On average, a commuter in the US spends twenty-five minutes driving each way to and from work. From this reading, I agree that Transportation is an initial topic of AI implementation for the public use, especially in the city domain for public buses or taxis. The paper suggests that self-automating cars or semi-automating, could allow one to use this time in a more day-constructive manner.  This idea challenges how quickly auto-driving cars will transcend and affect recently built companies such as Uber or Lyft. From a Peoples aspect, will public trust push for a human operating or AI driven vehicle?  Additionally, there is the predictive possibility that, Self-driving cars and peer-to-peer transportation services may eliminate the need to own a vehicle.  Yes, I agree; however, I dont anticipate it to trigger eliminating a public demand for a personal or owned vehicle, autonomous or not.  I believe the right or ability to manually drive ones car would dominate the proposal of eliminating the need to own a vehicle unless it was a government sanctioned transition to self-automated cars in public or work commute.  I dont intend to see flying cars providing public transportation anytime soon, especially not by 2030.

Individual interventions are difficult and expensive, and the youths mistrust of authority dictates that key messages are best spread through peer leaders. This statement is in regard to AI in social media and its relationship with spreading urgent news to a younger audience, which yes, I agree to; however, Social Media undeniably has already shown adverse affects of AI Technology in terms of the spread of information. This was noted during the most recent election where hackers were able to outsmart the Facebook algorithm in determining and fact checking each post.  It shows a vulnerability or misuse of AI technology in public trust, which some could argue had impeding influence in something as concrete as our electoral process and for viable access to correct information.

To bridge the relationship between politics and AI, it would be interesting to see the progression of AI with the posed question of whether or not there would be a collective agenda between the State and the People of wanting to advance AI possibilities.  Im intrigued to see if constraints created by societal ethics and moral views would make AI availabilities to the public unequal in comparison to that of what is at the disposal of the US government, particularly how they use the aforementioned technology to police the People.

To continue, the paper states, Many opportunities exist for AI to improve conditions for people in low-resource communities.  I challenge the capability of AI technology being made available to low-resource communities for public and personal use.  Will there be a territorial separation or social class segregation of who is able to use or own AI technologies for personal use.  To be more specific and because the paper talked about the use of self-automated public transportation, will this be extended to inner-city and poverty stricken areas or only implemented for busy and in main transport for crowded downtown areas?  I say this because Insurance Companies already use predictive analytics to find the likelihood of and when someone would file a claim, and it does so at the time of a customer calling in for a quoted policy premium based on their personal data. There are also shown relationships between payment plans available based on the customers financial responsibility risk.





