ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cars

View Poll Results: Driverless cars will become mandatory by 2050
Yes they will 30 24.39%
No they won't 56 45.53%
It will take longer 20 16.26%
Your poll options suck 35 28.46%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 123. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Old 16th May 2017, 07:36 PM   #921
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
In my area, there are going to be a lot of heavily fined deer.
Deer was one of the first things brought up in my original thread, *********** years back now... suppose for a minute that at least part of what Michio Kaku means when he says that sensors will be as cheap as toilet paper... OK so rural roads, especially where the roads curve and change elevation, sensors, that put out little led flashes, easily will pick up the eye reflections, over time, any time they are picked up within 100 m of the tree line cars slow up. They work with the technology as years go on but by 2050 they will figure it out.

You unimaginative people are forgetting the title of the thread says 2050. You have to do intellectual due diligence to get respect in this thread. OK?
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 07:38 PM   #922
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
I really really want to see this
Certain areas of New York, ask the locals for recent sightings.
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 08:42 PM   #923
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,367
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
We could train birds like falcons to drop down out of the sky and smack the heads of any pedestrians or deer or moose or wombats getting near the roads. Fines are too much bureaucracy and happen after the fact anyway. Drop birds are much easier and simple.
Wombats are nocturnal, falcons are not.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 08:52 PM   #924
The Great Zaganza
Master Poster
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,542
it's a typical human trait to be more upset by injury caused by agency than if it was caused by accident.
Doesn't make it rational, though.
__________________
"eventually we will get something done."
- Donald J. Trump
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 09:14 PM   #925
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 12,854
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Deer was one of the first things brought up in my original thread, *********** years back now...

How about large dogs, or discarded empty cardboard boxes?
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2017, 10:42 PM   #926
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,367
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
How about large dogs, or discarded empty cardboard boxes?
The discarded empty cardboard boxes will be equipped with microchips and track the large dogs
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 02:23 AM   #927
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
I live in a country with less deaths per resident than the USA but it never occurred to me to make an argument that the answer lies in other methods, that is pathetic.
No, I can well imagine that this logical argument never occurred to you, much like all the others.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Do you have a solution for ending virtually all automobile accidents caused by drunk drivers, heart attack victims, panicked morons and inattentive scatterbrains? Then stop trying to contribute, I think that was a polite way of putting it.
I think you'd be the authority on at least three out of four of those points.
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 02:24 AM   #928
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Deer was one of the first things brought up in my original thread, *********** years back now... suppose for a minute that at least part of what Michio Kaku means when he says that sensors will be as cheap as toilet paper... OK so rural roads, especially where the roads curve and change elevation, sensors, that put out little led flashes, easily will pick up the eye reflections, over time, any time they are picked up within 100 m of the tree line cars slow up. They work with the technology as years go on but by 2050 they will figure it out.
LOL! Sensors that identify deers' eyes. Ah, the future, it's going to be grand!
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 02:35 AM   #929
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by baron View Post
That relates to what I posted earlier, or in one of the numerous other threads. People who think we can get the death toll down to crazy low amounts (zero was quoted by one poster!) are apparently unaware that a great many fatalities are of pedestrians, cyclists, bikers and other non-car road users. Bikers alone represent 20% of the road fatalities in the UK and slightly lower in the US. Even assuming perfect automated car performance there would still be many road deaths annually from factors beyond the vehicles' control. Unless of course everyone else was banned from the roads, as has been suggested should happen.
That's an interesting point, but the deaths being non-car road users doesn't suggest that automated cars won't be able to avoid those fatalities. If a drunk driver hits a pedestrian, does that mean that an automated car would hit that same pedestrian as well?

I agree with you that some fatalities will likely turn out to be unavoidable. I also agree that automated cars won't be able to avoid all avoidable accidents either. But there's no reason to think that because a particular death was a non-car road user that that death can't be avoided by making driving automated. Even in cases where the, say, cyclist, is at fault, an automated car could (in theory, not yet in practice) react more quickly than a human driver, be more aware than a human driver, or some combination of those factors and thus avoid the mortal outcome.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 06:53 AM   #930
Disbelief
Master Poster
 
Disbelief's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,375
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
What legal ramifications do you mean? There's certainly no problem with filming in public.
Privacy concerns in states where you are not allowed to record audio without consent of both parties. Eavesdropping could be a problem if your dash cam records audio when you are not present in the car, even in states where you can normally record audio.
__________________
Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman
Disbelief is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 07:03 AM   #931
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,319
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
Privacy concerns in states where you are not allowed to record audio without consent of both parties. Eavesdropping could be a problem if your dash cam records audio when you are not present in the car, even in states where you can normally record audio.
Also, there doesn't appear to me any consumer demand for this. Drivers don't want their own driving to be recorded.

