"but it's on you to recognise that happening and take steps just like when you're driving a regular car. "
I'm certainly not arguing to the contrary. It just goes against how we've been TRAINED to work cars since forever. You are either a passenger or a driver. I think it could easily fall in to the "passenger" roll if you are not an active driver. Or maybe it's deeper than that. Maybe it's human nature that if you are doing effectively "nothing" that sleep can come on you much easier than if you are actively doing something requiring your constant attention.
Unintended consequences... that's all I'm saying.
That said, I think this technology will result in fewer deaths or accidents -- but with far different causes.
"If a driver was asleep with this kind of tech that just goes to show how dumb they are."
A smooth ride. No real attention required to keep the car on the road. No engine sound. About the only thing missing is a lullaby.
I believe this may be less a "dumb" thing and more an unintended consequence of providing a convenience -- it can promote sleep in a way active driving does not. With all the noise and jostling on a public bus, I still see people nap there.
"Except he only had his hands the on wheel for 30 seconds, so unless he fell asleep instantly...?"
30 seconds for the 39 minutes the autopilot was engaged -- how far in to that 39 minutes was the first alert? Many of the videos I've seen of the system working show drivers with hands on lap or on knees without any warning.
Also, this accident was caused by a truck turning left in front of the car. The Tesla driver had ~7 seconds to react from the beginning of that turn if he were driving. If a driver NEEDS to react to someone making a left turn, that left turn driver is in the wrong. I'm unsure an accident could have been avoided in that time-window at that speed but likely the death could have been avoided.
"Sure, because being tired makes you dumb. Which means you might make a dumb decision, like driving a car."
Driving while "tired" isn't necessarily bad or dangerous -- depending on conditions. There's a difference between tired and exhausted. Having autopilot where you don't need to "focus" your attention on the road could allow someone to drift asleep -- maybe to the point of not hearing the alerts.
"That said, I agree with the general principle here that "autopilot" was not at fault."
I'm leaning that way -- and at the very least, certainly not directly. There might be unintended consequence of having an effective auto pilot - promoting sleep -- or at least not detouring sleep by forcing a driver to be attentive to the road.
"Driving while tired is also a decision. If you make that decision, you are also dumb."
Tired or exhausted? Tired with autopilot might end up being as bad as driving while exhausted to the point of falling asleep behind the wheel without autopilot.
"Yet this driver has demonstrated that people are about as dumb as you think they can be, so now they've implemented a 3 strikes policy that disabled autopilot after 3 reminders."
Maybe the driver was asleep? Deep sleep? Was that ruled out?
You know, there's a great line in the book The Martian when asked about someone being on Mars without an MAV (which had the only radio backup). The answer was "One in three -- given empirical data" (this was the Arias III mission). Look at the list of solar system probes vs. those that are still working. The odds are not in our favor by a long shot.
Also, Voyager's 1 and 2 have a big barrel of radioactive material (RTG) providing power and managed to navigate out of the solar system with a number of mechanical failures they were able to "work around". And those were while still within the solar system. I'm unsure how you are going to power something waffer sized for 30+ years...
Never mind the juice required. How often have we built complex electronics that can continue working without maintenance for over 30 years? In even an ideal environment (never mind space)?
Man I hope they can work out the kinks and get transmissions back in my lifetime... Unlikely, but it would be awesome (and I'm not suffering from dementia).
Might be able to get there in 20-30 years then 4+ years to get the data back to earth. If we "magically" had 'starshot' technology ready to go (we don't). Besides, I'm unsure we have the ability to send something that could transmit meaningful data across 4+ light years.
There were a few good episodes. Not even a season's worth but a few.
Mirror Darkly 1 and 2 come to mind. Twilight wasn't that bad either.
Both those episodes were basically took place outside the dreck being served up as the season 2-4 plot line so they could actually tell some neat stories.
" but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want,"
I am of that generation and it's not really what I want. It would be a nice ADD ON to something that could play 8bit games and had 4 joystick ports. Hell... I'd be there if it could only play M.U.L.E.
"It's cool that they are doing this but I was expecting this to be in New York..."
He lived and worked in Los Angeles. This is was his home for decades. Plus, the crowds that came to see this was insane.
He literally played Batman for over 40 years (from the TV series to animated versions of himself). I was surprised from the "nostalgia flash" I had when I heard he passed. I'm an 'old fart'. I guess I didn't realize how far down the generation ladder affection for him went.
BTW, driving past downtown and seeing that signal was awesome.
Was I that unclear? Isn't that pretty much exactly what I said?
Doesn't this statement indicate that: " they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP."
I'm thinking people are just reading like a single sentence and then stop: "You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies"
" #fake_news #fake_news #fake_news from you Sir."
