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.
I said... "to any practical extent" and no, in 30-40 years we still won't have the level of AI to be able to "practically" handle such to any "reliable" extent.
Wow. 2056 and AI still can't even handle driving. I'm not sure what your "practical extent" qualifier is meant to imply. Are you saying it will still only be in the experimental stages by 2056?
It's really just a matter of time. That's really all we're arguing about.
I would much rather have a 22 year old idiot driving than having to rely on software managed by that 22 year old idiot.
I wouldn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalDiscord
You want to drive in such a car, fine... more power to ya. I have no issues being on the road with one, I can always drive defensively myself, but I will NOT be forced to rely on one myself.
You're now talking about preference, whereas I thought we were talking about prevalence.
You must have true AI that is able to take an unknown and then evaluate it and then act accordingly...
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalDiscord
...otherwise you end up with that Tesla car killing the driver because it couldn't tell the difference between a white trailer turning in front of the driver and that of the sun glaring.
Tesla likely over-stated what its beta system could do here in 2016. And then owners took that over-statement and ran with it. Clearly there's a long way to go which is why nobody thinks what that driver was doing (not doing) was clever and why nobody thinks this is going to happen overnight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalDiscord
There are infinite variables to consider...
I don't think I would characterize the variables as infinite, but it's probable that you can't account for EVERY situation. And how does a self-driving car decide who to kill? The point is that you can make it good enough and still have accidents and deaths while drastically reducing the million-plus deaths from ape drivers each year to something much more reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LogicalDiscord
Now you might be perfectly fine with taking that risk. I am not, because... you see... I know how to drive defensively and have yet to be in an accident, but I have avoided numerous ones due to my approach to driving.
But again this is going to your preference, not the prevalence of the technology or its speed of advancement and acumen. I believe, in the long run, that there will eventually come a time when ape-driven cars are cast as morally repugnant, when driving skills atrophy to the point where the children of the children of today's Millennials are scared to even think about driving themselves, and eventually when driving yourself is made illegal.
I mean, I get it. I ride motorcycles. I've had sporty cars (RX-7, Stealth R/T TT, Civic Si, Scion FR-S, and now a 2015 Mustang). I've done track days and autocross. I enjoy driving and used to enjoy it a lot more. I trust my ability too. I'm looking, though, at larger technological and societal trends, not my individual preferences.
Because of variances in tire wear, etc, no speed limiting system can effectively hold a vehicle to exactly 68 mph. The result would be a bunch of vehicles who's maximum speeds are close, but not exactly the same.
It would be great being stuck behind a truck going 68.0 mph at full throttle which takes 3 counties to pass another truck which is going 67.9.
It is easy to program trucks to 68. Or 75. Or anything else. It's just a matter of plug in and adjust, and it's been that way for years.
I drove 18 wheelers until 2010 and all our trucks were limited to 70. At speeds greater than 70 the throttle goes dead. Down hill is fun, though.
Some states - Ohio and Illinois - limited truck speed to 55 for several years. But they found that the speed differential was too much for normal traffic. Just as you said, it takes forever to pass another truck.
Limiting truck speed to 68 is a mistake.
But that probably won't stop them.
I want to clarify why this won't likely happen in our lifetimes. You can't approach these systems from a strict rule style design (ie if this, then that). You must have true AI that is able to take an unknown and then evaluate it and then act accordingly otherwise you end up with that Tesla car killing the driver because it couldn't tell the difference between a white trailer turning in front of the driver and that of the sun glaring.
Uber is about ready to deploy this tech in Pittsburgh.....it's coming now and not years from now.
They are using AI, the Tesla example was failure of the sensors and not the AI. There is two sensing systems, one is radar based and the other is video. If they were using just the radar system it would have stopped the car but the radar system has issues with overhead signs and other things. Both the video and the radar need to match to to detect it as an obstacle.
It's certainly a huge setback but they will adjust, these cars already have better driving records than humans. There is no way you as human will be able to compete with these cars.
Quote:
There are infinite variables to consider with such systems and a developer can not account for them all.
They don't need to, they are using AI. These vehicles were able to travel desolate country roads a decade ago with little more than GPS waypoints as guidance.
If you request an Uber in Pittsburgh this week, there's a chance your car may be driving itself.
Well, not completely by itself. There will still be two operators in the vehicle: A trained Uber engineer as well as a person to take notes.
But, despite the presence of these humans, it's official: Self-driving cars are now accessible to the public. In the middle of August, Uber announced it would unveil self-driving rides in Pittsburgh. And then, beating the ride-sharing giant by mere days, Cambridge startup nuTuonomy began shuttling passengers in driverless taxis in Singapore.
The idiots who dreamed this up have obviously spent very little time in the cab of a heavy-duty truck; probably have no concept of how changes in grades, to cite just one example, have to be negotiated.
Some trucking companies already set governors on their tractor trailers at 62 mph.
The only real impediment to the onslaught of self-driving vehicles will be hackers and lawsuits. Someone with a GPS spoofer or access to exploitable software bugs could wreak havoc and doom the technology for decades. It's almost certain to happen, so the AI and sensor code needs to be absolutely bulletproof or people will die for one reason or another.
The only real impediment to the onslaught of self-driving vehicles will be hackers and lawsuits. Someone with a GPS spoofer or access to exploitable software bugs could wreak havoc and doom the technology for decades. It's almost certain to happen, so the AI and sensor code needs to be absolutely bulletproof or people will die for one reason or another.
True, Jeep has had multiple instances of their vehicles being hackable. Even with drivers in the cars, they were powerless to manually overcome the hackers efforts.
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.
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.
