I hadn't really grasped the concept of driverless cars until I saw an item on television last week (yes, you can still get useful information on the TV).
I mean, I understood the concept — the car drives itself, you just sit there — but I hadn't understod why wewere going down this driverless road.
Lots of people I know enjoy driving — it's speed, it's skill, it's a bit of fun. Go ask Earl Bamber, Whanganui's double Le Mans 24 Hours winner, or our latest F1 ace Brendan Hartley.
In fact, Kiwis are often regarded as a nation of "petrolheads", and with not much more than rugby and Treaty settlements to get excited about, the obsession with cars and driving them makes some kind of sense.
Given the upcoming generation of boy racers, the roar of the souped-up vehicles, the burn-outs, the doughnuts and, of course, the huge number of vintage and classic cars making their regular rallies, it seems demand for driverless cars is not coming from the general public.
Are they safer? Well, maybe ... maybe not. There does seem to be some push towards going driverless from those in the road safety industry.
But last week I was happy to be enlightened about another episode in the 'we-have-the-technology-so-we'll-do-it-whether-people-want-it-or-not' saga that so defines modern life.
And — surprise, surprise — it is all about selling you stuff (and not just a new driverless car).
The idea is that if you are not distracted by having to manoeuvre the vehicle from A to B, you can watch a screen (possibly replacing the now-redundant windscreen) and enjoy music videos, movies, your favourite bit of Netflix and, of course, be bombarded with advertising.
As if we don't spend enough time staring at screens — and enough time being bombarded by people trying to sell us things we don't need — a little bit more of every day could soon be swallowed up in this manner as the daily commute becomes another shopping opportunity.
The pundits say driverless cars are "inevitable" ... needs must when the devil drives.
