|
I don't see how a program will ever supersede a human being. It is acceptable when a person accidentally kills. But, it is never acceptable when a program kills a human being. You can sentence someone to jail for reckless behavior, but you can't do this with a program.
The crux is software is intrinsically deterministic. Programs have no free-will and no morals. A program will only do what it is designed to do which includes bugs. So you can't hold it accountable.
We will see automation in mundane tasks like parking, and cruise control. But, the driver will remain responsible for what happens when something goes wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
The way I see it, self driving != no driver. The driver will be there but won't have to do much, like the plane analogy below.
It will probably be safer if all cars were automatic. Boring, but safer.
|
|
|
|
|
So lets get this right . I can go to the pub , get slaughtered , and then phone for my car to come and get me to drive me home ?
I can also work in the car on the way too and from work ? I can send my car to the garage . My mother who cant drive can use it . Heck even my blind friends can use it . Its a no brainer .
Safety ? Pah ! There is no doubt some will die , but is that a reason to give up ? 2000 ish people die every day in the UK and about 1 million die world wide every week . Anyway , when it is working I expect driverless cars to be safer and faster than the cars we have today .
|
|
|
|
|
Seriously - I would have no problem riding in one; heck, I'd be willing to step into google's today, no questions asked. I'm sure there's still bugs to be ironed out, but for the most part, it seems like a mostly solved problem (at least for google, that is).
I guess I am also more comfortable with the tech since taking and passing Udacity's CS373 MOOC a couple of years ago. Taught by Sebastian Thrun, it gave me a lot of insights into the basic technologies behind self-driving vehicles - the concepts, the code and the basic algorithms. While I wouldn't get in a car piloted by the kind of basic code we were exposed to (it was done in Python), the insights made me more comfortable with the tech.
If you have the time, and are interested - I encourage everyone to take that course. It's free and self-guided - if you keep to the daily schedule, you can get it done in 8 weeks - or you go faster, or take longer; it's up to you. You'll learn about basic machine learning algorithms, neural networks, kalman filtering, how PID works, path planning, and a ton of other topics. In the end, you bring it all together to make a virtual "car" navigate a simple virtual course.
I previously took the ML Class that was presented by Stanford (taught by Andrew Ng) - that class is now available via Coursera. One individual, about 3/4 of the way thru that class, got inspired by the neural networking portion and the information on the old ALVINN vehicle, and built his own simple version:
http://blog.davidsingleton.org/nnrccar/[^]
Between both of those courses, there is definitely more than enough information for anyone to play around with the technology; maybe not with a full-scale vehicle, but certainly with smaller vehicles and simulations.
|
|
|
|
|
Member 10731944 wrote: ...as long as it isn't running Windows...
So according to you, all OSs other than Windows are bug free ? Google's Android has more bugs than windows even after rapid version upgrades. Heck Google don't even care about compatibility for developers, they deprecated methods just because of their names. So if a method is introduced in a new API may get deprecated in next version. 
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH`A#@`RFJ\c^JPL>;"[,*/|+&WLEZGc`AFXc!L
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ`R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_AD`EPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[M`UKs*$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is not with a self-driving car but with people-driving cars.
Self-driving car will not try to take-over in a blind turn (once I almost got killed by a reckless driver).
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed! The most unreliable, unpredictable software is already installed in all road-going vehicles 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes and I'm often the passenger.
Peter Wasser
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
|
|
|
|
|
Planes have autopilot and can land themselves. I've already committed myself to technology, so why not in cars? If the question was posed "In the next 5 years, would you..." my answer would be different.
|
|
|
|
|
Excellent analogy though congestion is orders of magnitude smaller and there are less trees to bump into if you veer off the..whatever you call the thing planes fly on in the sky.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
But you'd never get off the ground because takeoffs are done manually. Pilots are (or are supposed to) constantly monitor the autopilot, and nearly all landings are done manually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) Some years ago I saw a movie, I think it was called Avatar. The basic premise was that humans were able to control alien bodies remotely. I left the movie theater chuckling and shaking my head, because Hollywood was (as usual) completely clueless about how technology is made.
In this movie when the connection was lost the Avatar would lose consciousness, fall down (and perhaps break his head). I don't know if we will ever have that kind of remote control of another body (probably yes) but I can give you the 1st line of the code right here and now:
If (ConnectionLost == True) Then SitDown
The concept is called "Graceful Degradation" and real, useful computer-driven cars will need to implement something similar.
2) Horse-drawn carts cannot go on expressways. Right now computer-driven cars are of dubious safety and there are some pretty strict rules about their use in public streets. However, once there is a critical mass of computer-driven cars we will immediately start having rules and regulations restricting the use of *manual* cars. At some point in the not too distant future there will be whole streets and complete neighborhoods (and maybe cities) where you will not be able to drive a manual car. Enough of that and the manual car goes the way of the horse cart.
|
|
|
|
|
From RoSPA (the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents):
Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain, 2012
Killed 1,754
Seriously Injured 23,039
Slightly Injured 170,930
All 195,723
I'd say cars with human drivers are of dubious safety, looking at the figures above. Even worse, Britain is among the safest countries to drive in. Imagine what these figures must be worldwide 
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I was watching listening to the TV where in an ad they were touting the advantages of a home security system to moms and they actually had the audacity to proclaim that a "land line" was vulnerable and this product did not use the rascal land lines presumably for this reason.
