Dash cameras that do basic auto f-stop adjustments are certainly possible, the way your iPhone camera can adjust grossly when you tap on different areas of the image. Dash cams that recreate exactly what the driver was seeing are a long ways off, unless you want to give every car a RED and a cinematographer in the back seat working post on a laptop. There’s a little room for improvement but let’s not go crazy here.
Please read the article that was linked, people filmed the same road the same time of day with a better existing dash cam (not a cinematography team) and it looks way better. Looks like Uber opted for a cheapo dashcam or fudged the video to make it look worse.
Dash cameras that do basic auto f-stop adjustments are certainly possible, the way your iPhone camera can adjust grossly when you tap on different areas of the image. Dash cams that recreate exactly what the driver was seeing are a long ways off, unless you want to give every car a RED and a cinematographer in the back seat working post on a laptop. There’s a little room for improvement but let’s not go crazy here.
Please read the article that was linked, people filmed the same road the same time of day with a better existing dash cam (not a cinematography team) and it looks way better. Looks like Uber opted for a cheapo dashcam or fudged the video to make it look worse.
You might wanna read that post a little more closely there. It's just a joke about the idea of any camera being able to "recreate exactly what the driver was seeing".
I do find it hard to fault someone who loses concentration on a task that they normally have no input in whatsoever.
Even if they're the test drivers, and are expected to be attentive 100% of the time for just this scenario.
I do not think the vast majority of people would be able to hold their attention in that circumstance, and I do not trust that Uber would have selected an appropriate individual for the task.
My experience is that people using cruise control don't take longer to break or the like because they aren't paying attention. They take longer because they don't wanna turn off cruise control until they absolutely have to.
Dash cameras that do basic auto f-stop adjustments are certainly possible, the way your iPhone camera can adjust grossly when you tap on different areas of the image. Dash cams that recreate exactly what the driver was seeing are a long ways off, unless you want to give every car a RED and a cinematographer in the back seat working post on a laptop. There’s a little room for improvement but let’s not go crazy here.
Please read the article that was linked, people filmed the same road the same time of day with a better existing dash cam (not a cinematography team) and it looks way better. Looks like Uber opted for a cheapo dashcam or fudged the video to make it look worse.
You might wanna read that post a little more closely there. It's just a joke about the idea of any camera being able to "recreate exactly what the driver was seeing".
Plus the cam footage was from the police. Unless you think Uber fudged the video they gave the police.
Dash cameras that do basic auto f-stop adjustments are certainly possible, the way your iPhone camera can adjust grossly when you tap on different areas of the image. Dash cams that recreate exactly what the driver was seeing are a long ways off, unless you want to give every car a RED and a cinematographer in the back seat working post on a laptop. There’s a little room for improvement but let’s not go crazy here.
Please read the article that was linked, people filmed the same road the same time of day with a better existing dash cam (not a cinematography team) and it looks way better. Looks like Uber opted for a cheapo dashcam or fudged the video to make it look worse.
You might wanna read that post a little more closely there. It's just a joke about the idea of any camera being able to "recreate exactly what the driver was seeing".
Plus the cam footage was from the police. Unless you think Uber fudged the video they gave the police.
I mean I wouldn't put that past Uber.
Their whole MO is based around ignoring the law.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
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
It's not a traffic jam. It is continually improving the flow of more and more traffic as time goes on. Every second more vehicles are travelling at an appropriate and constant speed, and the amount of fast vehicles causing braking events is decreasing. Every vehicle in that smooth flow zone is improving the average performance of the highway.
This statement is only NOT true, if traffic density is so low that no pulsatile traffic jam would ever have formed. And then yes, what the students have demonstrated is that the speed limit is too low
It has already been shown that it is a traffic jam by mathematical necessity.
It is impossible to create a negative density space when a higher flow rate is behind a slower flow rate.
It is impossible to create good traffic by this method because the flow rate is limited by any lower flow rate in front of it.
They did not run into a low flow rate in front of them ergo there was no pulsate traffic in front of the obstruction!
4 cars driving in a line cannot violate the laws of physics
Nah.
The flow rate could well be the same.
Just you have turbulent mixed traffic/bubbles at the average flow rate followed by a large bubble of zero flow and then a well packed packet of high flow rate, falling back to the average fall rate after.
As long as the overall flow of break in traffic + packed traffic column doesn't exceed the previous flow rate, it shouldn't catch up to the rest of the traffic.
