again.
Conclusion
Speaking of being a contrarian, it’s my position that we aren’t going to have only a handful of fleet owners that command all self-driving cars.
Individual ownership of self-driving cars is still a possibility, and I argue that it is likely, partially due to the aspect that each of us will have an opportunity to make money from owning a driverless car. Right now, we own cars that sit and do nothing for 95% of the time, a costly asset that is woefully underutilized.
By owning a self-driving car, you could use it to get to work, and then the rest of the workday it is providing ride-sharing, bringing in the bucks for you, making it into a money-making asset rather than today’s (essentially) money-losing asset.
For more on the rationale involved, see this link.
Would looks matter when we still have individual ownership of cars, in this case, self-driving cars?
Humans seem to care about appearance, which appears in the maximum things we do or possess.
The concept that we will dispense with assessing the appearance of anything, self-driving cars, would be opposed to the very nature of human behavior.
We are all pre-programmed to judge a book by its cover, and no matter how hard we try to suppress that innate urge, it inevitably and inextricably re-emerges.
Time will tell, and that’s the sad truth.
Dr. Lance B. Eliot is a world-renowned expert on Artificial Intelligence (AI) with over 3 million amassed views of his AI columns. As a seasoned executive and high-tech
Dr. Lance B. Eliot is a world-renowned expert on Artificial Intelligence (AI) with over 3 million amassed views of his AI columns. As a seasoned executive and high-tech entrepreneur, he combines practical industry experience with deep academic research to provide innovative insights about the present and future of AI and ML technologies and applications. Formerly a professor at USC and UCLA, and head of a pioneering AI lab, he frequently speaks at major AI industry events. Author of over 40 books, 500 articles, and 200 podcasts, he has made appearances on media outlets such as CNN and co-hosted the popular radio show Technotrends. He’s been an adviser to Congress and other legislative bodies and has received numerous awards/honors. He serves on several boards, has worked as a Venture Capitalist, an angel investor, and a mentor to founder entrepreneurs and startups.