I will note that the country with the highest rate of usage of dash cams does seem to have the safest roads, based on my cursory review of YouTube.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 09:20 AM   #932
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
How about large dogs, or discarded empty cardboard boxes?
Anything that gets close to the road will be sensed by the network. Anything in the road will be driven around, and the other cars will give berth. Anything that impedes traffic will have human eyes on it in seconds, robots and humans if necessary dispatched within seconds. I am basically the the oracle at Delphi here.
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 09:23 AM   #933
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
Originally Posted by baron View Post
LOL! Sensors that identify deers' eyes. Ah, the future, it's going to be grand!
Name one natural thing that will bounce electrons back to a sensor more efficiently than the back of an animal's eye while driving through the boreal forest and you may attempt at a chance of geting close to making a barely relevant point.
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 09:25 AM   #934
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
It's kind of like saying humanity could never do it because joey mcgee is stupid, so, I see what you did there. Go every major car company in the world, you need me to cheer you on because you're doubtful about your prospects, so you have my support.
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 01:43 PM   #935
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Name one natural thing that will bounce electrons back to a sensor more efficiently than the back of an animal's eye while driving through the boreal forest and you may attempt at a chance of geting close to making a barely relevant point.
I wouldn't advise relying on beams of electrons to see the road ahead. Photons do a much better job.
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 05:48 PM   #936
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,367
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Name one natural thing that will bounce electrons back to a sensor more efficiently than the back of an animal's eye while driving through the boreal forest and you may attempt at a chance of geting close to making a barely relevant point.
Eucalypt and Acacia vegetation (and rocks) reflect better than kangaroo eyes.

Wild pigs don't have tapetum lucidum either, but roos have several million years of evolution telling them they are the fastest critters around and can dash across a road in front of anything without getting hit.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 11:45 PM   #937
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by baron View Post
I wouldn't advise relying on beams of electrons to see the road ahead. Photons do a much better job.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 02:24 AM   #938
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
Eucalypt and Acacia vegetation (and rocks) reflect better than kangaroo eyes.

Wild pigs don't have tapetum lucidum either, but roos have several million years of evolution telling them they are the fastest critters around and can dash across a road in front of anything without getting hit.
Plus, of course, it's the deer that don't look at you that you need to watch out for. We have quite a few round here and they just leap right out.
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 09:40 AM   #939
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,378
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
You can't untie this knot? You say that there are no non-buggy systems. Someone gave an example of a non-buggy system. Therefore there are non-buggy systems.

That's not very difficult.
Saying so, without any supporting evidence, doesn't establish it to be true.*

Therefore your "therefore" falls flat.



*Once again, I managed my end by providing evidence that refutes the claim. After all, how error-free could a system be that requires constant human monitoring?
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 18th May 2017 at 09:44 AM.
Regnad Kcin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 12:20 PM   #940
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,768
Originally Posted by Disbelief View Post
Privacy concerns in states where you are not allowed to record audio without consent of both parties. Eavesdropping could be a problem if your dash cam records audio when you are not present in the car, even in states where you can normally record audio.
Easily remedied. Don't record audio.
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 01:29 PM   #941
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,378
I wasn't really satisfied with the thinking behind my footnote in post 939 above. So...

Originally Posted by South China Morning Post
The new air traffic control system suffered another glitch on Saturday when operators temporarily lost information on the positioning and altitude of a large number of flights.

This triggered the deployment of a back-up system for the first time since the HK$1.56 billion technology went live at the airport in November.
This was last month.

Hong Kong's air traffic control systems suffer another glitch
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 18th May 2017 at 01:37 PM.
Regnad Kcin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 06:55 PM   #942
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Saying so, without any supporting evidence, doesn't establish it to be true.*
Agreed: and later you brought up the point that perhaps it isn't true that air traffic control systems aren't buggy. That's entirely valid and is where the discussion should go.