And all you're looking to do is increase the instantaneous flow rate anyway, to prove that the well-packed slower traffic could admit a higher volume of traffic if everyone followed the speed limit and enabled laminar flow.
It's not like the flow changing will increase the volume of cars entering the system immediately.
Flow rate cannot be the same because the obstruction created a negative density/flow zone ahead of it. This can only occur when there is a change from low flow to high flow along the path. Flow rate behind the cars must have been lower. The only way it could have been higher is if these four cars caused the highway to violate the physical laws of the universe and math itself.
Well packed traffic could theoretically increase flow rate if it’s over the entire range of traffic. But it cannot increase the flow rate unless it is done from the front rather than the rear. This is because of the aforementioned physical laws of the universe.
IE. The problem of traffic jams is road and speed limit is to design to get people to align optimally naturally. Not to create obstructions and run them along the path. It cannot work.
The flow rate of the road is bounded by the flow rate of the inputs/outputs.
The traffic ahead of the break is likely flowing at the same rate as the average flow in the break (zero) and the cars behind the obstruction.
This would mean the cars behind the obstruction are flowing faster than those ahead of them.
Because math.
Like you could think about it as partial pressures of two gasses and think about what happens to the effective flow rate of one if you go from mixed gasses to gas one then gas two.
The overall flow rate may have decreased due to the obstruction as a second option, which would create a traffic jam, and that would be different in that the tail behind the obstruction would not have passed under the bridge the students were standing on.
But I don't believe we saw that.
Flow rates are bounded by overall input and output in totality for an area, including inflow. When flow is less than maximum flow there will be a density reduction so long as another medium can infill.
Baring exogensous input/output changes. If you increase inflow you will increase flow as the inflow pushes the flow ahead of it by physically colliding with it.
If you decrease Inflow you will reduce flow. This reduction in flow is what we are seeing when the empty highway is ahead of the obstruction. The empty highway has flow capacity and it is not being used because of an obstruction.
Unobstructed flow must be higher if density is reduced after an obstruction!. Unobstructed flow must be higher over the entire range of the highway because the obstruction is a moving barrier.
We cannot see a density reduction while having a higher backed up flow rate. We cannot see a density reduction without a lower backed up flow rate.
The thread isn't actually being jammed, because it's not technically moving backward yet..
Kidding, kidding..
I really hate that due to the worst of us (soulless corporate profiteers, potential hackers wanting to cause chaos) our glorious knight rider future will be marred by careless death and inability to to fully utilize technologies that would stop it. To be fair, uber probably wouldn't have sprung for smarter technology anyway, but I suspect this will keep happening as long as cars aren't actually talking to each other and the road in some manner. Though to STILL be fair, this just makes it like every other technology we've pathetically mishandled through history.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The problem is that this is the company's endgame. Giving up pretty much means their end.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The problem is that this is the company's endgame. Giving up pretty much means their end.
I have no love for Uber and if this sinks them, I won't cry any tears. I just don't want them to literally kill people if they implode.
That said, they've made a business out of having no employees and owning no physical assets. It would almost be fitting if they licensed the self-driving software, too. A hollow company whose only value is its own branding.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The difference is that google started their project nearly 10 years ago and they staffed it well too, uber is just getting started and think they're ready for the road
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The difference is that google started their project nearly 10 years ago and they staffed it well too, uber is just getting started and think they're ready for the road
To be fair, they tried to get a head start by stealing that 10 years of work.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The problem is that this is the company's endgame. Giving up pretty much means their end.
I have no love for Uber and if this sinks them, I won't cry any tears. I just don't want them to literally kill people if they implode.
That said, they've made a business out of having no employees and owning no physical assets. It would almost be fitting if they licensed the self-driving software, too. A hollow company whose only value is its own branding.
Them currently running is already killing people though! Is there any word on what the death was ruled as? Negligent manslaughter would fit pretty well I think.
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
The problem is that this is the company's endgame. Giving up pretty much means their end.
I have no love for Uber and if this sinks them, I won't cry any tears. I just don't want them to literally kill people if they implode.
That said, they've made a business out of having no employees and owning no physical assets. It would almost be fitting if they licensed the self-driving software, too. A hollow company whose only value is its own branding.
Them currently running is already killing people though! Is there any word on what the death was ruled as? Negligent manslaughter would fit pretty well I think.
Investigation isn't over yet.
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
So, as someone who is still overall excited about self driving cars and the future and whatnot...
