U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-19-2019, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Newburyport, MA
1,304 posts, read 536,458 times
Reputation: 1660

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The issue as I understand is not necessarily the AI the the data input. That Tesla that drove into the tractor trailer. The LIDAR saw the truck but the truck was white on white sky background and the video recognition didn't recognize it. That woman in Arizona on the bike, she was wearing dark clothing and I didn't see any reflectors. This is condition where a human may have difficulty seeing her too. The video recognition identified her as "something" but that can be a false positive and by the time it positively identified her as a pedestrian it was too late.
Yeah, these systems work great, until they don't, and then you're dead. Mind you, I do believe they will eventually work better than human drivers, but I don't want to be an early adopter in this space, that's for sure. I work in IT, and did my PhD in AI years ago, so I am not afraid of tech... on the contrary, I think my background allows me to understand the potential, but also appreciate the limitations in current systems.

They're not ready for prime time yet, not when your life and those of your loved ones hang in the balance. I'll let the engineers refine their algorithms and heuristics over the dead bodies of other customers, thank you very much. That is the reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2019, 02:10 PM
 
12,619 posts, read 4,779,280 times
Reputation: 5584
Quote:
Originally Posted by OutdoorLover View Post
Yeah, these systems work great, until they don't, and then you're dead. Mind you, I do believe they will eventually work better than human drivers, but I don't want to be an early adopter in this space, that's for sure. I work in IT, and did my PhD in AI years ago, so I am not afraid of tech... on the contrary, I think my background allows me to understand the potential, but also appreciate the limitations in current systems.

They're not ready for prime time yet, not when your life and those of your loved ones hang in the balance. I'll let the engineers refine their algorithms and heuristics over the dead bodies of other customers, thank you very much. That is the reality.
Actually they work significantly better than the human now. Simply look at the CA AV accident data. Humans are the problem by greater than 10 to 1.

The Tesla accident was a design flaw purportedly corrected. The driver was also pushing the system well past its design capability.

The Uber death was a design flaw of the kind that should have been impossible. They had a clearly identified target of almost a "gimme" sort and failed to react to it. Incompetence.

So basically if you introduce the Waymo system you likely have lesser accidents and fewer fatalities. And yes people will get killed in AVs. But less than would die without them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Newburyport, MA
1,304 posts, read 536,458 times
Reputation: 1660
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Actually they work significantly better than the human now. Simply look at the CA AV accident data. Humans are the problem by greater than 10 to 1.

The Tesla accident was a design flaw purportedly corrected. The driver was also pushing the system well past its design capability.

The Uber death was a design flaw of the kind that should have been impossible. They had a clearly identified target of almost a "gimme" sort and failed to react to it. Incompetence.

So basically if you introduce the Waymo system you likely have lesser accidents and fewer fatalities. And yes people will get killed in AVs. But less than would die without them.
Most of the data from cars driving in self-driving mode, comes from them being operated on limited access highways. That's real world driving, but it's basically the simplest type of driving scenario and grossly incongruent with the wide range of environments, actors, situations, weather and lighting conditions, etc that are faced by human drivers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Newburyport, MA
1,304 posts, read 536,458 times
Reputation: 1660
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
Actually they work significantly better than the human now. Simply look at the CA AV accident data. Humans are the problem by greater than 10 to 1.

The Tesla accident was a design flaw purportedly corrected. The driver was also pushing the system well past its design capability.

The Uber death was a design flaw of the kind that should have been impossible. They had a clearly identified target of almost a "gimme" sort and failed to react to it. Incompetence.

So basically if you introduce the Waymo system you likely have lesser accidents and fewer fatalities. And yes people will get killed in AVs. But less than would die without them.
The Uber situation was stark, but no more so than some Tesla failures. In the case of the Uber pedestrian death, it first classified her as an unknown object, then a person, then a bike, if I recall... and you know what? If *anything* sizable is coming into your lane, it actually doesn't matter what it is, the right decision is to avoid striking it! Doesn't matter if it's a car, a bike, a pedestrian, a deer, a dog, or a man riding a unicycle and carrying a refrigerator - you name it - driving straight into it is a catastrophic and DUMB mistake!

Teslas have driven straight into at least 2 trucks that I have read about, and it's not like I am scouring the news for them - a parked firetruck and a moving 18-wheeler. In both cases, these were just gross, catastrophic errors. These are not "smart" systems, I think a lot of lay people overestimate the knowledge and "thinking" ability of these systems. Compared to a human being, they are DUMB - extremely narrow in their competence, shallow in their patchy knowledge, they lack context, and they have huge cognitive blind spots - that's why Musk-mobiles drive right into trucks and then Elon Musk says "Ooops, guess we didn't think of that, oh well, I'll just blame the customer and we'll see if we can prevent this particular catastrophe from occurring the next time." I cannot express how disappointed and angry I have been to see Musk blaming customers for his products' poor performance, even when it produces horrific consequences. The man is not a simpleton, he knows better, he just wants to escape responsibility and keep sales up.

