Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Self-Driving Cars

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Moliere View Post
    I've said this before, but I'll repeat that I don't think self-driving cars will exist on the roads as they are today. I think a certain protocol has to be invented and implemented on the roadways to allow for it. I'm not saying it'll be like a train on a set of rails, but lane markings, intersections, construction, etc. will all have to have some conformity on how they are marked and cars will be programmed to read that marking. You also have issues with heavy rainfall or snow that will make it difficult as well. There are a lot of places in Houston that don't even have paint markers for lanes and they rely on small reflectors that aren't currently picked up by current lane sensing cameras.

    Autonomous cars are coming but I doubt when they get here they look anything like the current Tesla or Google vehicles.
    Not that difficult to program autonomous vehicles to manage all the situations you note; it's already happening.
    Give 'em Hell, Cougars!!!

    For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.

    Not long ago an obituary appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune that said the recently departed had "died doing what he enjoyed most—watching BYU lose."

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by myboynoah View Post
      Not that difficult to program autonomous vehicles to manage all the situations you note; it's already happening.
      It must be difficult since it's taking a long time to program them right.
      "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by myboynoah View Post
        Not that difficult to program autonomous vehicles to manage all the situations you note; it's already happening.
        Yes it is.

        Walter is a programmer so he gets it.
        "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
        "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
        "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Moliere View Post
          It must be difficult since it's taking a long time to program them right.
          I don't understand what you are saying. Just because you don't see it deployed doesn't mean it hasn't been done and the issues addressed. Obviously uniform lane markings will make it easier for the vehicles, but it doesn't mean that they will be necessary.
          Give 'em Hell, Cougars!!!

          For all this His anger is not turned away, but His hand is stretched out still.

          Not long ago an obituary appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune that said the recently departed had "died doing what he enjoyed most—watching BYU lose."

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
            Yes it is.

            Walter is a programmer so he gets it.
            I am not so sure that the impediments to human judgment that Walter points to will not eventually(and soon) be seen as acceptable trade-offs for autonomous vehicles. Will pedestrians or cyclists be victims of autonomous vehicles? Probably so at some point. But will the rate of such incidents be equal to or greater than the rate of incidents involving dumb ass moves by human drivers? I seriously doubt it.
            PLesa excuse the tpyos.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by creekster View Post
              I am not so sure that the impediments to human judgment that Walter points to will not eventually(and soon) be seen as acceptable trade-offs for autonomous vehicles. Will pedestrians or cyclists be victims of autonomous vehicles? Probably so at some point. But will the rate of such incidents be equal to or greater than the rate of incidents involving dumb ass moves by human drivers? I seriously doubt it.
              It goes far beyond that one example.

              People almost always overstate the reach of technology when predicting the future (where is my &&#@*@ jetpack?). I can certainly see how we will get cruise control that is more and more automated, but to the point that we replace drivers and remove steering wheels? nfw.
              "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
              "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
              "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                It goes far beyond that one example.

                People almost always overstate the reach of technology when predicting the future (where is my &&#@*@ jetpack?). I can certainly see how we will get cruise control that is more and more automated, but to the point that we replace drivers and remove steering wheels? nfw.
                Well, I guess that seems like a different issue. You had referred to Walter getting it as a programmer and, in reading his post, he talked about how most of us would be hesitant to share the road with autonomous vehicles (not specifying with or without steering wheels) due to their inability to exercise human judgment (groceries vs. baby as cargo) or human creativity in emergencies (Scully). While I think he is probably correct, as I said, I also think that those failures are likely to be acceptable risks if we simultaneously eliminate drunk, distracted, dumb, poorly skilled, aged, and impaired drivers from the roads. Nothing is going to be perfect, the question is which set of problems and risks do you accept?
                PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by creekster View Post
                  Well, I guess that seems like a different issue. You had referred to Walter getting it as a programmer and, in reading his post, he talked about how most of us would be hesitant to share the road with autonomous vehicles (not specifying with or without steering wheels) due to their inability to exercise human judgment (groceries vs. baby as cargo) or human creativity in emergencies (Scully). While I think he is probably correct, as I said, I also think that those failures are likely to be acceptable risks if we simultaneously eliminate drunk, distracted, dumb, poorly skilled, aged, and impaired drivers from the roads. Nothing is going to be perfect, the question is which set of problems and risks do you accept?
                  Do you ever see yourself in a pilot-less jet? I don't think so.

                  It is not just a case of balancing risks. It is also a case of surrendering an incredibly convenient and fundamental capability: piloting a vehicle wherever you want.

                  Good grief, we can't even let go of our guns in spite of mass shootings and you think people will willingly surrender driver licenses?
                  "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                  "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                  "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                    Do you ever see yourself in a pilot-less jet? I don't think so.

                    It is not just a case of balancing risks. It is also a case of surrendering an incredibly convenient and fundamental capability: piloting a vehicle wherever you want.

