I'm just throwing this out there with admittedly not knowing, but I've always assumed radio connectivity in airplanes is informational and not actually able to control the plane in any possibly disastrous way.
Oh I forgot.. Automated cars will be nothing to worry about so no car seat required at all, just let the little one crawl around on the floor of the vehicle.. that will be ultra clean somehow.
Apparently you have a very high opinion of the safety level that some car seat in a car will have that has been used by hundreds of people before. In this imaginary service.
It's not a matter of progress. It's a matter of practicality. Why would I want to call a car service and install a car seat for my kid every single time I want to use a car? Plus I didn't say it would work for everyone, it was just my opinion. Am I supposed to be speaking for everyone now?
Do you really think automation will be available in vehicles around the price level of $20K, which is the top end of what a lot of families can afford?
Because there are only human drivers. Unless you are reading a eutopic sci fi novel, only a small percentage of the population will benefit from automation.. those that have wealth. Automation will never be available to you or I, so it will never make a difference. Not unless we move past capitalism.
I'm not saying humans don't kill each other in accidents. I'm saying that I'm not ready to believe that there will be enough people with automation to make a dent in the accidents that happen. People can't afford it under capitalism. So any accident that automation causes today is just another death, not part of some grand scheme. I mean that whole thing almost sounds like a religion.. the great oncoming of our robot saviors. Automated cars will always be luxury items, or at least there is no evidence otherwise. So let's not kill more people by rushing them out. It's half-baked.
Fine, then if that's not the case let's immediately limit every automated vehicle to 20 MPH so they can't kill anyone. Let's cover them with reflectors and lights and warning sirens so everyone knows they are coming, and call it a day.
Automated cars need to not create more problems, period. There is no guarantee there will ever be enough adoption of personal automated vehicles to make a difference, so lets not kill people now. Full adoption doesn't work financially, not until we move to a different type of economy.
No I'm not looking for perfection. I'm really just looking for corporations to not make products that are known to have weaknesses that kill people. It will be a generation before there is enough adoption to make a statistical difference, let's not rush this stuff out and kill people today for the sake of something that might not even happen.
Go is a computationally deep game defined by a simple set of rules. It is exactly opposite to the task of driving, which is not computationally significant but has an almost infinite number of rules.
The point is that an automated car will only be able to make decisions based on what its sensors can pick up. If there is a child running out on the road that is obscured from sensors, a human will see the ball, see others on the yard in horror and shock and be able to intuit what is about to happen. In slippery situations, the two extra seconds will mean the difference between stopping in time and not stopping in time.
Speaking of slippery situations.. what stopping distance will an AI car calculate to be adequate? It will be able to know how slippery it is and what its stopping time will be, how will the balance be determined between traveling at a decent speed and not stopping? When you are human, you just try as best you can to stay close to the speed limit and hope you stop on time. If I walk out 20 feet in front of an AI car and it cannot stop due to ice I should be able to sue the automaker because that car is capable of using its sensors to determine that it wasn't able to stop.. on the other hand, automated cars obviously won't be able to drive 20mph at all times if slippery. Do they just drive the speed limit if slippery and deal as best as they can with limited steering and stopping?
Don't see how that could happen. They could do that now and only allow taxis and buses and other specially trained drivers on freeways. If it hasn't happened already it probably won't.
You're saying a car with automation and $5000 worth of sensors is some day going to be the same price as a car without any of those things? Someone will always be able to undercut on price by not adding all the automation.
People have couriers now, and taxi's now. The only difference is no driver. I don't think they will easily be cheap AT ALL. If you think Uber and every other self driving company won't jack up prices the instant there are no taxis to compete with you don't understand how capitalism works at all.
This is nto to say they are perfect, but neither are humans
So how is putting MORE imperfection on the road a solution to anything? Especially imperfection that is not likely to coexist with human thinking very well and thus cause even more mistakes to happen?
Because people avoid hitting animals. We get flocks of geese meandering across streets where we live; an automated car shouldn't just plow through them.
If that cat were a ball bouncing out from between parked cars, will it be able to anticipate that its scanners might not be picking up the child running between two parked cars after the ball?
A self driving car is driving down a road in slippery conditions and an object appears in the road moving from right to left out from between two parked cars. If it is a child's toy such as a ball, a human would anticipate a child running after it and therefore slow down and wait for the child. In a microsecond, a human might look for queues from the yard that the ball came from, such as another child with a baseball mitt. AI will lack this reasoning, so if they cannot see a child they won't anticipate one running into the street. Until AI can understand all objects that might appear in the road and what they might mean, it will be weak at driving. It will have to stop for everything, drive slowly for everything, and be terrible at coexisting with humans in the road. Another difficult circumstance is being able to navigate a road in winter that is full of snow clearing equipment moving independent to the general flow of traffic. It will be a long time before AI can pick an alternative path down the road that anticipates the thinking of the humans driving the equipment and other drivers of vehicles as well and successfully navigates around the equipment, other cars, and piles of snow on a path that is not the straight through one that it had set for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just throwing this out there with admittedly not knowing, but I've always assumed radio connectivity in airplanes is informational and not actually able to control the plane in any possibly disastrous way.
Tesla was able to patch all their cars quickly
Have you ever heard of a zero-day exploit?
