Welcome to the Lounge

Mike Hankey23-Mar-18 0:10

Mike Hankey

23-Mar-18 0:10

So that's the secret, all these years I've just ducked!

Everyone has a photographic memory; some just don't have film. Steven Wright

peterkmx23-Mar-18 0:34

peterkmx

23-Mar-18 0:34

there is a positive side - exercise keeps you in good shape ...

W∴ Balboos, GHB23-Mar-18 1:52

W∴ Balboos, GHB

23-Mar-18 1:52

Here - enjoy these now, while you can.

Rose | [Rose]

Because after you test that answer, :tombstone:*

* Yes - I know this won't convert to an icon, but it should!

Ravings en masse^
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010

Richard Deeming23-Mar-18 3:18

Richard Deeming

23-Mar-18 3:18

Don't forget to add: "And you can't spell overreacting without ovary!" Smile | :)

"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer

Footage of the Uber driverless car accident

dandy7224-Mar-18 1:21

dandy72

24-Mar-18 1:21

Slow clap

The pompey22-Mar-18 22:22

The pompey

22-Mar-18 22:22

I think it is misleading [^] as although you don't 'see her till late, the car should have other mechanisms other than 'sight' to be able to detect her. It does debunk the earlier theory I saw in here where they said a human driver would be aware of someone near the road - you literally don't see her.

glennPattonWork322-Mar-18 22:39

glennPattonWork3

22-Mar-18 22:39

I must admit I was a little skeptical of all 'human killed by robot stuff' (humans have been killed by robots before, uprising was not triggered). From the looks of it was someone crossing a road that wasn't busy at night wearing black while not paying attension. Darwin potential?

A_Griffin22-Mar-18 22:42

A_Griffin

22-Mar-18 22:42

Quote:
you literally don't see her.

But that may be down to the quality of the video - you can't judge from that what a human in the car could see. But yes, as the selling point of these vehicles is their improved safety and efficiency over humans, one does rather feel they failed here.

Having said that, I find the various remarks by the victim's family to be somewhat distasteful - I get the distinct impression their first instinct is about how much money they can get out of this rather than grief for their relative.

ZurdoDev23-Mar-18 4:28

ZurdoDev

23-Mar-18 4:28

A_Griffin wrote:
one does rather feel they failed here.

It will never be 100% safe. But even 1 accident from time to time is still monumentally better than what we have now.

Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.

Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.

HobbyProggy22-Mar-18 23:05

HobbyProggy

22-Mar-18 23:05

As i linked earlier =>
An HDR picture of the scene at darkness Where it happened - Album on Imgur[^]

Rules for the FOSW ![^]

if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 3:09

23-Mar-18 3:09

If that's actually HDR, it's not representative of what's reasonable for the cars camera to have seen. In low light HDR will be combining multiple images, some relatively long to build up enough data on the dimly lit portions; the car's camera has to run in video mode so it can react to the far more common fast moving objects.

Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius

Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt

HobbyProggy23-Mar-18 3:19

HobbyProggy

23-Mar-18 3:19

So you really want to tell me it's okay for you that an autonomous car is only driving by cam vision with that horrible quality?
Minimum for me is LIDAR and RADAR on the car, otherwise it has to follow rules like only drive as fast as you can react, meaning with this low light and bad view not even 10mph!

I wanted to show with that picture that the human could have prevented the accident because she would have seen way more than the cam.

Rules for the FOSW ![^]

if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 3:47

23-Mar-18 3:47

No, that's not what I said.

What I said was that HDR is not, and cannot be, used as a reference for what should be seen by what needs to be a video camera. That said, from what I've seen after making my previous comment I've seen cell phone video of the street at night showing almost as much detail as that still that paints a much worse picture of the quality/calibration of Uber's camera and has me wondering about the statements from the local cops about it being too dark to see the victim in advance.

Elsewhere on this very thread I said that LIDAR (which everyone but Tesla's self driving cars are using) should have detected the woman.

More broadly speaking, I find myself in increasing agreement with Timothy B Lee that even if not legally at fault in any of their recent crashes, Uber's cars are demonstrating a pattern of not being particularly good drivers.

HobbyProggy25-Mar-18 19:32

HobbyProggy

25-Mar-18 19:32

Dan Neely wrote:
Uber's cars are demonstrating a pattern of not being particularly good drivers.

Agreed, they should be banned from the road.

Rules for the FOSW ![^]

if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

F-ES Sitecore22-Mar-18 23:23

F-ES Sitecore

22-Mar-18 23:23

What learned from this is that having a "human backup" is useless if that person is on their phone. He should be prosecuted.

Munchies_Matt22-Mar-18 23:24

22-Mar-18 23:24

Infrared imaging?

Good idea.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 3:06

23-Mar-18 3:06

IR cams would be a good idea (and some luxury cars have had them for the last few years); but just LIDAR should've been enough to detect her.

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 4:49

23-Mar-18 4:49

Some Mercs had them, they will probably become standard on all cars soon.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 4:55

23-Mar-18 4:55

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Some Mercs had them, they will probably become standard on all cars soon.

On the loaded packages from more mainstream makes perhaps, but barring govt mandates I wouldn't expect to see them working their way down to base models for a while. Things like blind spot sensors and adaptive cruise/lane following that're currently only on mid/upper levels for most cars'd be a lot more generally useful IMO.

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 4:58

23-Mar-18 4:58

Mercs were the first with antilock brakes I think. And airbags?

They have pretty much lead the way. I wouldnt be surprised if we had IR screens in the dash in 10 or 20 years.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 5:09

23-Mar-18 5:09

15+ out I'd have no problem with a prediction of it as a standard feature (unless self driving cars conquer the world first); but even 10y is beyond what I'd consider "soon".

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 5:18

23-Mar-18 5:18

Yeah, I can see alot of automation coming in.

Take cars on motorways, doing say 150 mph, bumper to bumper, in a train, all controlled automatically. You can switch off, sleep, read. When you want to exit you go through some kind of exiting procedure an leave the train.

And Mercs have also introduced on some cars proximity sensors that activate the brakes. With this Uber accident, that would have worked.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 5:36

23-Mar-18 5:36

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Take cars on motorways, doing say 150 mph, bumper to bumper, in a train, all controlled automatically. You can switch off, sleep, read. When you want to exit you go through some kind of exiting procedure an leave the train.

Trains more than a few cars long are going to need dedicated lanes because they become obstacles to anyone trying to change lanes. Driving at 150 MPH is going to be a lot more limited. Outside of the Autobahns very few roads are designed for traffic that fast. Locally even if the turns were banked steeply enough to keep cars from flying off into the guard rails the g-forces on passengers would suck. Short of completely new construction that continuously sliced through hills and bridged valleys I don't think anything above 90 MPH or so would be viable from a passenger comfort standard on most of the divided highways in western PA.

Munchies_Matt wrote:
And Mercs have also introduced on some cars proximity sensors that activate the brakes. With this Uber accident, that would have worked.

Collision alerts and emergency braking are well on their way to being standard features. My guess'd be that they'll be among the next set of safety features to be mandated by various govts. Although I hope the software gets better about false alerts first. (My '17 Accord doesn't combine the collision warning radar with the camera feed from lane following and generates a lot of false positives from oncoming traffic on curved highways.)

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 5:39

23-Mar-18 5:39

Of course, I am talking way into the future. The energy source will need to be in the tarmac, perhaps inductors.

Dan Neely wrote:
Although I hope the software gets better

Dont we all, in all things! Smile | :)