Discussion
Last time i checked the sensors used on these cars don't look through objects and no AI system will be able to predict random acts of stupidness, so you will still have the same issue with kids running out between parked cars and people doing random acts that happen in a space that doesn't allow a reaction. You cant change the laws of physics.
Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
Mark Benson said:
Gargamel said:
Max_Torque said:
And how does a human make this decision? if we can do it (and drivers pass pedestrians on zebra crossings every day) then a computer can do it. The difference? the computer can make much more rational judgments, as it doesn't care about being "late for that meeting" or "moron in the van who just cut me up" etc etc!
We are reading body language and other very subtle visual clues, are they looking at a phone, looking at the car, are they moving away or toward, quickly or slowly, are they focused or distracted. We read and assimilate that based on experience in a tiny tiny amount of time, and very accurately too. It is not impossible for a computer to "learn" how, but there are a huge range of variables, and even humans don't always get this right.
For instance there are great steps being made in analysis of medical scans, an AI program can be shown thousands of scans of say, hearts in various stages of health or disease and it can look for similarities. Given enough examples the program can then reliably spot issues on scans it's given to analyse.
We're not far off the day when hospital radiology departments can upload their scans in real time and only those which flag up will be sent to a clinician to investigate.
But heart scans are very specific and consistent, so the 'learning' process is easier to control and thousands of classified examples are readily available to feed the process. In the instance above with the Zebra crossing, the programmers would need thousands of examples of thousands of people near thousands Zebra crossings for the machine to be able to 'learn' similarities in the way in which people behave before they exhibit a certain action - much harder to obtain examples to feed the program and infinitely more variables to consider.
My feeling is that fully autonomous vehicles are a way off yet - I have no doubt that's where we're heading but AI has far more useful contributions to make to life before it's a tool for driving me safely home pissed from a night out.
jsf said:
Last time i checked the sensors used on these cars don't look through objects and no AI system will be able to predict random acts of stupidness, so you will still have the same issue with kids running out between parked cars and people doing random acts that happen in a space that doesn't allow a reaction. You cant change the laws of physics.
Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
So human beings can see through solid objects and can predict random acts of stupidness? Not sure how that's an argument against AI cars?!Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
I can guarantee you that an AI car will never drive drunk or be distracted by a billboard advertising lingerie though.
Your assertion that people don't change their behaviour to suit their environment is equally nonsense - people don't cross dual carriageways like they would a residential street, the majority are more than capable of adapting to changing risk levels on roads.
youngsyr said:
jsf said:
Last time i checked the sensors used on these cars don't look through objects and no AI system will be able to predict random acts of stupidness, so you will still have the same issue with kids running out between parked cars and people doing random acts that happen in a space that doesn't allow a reaction. You cant change the laws of physics.
Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
So human beings can see through solid objects and can predict random acts of stupidness? Not sure how that's an argument against AI cars?!Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
I can guarantee you that an AI car will never drive drunk or be distracted by a billboard advertising lingerie though.
Your assertion that people don't change their behaviour to suit their environment is equally nonsense - people don't cross dual carriageways like they would a residential street, the majority are more than capable of adapting to changing risk levels on roads.
A bug in the software is just as likely as someone driving drunk, probably more so as people tend to not do that so much these days.
The figures suggest people are becoming less aware of their surroundings, why would AI and electric cars change that trend?
jsf said:
youngsyr said:
jsf said:
Last time i checked the sensors used on these cars don't look through objects and no AI system will be able to predict random acts of stupidness, so you will still have the same issue with kids running out between parked cars and people doing random acts that happen in a space that doesn't allow a reaction. You cant change the laws of physics.
Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
So human beings can see through solid objects and can predict random acts of stupidness? Not sure how that's an argument against AI cars?!Pedestrian injuries are on the rise, not a decline because people don't pay attention and are more distracted now than ever. Your assertion that driverless cars will mean people will change their habits is a nonsense, there is already enough incentive to not get run over, but people do on a daily basis.
I can guarantee you that an AI car will never drive drunk or be distracted by a billboard advertising lingerie though.
Your assertion that people don't change their behaviour to suit their environment is equally nonsense - people don't cross dual carriageways like they would a residential street, the majority are more than capable of adapting to changing risk levels on roads.
A bug in the software is just as likely as someone driving drunk, probably more so as people tend to not do that so much these days.
The figures suggest people are becoming less aware of their surroundings, why would AI and electric cars change that trend?