It sounds like Uber has shit the bed but really only for themselves? Like, maybe other AVs can keep moving forward and I'll get one before I retire...
I'd hate for them to have ruined it for everyone...
Do you, in fact, have any builds in this shop at all?
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
Wheels? Where we’re going we don’t need...close enough.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
+6
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
They’ll manufacture a single seater for the purposes of luxury—your living room on the go.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
They’ll manufacture a single seater for the purposes of luxury—your living room on the go.
Why bother when you can make it a couch. More room to laze around in.
I mean, a luxury car right now is a limo, not a smart car. That is unlikely to change much.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
That's a state by state thing iirc
Personally I don't really care all that much if it's stopped or really slow traffic but I've seen geniuses on crotch rockets doing it at speed on the interstate and it's just like... you fucking idiots.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
That's a state by state thing iirc
Personally I don't really care all that much if it's stopped or really slow traffic but I've seen geniuses on crotch rockets doing it at speed on the interstate and it's just like... you fucking idiots.
So.. we also allow bikes to go between lanes of cars so long as the cars are moving slowly (under 60km/h I think, but the riders don't appear to be that brazen, and generally only use it to skip queues at lights)
In any case, if AVs can reliably keep their distance from each other, getting rid of a lot of the metal seems like a good way to go.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
That's a state by state thing iirc
Personally I don't really care all that much if it's stopped or really slow traffic but I've seen geniuses on crotch rockets doing it at speed on the interstate and it's just like... you fucking idiots.
So.. we also allow bikes to go between lanes of cars so long as the cars are moving slowly (under 60km/h I think, but the riders don't appear to be that brazen, and generally only use it to skip queues at lights)
In any case, if AVs can reliably keep their distance from each other, getting rid of a lot of the metal seems like a good way to go.
A single seat car would still be a lot wider than a motorcycle. We would need a ton of confidence in AVs before we allow them to start taking liberties with the lanes. I don't think it's feasible until after we get rid of human drivers entirely.
...
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
That's a state by state thing iirc
Personally I don't really care all that much if it's stopped or really slow traffic but I've seen geniuses on crotch rockets doing it at speed on the interstate and it's just like... you fucking idiots.
So.. we also allow bikes to go between lanes of cars so long as the cars are moving slowly (under 60km/h I think, but the riders don't appear to be that brazen, and generally only use it to skip queues at lights)
In any case, if AVs can reliably keep their distance from each other, getting rid of a lot of the metal seems like a good way to go.
We don't allow lane splitting in the US, except in one state (California).
It's a controversial practice here and it's mostly car drivers who oppose it whenever anybody tries to legalize it.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Once it becomes viable, i could totally see single seater vehicles with nothing but a comfortable chair, a cupholder, small stable for a laptop or a tablet, and possibly tiny compartment for a backpack, briefcase or stuff like that.
Not for personal use, but as a replacement for taxies in major cities.
Once it becomes viable, i could totally see single seater vehicles with nothing but a comfortable chair, a cupholder, small stable for a laptop or a tablet, and possibly tiny compartment for a backpack, briefcase or stuff like that.
Not for personal use, but as a replacement for taxies in major cities.
There's no point to making or buying one unless that smaller size confers some sort of advantage in using the road and getting around though.
Posts
Please read the article that was linked, people filmed the same road the same time of day with a better existing dash cam (not a cinematography team) and it looks way better. Looks like Uber opted for a cheapo dashcam or fudged the video to make it look worse.
You might wanna read that post a little more closely there. It's just a joke about the idea of any camera being able to "recreate exactly what the driver was seeing".
My experience is that people using cruise control don't take longer to break or the like because they aren't paying attention. They take longer because they don't wanna turn off cruise control until they absolutely have to.
Plus the cam footage was from the police. Unless you think Uber fudged the video they gave the police.
I mean I wouldn't put that past Uber.
Their whole MO is based around ignoring the law.
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
Flow rates are bounded by overall input and output in totality for an area, including inflow. When flow is less than maximum flow there will be a density reduction so long as another medium can infill.
Baring exogensous input/output changes. If you increase inflow you will increase flow as the inflow pushes the flow ahead of it by physically colliding with it.
If you decrease Inflow you will reduce flow. This reduction in flow is what we are seeing when the empty highway is ahead of the obstruction. The empty highway has flow capacity and it is not being used because of an obstruction.
