User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:38:55 AM EDT
[#1]
More cameras, more sensors.
Add programming to "brake check" tailgaters, narrow the gap for lane splitters, and a mechanical middle finger for left-lane slowpokes (upgradable to a M2 .50 MG) and you're cooking... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:45:11 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wake me up when I can climb into my car and say "take me home" while I nap in the backseat. "I'm sorry but you have exceeded your carbon credit allowance for the month. Vehicle will remain parked until credit balance resets to zero in 14 days. Would you like the location of the nearest mass transit station?" "Today is a red air quality day. All leisure travel will be limited." "A shelter in place order has been issued. All vehicles will remain disabled until the order has been lifted." Nothing good will come of this once the goverment gets involved and you know they will. The possibilities of fuckery are endless and that's not including cyber attacks from foreign nations, terror groups or bored script kiddies that could wreak havoc on the transportation network. Fuck self driving cars. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:49:43 AM EDT
[#3]
The only problem with autonomous driving is that we have been way too slow to develop and adopt it. We should have had flying cars by now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:54:00 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So it can control my vehicles turning, braking, acceleratiing, and deal with dickhead, dumbasses, children chasing balls, and any number of other emergencies? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So the makers of fucking video cards believe they can do cars. Hmmm. The processors in the video cards are very good at this type of work. So it can control my vehicles turning, braking, acceleratiing, and deal with dickhead, dumbasses, children chasing balls, and any number of other emergencies? Which do you think would be better at detecting an obstacle and reacting quickly to stop or avoid it, a human or a machine? The tech might not be ready for full autopilot but emergency braking/collision avoidance systems (once properly tested and refined) are a great thing and could save lives and prevent injuries. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:55:52 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've done 2 million miles so far. 7 accidents. One I was at fault for. There are too many variables beyond anyone's control. The people who are comfortable with computers in control are also comfortable with governments in control. Lol 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:56:19 AM EDT
[#6]
It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 11:58:57 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they think they are all set after 100 hours, they haven't really tested any contingencies at all. Only one camera? Break the lens with a truck recap tread doing 80 and see what happens. Have a kid hit it with an egg. Etc. Big juicy junebug splatter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:02:16 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though. On a scale of 1 to 10, how proficient are you in information technology? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:05:05 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I work in a highly automated industry with machinery that costs 10+ million dollars and they stop working all the time for stupid reasons. Sometimes computers just stop working. The AI is communicating with the brakes. Great. What if the comm stops for no reason. Guess what, it happens all the time in my industry. But instead of a 250k$ product, you have a human life on the line. I think the litigation that will happen the first few times somebody dies as a result of this will be enough to end it. Individuals don't have deep pockets like the companies who will produce this do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:19:56 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
On a scale of 1 to 10, how proficient are you in information technology? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though. On a scale of 1 to 10, how proficient are you in information technology? On a scale of 1 to 10 how relevant is your question in regards to what I said? You really want to make the argument that Google and similar companies don't log user activity? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:27:20 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? In 10 years? El oh fucking el, the naivete of some people. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I work in a highly automated industry with machinery that costs 10+ million dollars and they stop working all the time for stupid reasons. Sometimes computers just stop working. The AI is communicating with the brakes. Great. What if the comm stops for no reason. Guess what, it happens all the time in my industry. But instead of a 250k$ product, you have a human life on the line. Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? In 10 years? El oh fucking el, the naivete of some people. This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:29:39 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All weather conditions including the ones that cover up the cameras/sensors? Yeah, full of shitsky. Segway tard: "They'll build cities around this invention...." If the various camera/radar technologies used in cars today can't see, then you couldn't either. Sure, you could build a car with shitty vision, but why? It's not like it is difficult to build cameras that see better than people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:30:05 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On a scale of 1 to 10 how relevant is your question in regards to what I said? You really want to make the argument that Google and similar companies don't log user activity? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though. On a scale of 1 to 10, how proficient are you in information technology? On a scale of 1 to 10 how relevant is your question in regards to what I said? You really want to make the argument that Google and similar companies don't log user activity? Since we are talking about tech that can self drive an automobile, I would go ahead and say 10. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:31:27 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only problem with autonomous driving is that we have been way too slow to develop and adopt it. We should have had flying cars by now. Its really a massive pipe dream even with today's tech. Flying cars would require a huge overhaul to the transportation infrastructure, its not like there are landing strips conveniently placed in every town, or even space for one. You would still have to maintain the normal road system too, and we cant afford it as is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:33:50 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The processors in the video cards are very good at this type of work. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So the makers of fucking video cards believe they can do cars. Hmmm. The processors in the video cards are very good at this type of work. High end Nvidia video cards are basically a super computer on a edge card. Hundreds or thousands a little highly optimized floating point processors on a single chip. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:34:28 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wake me up when I can climb into my car and say "take me home" while I nap in the backseat. It won't be "your" car anymore. When it gets to your workplace to take you home, some other "less fortunate" individual will already be asleep in your back seat. YOU will still pay for the vehicle, but the govt will decide how it is used when you don't NEED it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:36:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So it can control my vehicles turning, braking, acceleratiing, and deal with dickhead, dumbasses, children chasing balls, and any number of other emergencies? Likely better than 95% of the human drivers too busy talking on the phone, texting, eating or sleeping at the wheel. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:36:07 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. You know an even easier way to solve the liability concern? You leave all manual controls in place (including overriding the computer), call the tech driving aids, and maybe throw in a few gadgets that discourage not paying attention. Bam. The driver is as liable as ever. Does Garmin get sued when some idgit drives off a cliff because the GPS says turn right now? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:39:29 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:It isn't a question of whether it will run over kids. It will. The question is whether it will do so at a lesser rate than the average human. Time will tell.
/this But perfection is the standard which will be used to measure their performance. Like air bags. According to medical science air bags kill about 300 people a year. That's where the sensionalism stops. What they fail to mention in their stories is that the same medial science report that reports 300 dead reports 6000 people saved that would otherwise be dead - a twenty to one sucess to failure ratio. They also fail to mention that most of the 300 dead due to airbags were killed because they weren't wearing seatbelts or were doing a bong that was shot into their chest when the airbag went off.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:42:18 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe the autonomous car idea is a pipe dream for various reasons. At best we could get something that essentially operated on 'tracks' on main roads with only other 'self driving' cars for company, with assisted driving similar to what we have now for use on the side roads. The human brain has so much going on behind the scenes in order to operate a car on public roads that I just don't see it being feasible. The significance of perfecting the AI to make a fully functional autonomous car would alter society in a huge way. The original goal of driverless cars would seem petty when all was said and done. Lol, meanwhile planes are landing themselves on aircraft carriers. Such technology. Much scare |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:43:58 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:lol are you a trucker or something? You seem really butt hurt about this. This is a very good application for these robots. Robotic trucks to do the long hauling along the interstates starting and stopping only at the regional interchange locations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:45:38 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ah yes, the future! A bunch of boring little electric cubes driving their fat slobbish passengers to and fro in perfect synchronized harmony. Sounds like hell to me. Exactly the decription that was given the automobile using a self-combustion engine by those stuck in the 1800's with their horse and buggies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:46:54 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It won't be "your" car anymore. When it gets to your workplace to take you home, some other "less fortunate" individual will already be asleep in your back seat. YOU will still pay for the vehicle, but the govt will decide how it is used when you don't NEED it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wake me up when I can climb into my car and say "take me home" while I nap in the backseat. It won't be "your" car anymore. When it gets to your workplace to take you home, some other "less fortunate" individual will already be asleep in your back seat. YOU will still pay for the vehicle, but the govt will decide how it is used when you don't NEED it. Please point out a single instance in the history of automation where anything like that has happened. Anything. I'll wait. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:49:57 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Big juicy junebug splatter. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If they think they are all set after 100 hours, they haven't really tested any contingencies at all. Only one camera? Break the lens with a truck recap tread doing 80 and see what happens. Have a kid hit it with an egg. Etc. Big juicy junebug splatter. If only there was a technology that could clean off optical devices remotely. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:50:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
most common occupation by state Wrong - retail clerk and cash register operator by about 3:1. If you count office and admin support they're about 8:1 over truck drivers. Quoctrung Bui wrote a fucked up article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:55:43 PM EDT
[#26]
I'm sticking with my horse and buggy. My horse Roach knows the way home and once I point her in the right direction she'll take me home. I can nap in the back without worry. She's OK with coyotes and rattlesnakes but doesn't do well with stallions when she's in heat.
Quote HistoryQuoted:Humans can duck when they see a retread coming at them. The camera can only attempt to make the 4,000+ lb car move. Neat video though. You can see very clearly that it didn't anticipate the second pedestrian entering the crosswalk. /this I've been hit by exploding re-treads seven times this week and it's only Tuesday. 
People in this thread failed to mention the number of times jumbo jets land on freeways, boats tear loose from trailers, some old guy has a heart attack and plows though the liquor store, and the ever present sharknados in sharknado alley. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 12:59:27 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem will only get worse as younger generations start driving. The good drivers will age out. /this And the technology will have to improve greatly if they're ever to survive. They seemingly can't drive without being on the phone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:02:47 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is a very good application for these robots. Robotic trucks to do the long hauling along the interstates starting and stopping only at the regional interchange locations. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:lol are you a trucker or something? You seem really butt hurt about this. This is a very good application for these robots. Robotic trucks to do the long hauling along the interstates starting and stopping only at the regional interchange locations. You mean like trains? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:08:38 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
would suck to be a truck driver, 3.5 million americans are going on the dole in the next decade https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*FAOTYaCoYpUhjiAe3sjofA.png most common occupation by state Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
lol are you a trucker or something? You seem really butt hurt about this. would suck to be a truck driver, 3.5 million americans are going on the dole in the next decade https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/800/1*FAOTYaCoYpUhjiAe3sjofA.png most common occupation by state A couple hundred years ago that graphic would have been "Farmer, Farmer, Farmer, Farmer..." yet here we are having somehow managed to re-purpose the 90% of the work force whose primary occupation was farming in colonial times. Truck drivers will find something else to do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:08:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? And this in spades. I've had more than a handful of great ideas for inventions but would dare bring them to market for fear of the lawyers. Only hugely large companies with their legions of staff lawyers and do battle with those looking to sue companies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:11:04 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I used to work with GPU clusters doing some pretty heavy spatial analysis. They can do some impressive things when given the right task. I'd be interested in seeing the optical system they use. I'd assume they are using some sort of LiDAR (probably phased continuous wave) and multispectral overlay. Either way GPUs excel at this type of data/algorithm processing. Would I trust my child's life to it? That's a different question. Machine vision is a large and growing segment of industry. I can see vision robots doing more mundane tasks like controlling traffic lights, cooking burgers, and operating cash registers before they're driving. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:13:30 PM EDT
[#32]
BUT CAN IT RUN CRYSIS AT 60 FPS?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:16:38 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sticking with my horse and buggy. My horse Roach knows the way home and once I point her in the right direction she'll take me home. I can nap in the back without worry. She's OK with coyotes and rattlesnakes but doesn't do well with stallions when she's in heat. /this I've been hit by exploding re-treads seven times this week and it's only Tuesday.
People in this thread failed to mention the number of times jumbo jets land on freeways, boats tear loose from trailers, some old guy has a heart attack and plows though the liquor store, and the ever present sharknados in sharknado alley. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sticking with my horse and buggy. My horse Roach knows the way home and once I point her in the right direction she'll take me home. I can nap in the back without worry. She's OK with coyotes and rattlesnakes but doesn't do well with stallions when she's in heat. Quoted:Humans can duck when they see a retread coming at them. The camera can only attempt to make the 4,000+ lb car move. Neat video though. You can see very clearly that it didn't anticipate the second pedestrian entering the crosswalk. /this I've been hit by exploding re-treads seven times this week and it's only Tuesday.
