Self driving cars....

[desol]

I don't know that humans would be any better at split second decisions making than machines, only when the decisions are completely unanticipated would a human have some value (maybe).

Say, downtown Manhattan?

I believe that humans are far superior with any kind of decision making where a gigantic amount of variables may present themselves. At this point in history anyway...

Again, I'd love to kick back on a road trip.

 

[madswitcher]

you don't think 1 million lives are worth saving? 

Na Na, That's not what I said or implied as my point of view. I said that someone at some level will be doing a financial calculation weighing up pros and cons, where money comes into that calculation.

For example,

The reluctance of the car industry to install safety belts and adopt lead-free petrol.

At some level of government, ( UK Treasury) weighing up the investment in the National Health scheme in the UK, versus the 'burden' of people living longer.

Regards

Mike

 

[joaquins]

  I don't know if a paying-attention human woulnt avoid that accident, Ive been in situations where pedestrians where in complete darkness and be able to see them just because of the shadow of far away lights, once even with a black dog in an awfully illuminated highway. I can't say if in this situation that would been the case, but for sure I can't judge from just the video as the police did.

  In the other hand, self driving cars have several other systems other than sight to detect objects, for what I've seen of this case radar and ladar, I wonder if it was lacking a few thermal cameras to avoid this particular collision.

JS

 

[The Kid]

In the other hand, self driving cars have several other systems other than sight to detect objects, for what I've seen of this case radar and ladar, I wonder if it was lacking a few thermal cameras to avoid this particular collision.

JS

This is kinda what I was getting at, regarding physics; it doesn't matter how many cameras/sensors you have, at the point of no return, even with the best software, physics takes over and the limits of vehicle braking are probably going to be exceeded.  Hopefully, though, the vehicle will still be able to stop and not run over the pedestrian.  But, it doesn't take much force to do serious injury. 

I, myself, when I was a kid got hit by a pickup while on a bicycle that wasn't going all that fast.  It was my fault, I came out of nowhere, and in front of the moving vehicle, but the pickup driver just couldn't stop in time.  I'm sure he had the brake pedal  through the floor, but again, doesn't matter, because the vehicle will keep going, due to momentum.  And I was told I was hit by a truck, because I woke up in the hospital couple days later, wondering where I was and what happened.  Ended up with a skull fracture (but I'm feeling much better now!  ).  I still don't have memory prior to or after the accident.  But, anyway, point is just a little bump and depending on how you hit the pavement could really have some disastrous consequences.  I actually consider myself an expert on the pedestrian side of collisions, because that was NOT the last time I encountered a car vs. my bicycle.  I've been told more than a few times my guardian angel was working overtime.  Out of the other incidents I was in, just one more was a head on, and from what I gathered, looked worse than it was.  I went to make a left turn, and due to an error in judgement on what the oncoming traffic was doing, ended up having to make a split second decision on getting hit by a van or a car.  I chose the car, because I figured less surface area.  Turned out to be the right choice.  I hit the car, which was probably doing 35/40, and rolled off the hood.  I checked my bike, it was bent a little, but still operational.  I grabbed my box of donuts, and walked to the sidewalk.  Kinda dusted myself off, and went to leave.  Well, somebody called the fire dept.  Everybody was telling me I was in shock.  I wasn't, I felt fine, and since this wasn't the first time I had done this, I guess I was used to it.  The paramedic took my blood pressure monitor, and said it was really good, to which I told him, yeah, I ride my bike a lot!!  lol.  He asked if I wanted to go to the hospital to get checked (I probably should have) but I said no.  And then, the police officer that was there issued me a ticket, because bicycles are considered motor vehicles up here.  It was my fault, but to this day, that still annoys me.  It's on my permanent driving record, failure to yield.  I just always had the image of being in a coma in the hospital and getting a traffic ticket.  I did actually feel bad about this wreck because I'm sure I scared the sh** out of the lady that hit me.  She (and others) saw me fly through the air and she thought she killed me.  She even offered to pay to fix my bike. 

I'm not bragging about being reckless, more of wow, I consider myself VERY lucky, and really wonder why I'm still walking around, especially when there's people out there that can die from eating peanuts. 