But:

Quote:
*Once again, I managed my end by providing evidence that refutes the claim. After all, how error-free could a system be that requires constant human monitoring?
A system that isn't designed to work without human monitoring may be entirely error free and still require human monitoring. Again, autonomy and "non-bugginess" are two entirely different things. So, no, when you show that these systems aren't autonomous you don't show that they are buggy.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th May 2017, 07:06 PM   #943
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
I wasn't really satisfied with the thinking behind my footnote in post 939 above. So...



This was last month.

Hong Kong's air traffic control systems suffer another glitch
Cool, that's the sort of thing that I would consider a reasonable argument against the claim that air traffic control systems don't suffer from glitches.

It is interesting to note that as you quoted, this was the first time they had to use the backup system since November, and yet this level of "bugginess" is newsworthy. It's also perhaps worth noting that they claim that the failure was due to user error (too many people logging on to the system at once).

I agree with you if you are saying that no system can be made to be perfect. But that doesn't suggest that they cannot be made to be very reliable. And it's also worth noting that the solution to the potential for failures that air traffic control has put in - redundancy, that is a back-up system - is entirely possible in cars as well.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 02:49 PM   #944
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,319
The air traffic control system derail was fun and all, but there are simpler answers to this question:

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Speculative? Please name me an electronics technology that is not at times buggy/erratic, unresponsive, inaccurate, or troublesome. Now add to the mix various mechanical components.
Most current automobiles run on computers that are not buggy/erratic, unresponsive, inaccurate, or troublesome. Engine management has been electronic for decades now. An ECU going bad is typically a symptom of some other fault, even in an older car. Electronic braking and steering are becoming more and more common.

Quote:
And now place yourself inside this non-existent marvel moving, in traffic and among stationary physical objects, at 70 mph.
We already are.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 05:17 PM   #945
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 6,784
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Most current automobiles run on computers that are not buggy/erratic, unresponsive, inaccurate, or troublesome. Engine management has been electronic for decades now. An ECU going bad is typically a symptom of some other fault, even in an older car. Electronic braking and steering are becoming more and more common.
Like I said, pretty much any device that's closed and dedicated rather than generalized and open to have any random stuff loaded on it from anywhere: calculators, alarm clocks, stereos, microwaves, aircraft engines & aerodynamic control surfaces, sea & air navigation, TVs, thermostats, traffic lights, the centrifuges & vital-signs monitors & refractometers we use at my job, gyroscopes & CO₂ detectors & a zillion other things on spacecraft, X-ray machines, submarines' sonar & pressure controls & nuclear engine controls, LEDs, the thing that keeps power flow & light output stable for every fluorescent light... even things that can be done by non-electronic means are often electronic these days without showing any outward sign to the consumer of which kind they have, like the temperature knob on a crockpot or toaster-oven, or the oscillation system on oscillating household fans, and radar's transition from analog to electronic was pretty smooth from the user's perspective (although in that case they probably knew which ones were which just because of it would have been mentioned in their training)...

The question was absurd.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 09:47 PM   #946
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,312
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Like I said, pretty much any device that's closed and dedicated rather than generalized and open to have any random stuff loaded on it from anywhere: calculators, alarm clocks, stereos, microwaves, aircraft engines & aerodynamic control surfaces, sea & air navigation, TVs, thermostats, traffic lights, the centrifuges & vital-signs monitors & refractometers we use at my job, gyroscopes & CO₂ detectors & a zillion other things on spacecraft, X-ray machines, submarines' sonar & pressure controls & nuclear engine controls, LEDs, the thing that keeps power flow & light output stable for every fluorescent light... even things that can be done by non-electronic means are often electronic these days without showing any outward sign to the consumer of which kind they have, like the temperature knob on a crockpot or toaster-oven, or the oscillation system on oscillating household fans, and radar's transition from analog to electronic was pretty smooth from the user's perspective (although in that case they probably knew which ones were which just because of it would have been mentioned in their training)...

The question was absurd.
Fixed function and very narrow range of operations. And still bugs and failures tend to show up sooner or later.

Sorry, but nothing on that list is bug/error/failure free.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 11:20 PM   #947
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,585
Originally Posted by Klimax View Post
Fixed function and very narrow range of operations. And still bugs and failures tend to show up sooner or later.

Sorry, but nothing on that list is bug/error/failure free.
The claim was that all systems are "buggy". The opposite of that is not error free, but simply something which is not prone to error.

I hope that the objection to automated cars isn't that no system is perfect. I thought the objection was that no system can avoid a very high rate of error. I think that claim has been shown to be false. That errors will still arise is certainly going to be true. But the question is whether the rate at which they arise can be brought low enough that the risks are much less than what we would consider to be too high.