People in this thread failed to mention the number of times jumbo jets land on freeways, boats tear loose from trailers, some old guy has a heart attack and plows though the liquor store, and the ever present sharknados in sharknado alley. Lol, he thinks people aren't going to swerve when a retread is flying at their windshield. People swerve for a freaking possum without the slightest clue of their surroundings. But they are going to stand fast for a semi tire flying at their windshield at interstate speeds. There are only two reasons people won't swerve for a semi tire flying at their windshield. One, they are part of a shrinking minority of decent drivers that pay attention, are aware of their surroundings, and stay calm in the face of danger. Two, and far more likely, they didn't see the tire because they are busy texting, sleeping, or checking out the hottie at 9 o'clock. At least a machine will see it, identify the threat (or lack thereof), already know what's beside it, and react faster. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:17:03 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only problem with autonomous driving is that we have been way too slow to develop and adopt it. We should have had flying cars by now. Speak for yourself! My Jeep routinely flys (very short distances of say 5-25 feet!). |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:18:30 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though. Hope this isn't news ... but they already do via your phone/location tracker. https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6258979?co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop&hl=en |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:26:52 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I work in a highly automated industry with machinery that costs 10+ million dollars and they stop working all the time for stupid reasons. Sometimes computers just stop working. The AI is communicating with the brakes. Great. What if the comm stops for no reason. Guess what, it happens all the time in my industry. But instead of a 250k$ product, you have a human life on the line. Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? In 10 years? El oh fucking el, the naivete of some people. This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. Just get them to, huh? lol No, seriously.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:28:00 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You mean like trains? 
I always wondered why trains never came back once fuel prices went stupid. I lived in Australia where they have road trains - triple and quadruple tractor trailers on some roads. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:29:06 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its really a massive pipe dream even with today's tech. Flying cars would require a huge overhaul to the transportation infrastructure, its not like there are landing strips conveniently placed in every town, or even space for one. You would still have to maintain the normal road system too, and we cant afford it as is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The only problem with autonomous driving is that we have been way too slow to develop and adopt it. We should have had flying cars by now. Its really a massive pipe dream even with today's tech. Flying cars would require a huge overhaul to the transportation infrastructure, its not like there are landing strips conveniently placed in every town, or even space for one. You would still have to maintain the normal road system too, and we cant afford it as is. Do you think that even using the term 'pipe dream' is largely indicative of one of the reasons why our technological progress is not anywhere where it should be? I'm a strong believer in what Tyler Cowen and Peter Thiel espouse regarding technological stagnation behind many of our economic problems. Working in Defense, I see it all the time, on every project. People just expect things to fail nowadays. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:31:37 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I always wondered why trains never came back once fuel prices went stupid. I lived in Australia where they have road trains - triple and quadruple tractor trailers on some roads. https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/PublishingImages/RoadTrain.jpg https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/PublishingImages/Road%20Train.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
You mean like trains?