Last edited by OutdoorLover; 02-19-2019 at 03:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:06 PM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
33,844 posts, read 41,968,199 times
Reputation: 43226
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch View Post
AVs easily detect and deal with pedestrians and bicyclists. These modes will need their own infrastructure to integrate in any opaque signal free system. There will need to be an interface into the AV infrastructure.

This is of course very long range stuff. You start implementation non signal intersections when virtually all vehicles are AV.

Motorcycles and horse drawn are simply other versions of vehicle and can be integrated in any AV system. There are in fact already prototypes of AV motorcycles.
In your first statement are you saying that pedestrians and bicyclists will have to have transponders also in order to be protected from all those super safe AVs?

If traffic signals are eliminated at intersections how will walkers cross the street?

Yeah, we saw how "easily" that Uber AV detected that pedestrian in Tempe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:09 PM
 
7,916 posts, read 3,161,069 times
Reputation: 5421
Quote:
Originally Posted by OutdoorLover View Post
Most of the data from cars driving in self-driving mode, comes from them being operated on limited access highways. That's real world driving, but it's basically the simplest type of driving scenario and grossly incongruent with the wide range of environments, actors, situations, weather and lighting conditions, etc that are faced by human drivers.
At this point thatís all weíre asking for. I want a self driving car when Iím on a mind numbing boring trip on the interstate doing nothing but staying in the lines and not hitting the guy in front of me. Surely some PhD in AI can sign up to that challenge and not hide behind a bunch of lawyers and legal disclaimers.
Worry about the nighttime left turn onto a 6 lane city street during rush hour during a blizzard later. Baby steps man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Newburyport, MA
1,304 posts, read 536,458 times
Reputation: 1660
Interesting article linked below. Like I said, in time, autonomous systems will drive better than people. There are fewer limitations on these systems than there are on human beings, so it's a question not of if, but when. But today? I would pick the human as my pilot every time.

https://theconversation.com/are-auto...-drivers-90202
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Newburyport, MA
1,304 posts, read 536,458 times
Reputation: 1660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy100 View Post
At this point thatís all weíre asking for. I want a self driving car when Iím on a mind numbing boring trip on the interstate doing nothing but staying in the lines and not hitting the guy in front of me. Surely some PhD in AI can sign up to that challenge and not hide behind a bunch of lawyers and legal disclaimers.
Worry about the nighttime left turn onto a 6 lane city street during rush hour during a blizzard later. Baby steps man.
So I agree with what you're saying - if the best systems are really trustworthy for driving on limited access highways, then bravo! That's still very useful and it's a huge advance. I am nearly 60, and I am actually counting on these systems to drive for me in the general sense, before my own faculties diminish too much, so I am hoping that in another 10 years, 15 years, I will feel safe in turning over the wheel to one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, TX
2,622 posts, read 788,636 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone View Post
I've spoken out against self driving cars in the past but really I think someday they will be a wonderful thing. My problem with them is how aggressively their proponents want to implement their ubiquitous usage on us. We've got people saying that between 5-10 years not only will they be commonplace, but you won't even be allowed to drive your old car anymore. You'll either have to purchase an extremely expensive self driving car, or, as some suggest, you won't even be able to own one and you'll be forced to ride share. (But it will be great we promise!)

I don't think the technology will be ready for such a drastic changeover in such a short amount of time and even on the off chance that the tech is ready, society won't be. I know, I know, muh horse and buggy, but this is not the same thing. Not everyone is going to want this ride sharing autonomous vehicle utopia and for people who don't live in large cities it won't even be practical. And no, you won't be able to force everyone to abandon the countryside and move to your urban paradise. There are people who will literally fight and kill/die before allowing themselves to be forced to do that. It's simply not a lifestyle for everyone.
Good luck when your car gets hacked
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2019, 03:45 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, TX
2,622 posts, read 788,636 times
Reputation: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by OutdoorLover View Post
Interesting article linked below. Like I said, in time, autonomous systems will drive better than people. There are fewer limitations on these systems than there are on human beings, so it's a question not of if, but when. But today? I would pick the human as my pilot every time.

https://theconversation.com/are-auto...-drivers-90202
Ban cell phones then if you wanna go authoratarian, no more cell phone usage outside of home
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:43 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top