In no time flat your reliable "old mare and attached buggy" will be illegal. What ever that may be, your flip phone, your faith........
Still, I fancy a driverless car.
Imagine being able to amuse and abuse you alls at 80 mph. 
|
|
|
|
|
Right off the bat... I answered "Definitely not." to the survey. Can you imagine them trying to code a car to be able to hang with an all-of-a-sudden down-pour in SoCal where a whole years worth of road oil gets washed-up to the surface of that water? Yeah... sure... like some code is going to be able to handle my truck all of a sudden wanting to slide the back-end out "flat-track" style in a turn.
Anyway, do we really need more things to confine us to sitting behind a desk and not actively participating in the experience anymore than we already do?
That being said... the idea struck me that a self-driving car... though it would suck for most of us... I got to thinking about all the assholes who for some reason simply can NOT put down their cellphones... OR all the assholes who DON'T obey the "Slower Traffic Keep To The Right" signs. OR all the assholes who jump into an HOV lane... then proceed to drive at a speed below the "de facto" speed people expect to achieve by going into the God Damned HOV lane to begin with.
Hrmm... I wonder if maybe these self-driving cars should be a punishment handed-down to drivers who have committed verifiable acts to demonstrate their poor skills or poor responsibility? Gotta DUI? Ok... you wanna get around? You gotta LEASE a self-drive car. You were at fault in an accident that permanently injured another person? You gotta LEASE a self-drive car.
The flip-side... I know some people would actually LIKE (EEK!!) to have a self-drive car so they could scrape together even MORE minutes of their life to be stuck behind a computer/laptop during the week. Those people are often already parking at Metro train stations in their satellite communities and commuting into their downtown jobs... already answering Emails, etc.
Hrmm... wait a sec... if my car is driving itself... OH SNAP! That gives me an opportunity for some "Road-Head"!!! or Gettin' Busy down the 15 headin' to Vegas!
I may have to re-think this whole self-driving thing.
|
|
|
|
|
...as long as there was physical, immediate, no nonsense switch to manual. If I notice somebody playing with my car from the outside, I want to be able to take over. Same for any kind of alert that the car might issue (camera broken, mudded, blinded, whatever)
I believe the traffic jams would near on disappear as impatient drivers wouldn't run through red and get stuck in the middle of the crossroads just as the other side starts, there wouldn't be "slalom skiing" in the traffic with the cars running one in front of the other only to switch places because slower lane just got faster.
I believe it would be much safer on the road. But I wouldn't let my kids into such car without me being near to switch if needed. And I would still require the driver to have the license or the car should know to simply force stop if manual switch is triggered - some (again physical) switch that would be set for drivers and non-drivers.
|
|
|
|
|
Sinisa Hajnal wrote: ...as long as there was physical, immediate, no nonsense switch to manual.
That probably is an illusion. Especially on a longer trip, you will of course stay perfectly alert and be able to take over in a split second. I really fear that very many people would be foolish enough only to pretend to be alert and secretly pass the time with all kinds of little distractions.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't say I wanted to be alert at all times, hostile takeover of the car hopefully will not be for causing instant crash. But if the car starts to behave strangely, I want the ability to take over without dependance on electronic brain (which could be controlled) - as far as the AI for driving leaves me to steer and stop if I want regardless of what the outside command (or inside algorithm) want to do, I'd take it.
|
|
|
|
|
It's already happening without computers driving...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-31295774[^]
I've been driving for 25 years, done up to 40,000 miles a year on occasion. There have been a few near misses and I'm honest enough to admit a few mistakes on my part, simply due to human error.
I try to be careful and try to stick to the speed limit, but there are always distractions - I know we all believe we're the worlds greatest driver, but really we're not. Most of the time we're lucky. Most of the time we don't even realise that we've been lucky, we assume it's talent
Anyone who thinks they're a great driver is deluding themselves.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Nobody seems to be mentioning this ... it is not really up to us! Our insurance companies will (in due course) realize that these cars drive better and safer than humans, and will either refuse to insure manual cars or else price the insurance out of reach for most people. At some point in the 2nd half of this century owning a manually-driven car will be the mark of luxury. Eventually, manually-driven cars will be relegated to special roads and there will be driver clubs ... kind of like the vintage car clubs of today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi there!
Quite a few years ago I used to work in metal manufacturing (writing AI code to optimize job scheduling for turret punch presses; fascinating stuff). You are very right in that people do not see the connection--more and more critical pieces of what we use every day are completely machine-made. Guess it is inevitable, so we might as well get used to it ...
Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree whole-heartedly. The insurance companies and the lawmakers will, in due course, make it exceptionally risky and expensive to ever drive yourself after this technology is common place.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe the insurance companies will prevent this because if they become un-crashable, they'd be out of business!
But like the stories of the oil industry trying to stifle investment in cleaner technologies.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