Sigh... #read_everything_before_spouting_off to you sir.
"most incidents are, in fact, against Trump supporters. "
What did you say before? Oh yeah... "Your memory is not serving you correctly. To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents." I haven't heard of any trump supporters falsely reporting attacks or intimidation by Clinton supporters.. Maybe you can refresh your memory and list some?
"You have no idea if this guy wasn't a paid repub false flag trump lover."
Makes perfect sense. He knew decades ago Trump would become President one day! How could I have not seen it! And he PRETENDED to vote D in election after election! And years of social media supporting far left ideology! Those darn "repubs" are so smart!
"No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference. If there stronger gun control, the bad guy might not have had a gun but those police still would have."
Let's live in the real world. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. That's not going away without a constitutional amendment.
So, right now, it is an actual reality that if you make gun ownership illegal only criminals will have guns. It's a trope, but it is true. Most people follow the law. During prohibition, drinking alcohol dramatically went down. It worked. It had many unintended consequences as well.
So, lets live in the real world where bad guys can get guns and chew on the idea that "when seconds count, the police are minutes away".
btw... I don't own a gun. I don't like them and I don't want one. I also believe that George Mason got it right with the 2nd amendment.
"That's a good point. Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal."
Way off topic, but there's an awesome account of a push during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to limit a standing army to 3000 men. Washington, known for keeping his opinions to himself for the most part -- put on his sarcasm hat and said something to the effect: "I will support this providing we include the following: 'no nation shall invade with a force greater than 5000 men'".
"You saw this for days in the streets after Trump won..."
You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies. Of course, they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP. Not out of any rational fear based on reality -- just irrational fear of living in their own echo-chambers for so long.
Slashdot Mirror
"but it's on you to recognise that happening and take steps just like when you're driving a regular car. "
I'm certainly not arguing to the contrary. It just goes against how we've been TRAINED to work cars since forever. You are either a passenger or a driver. I think it could easily fall in to the "passenger" roll if you are not an active driver. Or maybe it's deeper than that. Maybe it's human nature that if you are doing effectively "nothing" that sleep can come on you much easier than if you are actively doing something requiring your constant attention.
Unintended consequences... that's all I'm saying.
That said, I think this technology will result in fewer deaths or accidents -- but with far different causes.
"If a driver was asleep with this kind of tech that just goes to show how dumb they are."
A smooth ride. No real attention required to keep the car on the road. No engine sound. About the only thing missing is a lullaby.
I believe this may be less a "dumb" thing and more an unintended consequence of providing a convenience -- it can promote sleep in a way active driving does not. With all the noise and jostling on a public bus, I still see people nap there.
I find it unlikely that my soldering will be part of the great IoT revolution.
Maybe the power-outlet it plugs in to, though...
"Regardless of that, it would be safer to pull over and disable the vehicle"
Agreed. A "semi smart" auto pilot has it's own dangers.
"Except he only had his hands the on wheel for 30 seconds, so unless he fell asleep instantly...?"
30 seconds for the 39 minutes the autopilot was engaged -- how far in to that 39 minutes was the first alert? Many of the videos I've seen of the system working show drivers with hands on lap or on knees without any warning.
Also, this accident was caused by a truck turning left in front of the car. The Tesla driver had ~7 seconds to react from the beginning of that turn if he were driving. If a driver NEEDS to react to someone making a left turn, that left turn driver is in the wrong. I'm unsure an accident could have been avoided in that time-window at that speed but likely the death could have been avoided.
"Sure, because being tired makes you dumb. Which means you might make a dumb decision, like driving a car."
Driving while "tired" isn't necessarily bad or dangerous -- depending on conditions. There's a difference between tired and exhausted. Having autopilot where you don't need to "focus" your attention on the road could allow someone to drift asleep -- maybe to the point of not hearing the alerts.
"That said, I agree with the general principle here that "autopilot" was not at fault."
I'm leaning that way -- and at the very least, certainly not directly. There might be unintended consequence of having an effective auto pilot - promoting sleep -- or at least not detouring sleep by forcing a driver to be attentive to the road.
"Driving while tired is also a decision. If you make that decision, you are also dumb."
Tired or exhausted? Tired with autopilot might end up being as bad as driving while exhausted to the point of falling asleep behind the wheel without autopilot.
How do they know he was watching it? It might have been PLAYING... but how do they know he wasn't asleep?
"Yet this driver has demonstrated that people are about as dumb as you think they can be, so now they've implemented a 3 strikes policy that disabled autopilot after 3 reminders."
Maybe the driver was asleep? Deep sleep? Was that ruled out?
Along with POGs.
"Voyagers 1 and 2 say hello."