I was watching Elon Musk recently when he made a similar point, saying that Tesla's cars will never be perfectly safe, and if the error rate is one major failure every 100 days worth of driving, that's in some sense relatively safe but certainly far too dangerous. But if the autopilot has an error rate of 1 in every thousand human lifetimes, that's certainly good enough.

So again, the question isn't whether or not systems can be made to be completely error free, but how low the error rate can be brought down.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 02:30 AM   #948
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Like I said, pretty much any device that's closed and dedicated rather than generalized and open to have any random stuff loaded on it from anywhere...
The last thing an automated ECU will be is 'closed and dedicated'. It will need to benefit from third party learning situations, communicate with other vehicles and external sensors, it will almost certainly need to be linked into a hub real-time and also receive periodic updates for base functionality as technology improves. Think Windows, not a toaster, then add a few dozen extra communication channels and increase the complexity by two orders of magnitude.

Edit: And I'm looking forwards to seeing the cost of these ECUs and all the gadgets, software, etc. I recently bought an aftermarket ECU for my car at a cost of £1,200 and it's really basic stuff.
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.

Last edited by baron; 20th May 2017 at 02:32 AM.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 09:26 AM   #949
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,312
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
The claim was that all systems are "buggy". The opposite of that is not error free, but simply something which is not prone to error.

I hope that the objection to automated cars isn't that no system is perfect. I thought the objection was that no system can avoid a very high rate of error. I think that claim has been shown to be false. That errors will still arise is certainly going to be true. But the question is whether the rate at which they arise can be brought low enough that the risks are much less than what we would consider to be too high.

I was watching Elon Musk recently when he made a similar point, saying that Tesla's cars will never be perfectly safe, and if the error rate is one major failure every 100 days worth of driving, that's in some sense relatively safe but certainly far too dangerous. But if the autopilot has an error rate of 1 in every thousand human lifetimes, that's certainly good enough.

So again, the question isn't whether or not systems can be made to be completely error free, but how low the error rate can be brought down.
And how costly it'll be.

In an case my primary objection is to mandatory use of them and objection to "worship" of them.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 05:52 PM   #950
Joey McGee
I am become death, the destroyer of worlds
 
Joey McGee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,261
Quote:
Brits expect driverless cars to outnumber normal cars in 15 years

http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4...rs-in-15-years
bottoms up
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit." - Aristotle - Checklist of Rationality Habits http://rationality.org/checklist/
"I took a bite out of the earth. Sorry, I was drunk." - Joey McGee
"I can't think that it would be terrible of me to say — and it is occasionally true — that I need physics more than friends." - J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 06:43 PM   #951
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,378
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Most current automobiles run on computers that are not buggy/erratic, unresponsive, inaccurate, or troublesome. Engine management has been electronic for decades now. An ECU going bad is typically a symptom of some other fault, even in an older car. Electronic braking and steering are becoming more and more common.

We already are.
Now let's take away your steering wheel.

I appreciate the worthwhile perspective. However, you certainly appreciate the difference between engine management, traction control, and other similar processes which, though sophisticated in their own right, would be comparatively rudimentary with any widespread driverless systems. Systems needing to operate with, to borrow a mechanical term, very close tolerances while dealing with the exponentially greater number of issues which arise in every moment of travel that humans have long taken into account and for granted.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 20th May 2017 at 07:09 PM.
Regnad Kcin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 06:47 PM   #952
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,378
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Like I said, pretty much any device that's closed and dedicated rather than generalized and open to have any random stuff loaded on it from anywhere: calculators, alarm clocks, stereos, microwaves, aircraft engines & aerodynamic control surfaces, sea & air navigation, TVs, thermostats, traffic lights, the centrifuges & vital-signs monitors & refractometers we use at my job, gyroscopes & CO₂ detectors & a zillion other things on spacecraft, X-ray machines, submarines' sonar & pressure controls & nuclear engine controls, LEDs, the thing that keeps power flow & light output stable for every fluorescent light... even things that can be done by non-electronic means are often electronic these days without showing any outward sign to the consumer of which kind they have, like the temperature knob on a crockpot or toaster-oven, or the oscillation system on oscillating household fans, and radar's transition from analog to electronic was pretty smooth from the user's perspective (although in that case they probably knew which ones were which just because of it would have been mentioned in their training)...

The question was absurd.
You have no steering wheel now. Go!