But back to the point of auto cars, in my opinion, in both of these situations, the self driving thing may have helped slow the collision, but it was still going to happen.  The only real option in software to stop the collision is to STOP, hit the brakes.  A human would probably also try to steer the car away from the pedestrian.  Problem with that, in this situation, is the car in the lane next to it would prevent that.  And the other side is the sidewalk, and whatever is there, fire hydrant, bus stop bench, human, nothing, whatever.  Sure, software could probably make that decision as well, and probably better, because it would know if there was an empty space to try and occupy as opposed to hitting the pedestrian. 

I think it'll still be a good idea to have the computer making a lot of decisions, but the total control thing , I just don't know how it could possibly happen.

I also shudder to think about all the hackers out there taking control of a vehicle.  Good luck trying to stop that. 

 

[scott2000]

I also shudder to think about all the hackers out there taking control of a vehicle.  Good luck trying to stop that.

Pretty sure I saw a special on tv that showed how hackers could  control a system....It was a while ago...at least a couple of years I'm sure....I think it was something to do with the Northstar System......But, yeah....they could at least make the car stop from what I remember.....but it was a while back....

 

[JohnRoberts]

Pretty sure I saw a special on tv that showed how hackers could  control a system....It was a while ago...at least a couple of years I'm sure....I think it was something to do with the Northstar System......But, yeah....they could at least make the car stop from what I remember.....but it was a while back....

Yes I recall some jeeps being hacked but AFAIK those exploits have been closed.
-----
The more appropriate discussion might be about remote control of already self-driving air liners.

Lives could have been saved in planes that lost human control due to depressurized cabins or like events, but perhaps other instrumentation failures could be worked around too with remote control. Boeing even filed a patent (2006)  for a system to take over control and safely land hijacked planes***.

I expect the remote piloting of drones is highly focussed on network security, while self driving cars would be more numerous so harder.

Yes I'm sure this is a concern being thought about.

JR

**** some speculate that the malaysian airliner that disappeared may have been hacked, but there are conspiracy theories for every disaster.

 

[The Kid]

Was reading through this today:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/technology/uber-self-driving-cars-arizona.html

I thought this was interesting, regarding test drivers:

"Not all drivers followed Uber’s training. One was fired after falling asleep at the wheel and being spotted by a colleague. Another was spotted air drumming as the autonomous car passed through an intersection, according to the two people familiar with Uber’s operations."

And this point:

"But Uber’s autonomous cars are not operating nearly as well as those of its competitors. Cruise reported to California regulators that it went more than 1,200 miles per intervention. After its strong California results, Waymo is now testing cars in Chandler, Ariz., a Phoenix suburb, with no safety drivers."

 

[SIXTYNINER]

What is the obsession with them these days?  Out of all the things that technology can do for us, I feel like a self driving car is pretty far down on the list of importance...  It seems to me like that kind of thing  would be more applicable to farm equipment than cars on the road.  Also, it doesn't seem like the accidents that have been happening involving self driving cars are quelling the fever for them.  Personally, I don't think I'd get in one....

Believe me

Get a Tank !!!

i'm working on ….

make yourself comfortable
we'll see some good ones  , unfortunately ,

the most probable cause that will destroy the planet earth
will derive from human stupidity….. ,
unfortunately  :'(

 

[desol]

"What is the obsession with them these days?"

I'm guessing? Hollywood.

 

[SIXTYNINER]

"What is the obsession with them these days?"

I'm guessing? Hollywood.

….it's "Media Evo"  Age..

only a little black out on power supply

and who drive the car ? 

 

[JohnRoberts]

if you think about it Robbie the robot may have been one of the first self driving cars in science fiction.

I can still imagine some passive aggressive human shenanigans if self driving cars are programmed to yield to pedestrians in cities with dense pedestrian traffic, not to mention cyclists.

JR

PS: When I was a young puke I was hit by a car, more like I ran into the moving car... Being a dumbass kid, instead of looking both ways before crossing, I put my head down and ran full speed into traffic. I hit the front wheel of a moving car and broke my foot.  Good thing I wasn't a faster runner.  :-[

 

[weiss]

if the cars won't succeed why not buy a self riding bike? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSZPNwZex9s

 

[desol]

Again, it's neat but...sending your kids on a self driving bike in the middle of traffic, with trains, etc? That a disaster waiting to happen. Who's to stop anyone from hijacking a bike when it's coming to pick you up? What privacy costs are also involved with the actual ($$$)costs(and yes, I'm sure there are some)? Will driver-less bike gangs ensue?