Unobstructed flow must be higher if density is reduced after an obstruction!. Unobstructed flow must be higher over the entire range of the highway because the obstruction is a moving barrier.
We cannot see a density reduction while having a higher backed up flow rate. We cannot see a density reduction without a lower backed up flow rate.
It’s a backup
Get back to talking about the glorious future of everyone having robot cars like in Knight Rider.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Kidding, kidding..
I really hate that due to the worst of us (soulless corporate profiteers, potential hackers wanting to cause chaos) our glorious knight rider future will be marred by careless death and inability to to fully utilize technologies that would stop it. To be fair, uber probably wouldn't have sprung for smarter technology anyway, but I suspect this will keep happening as long as cars aren't actually talking to each other and the road in some manner. Though to STILL be fair, this just makes it like every other technology we've pathetically mishandled through history.
1. Waymo CEO says their tech would have avoided the collision
2. Lyft CEO says the tech should have prevented the collision
3. Uber's cars required way more interventions than other companies' (once per 13 miles vs once per over 5000 miles) and Uber also switched to solo test drivers while other companies use two people in the car
4. Arizona has suspended Uber's license to test AVs
At this point, Uber should just give up. This clearly isn't one of their competencies. Let companies like Alphabet and Toyota who know what they're doing develop the technology, and then license it.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/ubers-self-driving-car-project-is-struggling-the-company-should-sell-it/
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
The problem is that this is the company's endgame. Giving up pretty much means their end.
I have no love for Uber and if this sinks them, I won't cry any tears. I just don't want them to literally kill people if they implode.
That said, they've made a business out of having no employees and owning no physical assets. It would almost be fitting if they licensed the self-driving software, too. A hollow company whose only value is its own branding.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
The difference is that google started their project nearly 10 years ago and they staffed it well too, uber is just getting started and think they're ready for the road
To be fair, they tried to get a head start by stealing that 10 years of work.
It’s not a very important country most of the time
http://steamcommunity.com/id/mortious
What's the average intervention rate for non-automated cars?
Honestly, on a straight road I could probably make it a few miles at least
Them currently running is already killing people though! Is there any word on what the death was ruled as? Negligent manslaughter would fit pretty well I think.
Investigation isn't over yet.
Hopefully lower intervals than that.
So, as someone who is still overall excited about self driving cars and the future and whatnot...
It sounds like Uber has shit the bed but really only for themselves? Like, maybe other AVs can keep moving forward and I'll get one before I retire...
I'd hate for them to have ruined it for everyone...
I want this car.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
A Jaguar? That solves the whole zombie car issue, It will just drop you off at work then drive to the mechanics for its daily maintenance.
Considering an AV doesn't need the form factor of a car..
How long until I get my solar panel powered single person pod-with-wheels for city travel?
Wheels? Where we’re going we don’t need...close enough.
I'm sure the livery services will start using a two-seater like the first Waymo car for single pickups, no reason not to. Don't expect a single-seat car any time soon though - it doesn't really make sense to manufacture one, it still has to obey the traditional lanes regardless of how wide it is.
They’ll manufacture a single seater for the purposes of luxury—your living room on the go.
Why bother when you can make it a couch. More room to laze around in.
I mean, a luxury car right now is a limo, not a smart car. That is unlikely to change much.
Nope.
Motorcycles don't obey normal lanes, at least here.
I see no reason you couldn't also send multiple AVs down the same lane if they're narrow enough.
That's a state by state thing iirc
Personally I don't really care all that much if it's stopped or really slow traffic but I've seen geniuses on crotch rockets doing it at speed on the interstate and it's just like... you fucking idiots.
So.. we also allow bikes to go between lanes of cars so long as the cars are moving slowly (under 60km/h I think, but the riders don't appear to be that brazen, and generally only use it to skip queues at lights)
In any case, if AVs can reliably keep their distance from each other, getting rid of a lot of the metal seems like a good way to go.
https://cnet.com/roadshow/news/aptiv-intel-uber-self-driving-sensors-off/
A single seat car would still be a lot wider than a motorcycle. We would need a ton of confidence in AVs before we allow them to start taking liberties with the lanes. I don't think it's feasible until after we get rid of human drivers entirely.
We don't allow lane splitting in the US, except in one state (California).
It's a controversial practice here and it's mostly car drivers who oppose it whenever anybody tries to legalize it.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Not for personal use, but as a replacement for taxies in major cities.
There's no point to making or buying one unless that smaller size confers some sort of advantage in using the road and getting around though.