Over 8,000 people were either killed or injured by drink drivers in 2014.
Still it's pretty clear that you'll just ignore any facts that support AI cars being safer than human driven cars, so I'm out.
R2-TEA2..... 
Please can we have a whole program about the Volvo. It was great seeing it on TV but probable that the average viewer would have no idea how fast an 800bhp "hotrod" would be. Should have raced it against the soundmans Skoda just to really hammer the how fast the Tesla is point home.
Please can we have a whole program about the Volvo. It was great seeing it on TV but probable that the average viewer would have no idea how fast an 800bhp "hotrod" would be. Should have raced it against the soundmans Skoda just to really hammer the how fast the Tesla is point home.
chrisga said:
R2-TEA2.....
Please can we have a whole program about the Volvo. It was great seeing it on TV but probable that the average viewer would have no idea how fast an 800bhp "hotrod" would be. Should have raced it against the soundmans Skoda just to really hammer the how fast the Tesla is point home.
Agreed, Guy Martin, being used to racing superbikes, also down played the ludicrous mode on the Tesla. 0-60 mph in under 3 seconds is violently quick.Please can we have a whole program about the Volvo. It was great seeing it on TV but probable that the average viewer would have no idea how fast an 800bhp "hotrod" would be. Should have raced it against the soundmans Skoda just to really hammer the how fast the Tesla is point home.
It's the sort of acceleration that can give you mild whiplash if you're not braced for it.
I was more interested in the Raspberry Pi tea machine than the AI b
ks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life.
Just fk off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose?
ks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life. Just f
k off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose? mp3manager said:
I was more interested in the Raspberry Pi tea machine than the AI bks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life.
Just fk off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose?
It's a means to an end. I can see driverless freight convoys making better use of road space in my lifetime.ks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life. Just f
k off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose? Ever seen Tesla's collision avoidance in action? It's amazing and we're only at the start of the journey
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FadR7ETT_1k
fatandwheezing said:
I too was quite stunned how basic the Roborace systems were. They are meant to be racing in packs of 20 this time next year aren't they?
I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
It did seem crude. They appeared not to have even basic filters on the control inputs and feedback from accelerometers or gyros. I don't think that can actually be the case but the show didn't seem to be that dumbed down.I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
mp3manager said:
I was more interested in the Raspberry Pi tea machine than the AI bks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life.
Just fk off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose?
I'm completely with you on this.ks, as that is what it is. AI is just utter bks spewed by speccy, beardie hipsters who are falling over themselves to grab the billions of venture capital dollars, in order to keep themselves in a cushy, well-paid job for life. Just f
k off and why don't you do something worthwhile for humanity like curing cancer, rather than trying to get a car to drive around a track, which actually serves no useful purpose? My take is that the world's greatest minds have little (relatively) to do these days. We're not sending anyone to the moon and the space race has become more of a space meander. The high-tech sector have somehow managed to convince the G7 nations that Ai is the future and each of these nations are keen to stake a flag in this new ground so are throwing use amounts of money at it.
I've yet to see anything that comes remotely close to being truly 'self-thinking' - just some really clever coding.
I've no doubt it will come. I've no doubt it will be great but unlikely to be in my lifetime or that of my children.
Autonomous vehicles are not Ai in my eyes - just fully automated vehicles. Their existence and ability to self drive is entirely dependant upon the human input needed to design, build them and code them to operate without direct human intervention.
frisbee said:
fatandwheezing said:
I too was quite stunned how basic the Roborace systems were. They are meant to be racing in packs of 20 this time next year aren't they?
I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
It did seem crude. They appeared not to have even basic filters on the control inputs and feedback from accelerometers or gyros. I don't think that can actually be the case but the show didn't seem to be that dumbed down.I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
MartG said:
frisbee said:
fatandwheezing said:
I too was quite stunned how basic the Roborace systems were. They are meant to be racing in packs of 20 this time next year aren't they?
I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
It did seem crude. They appeared not to have even basic filters on the control inputs and feedback from accelerometers or gyros. I don't think that can actually be the case but the show didn't seem to be that dumbed down.I've had "debates" with people at work about the attraction of an autonomous car race with no human element, but I didn't realise that it appears to be a single team developing the algorithm. Surely 20 cars all running to the exact same driving algorithm will just result in either utter carnage, or an Abu Dhabi style snake of cars never overtaking.
Do want to make my own crappy Raspberry Pi tea machine though.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff