RE: Autonomous cars: do you feel lucky

[loose cannon]

Is there any car enthusiasts left on ph

[DonkeyApple]

Evilex said:

Debaser said:

I recall Mercedes stating their autonomous cars will prioritise the lives of the occupants.

I wonder what would happen if two Mercedes were about to crash?

Swerve and hit the Beemer instead?

Just falls back on badge designation like humans do? A Class proletariat scum versus S Class superior human. More valuable customer saved.

Google cars will probably opt to hit pedestrians who aren't carrying a Google phone. Google will have data on everyone in the queue and comfortably select the purchaser of competitor goods to be terminated.

[Kawasicki]

RobDickinson said:

Kawasicki said:

AI doesn't exist, so it is difficult for it to be used any time soon in a car.

Limited AI certainly does exist, and fully concious general AI isnt that far off ( 20-40 years or so)

But we dont need full AI to have self driving cars which will start to get common in the next ~5 years.

We already have them operating on real roads in the real world (waymo/us), and so long as they are safer overall than humans (not hard) they will be good.

AI is always 20-40 years off.

An autonomous system can definitely soon be developed that is better that a poor driver or a good driver driving poorly. That is hardly a challenge. The question is who wants to be driven by a somewhat better than poor driver? Not me. I see that systems can and are being developed that work to reduce workload in stop start jams and other reasonably controlled environments. Great and not easy to get working well for what customers are willing to pay.

I was in a meeting a couple of months ago with some autonomous driving engineers. There was a couple of mentions of AI in the documents. I asked about the AI. The lead engineer told me there is no AI in the system, the only reason that AI is mentioned is because marketing requested it.

[DonkeyApple]

Another interesting aspect of self driving cars is that the whole 'driving experience' stuff that companies market with becomes moot. Who cares. We aren't driving, we're just sitting in the passenger seat. Traditional 'male' buying agendas will go out the window.

[RobDickinson]

Kawasicki said:

AI is always 20-40 years off.

An autonomous system can definitely soon be developed that is better that a poor driver or a good driver driving poorly. That is hardly a challenge. The question is who wants to be driven by a somewhat better than poor driver? Not me. I see that systems can and are being developed that work to reduce workload in stop start jams and other reasonably controlled environments. Great and not easy to get working well for what customers are willing to pay.

I was in a meeting a couple of months ago with some autonomous driving engineers. There was a couple of mentions of AI in the documents. I asked about the AI. The lead engineer told me there is no AI in the system, the only reason that AI is mentioned is because marketing requested it.

Computing power and ai development are pretty well understood. go read the wait but why article. We know how much power the human brain has, we've simulated it but not in real time.

As for AI in cars, depends on who's self driving system, waymo isnt using AI but nvidia is.

[Paul O]

Why is the focus so much on auto cars, with all the problems and dangers that entails, yet we haven't got auto trains yet. Surely that's far simpler? Or is the risk too high, in which case, why is it being worked on at all, other than for experimental reasons?

[RobDickinson]

Paul O said:

Why is the focus so much on auto cars, with all the problems and dangers that entails, yet we haven't got auto trains yet. Surely that's far simpler? Or is the risk too high, in which case, why is it being worked on at all, other than for experimental reasons?

Theres like 8 trains a year built and few driver related accidents.. (also pretty sure there is already autonomous train services somewhere..)

Theres a lot of money to be made if you are the early in selling self driving cars, its going to be a huge paradigm shift in transport affecting a lot more people a lot quicker than trains would.

[big_rob_sydney]

Frankly, I'm almost beyond caring.

Every second wker on here thinks they're a driving god. Yet when push comes to shove, I bet a lousy computer would be better than these idiots.

And for all of that, there are loads of times when we're already at the mercy of something else. Taxi's, buses, planes, trains, even sitting there minding your own business in your own car and some distracted driver can plough into you.

For all that, autonomous tech will save countless lives. It may be galling to think you will be removed from the gene pool without having a chance to save yourself. How different is that from any other accident, gun event in the US, etc? At least we know for sure that autonomous cars will save many, but not only that, there will also be enormous numbers of accidents where people weren't killed, but injured, and these numbers will decrease as well.

The savings to our health services will allow monies to be spent in other areas (use your imagination, choose your preference, whatever that may be), and more to the point, large numbers of people who have mobility issues (eg vision impaired people) will have new opportunities to enjoy life in the manner that more able bodied people take for granted. This will have huge benefits to families all over the world.

Now if only those driving god cocks would just get over themselves, or better yet, do us all a favour and remove themselves from the gene pool due to not having made it anywhere near F1 besides their over inflated dreams...

[DonkeyApple]

Paul O said:

Why is the focus so much on auto cars, with all the problems and dangers that entails, yet we haven't got auto trains yet. Surely that's far simpler? Or is the risk too high, in which case, why is it being worked on at all, other than for experimental reasons?

Are car drivers members of unions for the purpose of driving that car?

The DLR is driverless. It has no driver union affiliations.

[ratty6464]

Debaser said:

Can we not get the programmers working on AI and deep learning to come up with automatic wipers that actually work?

Exactly! You would have thought they'd manage that by now.

[Kawasicki]

big_rob_sydney said:

Every second wker on here thinks they're a driving god.

