Thoughts on driverless cars

[Cowboys_22]

make babies in the backseat

If it’s driverless then why does it need a steering wheel?

 

[Reverend Conehead]

They worry me that one will be used in a terrorist attack. No need for a suicide bomber. Just send a driverless car.

 

[YosemiteSam]

They worry me that one will be used in a terrorist attack. No need for a suicide bomber. Just send a driverless car.

You can already do that with a drone.

...wait. A suicide bomber is nothing more than a drone anyhow right?

 

[Runwildboys]

They worry me that one will be used in a terrorist attack. No need for a suicide bomber. Just send a driverless car.

Or hijack a bunch of them remotely, with the owners inside.

 

[waldoputty]

It sounds really cool and sounds like it would be a big breakthrough with many applications. The reason I asked about how it worked in adverse weather conditions is those would be the times when people would probably be more tempted to use the driverless tech. People that don't like to drive or nervous to drive in those conditions would feel safe using the tech, but could possibly be the worst circumstances to rely on it. Could the sensors discern something like harmless side spray from rain/snow or splash from a puddle from a vehicle traveling next to you on your side from something like a motorcycle, bicycle or human? What about weather conditions that can't be seen like wind gusts? Certain times of the year when big fronts push through and can cause big gusts, going past a semi and get hit with a big gust from the side as you clear the semi.

sensor that are being developed can tell size, velocity so it can tell a lot.
for example if you use radar or lidar to watch a bicyclist, it can get a small signal on top of a big signal where the smaller signal is for the foot pedaling whereas the bigger signal is the bike moving (they are different speeds).
for humans, when moving, you can often tell because the arms are swing at a different speed than the walking.
in the further future, with a breakthrough in resolution, they may be able to detect someone breathing. but that takes enormous resolution which means a lot of frequency spectrum so the frequency is far higher than is technologically feasible from a cost point of view.
the puddle itself would represent a problem as i am not aware of a technology that can easily tell the difference between a puddle and a wet surface. so going over a deep puddle is a huge hazard, but human recognition also share a similar problem but would do a better job.
gusts - not anticipated - there are sensors for wind velocity obviously.

for a societal point of view, if tech is allowed to developed to maturity before deployment, then i can see more lives be, in my view, saved than lost from driverless cars.
a lot of driverless car tech is based on cars being connected to a AI hive mind where experiences are learned and shared. it should provide a very high level of driving skill to all cars that gains from the knowledge, but kind of like skynet...

 

[waldoputty]

You can already do that with a drone.

...wait. A suicide bomber is nothing more than a drone anyhow right?

yea, they are attaching grenades to drones and dropping them from the sky
drones that only cost $1k can do this...

 

[waldoputty]

You can already do that with a drone.

...wait. A suicide bomber is nothing more than a drone anyhow right?

i suspect a kill switch would be available so it would be unlike HAL

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If God wanted us to have driverless transportation, we would have still been kept drunk, sitting on the backs of Donkeys.

That is all...........

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

i suspect a kill switch would be available so it would be unlike HAL

The more sophisticated they get, the less simple technology like kill switches remain viable.

 

[Roadtrip635]

i suspect a kill switch would be available so it would be unlike HAL

Except that kill switch only works if you know of the attack beforehand. Many vehicles could be used and each could carry a substantial payload. That's always been the problem with any kind of technology, no matter how good the intentions, there will always be plenty that will find a way for it to do harm. It's not technology's fault, just too many twisted people in the world.

 

[Roadtrip635]

sensor that are being developed can tell size, velocity so it can tell a lot.
for example if you use radar or lidar to watch a bicyclist, it can get a small signal on top of a big signal where the smaller signal is for the foot pedaling whereas the bigger signal is the bike moving (they are different speeds).
for humans, when moving, you can often tell because the arms are swing at a different speed than the walking.
in the further future, with a breakthrough in resolution, they may be able to detect someone breathing. but that takes enormous resolution which means a lot of frequency spectrum so the frequency is far higher than is technologically feasible from a cost point of view.
the puddle itself would represent a problem as i am not aware of a technology that can easily tell the difference between a puddle and a wet surface. so going over a deep puddle is a huge hazard, but human recognition also share a similar problem but would do a better job.
gusts - not anticipated - there are sensors for wind velocity obviously.

for a societal point of view, if tech is allowed to developed to maturity before deployment, then i can see more lives be, in my view, saved than lost from driverless cars.
a lot of driverless car tech is based on cars being connected to a AI hive mind where experiences are learned and shared. it should provide a very high level of driving skill to all cars that gains from the knowledge, but kind of like skynet...

That's also something to consider, being allowed to be developed to maturity before deployment. The tech is already being deployed and it's not ready for primetime. Tech is rarely developed to maturity before being released due to the amount of financial resources and pressures on a company.

