The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules
document is now in effect.
[Autonomous Transportation] When the cars have all the jobs, the poor will walk the earth
Posts
Like what does that situation even look like?
There are a bunch of kids planning in the middle of the road on a bridge and you will either hit them or drive over the edge?
The number of situations where 'hit the breaks' is a response that will kill you if you are driving is pretty small. The number where it will kill you and if you don't do it you'll kill some larger number of people...
I doubt you'd see anything really built around the car making evasive maneuvers. Just too many ways it can go wrong. "well the car swered into oncoming traffic because it detected 2 kids playing in the street and 2>1" seems great till its peoples garbage cans that got blown into the road.
On top of that most their sensors are still LOS. So for the car it might make sense to jump the curb to avoid the driver who just opened his door. But you might take out the wife unstrapping the kid from a carseat.
There is an obstacle:
Hit the brakes.
If you can't stop in time; and you have a space to legally go (e.g. another lane in your direction--not the curb, or an oncoming lane, or something like that) that isn't occupied, move into that lane.
Honestly it might be safer overall to always hit the brakes and never attempt to swerve.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Pretty stupid, it will just act like a hyper aware normal driver.
humans aren't expected to intentionally crash into a parked car as an emergency brake to avoid hitting a human, I'm not sure why we would expect an AI to do it
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Ultimately, it probably should. But that is almost certainly a problem many, many iterations in the future and will be an incremental improvement in safety that will be made possible by vastly more powerful AI and sensor data than is currently available.
Simply having an entirely predictable, law abiding/rule following and entirely vigilant driver that never get bored or impatient is already a huge improvement in safety but one that is vastly magnified as all cars are automated. It may be the case that once all cars or nearly all cars are automated this sort of question becomes irrelevant or nearly so
Shrug. Computer get better, and eventually, in theory they all get networked. You share all the data, if you have to processing, you can get a pretty good distributed picture of what is going on in an area, and share things like "I am avoiding a pedestrian by going into your 'lane'" or time intersection flow tightly. In decades, when there aren't human drivers.
Now the stop and don't change lanes+not being drunk, tired, distracted or speeding will probably be a good enough to keep insurance companies happy for a while.
Also: Self-driving motorcycles.
I...
want a bike horsie.
Hitting a bus at 2 mph where the 'fault' is pretty contentious (it sounds like municipal bullshit to me, as others have said, where the bus is always given the right of way even if the driver is being an asshole and would be considered at fault if he/she were any other driver) isn't the real test, though. The real test is what happens when a self driving car is involved in a fatal collision and there is very compelling reason to believe that the driving algorithm or sensors somehow caused the accident.
Maglev technology had plenty of little missteps, but it wasn't until Lathen that there was blacklash against the technology - and even when the investigation of that tragedy revealed it was 99% human error and had nothing to do with the train, German media & political opportunits kept harping on about that 1% and it really set back the technology.
One word: sidecar.
There was actually a motorcycle entered in one of the DARPA Grand Challenges a few years back. It failed miserably. In fairness, so did nearly everyone else. And my university has a self-driving bicycle (riderless; there's no room for the person there anyway) but I've never seen it in action (I don't even know if it ever worked).
I'd think I would want to have parental controls, a set of permitted destinations that a younger kid could direct the car to, and a built-in alert if the kid tries to take the car after bedtime or during school hours. Or maybe have a remote approval function - the kid gets in the car after school and says she wants to go to Britney's house, the car texts me to ask for approval before scooting over.
Is that too helicopter parent-y?
An auto-car with all that 360 degree integrated information stuff would probably be safer just because any decision to swerve would include data on what's to the side of the vehicle, and would ideally include a broadcast to other vehicles so that they would adjust to give more space.
The biggest danger with self driving cars is that I think people will get out of the habit of wearing seat belts, so any collision would probably be deadly.
Someone forgets their baby in the car. The limited AI of the garage does it's best, and surprisingly the child actually survives and even thrives, ultimately becoming a kind of machine Mowgli.
LTTP I know, but I just had to put this one down.
I'd envisioned a riderless bike as being something like the three wheeled scooters that are designed so you don't have to put a foot down. They self balance at low speed but still lean like a bike:
The privacy thing is a stickier problem and ties into the concerns about Big Data.
When it comes to renting vs owning a car, why not have it both ways? My family has two cars, one for me to commute to work, and the other one (a van) for for taking the kids to school, grocery shopping, family stuff. I would eagerly give up my car and just take Johnny Cab to work, and keep the family car for everything else.
They might even be able to plan out skids at high speeds or on slippery surfaces.
and that's six years old.
It's all publicly available information. My last car rental had a GPS that knew what the local speed limit was.
Oh god pixar get on this!
Post apocolipse New York with autonomous cars taking care of an infant. Tarzan with robots.
Evil tribe of earth movers or some such.
Backing a trailer into a loading dock is really easy, that is just geometry. Not freaking out over a cardboard box in the middle of the street, that is hard.
Relevant xkcd
Okay, this changes my view on them completely. One self driving Subaru Impreza STI please, and yes I would like the Ken Block DLC.
^ This, and Google's current cars can all read most road signs (they know what construction zones & school zones are, for example). Non-standard signs could be a problem for the cars... but if we're honest, people are so bad at reading road signs anyway that it's hard to imagine self-driving cars doing a worse job (can anyone here claim that they've never accidentally or even intentionally just sped through a school zone?).
I'm wondering if a driverless cars sensors would have caught the biker far enough in advance where I couldn't, or possibly even done a good enough job reacting and braking to avoid it.
Has this changed since 2014? Google's car can read all most all stop signs to handle the case of construction on a mapped road, but it's still dependent on the road being mapped by a special vehicle that requires multiple passes and then the data analyzed by both humans and a computer.
Wait the biker was riding in the cross walk?
Pet peeve of mine bikes should always be part of traffic. Also fuck those bike lanes to the right of traffic, drivers never look to their right.
As a cyclist autonomous cars can't come fast enough.
I haven't kept up with stuff but I believe it still relies on the road being mapped, and still can't properly deal with a bunch of unexpected things.
And GPS relies on mapping too. and can be wrong, but at least there you can ignore what your GPS says and look at the signs. For autonomous cars you'd need a system that can be immediately updated whenever changes to the road are made.
Well, given that even current cars can be hacked and shut off remotely....