We all remember the Tesla Cybercab, right? Sure you do. It was the car Tesla revealed last month that was to be a fully-autonomous ride-hailing car, with no steering wheel or pedals or anything. It’s only been demonstrated in a context that’s about the same as a theme park ride and had gold rings painted on the tires to give the illusion of a lower-profile tire, and I’m pretty skeptical it’ll be available any time soon, but whatever.
I have had a bold realization about the Cybercab, and I’m going to share it with you, if you can handle it.
Can you handle it? Let’s find out. Here it is:
The Cybercab’s one row of seats is, in fact, the back seat.
That’s right, friends! It may be the first car to only have back seats! [Ed Note: Oh boy, what is this blog? -DT] I know we’ve lamented that, for a cab, this thing really should fit more than just two people, because, jeez, come on, but we’ve never specified just which row of seats the Cybercab has as its only seats.
And I maintain the one row it has is actually the back row, not the front. That’s because the Cybercab, one could argue, has a “virtual” or “digital” front seat, because the front seat in a taxi is where the driver sits. Since there is no physical driver, that means there is no physical front seat. The seat that does exist is designed to take passengers, who, traditionally in a cab, sit in the back seat.
View this post on Instagram
If a car has just one row of seats, that row can as easily be considered the first row of seats or the last – it’s the same either way, physically. But conceptually it’s different. If one of those seats is designed for a driver, then that seat is the front row. That’s why a Bugeye Sprite or a Triumph Spitfire or a Miata’s one row of seats is the front row, because that row is designed to accommodate a driver.
But not a Cybercab. The one row is only for passengers, which means it’s a back seat.
So that’s how it is. The Cybercab only has back seats. It’s a two-row car, but one of the rows is digital.
Do you agree? Do you think I’m a fool? About this? Tell me! Let’s discuss! Loudly!
[Ed Note: I just… I…I got nothin’. -DT]
ND/Crackpipe…then it wouldn’t be called a “back” seat…it’s not in the back
So a Victorian Hansom cab would screw with your brain?
https://d2kdkfqxnvpuu9.cloudfront.net/images/giant/72258.jpg?1420291696
Word. Now there’s no way to put that toothpaste back in the tube – it’ll be all the internet will talk about.
Why? I never would have considered this ever. Now? I can’t stop thinking about it.
This is the equivalent of the “is a hotdog a sandwich” argument. It all depends on your definitions. There isn’t a universal definition of sandwich and there isn’t a universal definition of “front seat” or “back seat”. If the front seat is where the driver sits and there is no driver, then sure.
However, what if a vehicle is driven from the rear? Does this make the seats towards the front of the vehicle the “back seat” because the driver is always in the “front seat”? Of course not, because that would be silly.
I contend that Torch is on to something here, but isn’t quite nailing it. The cybercab has neither front seat nor back seat. It has seats. That’s it.
Actually it’s a Rumble seat. Because passengers will probably be forced to watch preferred Far-Right video streaming site Rumble on the dashboard screen.
I think they are both the front and back seats at the same time.
So they are Schrödinger’s seats…
Poor David. You do this on purpose, don’t you?
Want to plan a wedding do ya? Well: THINK ON THIS!!! Mwahaha.
theres no front seat, theres no back seat. There is only THE seat.
Simplifies Rebecca Black’s decision making
I am absolutely horrified that I understood that reference and you should be ashamed of yourself for dredging that up out of my memory banks…