|
Gerry Schmitz wrote: Anyway, at some point, there had been a discussion about "burying things in the road"; i.e. virtual slots.
Elon's already taking it way deeper with his Boring Company. Given that he's also already working on self-driving cars, I'm sure he's got something in mind...
|
|
|
|
|
I'm quite sure he's going for the Golgafrincham solution.
He will be sending all the people that buys his cars. Already sent one.
|
|
|
|
|
My answer is not yet.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
My own response is emphatically "NO!"
First, I have never seen a truly bug free program, no matter what language, what system, or what technology was used in the development. Even the Boeing 737 had a bug in its ADAR that they couldn't find so the engineers developed code to catch when the bug occurred.
Second, Personal experience. I had a Ford F150 with EPAS (Electronic Power Assisted Steering or drive-by-wire) that rolled over on me when I dropped a wheel into the drainage ditch. The software thought the truck was skidding (or something) and took control of the steering. But the "corrective action" caused the truck to turtle.
Truck was considered totaled because the side airbags went off. Three weeks after I settled with the insurance company, I got an urgent recall notice from Ford to have the truck's software updated. (Truck was long gone by that time.)
I have tried power slides, drifting, etc, with my new truck and, after a few seconds, it just shuts down. The accelerator has about a 1-2 second lag from when I hit the gas until the engine responds. Can't do a burnout (Iwas told I can override traction control but I don't trust the truck enough to even try anymore.)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to seeing how a self driving car would cope with the residential roads in my home city of Portsmouth in the UK. Victorian/Edwardian roads, built before cars existed, require a mutually agreed "code of conduct" between drivers to stop a logjam forming in the single car width between the parked vehicles. You need to anticipate the actions and respond to signals (light flash/pulling over) over a distance of 100 yards or more to be able to negotiate the streets here. I can't see a self driving car being able to comprehend any of that. What I expect to see is it causing a multitude of traffic jams as it ignores Portsmouth road 'etiquette'.
See pic to get the idea of the issue.
|
|
|
|
|
No - does that make me a control freak?
|
|
|
|
|
For me, the questions is:
Would I trust me, if I trusted a self-driving car (to do my driving)?
That's a solid NO.
But then, I still prefer a stick-shift to an automatic gear-box.
Having done a decent bit of driving under many conditions has led me to provisionally trust me.
As long as I am really in control.
I manage to be self-critical, though perhaps not all of the time.
I have not noticed self-criticism as a subject in self-driving.
Then again, when I am (bi)cycling, I might statistically prefer self-driving cars as less dangerous.
So, yeah, that's a bit of "all other drivers (except a few) are bad drivers", which makes me suspicious again. Should I end with "clueless"? When I'm old perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
I just hope Audi, Mercedes and BMW hurry the hell up and start producing theirs - got to be better than some/most of the dorks who drive their cars at the moment
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leaning toward yes.
The technology isn't quite there, but it is quickly getting there. Although I enjoy driving, I look forward to the day when self driving cars are mandated:
1. There are so many scared/inattentive/aggressive/distracted drivers and self driving will eliminate those dangers.
2. Traffic congestion can be minimized. With closer following tolerances, fewer stupid moves and dramatic reduction in accidents, drive times will be shortened.
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend; inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -- Groucho Marx
|
|
|
|
|
Of course not.
But, of course, I would trust it way more than a car driven by a human.
|
|
|
|
|
I read the question as, “would you walk (or bicycle) along a road that has self-driving cars.” My answer to that is an emphatic no. Wouldn’t want a car to decide to run me over to save its passengers or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
A lot of them have conditions like the lanes have to be visible, and where I live, that's just not a reality. I do think it would be better in the long run, but No, I wouldn't trust a self driving car.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely!
Look, EVERYONE is a sh*tty driver. And yet we get out on the road and let ourselves believe that we are safe there.
Everyone gets distracted by something: their phone, a song or discussion on the radio, a fight that they just had, a hottie in the car next to them, problems in life.
Self driving cars will never be affected by THESE distractions. They may never be PERFECT but with their sole focus on driving, they will always be safer than the current alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree about bad drivers. Driving skills are not taught in Driver's Ed.
The question then becomes: How much driving experience do the engineers/developers have in all the possible situations? And do they know enough to be able accommodate such things as controlling a skid on black ice? How about hydro-planing on worn tires? If they don't have the driving experience, how can they develop software to handle it?
Just thinking.....
|
|
|
|
|
NO!
But, I think they should start working on self-walking pedestrians, and self-driving bicycles and self-driving motor-scooters and motorcycles. Those are more of a danger to themselves and automotive traffic and each other than anything else.
Additionally, All cars, trucks, bicycles, etc. should be fitted with a Wi-Fi signal jammer that operates whenever the vehicle is in motion.
|
|
|
|
|
I will. If I am allowed to see the source code and reprogram it myself.
A bunch of drunkards jumped on the street right in front of you, what would you do?
-> brake very hard
-> swerve and go into accident myself
-> brake normally and hit the drunkards
|
|
|
|
|
Massacre at 10:01. Assemble in moat. (10)
Hint
[Base]:[Numeral]
Solution (added after solved)
DECIMATION = Massacre
DEC = 10 (as in decimal numeric base)
I = 01 (1 in roman numerals)
MATION = (assemble) anag. of "in moat"
modified 13-Feb-20 8:14am.
|
|
|
|
|
Need a hint?
I am not around tomorrow so can't set one. Either someone else covers, or I do one on Monday.
(or this one gets solved of course)
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah please a hint will be good.. 10.01 is baffling me
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am stuck with two things, either palindrome or anagram of one past ten. Both do not make any sense
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
lw@zi wrote: Both do not make any sense
That is because both are wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
I am decimated.
"It is easy to decipher extraterrestrial signals after deciphering Javascript and VB6 themselves.", ISanti[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
The use of 10:01 (the time of day) is a tad confusing ...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
