EDIT: A rough timeline of events here:
- In 2024, a user noticed this odd traffic on their local network, took a screenshot of the graph, and posted it to Twitter
- After discussing the issue with other Twitter users, the original poster realized that this graph was actually a mistake with their router or something. This reporting software was reporting some other device's network traffic as being the washing machine's traffic. The washing machine was actually only using a reasonable amount of data.
- Despite this past revelation, in 2026, someone put together a "meme" of sorts comparing the supposed events in that 2024 graph to what people in the past had predicted the future to be.
- For whatever reason, that "meme" was put through AI post-processing of some sort. Was the attempt to "upscale" this image after it had been passed around and been automatically compressed down by various platforms? Or was it someone using some newfangled AI-assisted compression technique in an attempt to create a smaller file size than any of the more traditional compression techniques? No idea. Whatever reason was, the image was left with a bunch of nonsense text on the graph portion.
- I saw this "meme" and decided to share it here without scrutinizing the text on the graph. As mentioned in my first point, this graph was originally posted years ago, so I was already familiar with it and did not feel the need to read into it in the image I was sharing. I felt safe assuming it was just the same graph that I remember seeing years back.
- After users here called out the nonsense text, I just recreated the "meme" from scratch. I grabbed the original screenshot of the graph from Twitter and a stock photo of clouds, and then combined them along with some text so that this is more-or-less the same exact "meme", just without the AI gibberish.
Talking about the danger. Cars can allready be driven to masses and many houses or businesess dont have any guard railings protecting them from normal cars, but we dont see those happening that much. Why it would suddenly change, by adding additional dimension.
Also small planes are not really that hard to come by. Why we dont have those driving in to buildings now?
Also doing "mini-9/11" would most certainly kill or atleast hospitialize the driver. I can somehow understand giving your live for cause you support and cause the enemy lot of pain, but i think there would be much higher treshold to give a life for something that is very unlikely to do anything but structural damage and hurt your self.
More likelly would be crashing while driving under influence, but i would imagine there would be higher treshold for anybody to fly drunk than drive drunk.
because there are roads and usually cars stick to those. grip is an important aspect of safety. there's no grip in the air.
small planes aren'tn hard to come by? compared to cars? also do you think flying cars are going to use the same routes as planes? what about air traffic control?
you're still thinking about my point as deliberate attacks when I'm talking about accidents having much bigger consequences. contrary to your belief there are tons of guardrails, literally or conceptually, around roads. there are no such things in air. if your car goes haywire in the air, it can end up anywhere.
I'll concede higher threshold for drunk driving even though I don't believe it can be enforced reliably. let's say you can. people still make mistakes while sober. even more when tired. or preoccupied.
I must missread something somewhere. I put much more weight on the terror side than the accident side.
If i was a civic engineer and a law maker and i would need to start making infra for flying cars, cities would be no fly zones, outside of dedicate "roads" that can be designed in so there is minimal danger to others in the case of crash. There would need to be dedicated flight height. These could be enforced similiarry than rentable electricscooters are now, so if driver would drive on a no fly zone or at wrong height the car would slow down. These would need to be build in things from the manufactorer. These no flight zones would also be near anything dangerous like energy plants, airports, military instalations etc etc.
We have allready things like automatic braking because pedestrians or deer or other cars. These would need to be supercharged so the vehicles do not let people drive to close other people or buildings.
Then things like harhers punishments for breaking the traffic law, more strict inspections for the vechicles and own permint for driving flying cars, that is prerequisite to buy a car and if you loose it, you cant keep the car, or there needs to be a mechanism where the car is made earhbound only.
A lot of responcilibity for the manufactores in case there are malfunctions.
Own mandatory insurance for flying, that pays to the victims in case of anything happening.
Mandatory breath analyzier for starting the vehicle, or in more scifi world blood test for any substances.
Drivers licence should have strict health inspection and it would need to be renewd often.
Mandatory flight plan system, where you need to mark where you are leaving from and where you are going, and the system could caluculate current traffic and give you the flight path, height and landing spot. So in a way automatic flight control that can open new "roads" if needed and there would be information on all traffic all the time so collision risk is small and traffic flows.
Clear idea that flying is not a right, it is a responsibility.
Edit: added few points.