Yup...half of them probably think they are better than average. wkers.

[otolith]

I don’t want to give up driving myself. But I would quite like it if everyone else did

And there are some journeys I’d rather sit in the back for. And it would be nice to be able to get pissed and have my own car pick me up and take me home.

I do think that once autonomous cars become commonplace self driving will die within a generation - young people will no longer need to spend money learning to drive or paying for their high insurance liabilities in order to be independently mobile.

[mac96]

Kawasicki said:

big_rob_sydney said:

Every second wker on here thinks they're a driving god.

Yup...half of them probably think they are better than average. wkers.

Well, it would be nice to hope that the average PH driver is better than the average driver in the country. So more than half of us couldbe above average.

Although, having read lots of threads over the years , you are probably right. wkers.

[aaron_2000]

The way AutoPilot should be for cars is a form of cruise control. Nothing sounds better to me than having something like a Leon 300 or something of that nature, drive it myself, enjoy it on twisty roads and all that. Then when I have to drive a few hours on the motorway, I put AP on and sit back with my coffee, sandwich and relax a bit.

[AER]

samoht said:

Drivers with actual experience of sharing the road with AVs said: "As far as their driving behavior, they pretty much blend in... When the light turns green, they're not sitting there texting, so they actually go."
( https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/11/why-phoenix-i... )

Oh thank fück for that! Bring it on, and quickly!

[swisstoni]

The implications are almost endless.
For people of a PH persuasion they are almost unconscionable; the end of cars as we know them. A car will just be a room that moves with an interior as configurable as any room and an exterior that might resemble a shipping container on wheels.

But way before all that, it's all very well for manufacturers to be racing to produce the first AVs but I very much hope and expect that it will not be left for them to decide when they are road ready.

[Stu08]

loose cannon said:

Is there any car enthusiasts left on ph

I'm glad someone else said it before me.

Surely we all enjoy driving? Yes the commute can be an absolute nightmare at times - but there are still those summer mornings and evenings when a drive through the countryside can be the most relaxing thing to do.

If autonomous cars become the norm and we are banned from driving on the roads - it won't be the same going to a track day for a 'relaxing' drive.......

[DonkeyApple]

otolith said:

I don’t want to give up driving myself. But I would quite like it if everyone else did

And there are some journeys I’d rather sit in the back for. And it would be nice to be able to get pissed and have my own car pick me up and take me home.

I do think that once autonomous cars become commonplace self driving will die within a generation - young people will no longer need to spend money learning to drive or paying for their high insurance liabilities in order to be independently mobile.

I think we will see a massive promotion in the media by the 'do no evil' FANG companies via fake news and distortion to explain that manual and autonomous cars cannot mix and the first result will be to make cities autonomous only. Andnin those environments the autonomous car will be mostly minicabs.

Out out in the sticks autonomous vehicles will solve many current transport issues.

As much as I love driving and as hard as it is for me to say, I can really see the beneficial upsides of autonomy but I also recognise that the FANGs will launch an all out, all encompassing media assault on drivers the moment their products are in the market place. They own the modern media and this might will be used to crush the competition whatever the cost. These companies are ruthless and highly pernicious.

And re the true benefit of these cars, us being chauffeured while pissed? I'm not sure that will be allowed. It's a matter of who is to blame. With driverless minicabs it should be OK as the operator firm will be or they wouldn't be able to collect any fare that was under the influence but with private ownership? Well the manufacturers have already just stated that the owner is to blame for everything but how will that owner responsibility relate to being clearly too drunk to ever be responsible?

There are an awful lot of aspects of this still to resolve. And I suspect that despite the relentless investor propaganda of the FANGs and their usual deceptions and misrepresentations they are much further away than they would have us believe.

[culpz]

Max_Torque said:

If there is time to decide who to hit, then there is also time to simple avoid the entire accident in the first place.

A very good point and something which everyone has failed to point out, on here. However, i also don't have time for all of these hypothetical scenarios, which always seems to be the case, whenever autonomous cars are mentioned.

I just don't think that us humans should be put on the back burner, just yet. Driving standards aren't the best right now, as seen on my daily commute, but is it really essential that AI technology takes over from us in the imminent future?

[otolith]

DonkeyApple said:

And re the true benefit of these cars, us being chauffeured while pissed? I'm not sure that will be allowed. It's a matter of who is to blame. With driverless minicabs it should be OK as the operator firm will be or they wouldn't be able to collect any fare that was under the influence but with private ownership? Well the manufacturers have already just stated that the owner is to blame for everything but how will that owner responsibility relate to being clearly too drunk to ever be responsible?

I think there are too many social benefits to no longer requiring the passenger to be competent to drive not to do it. Think ageing population, disability, school run, etc.

I think in terms of liability, it's simply a matter of who you make accountable for the civil liability of using the vehicle on the road, which isn't the same as who is criminally liable for their actions while driving. We will require the car to be insured for third party risks resulting from it being used on the road (which should be cheaper and very much less variable by personal circumstances than insuring human drivers) and it will be the owners rather than the manufacturers picking up the tab for that.

I don't however think we will be opening up AV use to the pissed, disabled, geriatrically befuddled, blind, underage or unqualified while they still have a manual mode available, though. Once there is literally nothing you need or can do other than tell it the destination, I don't see any reason not to.