                    Good grief, we can't even let go of our guns in spite of mass shootings and you think people will willingly surrender driver licenses?
                    ?? I think you are talking about completely different things.

                    First, I haven't mentioned aircraft. That's a different issue.

                    Second, I don't think the gun analogy holds up very well. But let's use it, for a moment. Yes, I think that just like the ownership, possession and use of guns has been HIGHLY regulated and limited, I can also see the ownership, possession and use of non-autonomous vehicles being heavily regulated and limited in the future.

                    Third, what do you suggest that autonomous vehicles will not take you "wherever you want"? I don't understand your point. They will go anywhere your regular car goes, but you wont be turning the wheel. I can see many people willing to accept that.

                    Fourth, you aren't addressing the response I made to the point you highlighted in Walter's original post. Look, we tend to see the drawbacks in autonomous vehicles (and they are plentiful) and we romanticize the ability of humans to make judgment calls and be creative in emergencies, which does happen, but I think we forget to properly emphasize all the incredibly stupid things humans do on the road, including create many or all of the emergencies that we are worried about autonomous vehicles responding to. Eliminate human error and you are left with autonomous error. Neither one is great, but my guess is both can be acceptable.

                    Finally, who suggested that we would never be able to drive at all anymore? Not me. Thats a straw man, and I know you must recognize it as you love to call that out in others.
                    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by creekster View Post
                      ?? I think you are talking about completely different things.

                      First, I haven't mentioned aircraft. That's a different issue.

                      Second, I don't think the gun analogy holds up very well. But let's use it, for a moment. Yes, I think that just like the ownership, possession and use of guns has been HIGHLY regulated and limited, I can also see the ownership, possession and use of non-autonomous vehicles being heavily regulated and limited in the future.

                      Third, what do you suggest that autonomous vehicles will not take you "wherever you want"? I don't understand your point. They will go anywhere your regular car goes, but you wont be turning the wheel. I can see many people willing to accept that.

                      Fourth, you aren't addressing the response I made to the point you highlighted in Walter's original post. Look, we tend to see the drawbacks in autonomous vehicles (and they are plentiful) and we romanticize the ability of humans to make judgment calls and be creative in emergencies, which does happen, but I think we forget to properly emphasize all the incredibly stupid things humans do on the road, including create many or all of the emergencies that we are worried about autonomous vehicles responding to. Eliminate human error and you are left with autonomous error. Neither one is great, but my guess is both can be acceptable.

                      Finally, who suggested that we would never be able to drive at all anymore? Not me. Thats a straw man, and I know you must recognize it as you love to call that out in others.
                      It’s funny how seriously you take these things.

                      Those issues that I mentioned are in addition to the technological problems, which are huge.

                      Lots of people are predicting the end of autonomous driving in the next few years. Maybe you haven’t noticed.

                      If by self driving cars, all you are referring to is incremental increases in cruise control type driving, then I agree with you. That is not where most of the discussion is these days.
                      "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                      "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                      "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                        It’s funny how seriously you take these things.

                        Those issues that I mentioned are in addition to the technological problems, which are huge.

                        Lots of people are predicting the end of autonomous driving in the next few years. Maybe you haven’t noticed.

                        If by self driving cars, all you are referring to is incremental increases in cruise control type driving, then I agree with you. That is not where most of the discussion is these days.
                        It's funny how difficult it seems to be for you to sometimes stay on the topic. But I guess it's good we are each amused, in our own way. I guess I don't know where most of the discussion is these days. I admit it. But I know where it isn't, and that's in your responses here.
                        PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                          Do you ever see yourself in a pilot-less jet? I don't think so.
                          I have a friend that flies for American. He said that FedEx is getting close to pilot-less jets and their pilots are getting worried about job security. My friend isn't worried about his job, however. I never got him to quantify "getting close".
                          "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
                          "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
                          "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
                          GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by creekster View Post
                            It's funny how difficult it seems to be for you to sometimes stay on the topic. But I guess it's good we are each amused, in our own way. I guess I don't know where most of the discussion is these days. I admit it. But I know where it isn't, and that's in your responses here.
                            Lol. Ok.
                            "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                            "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                            "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                              It’s funny how seriously you take these things.

                              Those issues that I mentioned are in addition to the technological problems, which are huge.

                              Lots of people are predicting the end of autonomous driving in the next few years. Maybe you haven’t noticed.

                              If by self driving cars, all you are referring to is incremental increases in cruise control type driving, then I agree with you. That is not where most of the discussion is these days.
                              I test drove a car today that has lane assist and adaptive cruise control. It was pretty cool. The lane assist worked most of the time but it didn’t work when lane markings were missing or severely faded. The tech today is great but it’s not close to being autonomous.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                              "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Moliere View Post
                                I test drove a car today that has lane assist and adaptive cruise control. It was pretty cool. The lane assist worked most of the time but it didn’t work when lane markings were missing or severely faded. The tech today is great but it’s not close to being autonomous.
                                Did you pull the trigger?
                                "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                                "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                                "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X