I always wondered why trains never came back once fuel prices went stupid. I lived in Australia where they have road trains - triple and quadruple tractor trailers on some roads. https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/PublishingImages/RoadTrain.jpg https://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/PublishingImages/Road%20Train.jpg DOT is a buzzkill. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:32:30 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the various camera/radar technologies used in cars today can't see, then you couldn't either. Sure, you could build a car with shitty vision, but why? It's not like it is difficult to build cameras that see better than people. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All weather conditions including the ones that cover up the cameras/sensors? Yeah, full of shitsky. Segway tard: "They'll build cities around this invention...." If the various camera/radar technologies used in cars today can't see, then you couldn't either. Sure, you could build a car with shitty vision, but why? It's not like it is difficult to build cameras that see better than people. It's incredibly difficult to build cameras for a computer that are subject to road conditions inclement weather that can see, react and make ethical decisions better than people....and do it consistently enough that the thing doesn't just take a shit, or stop working, or kill someone. We can't make ATM's that work consistently, or a consumer GPS that navigates consistently, but they're going to pilot our vehicles on existing shit infrastructure without going batshit. Again, retarded optimism doesn't work itself around the laws of Murphy or the trial lawyers association. Come back in 10 years, dig this thread out of the archives, when your autonomous Utopia has arrived. I can wait. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:37:32 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You know an even easier way to solve the liability concern? You leave all manual controls in place (including overriding the computer), call the tech driving aids, and maybe throw in a few gadgets that discourage not paying attention. Bam. The driver is as liable as ever. Does Garmin get sued when some idgit drives off a cliff because the GPS says turn right now? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. You know an even easier way to solve the liability concern? You leave all manual controls in place (including overriding the computer), call the tech driving aids, and maybe throw in a few gadgets that discourage not paying attention. Bam. The driver is as liable as ever. Does Garmin get sued when some idgit drives off a cliff because the GPS says turn right now? For that to work, the judge/jury will have to throw out intent. If the case is argued successfully that the makers installed manual controls to alleviate liability while knowing that the software was really making the decision whether or not to mow over the Amish kid on the side of the road, the maker will still get sodomized and the flood gates of payout will commence. I think you guys are grossly over-looking the ingenuity of the lawsuit industry, and its lobbying power, and the complete fucktarded system of punitive justice we have. A man sued, quite successfully, a refrigerator manufacturer for not adequately warning consumers that putting it on his back for a charity race could result in back injury. They have a sticker on 'em now. You think the software companies are going to shield themselves from errors that result in death? In this country? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:54:08 PM EDT
[#42]
I think you make an excellent point and I agree with it. The greatest obstacle isn't going to be technological but rather the regulation and resulting litigation.
Would we even have the polio vaccine today if lawyers had sued the fuck out of the original researchers for accidentally killing and paralyzing some folks during initial trials? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 1:56:21 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just get them to, huh? lol No, seriously.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. Just get them to, huh? lol No, seriously.
You do realize that's exactly what they did with med-mal tort reform, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:03:49 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's incredibly difficult to build cameras for a computer that are subject to road conditions inclement weather that can see, react and make ethical decisions better than people....and do it consistently enough that the thing doesn't just take a shit, or stop working, or kill someone. We can't make ATM's that work consistently, or a consumer GPS that navigates consistently, but they're going to pilot our vehicles on existing shit infrastructure without going batshit. Again, retarded optimism doesn't work itself around the laws of Murphy or the trial lawyers association. Come back in 10 years, dig this thread out of the archives, when your autonomous Utopia has arrived. I can wait. Cameras don't make ethical decisions, and they can see much better than you can. The vast majority of people driving today have virtually no idea what they are doing. No one can possibly have the vigilence in watching the road that a computer can. The software to interpret the pictures and decide what to do is the challenge, but it is far from insurmountable. I have never had an ATM malfunction while I was trying to use it and consumer GPS navigates with very near perfect consistency. You will see mass produced self-driving cars on the road in the US within 15 years maximum, less than 10 is more likely. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean the machines are out to kill you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:04:53 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know an even easier way to solve the liability concern? You leave all manual controls in place (including overriding the computer), call the tech driving aids, and maybe throw in a few gadgets that discourage not paying attention. Bam. The driver is as liable as ever. Does Garmin get sued when some idgit drives off a cliff because the GPS says turn right now? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is a pretty simple problem to solve for the car makers and their insurance companies, just get the legislature to cap damages, just like the med-mal insurance companies did in Texas. You're talking something like 1/50th the number of people killed per year by medical mistake. I think that can be handled. Also, managing failure modes to a fail safe condition common engineering practice and isn't an issue. No one in the industry is so dumb as to have a trivial communications failure result in an unstoppable vehicle. You know an even easier way to solve the liability concern? You leave all manual controls in place (including overriding the computer), call the tech driving aids, and maybe throw in a few gadgets that discourage not paying attention. Bam. The driver is as liable as ever. Does Garmin get sued when some idgit drives off a cliff because the GPS says turn right now? That is just a dumb idea all around. All you have to do is cap damages to make it an manageable/insurable risk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:12:22 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's kind of funny that people here freak the fuck out when something gets mentioned about mile trackers being installed in vehicles to measure usage and tax accordingly. "Not in my car, muh privacy" and so on. Letting Google drive you around and record your every movement is "awesome" though. well if you own a cell phone someone is already doing that... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:17:06 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's incredibly difficult to build cameras for a computer that are subject to road conditions inclement weather that can see, react and make ethical decisions better than people....and do it consistently enough that the thing doesn't just take a shit, or stop working, or kill someone. We can't make ATM's that work consistently, or a consumer GPS that navigates consistently, but they're going to pilot our vehicles on existing shit infrastructure without going batshit. Again, retarded optimism doesn't work itself around the laws of Murphy or the trial lawyers association. Come back in 10 years, dig this thread out of the archives, when your autonomous Utopia has arrived. I can wait. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All weather conditions including the ones that cover up the cameras/sensors? Yeah, full of shitsky. Segway tard: "They'll build cities around this invention...." If the various camera/radar technologies used in cars today can't see, then you couldn't either. Sure, you could build a car with shitty vision, but why? It's not like it is difficult to build cameras that see better than people. It's incredibly difficult to build cameras for a computer that are subject to road conditions inclement weather that can see, react and make ethical decisions better than people....and do it consistently enough that the thing doesn't just take a shit, or stop working, or kill someone. We can't make ATM's that work consistently, or a consumer GPS that navigates consistently, but they're going to pilot our vehicles on existing shit infrastructure without going batshit. Again, retarded optimism doesn't work itself around the laws of Murphy or the trial lawyers association. Come back in 10 years, dig this thread out of the archives, when your autonomous Utopia has arrived. I can wait. You're conflating hardware, middleware, and software. It is very "easy" to make ruggedized optical and RF systems. Logic that can react to any environment possible on the face of the earth with 100% accuracy, not so much. It could easily react faster and with a much more favorable outcome than 99% of all meatbags behind the wheel in those same conditions though. Low MTBF at the system level, at current consumer quality levels, that will be hard. Autonomous LANDNAV is essentially a 2.5DOF problem that actually was "solved" a long time ago, for highly dynamic environments. It is actually vastly more simple than solving any 6DOF Nav solution. GPS nav issue have much more to do with constellation lock from single solution antennas and an interface designed to work with any number of hardware configurations. ei - what do you expect for 50 bucks? I absolutely agree on the litigation front. That is what will prevent mass adoption, even though technically it could have already been implemented. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:33:01 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, but the next driver update will steer you into a brick walls and Indian customer support will read from a script to blame it on you in broken English.. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Will I be able to overclock it to make it go faster? No, but the next driver update will steer you into a brick walls and Indian customer support will read from a script to blame it on you in broken English.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 2:38:30 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? In 10 years? El oh fucking el, the naivete of some people. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I work in a highly automated industry with machinery that costs 10+ million dollars and they stop working all the time for stupid reasons. Sometimes computers just stop working. The AI is communicating with the brakes. Great. What if the comm stops for no reason. Guess what, it happens all the time in my industry. But instead of a 250k$ product, you have a human life on the line. Yup, and every single fuckup that involves injury or death will result not in a lawsuit aimed at the driver or occupants, but at the software maker. Big, expensive ones. Lawyers will get their dick hard at the thought of it. That's going to be an entirely new paradigm, and no company is going to withstand that kind of lawsuit barrage. Every thread about this I bring it up, but no one even remotely has a grown-up answer to liability. We can't even get liability right for life & death medical care - but people expect it'll sort itself out for some cars? In 10 years? El oh fucking el, the naivete of some people. I hate to agree, but I do. There is not a way, other than laws that directly shield them from liability, to operate a company that does this. It's going to be epic the first time a software failure causes a mix of human and robo-cars to pile up in a heap of dead people. A person is a harder target to attach huge judgements to. Yeah, that guy fucked up and hit a bus of nuns but he's still a person and it was an accident which humans have. When it's Cyberdyn systems, engineer on the stand, well that is a big company and big companies better know EVERY possible risk and mitigate it in completely infallible ways or FUCK THEM RUNNING. This is how every Jury will work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2016 3:50:13 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You're conflating hardware, middleware, and software. It is very "easy" to make ruggedized optical and RF systems. Logic that can react to any environment possible on the face of the earth with 100% accuracy, not so much. It could easily react faster and with a much more favorable outcome than 99% of all meatbags behind the wheel in those same conditions though. Low MTBF at the system level, at current consumer quality levels, that will be hard. Autonomous LANDNAV is essentially a 2.5DOF problem that actually was "solved" a long time ago, for highly dynamic environments. It is actually vastly more simple than solving any 6DOF Nav solution. GPS nav issue have much more to do with constellation lock from single solution antennas and an interface designed to work with any number of hardware configurations. ei - what do you expect for 50 bucks? I absolutely agree on the litigation front. That is what will prevent mass adoption, even though technically it could have already been implemented. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All weather conditions including the ones that cover up the cameras/sensors? Yeah, full of shitsky. Segway tard: "They'll build cities around this invention...." If the various camera/radar technologies used in cars today can't see, then you couldn't either. Sure, you could build a car with shitty vision, but why? It's not like it is difficult to build cameras that see better than people. It's incredibly difficult to build cameras for a computer that are subject to road conditions inclement weather that can see, react and make ethical decisions better than people....and do it consistently enough that the thing doesn't just take a shit, or stop working, or kill someone. We can't make ATM's that work consistently, or a consumer GPS that navigates consistently, but they're going to pilot our vehicles on existing shit infrastructure without going batshit. Again, retarded optimism doesn't work itself around the laws of Murphy or the trial lawyers association. Come back in 10 years, dig this thread out of the archives, when your autonomous Utopia has arrived. I can wait. You're conflating hardware, middleware, and software. It is very "easy" to make ruggedized optical and RF systems. Logic that can react to any environment possible on the face of the earth with 100% accuracy, not so much. It could easily react faster and with a much more favorable outcome than 99% of all meatbags behind the wheel in those same conditions though. Low MTBF at the system level, at current consumer quality levels, that will be hard. Autonomous LANDNAV is essentially a 2.5DOF problem that actually was "solved" a long time ago, for highly dynamic environments. It is actually vastly more simple than solving any 6DOF Nav solution. GPS nav issue have much more to do with constellation lock from single solution antennas and an interface designed to work with any number of hardware configurations. ei - what do you expect for 50 bucks? I absolutely agree on the litigation front. That is what will prevent mass adoption, even though technically it could have already been implemented. I'm talking about implementation, not technical ability or sophistication. The reason your Garmin sucks? Not technical, it's the failure to build accurate maps and maintain them. That's essential for autonomy. I navigate by GPS routinely, and there isn't a solution on the market that doesn't occasionally just fucking suck....but this is going to be the foundation for how these vehicles navigate? Recipe for issues. Reason hyper complex robo-cars will go batshit occasionally? Same reason your Iphone does...not technology, implementation, the inevitability of failure of complex systems designed by eggheads. Your Intel powered computer is nearly flawless in infrastructure, but the blue-screens of death we are accustomed to is a question of implementation of getting that hardware to get from theoretical to practical. Do you honestly trust the car-makers to get this right in the complex real world? From the outset? It ain't happening....not enough to ensure safety, and it has to. Murphy, man. Murphy ensures the issues, especially early on. Trial lawyers ensure that will make it that much harder to ever get widespread adoption in a world built for human drivers. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