It really does sound cool and has many advantages and applications, I'm just leary it would cause people to become even more distracted and detached and unable to read or react to unforeseen circumstance or a system failure. You just can't make things foolproof, because fools can be very ingenious.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It is estimated that there are something like 32 million plus Cabs in the world. This would kill a lot of jobs. As example, England has something like 53 million people in it. It's estimated that there are something in the area of 240 thousand plus cabs in England. That is a pretty healthy number that will directly effect the economy. You can say that it would create jobs and go back into the economy but honestly, that sort of job creation is mostly design work, automated manufacturing and IT work. That doesn't really help the segment of the population that would be losing jobs and it's far fewer actual working people that come along with this replacement. I don't think it's a good thing for a lot of reasons.

JMO

 

[waldoputty]

If it’s driverless then why does it need a steering wheel?

because she needs something to hold on to

 

[waldoputty]

Except that kill switch only works if you know of the attack beforehand. Many vehicles could be used and each could carry a substantial payload. That's always been the problem with any kind of technology, no matter how good the intentions, there will always be plenty that will find a way for it to do harm. It's not technology's fault, just too many twisted people in the world.

i am talking about a kill switch for someone taking over the cars.
for what you are talking about, china has, for example, forced their manufacturers to use gps location to prevent drones to going to certain infrastructure assets.
small time terrorist stuff - there is no easy solution.

 

[waldoputty]

The more sophisticated they get, the less simple technology like kill switches remain viable.

it can readily be done. the kill switch would physically power off HAL and they would need to put in enough circuitry to allow manual control if HAL is disabled.
of course, they cannot get rid of the steering wheel etc.

 

[waldoputty]

That's also something to consider, being allowed to be developed to maturity before deployment. The tech is already being deployed and it's not ready for primetime. Tech is rarely developed to maturity before being released due to the amount of financial resources and pressures on a company.

It really does sound cool and has many advantages and applications, I'm just leary it would cause people to become even more distracted and detached and unable to read or react to unforeseen circumstance or a system failure. You just can't make things foolproof, because fools can be very ingenious.

what you saying about distraction is a real problem.
systems are not ready to go autonomous but people are using it that way because it works 99.99% of the time.
some expert said it takes between 5 to 15 seconds for a driver who is not driving and doing something else to take back over the car.
at 65 mph, 5 sec = 500 feet travel.

 

[waldoputty]

It is estimated that there are something like 32 million plus Cabs in the world. This would kill a lot of jobs. As example, England has something like 53 million people in it. It's estimated that there are something in the area of 240 thousand plus cabs in England. That is a pretty healthy number that will directly effect the economy. You can say that it would create jobs and go back into the economy but honestly, that sort of job creation is mostly design work, automated manufacturing and IT work. That doesn't really help the segment of the population that would be losing jobs and it's far fewer actual working people that come along with this replacement. I don't think it's a good thing for a lot of reasons.

JMO

true, but it is happening.
here are a few examples.
because of the labor shortage and overtime-pay policies in california, strawberry farmers are not happy. over 2/3 of strawberry farmers in the US have invested in a robotic startup for picking strawberries.
lettuce farmers have an option to buy robotic lettuce leave pickers - and that startup was acquired by john deere for $305 million last september.
uber operating margins will ~double if they can go driverless

it is going to happen, and it is a matter of time.

in a decade or two, a lot of jobs are going to vaporize.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

true, but it is happening.
here are a few examples.
because of the labor shortage and overtime-pay policies in california, strawberry farmers are not happy. over 2/3 of strawberry farmers in the US have invested in a robotic startup for picking strawberries.
lettuce farmers have an option to buy robotic lettuce leave pickers - and that startup was acquired by john deere for $305 million last september.
uber operating margins will ~double if they can go driverless

it is going to happen, and it is a matter of time.

in a decade or two, a lot of jobs are going to vaporize.

I never said it would not happen. I maintain that it is short sighted and stupid but I don't question the fact that it's happening. There are other solution to the problems presented but that's another discussion I suppose. For the record, Uber may not be around to see any of that realized.

 

[waldoputty]

I never said it would not happen. I maintain that it is short sighted and stupid but I don't question the fact that it's happening. There are other solution to the problems presented but that's another discussion I suppose. For the record, Uber may not be around to see any of that realized.

uber may not be around because of their questionable behavior.

i actually do not see many solutions for the arrival of robotics and artificial intelligence.
those jobs will be gone.
this affects many sectors beyond transportation/delivery.
this includes farming, mining.
what is less obvious is the eventual arrival of artificial intelligence and its impact on service jobs.
a lot of us will be on the camel watching the action.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

uber may not be around because of their questionable behavior.

i actually do not see many solutions for the arrival of robotics and artificial intelligence.
those jobs will be gone.
this affects many sectors beyond transportation/delivery.
this includes farming, mining.
what is less obvious is the eventual arrival of artificial intelligence and its impact on service jobs.
a lot of us will be on the camel watching the action.

Once that Genie is out of the bottle, it's over. We are going to have horrible economic issues, where our jobs markets are concerned. I am not looking forward to this at all.