You know, there's a great line in the book The Martian when asked about someone being on Mars without an MAV (which had the only radio backup). The answer was "One in three -- given empirical data" (this was the Arias III mission). Look at the list of solar system probes vs. those that are still working. The odds are not in our favor by a long shot.
Also, Voyager's 1 and 2 have a big barrel of radioactive material (RTG) providing power and managed to navigate out of the solar system with a number of mechanical failures they were able to "work around". And those were while still within the solar system. I'm unsure how you are going to power something waffer sized for 30+ years...
Never mind the juice required. How often have we built complex electronics that can continue working without maintenance for over 30 years? In even an ideal environment (never mind space)?
Man I hope they can work out the kinks and get transmissions back in my lifetime... Unlikely, but it would be awesome (and I'm not suffering from dementia).
"FWIW, the closes planet of this type is "only" 4 light years away."
https://www.space.com/32546-in...
Might be able to get there in 20-30 years then 4+ years to get the data back to earth. If we "magically" had 'starshot' technology ready to go (we don't). Besides, I'm unsure we have the ability to send something that could transmit meaningful data across 4+ light years.
"Star Trek Enterprise, I just wanted to die"
There were a few good episodes. Not even a season's worth but a few.
Mirror Darkly 1 and 2 come to mind. Twilight wasn't that bad either.
Both those episodes were basically took place outside the dreck being served up as the season 2-4 plot line so they could actually tell some neat stories.
" but for those who are only a few years older it might be just what they want,"
I am of that generation and it's not really what I want. It would be a nice ADD ON to something that could play 8bit games and had 4 joystick ports. Hell... I'd be there if it could only play M.U.L.E.
"It's cool that they are doing this but I was expecting this to be in New York..."
He lived and worked in Los Angeles. This is was his home for decades. Plus, the crowds that came to see this was insane.
He literally played Batman for over 40 years (from the TV series to animated versions of himself). I was surprised from the "nostalgia flash" I had when I heard he passed. I'm an 'old fart'. I guess I didn't realize how far down the generation ladder affection for him went.
BTW, driving past downtown and seeing that signal was awesome.
It got a better deal in an adjacent spiral arm with a red giant.
Was I that unclear? Isn't that pretty much exactly what I said?
Doesn't this statement indicate that:
" they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP."
I'm thinking people are just reading like a single sentence and then stop: "You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies"
" #fake_news #fake_news #fake_news from you Sir."
Sigh... #read_everything_before_spouting_off to you sir.
Isn't that effectively what I said?
"To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents."
Here's an old post of mine contemporary to the 2016 election. It's not excursively fake reports -- but it includes them. My memory is fine.
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Kohath's "fakehatecrimes" citation lists others.
"most incidents are, in fact, against Trump supporters. "
What did you say before? Oh yeah... "Your memory is not serving you correctly. To prove this to yourself you could try to come up with a list of incidents." I haven't heard of any trump supporters falsely reporting attacks or intimidation by Clinton supporters.. Maybe you can refresh your memory and list some?
"You have no idea if this guy wasn't a paid repub false flag trump lover."
Makes perfect sense. He knew decades ago Trump would become President one day! How could I have not seen it! And he PRETENDED to vote D in election after election! And years of social media supporting far left ideology! Those darn "repubs" are so smart!
"No, police stopped a bad guy with a gun. There's a difference. If there stronger gun control, the bad guy might not have had a gun but those police still would have."
Let's live in the real world. Gun ownership is a constitutional right. That's not going away without a constitutional amendment.
So, right now, it is an actual reality that if you make gun ownership illegal only criminals will have guns. It's a trope, but it is true. Most people follow the law. During prohibition, drinking alcohol dramatically went down. It worked. It had many unintended consequences as well.
So, lets live in the real world where bad guys can get guns and chew on the idea that "when seconds count, the police are minutes away".
btw... I don't own a gun. I don't like them and I don't want one. I also believe that George Mason got it right with the 2nd amendment.
"That's a good point. Anybody who's planning to commit mass murder will surely stop when he finds out gun ownership is illegal."
Way off topic, but there's an awesome account of a push during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to limit a standing army to 3000 men. Washington, known for keeping his opinions to himself for the most part -- put on his sarcasm hat and said something to the effect: "I will support this providing we include the following: 'no nation shall invade with a force greater than 5000 men'".
"You saw this for days in the streets after Trump won..."
You also saw a LOT of news about Trump supporters attacking, beating, vandalizing or intimidating people of various ethnicities or ideologies. Of course, they either couldn't be verified or turned out to be out-right fakes by folks on the "other side" who felt they needed to lie or stage fake hate because... TRUMP. Not out of any rational fear based on reality -- just irrational fear of living in their own echo-chambers for so long.
It might work. A nutter tried to run down Rep. Katherine Harris and supporters back in 04.