Gas stations are…already a drive-thru?
…?!!
This isn’t even one of those sounds good on paper ideas.
Is his idea that they open the side of your car door and stick a whole new tank in there?
You don’t need to put the tank in the door to do that…
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.
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.
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.)
Also, a door that weighs that much more is going to be fun on any ground that’s not perfectly level.
And it can slosh. I’m sure that won’t come into play at all when trying to open and close it.
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.
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.
He’s too late, Top Gear already did it anyway.
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.
And you can still realize your dream right now by moving to New Jersey. But then you’d be dreaming in New Jersey.
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.
English: drive-through
Murican: drive-thruNow about light…
English (Traditional), English (Simplified).
Murican Drive-through:
My driveway is at a T-in the road. it’s only a matter of time
You have large rocks or anything to stop this?
- The HOA would not abide.
- large rocks in my driveway would keep me from getting in my driveway
my best option would be to petition the HOA to allow me to install https://www.drivewaybollards.ca/
i doubt that would fly
You put the large rocks in the front yard, with an island and plants around them. For the driveway, if it’s a road-facing garage, your car should block that. If you don’t put the car in the garage, leaving the car ramps or blocks you use to change your oil against the garage door should be fine.
Nah, this is the pinnacle of murican drive-thrus
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.
Pinto door. Also the filler is on the side already
My exact thought. New Jersey already has gas stations as drive-thrus by default!
Well, just like any other idea that would definitely lead to fewer carholes in existence…I’m in favor of it.
It’s advertising my Millennial Retirement Plan.
Hi, my name is Pinto Jr.
D-AI-rwin awards?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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???
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.)
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.
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.
Mostly because people buy them. Because they’re convenient.
Why are we designing a surveillance state? Because we can.
Do you think modern ICE cars don’t have the same surveillance features? Surveillance isn’t an inherent part of electric cars
You’re absolutely right!
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.
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.
No, it’s stupid, I’m just drawing on a faint similarity.
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.
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.
Planes what??
STORE FUEL IN THE WINGS
So the wings are like the balls of the plane? I always wondered why they were there. I guess electric planes wouldn’t need them and would be able to fly through tunnels, which could help reaching areas with mountains in the way.
… What?
Where else would you put the fuel? under the passengers?
Sure I guess. I dunno, I’m not an engineer.
I think AI should know that already because they basically just use all previous human knowledge unless a weak model was used for this
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.
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.
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.
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
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
Bmp-2 moment
This is rage bait, right? Right?!
People are acting like these will just explode the moment an impact happens.
It would just pop and leak all the gas onto the ground and into waterways. This is a terrible idea for many reasons, but acting like it would increase car related deaths is sort of silly.
This is such a bad take, it would absolutely explode. Car gasoline is so flammable, especially on a hot day when the tank is full of vapor.
If this got T-boned it would pop like a balloon and throw a cloud of highly flammable fluid into the air. Not to mention all the sparks from the collision providing and excellent ignition source.
Gasoline requires a certain mixture of vapor and air to ignite/explode. The tank would not only need to be practically empty (which if you aren’t aware, you shouldn’t be letting your gas tank get to almost empty - it’s not just unsafe it’s bad for the car), it would need to immediately be exposed to some kind of ignition source. Sparks would require metal grinding on metal, which typically isn’t happening in a T-bone unless it’s a really bad T-bone. Not to mention, if the gas tank isn’t mostly empty - the amount of force required to vaporize the gasoline is actually insane and simply not realistic. I haven’t done the math on it but we’re talking melt the car door amounts of kinetic energy which… yeah an explosion is not just guaranteed but the least of your concerns.
It would certainly make fires more likely, again I’m not arguing that this is a good idea - this is certainly a bad idea. But it would not make explosions more likely.
The bigger threat is fuel leaking onto you in an accident. You’re now riding with the gas tank next to you and above your lap compare to behind you and below you. Most cars burn down from fuel leakage in an accident.
I think a fire is a much more realistic worry than an explosion, for sure.
It would slosh around every time you open the door
Now hold on, isn’t this like airbags, but then with explosive power instead of lame air?
Can’t be hurt in a car accident if you’re 50 yards away from it
Taps Forehead
if you jump out just before impact, you will be safe. My AI trained on Looney Tunes.
Can’t have blunt trauma if you are a fine mist
My god, you’re right! Gas tank the airbags!!
Air bags already have explosives tbf
deleted by creator