Working on a laptop, texting, etc...while riding a bike? I like going for a bike ride, for the simple enjoyment itself...I don't need to do a million things at once on a bike. Amazingly unpractical.

Again, more important things technology(and google) should be focusing on(imo). The first being, to fix their stupid search engine from ruining people's lives.

 

[weiss]

Again, it's neat but...sending your kids on a self driving bike in the middle of traffic, with trains, etc? That a disaster waiting to happen. Who's to stop anyone from hijacking a bike when it's coming to pick you up? What privacy costs are also involved with the actual ($$$)costs(and yes, I'm sure there are some)? Will driver-less bike gangs ensue?

Working on a laptop, texting, etc...while riding a bike? I like going for a bike ride, for the simple enjoyment itself...I don't need to do a million things at once on a bike. Amazingly unpractical.

Again, more important things technology(and google) should be focusing on(imo). The first being, to fix their stupid search engine from ruining people's lives.

Of course, but it was also only available april 1st so... no need to worry 

 

[Jarno]

In my opinion, self driving cars will become a lot safer if there's going to be some kind of central planning, your car being allotted a slot on the the motorway and everything moving in sync. As long as you rely on each and every single car thinking for itself, as Kid mentioned, physics will determine safety, not the cleverness of the software.
I have great respect for Elon Musk, at least what he achieved in an industry which is so locked down, but I think his response to the question for checking for driver attention after the woman plowed into a firetruck in Utah was not very thought through.

 

[JohnRoberts]

In my opinion, self driving cars will become a lot safer if there's going to be some kind of central planning, your car being allotted a slot on the the motorway and everything moving in sync. As long as you rely on each and every single car thinking for itself, as Kid mentioned, physics will determine safety, not the cleverness of the software.
I have great respect for Elon Musk, at least what he achieved in an industry which is so locked down, but I think his response to the question for checking for driver attention after the woman plowed into a firetruck in Utah was not very thought through.

The secret sauce (reportedly) will be 5G high bandwidth wireless com so autonomous vehicles can interact with each other in real time.  Of course maybe this is self serving spin to benefit 5G proponents.

Of course autonomous vehicles will be a ton safer than humans, because they won't be texting.

JR

 

[benb]

The secret sauce (reportedly) will be 5G high bandwidth wireless com so autonomous vehicles can interact with each other in real time.  Of course maybe this is self serving spin to benefit 5G proponents.

Of course autonomous vehicles will be a ton safer than humans, because they won't be texting.

JR

I hope the autonomous vehicle (data) traffic has high priority, else it could get swamped by all the passengers watching 4k movies on their handheld devices (as if a handheld device actually needed or could use high resolution), or worse, having 4k-bandwidth 2-way video conversations ...

 

[desol]

Of course autonomous vehicles will be a ton safer than humans, because they won't be texting.

JR

People are far more than complex enough for the task, they simply have no self control. People need to learn self control, and many things will resolve themselves. It's not very difficult.

 

[Gene Pink]

Of course autonomous vehicles will be a ton safer than humans, because they won't be texting.

Agree with texting and driving being flat-out stupid, but I am not sold on putting my safety in the hands of computers.

Can software at this complexity actually be written that is completely bug-free?

As someone who remembers MicroSoft's flagshit operating system Win 3.1 and all those blue screen divide-by-zero errors, I honestly don't believe it can be done. Ever hear a digital soundboard go into spazz mode with full scale digital hash through a PA? It would equate to a car going full-throttle and steering into the nearest telephone pole.

I'll take the wheel, but thanks for offering, silicon-head.

Just my opinion,
Gene

 

[Jarno]

Can software at this complexity actually be written that is completely bug-free?

That's a good point, and I think Tesla was very quick to release this, I mean, other institutions have literally worked on this for decades. I wonder how much verification has been done, and I think that  they didn't do as much as they should because they labeled it as just a "drivers aid" rather than the full auto pilot people are using it for. There are a very large number of pathways through the software, and really the only way to know that it is safe in all circumstances is do an insane amount of road testing.