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.
As for the Uber crash, humans are able to cause accidents as much as prevent them. It is called anticipation, often improved with years of driving experience or defensive driving methods. Can these computers do the same? Or did the Uber vehicle do little to avoid it because the offending action "wasn't supposed to occur"? This is important if it's going to share our roads to start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed
Author of that article has an odd definition of ubiquitous. Just means widespread/seen all over. I see F-150s everywhere, but not everyone has one.
He also challenges the 35% quote so it's not all about 100%.
Agree, OP, you should edit your post to point out that the self driver Uber car was not at fault.
That is insufficient. If the auto Uber could have prevented the crash it would still be a problem for Uber. The object is not to avoid liability it is to maintain safety well past that of a human.
So you would have to see the technical details of the crash to understand Uber's view.
I don't see that possible in that time frame. A nearby highway project for less than 15mi of road takes 4 years to remodel and won't be finished until 2019.
In order to make self-driving cars perform safely all roads needs to be retrofitted with communication devices. I don't see that happening.
It will take decades for the Feds to fix our roads and they haven't even started yet. What company is willing to take a chance and insure all cars using their self-driving kit that it won't kill people.
Not how it works. The intent of the autonomous industry is to live with the roads as they are. They will eventually integrate road and infrastructure capabilities but they do not need them.
There will be communications capability in all new cars starting soon. And that may be retrofit-able though certainly not initially required.
And of course the autonomous vehicles will kill people. But hopefully at a small percentage of the rate at which humans do.
Do you even have a car with auto-wipers or headlights? Many people still don't. Active (radar) cruise-control has been around for quite a few years now, nobody buys that option for $2k+ a pop. More technology, more stuff to break, is the mentality. Or they simply haven't chosen to buy a new car in the last decade - you can't force that.
I will not enjoy being on the road with these things until we're all autonomous. It's going to be a bumpy ride getting there because I'm not too excited about following cars going only 55mph on the interstate or an overly cautious left-turner because they are programmed to follow the letter of the law and safety rules in every way.
They won't be driving the speed limit and in time the speed limit goes away. They will likely drive a safe speed which will depend on traffic and conditions. They generally will avoid extreme speeding but not arbitrary speed limits. And they will make left turns much more aggressively than a human. They need less margin and have no fear.
They won't be driving the speed limit and in time the speed limit goes away. They will likely drive a safe speed which will depend on traffic and conditions. They generally will avoid extreme speeding but not arbitrary speed limits. And they will make left turns much more aggressively than a human. They need less margin and have no fear.
That all sounds great (and only plausible once we're close to 100% autonomous). But what are these opinions based on?
That all sounds great (and only plausible once we're close to 100% autonomous). But what are these opinions based on?
Thirty five years of running large engineering organizations. Retired now but still follow the art. IEEE and technical press provide at least limited insight but much of the technical problems are obvious.
LIDAR or radar/optical? Can LIDAR be reduced to a more economical and rugged design? How to identify bicycles? How good does it have to be? How will that be proved?
I still believe that trucks will go first. Simple cost/value issue. And trucks likely can be retrofitted...something not likely with automobiles.
But I think it is all certain. The variable is the timing.
I would not get into a car that did not have provision for a driver to take over control. In 40 years in the auto industry, I never once went into a garage that did not have broken down cars in it. This included cars from Ferrari and Rolls Royce all the way down to Yugo. Man made products do malfunction and there needs to be provision for that. Think about riding in the back seat of a self drive and seeing smoke coming out of the dashboard.
I would not get into a car that did not have provision for a driver to take over control. In 40 years in the auto industry, I never once went into a garage that did not have broken down cars in it. This included cars from Ferrari and Rolls Royce all the way down to Yugo. Man made products do malfunction and there needs to be provision for that. Think about riding in the back seat of a self drive and seeing smoke coming out of the dashboard.
And you are unaware that the primary cause of death is the human and not the mechanism?
And when the autonomous vehicle gets to be three times as safe on the highway as the human driven you will insist upon your right to risk your neck?
OK - But don't be surprised when you get banned from the road for your increased risk.
I think there is a larger issue here. I have no doubt that fully autonomous vehicles can be built that will operate more safely than human operated vehicles will.
Still, I question whether that is a positive thing. We are rapidly building a world in which any involvement by humans (except to design computers and artificial intelligence) is unnecessary. Perhaps, that world should be built. However, it shouldn't be done without a long public debate and a consensus being arrived at.
I think there should be heavy government regulation of autonomous vehicles. Don't prohibit them entirely. However, make the manufacturers prove several times over their vehicles are safer than vehicle operated by human beings.
What will we do with two or three million truck drivers who no longer have jobs? What will we do with millions of others who lack the skills to participate in a tech-plenty world? Its time for us to start talking about issues like this instead of issues like abortion, gun control, and racial relations. That world ended back in the 1960's or the 1970's.
Another thing I greatly fear is the notion that the less people have to do, the less they will be able to do. I see large percentages of human beings becoming nothing, but parasites that have no ability to do anything over than simply lay around. When all work is done by machines, why should humans try to maintain any skills at all? Perhaps, some jobs should always be reserved for human beings, despite technological capabilities.
Its a brave new world and whether it comes in ten years, fifteen years, or twenty years its coming. And we are dreadfully unprepared for it.
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.
