Realistically, how many places can you get up enough speed to kill a driver AND crowds of pedestrians are gathering? Particularly if the computer is driving and obeying posted limits, I get the hypothetical but that's probably somewhere in the Powerball odds. Bang up the car or curb rash the wheels, maybe, but kill the occupants? Unless you're driving a Corvair...Originally Posted by tanner
For inattentive careless drivers in traffic, it's probably a blessing. For attentive good drivers, not so much. For example, in winter, curved dry road that has the lane partially covered with a patch of ice. An attentive driver might see the ice patch and make a correction to avoid it. An computer driven car reads the wheel sensors having traction in the dry, then hits the patch and transitions to no traction. Will it coast off throttle without applying brakes?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk
Given the level of intelligence of relatively simple systems like Jeep's Quadra Drive II, traction control, ABS etc. that overcome traction obstacles, I'd say the machine will know how to deal with lost traction and do so more efficiently than humans.
Maybe the autonomous traffic lights&cameras can issue autonomous tickets to the autonomous cars and autonomously send the traffic light company their cut & the city their share of the revenue.
'Progress' . . . ain't it wonderful ?
As President Eisenhower said . . . there's complete, 100% 'security' . . . in a prison cell.
What the government can control, it will. If you aren't controlling your car, the government will. If the government controls how you go, they will control where you go.
I'm not much of a wookiesuiter, but I've heard Red Barchetta.
Ignore Alien Orders
Why would they need to write tickets? The eInfraction systems just eDebits your eAllowance. Your guilt would already be adjudicated by the eJusticeSystem which cuffs out those inefficient prosecutors, judges and juries. Instead of "policing" you have a tube at the entrance to each building that you step through, if you've committed a NonSocialAct™ formerly called "crime," the tube just doesn't open and rotates out of alignment where you wait until the truck from eJustice stops by to transport you to the NonSocialCenter. Alternatively, your car could just whisk you away to the NonSocialCenter after the scan it completes identifies you as having NonSocialThought.
Last edited by FNFAN; 07-02-2016 at 11:07 AM.
-All views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect those of the author's employer-
@FNFAN - I was in a store recently buying a cable for one of the computers. Struck up a conversation with the 20-something guy behind the counter. He thought it was 'a wonderful idea' that someday you might have an embedded chip in your hand that would automatically scan in prices of items you wanted to buy & credit your account. He also thought it 'wonderful' that your chip could be scanned as you moved around & signs display 'special offers' to you based on your past history.
I stood there dumbfounded, with my jaw probably hanging down. So many people have been sold this line of *#%^
Damnit. I was patiently waiting to find an opportunity to drop "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." into this one... I suppose a thread can't really have too many Rush references though
I'm not a cop, but I have a background in this stuff (and this is the Internet) so I'm going to offer my unsolicited opinion anyways.
I agree, but in the case of airplanes, that person is usually a highly-trained, and highly-experienced, expert in the field. If self-driving cars become a thing, people are going to have less and less actual experience controlling the vehicle, and teenage drivers aren't reliable in the best of circumstances.
That guy had posted something like 20 videos of him screwing around with the Tesla's autopilot, and police later found a DVD player in his car, so he was probably watching a movie when that collision occurred. Further, the Tesla's autopilot is still technically in beta, and not a "finished product." Customers have to manually opt in to the program to use it.
My experience is that it's actually fairly reliable, at least in urban areas. There was one time when I was at CSAT in Nacogdoches that the damned thing tried to lead me out to where they filmed 'Deliverance', and then literally had me going around in circles. Never seen that before, or since.
Unintended acceleration in Toyotas was a major deal a few years ago. It always sounded like a software problem to me, although Toyota insisted they never identified the source of the issue (and they may not have successfully identified it; anyone who has spent time with software quality assurance (e.g., the people that hunt for bugs in your program) knows the dizzying sequence of inputs necessary to recreate an issue, and Toyota may not have been able to reproduce the error).
I'm not sure that I agree. Nothing is going to work correctly all the time, and those sort of restrictions are a surefire way to stifle innovation. That's just my opinion.
You've got to be careful not to overly romanticize AI, which is something many people, including trained researchers, often do. It's a computer program, and not a "thinking" thing. Its ability to determine which of a variety of actions would result in the "least bad" outcome in such an open-ended scenario is a hypothetical thing.
Correct. And my understanding is the driver over-correcting creates more issues than it solves, something a computer would likely not do.
I've found that millennials don't really have the same concept of privacy regular people do. They're so used to voluntarily publishing the exhausting minutiae of every aspect of their lives that keeping something like that hidden doesn't compute. But at any rate, if his opinion surprised you, you'd be shocked to hear about a lot of the research that's been conducted in the fields of participatory sensor networks and location-based services. The privacy violations of said fields are so egregious, it spawned its own field of information security to try and keep those things from being abused.
"Sapiens dicit: 'Ignoscere divinum est, sed noli pretium plenum pro pizza sero allata solvere.'" - Michelangelo
Right. I have seen crashes akin to a "swoop and squat" where they are done without malice. A person doing some hard braking will sometimes hit the shoulder when they realize they are running out of room. If there is someone behind them, their reaction time is even less and they rear-end someone.
This, and many other scenarios, will have to be decisions that are programmed into it ahead of time. Just saying, it is a bit trippy when machines start making calls like these.
Reply With Quote