Connecting a car to anything is just stupid and reckless. It will be a constant battle with hackers. All AI should be on board.
Oh I forgot.. Automated cars will be nothing to worry about so no car seat required at all, just let the little one crawl around on the floor of the vehicle.. that will be ultra clean somehow.
Apparently you have a very high opinion of the safety level that some car seat in a car will have that has been used by hundreds of people before. In this imaginary service.
It's not a matter of progress. It's a matter of practicality. Why would I want to call a car service and install a car seat for my kid every single time I want to use a car? Plus I didn't say it would work for everyone, it was just my opinion. Am I supposed to be speaking for everyone now?
Do you really think automation will be available in vehicles around the price level of $20K, which is the top end of what a lot of families can afford?
Because there are only human drivers. Unless you are reading a eutopic sci fi novel, only a small percentage of the population will benefit from automation.. those that have wealth. Automation will never be available to you or I, so it will never make a difference. Not unless we move past capitalism.
Would you say that of a human being? Fred doesn't need to be perfect, he just needs to not kill anyone. Why does automation get a pass?
I'm not saying humans don't kill each other in accidents. I'm saying that I'm not ready to believe that there will be enough people with automation to make a dent in the accidents that happen. People can't afford it under capitalism. So any accident that automation causes today is just another death, not part of some grand scheme. I mean that whole thing almost sounds like a religion.. the great oncoming of our robot saviors. Automated cars will always be luxury items, or at least there is no evidence otherwise. So let's not kill more people by rushing them out. It's half-baked.
Fine, then if that's not the case let's immediately limit every automated vehicle to 20 MPH so they can't kill anyone. Let's cover them with reflectors and lights and warning sirens so everyone knows they are coming, and call it a day.
Automated cars need to not create more problems, period. There is no guarantee there will ever be enough adoption of personal automated vehicles to make a difference, so lets not kill people now. Full adoption doesn't work financially, not until we move to a different type of economy.
No I'm not looking for perfection. I'm really just looking for corporations to not make products that are known to have weaknesses that kill people. It will be a generation before there is enough adoption to make a statistical difference, let's not rush this stuff out and kill people today for the sake of something that might not even happen.
Go is a computationally deep game defined by a simple set of rules. It is exactly opposite to the task of driving, which is not computationally significant but has an almost infinite number of rules.
The point is that an automated car will only be able to make decisions based on what its sensors can pick up. If there is a child running out on the road that is obscured from sensors, a human will see the ball, see others on the yard in horror and shock and be able to intuit what is about to happen. In slippery situations, the two extra seconds will mean the difference between stopping in time and not stopping in time.
Speaking of slippery situations.. what stopping distance will an AI car calculate to be adequate? It will be able to know how slippery it is and what its stopping time will be, how will the balance be determined between traveling at a decent speed and not stopping? When you are human, you just try as best you can to stay close to the speed limit and hope you stop on time. If I walk out 20 feet in front of an AI car and it cannot stop due to ice I should be able to sue the automaker because that car is capable of using its sensors to determine that it wasn't able to stop.. on the other hand, automated cars obviously won't be able to drive 20mph at all times if slippery. Do they just drive the speed limit if slippery and deal as best as they can with limited steering and stopping?
Don't see how that could happen. They could do that now and only allow taxis and buses and other specially trained drivers on freeways. If it hasn't happened already it probably won't.
You're saying a car with automation and $5000 worth of sensors is some day going to be the same price as a car without any of those things? Someone will always be able to undercut on price by not adding all the automation.
People have couriers now, and taxi's now. The only difference is no driver. I don't think they will easily be cheap AT ALL. If you think Uber and every other self driving company won't jack up prices the instant there are no taxis to compete with you don't understand how capitalism works at all.
It's a nice thought that everyone will be able to afford one but it will never happen.
This is nto to say they are perfect, but neither are humans
So how is putting MORE imperfection on the road a solution to anything? Especially imperfection that is not likely to coexist with human thinking very well and thus cause even more mistakes to happen?
Correction.. Uber has TWO drivers, but soon they hope to cut back to one.
Because people avoid hitting animals. We get flocks of geese meandering across streets where we live; an automated car shouldn't just plow through them.
You should visit Africa, or a place where people actually die of starvation on the streets. Sounds like you might like it.
If that cat were a ball bouncing out from between parked cars, will it be able to anticipate that its scanners might not be picking up the child running between two parked cars after the ball?
A self driving car is driving down a road in slippery conditions and an object appears in the road moving from right to left out from between two parked cars. If it is a child's toy such as a ball, a human would anticipate a child running after it and therefore slow down and wait for the child. In a microsecond, a human might look for queues from the yard that the ball came from, such as another child with a baseball mitt. AI will lack this reasoning, so if they cannot see a child they won't anticipate one running into the street. Until AI can understand all objects that might appear in the road and what they might mean, it will be weak at driving. It will have to stop for everything, drive slowly for everything, and be terrible at coexisting with humans in the road. Another difficult circumstance is being able to navigate a road in winter that is full of snow clearing equipment moving independent to the general flow of traffic. It will be a long time before AI can pick an alternative path down the road that anticipates the thinking of the humans driving the equipment and other drivers of vehicles as well and successfully navigates around the equipment, other cars, and piles of snow on a path that is not the straight through one that it had set for it.