As with Dr. Keith above, your viewpoint is terrific. But to be candid, the only real absurdity with regard to this discussion is the infatuation so many apparently have with this proposed brave new world of driverless cars.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 20th May 2017 at 07:11 PM.
Regnad Kcin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 07:43 PM   #953
Regnad Kcin
Philosopher
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,378
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
The claim was that all systems are "buggy". The opposite of that is not error free, but simply something which is not prone to error.

I hope that the objection to automated cars isn't that no system is perfect. I thought the objection was that no system can avoid a very high rate of error. I think that claim has been shown to be false. That errors will still arise is certainly going to be true. But the question is whether the rate at which they arise can be brought low enough that the risks are much less than what we would consider to be too high.

I was watching Elon Musk recently when he made a similar point, saying that Tesla's cars will never be perfectly safe, and if the error rate is one major failure every 100 days worth of driving, that's in some sense relatively safe but certainly far too dangerous. But if the autopilot has an error rate of 1 in every thousand human lifetimes, that's certainly good enough.

So again, the question isn't whether or not systems can be made to be completely error free, but how low the error rate can be brought down.
First, I want to acknowledge our recent back-and-forth. I enjoyed it.

Here, I'd just like to offer a gentle reminder that Mr. Musk is in business to sell things.

I was recently walking through a Bed, Bath and Beyond store and passed an endcap display featuring the new Dyson Supersonic (hand held) Hair Dryer. I don't know if I actually did a double take when I saw the price, but it certainly caused me to stop and stare. Here it is on Amazon for from $489.99 to $528.40*.

A little blow dryer. For your hair.

I can't help but doubt that Dyson, makers of (perceived, thanks to terrific marketing) high-end vacuum cleaners and, lately, paperless hand dryers (and perhaps other types of similar moving-air devices of which I'm unaware), were furrowing their collective brows over the as yet unsolved mystery of how to blow hot air at one's head. No, I expect they were, and still are, looking for ways to adapt their expertise in this field to new markets. Dyson may very well be striving to solve problems and make life easier or better in some small fashion. But they also want to sell you their crap.

Tesla, and GM, and Mercedes-Benz, and Ford, and Toyota, and all the rest devote vast resources to research, development, testing, and marketing. It is a highly, extremely, competitive field, in which they are principally concerned with beating the other guy and increasing market share. Helping their fellow man and woman, who, of course are also their relatives and friends, is a worthwhile consideration. But I feel pretty confident that every stockholder in these companies is only along as long as the end product puts the dollars or yen or euros in their bank accounts.



*Really? 40 cents?
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 20th May 2017 at 07:45 PM.
Regnad Kcin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 02:16 AM   #954
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
bottoms up
That shows how stupid the British public are. Even if the cars and the infrastructure was fully developed, and the vehicles available to buy right now, they still wouldn't be a majority in 15 years or anywhere close. In reality, the idea that 25 million+ people out of 50 million will go out and replace their vehicle with one that doesn't currently exist, in preference to the offerings of the entire automotive industry, is so ridiculous it's not worth discussing. Forty two percent of Americans believe God created the world 6,000 years ago; are they right too?
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 02:02 PM   #955
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,359
Ford Motor Company has a new CEO. That CEO was, until recently head of their driverless car initiative.

It may be the biggest waste of money in history, but a lot of companies are betting big money that they will work. Based on Ford's commitment to driverless cars, should their stock be a buy, or a sell?
__________________
Don't blame me. I voted for Kasich.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 02:08 PM   #956
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,768
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Ford Motor Company has a new CEO. That CEO was, until recently head of their driverless car initiative.

It may be the biggest waste of money in history, but a lot of companies are betting big money that they will work. Based on Ford's commitment to driverless cars, should their stock be a buy, or a sell?
Has anyone called driverless cars a waste of research dollars?
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 02:30 PM   #957
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,319
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Now let's take away your steering wheel.
If not you, then someone you share the road with, already has a computer between the steering wheel and the actual wheels. You do get that if that computer fails the steering wheel is as useful as a tennis racket, yes?

More common is brake-by-wire. Computer fails and you have no brakes.

Quote:
I appreciate the worthwhile perspective. However, you certainly appreciate the difference between engine management, traction control, and other similar processes which, though sophisticated in their own right, would be comparatively rudimentary with any widespread driverless systems.
Engine management, traction control and other similar systems perform far better than their human/mechanical analogs.

If you think traction control is rudimentary try to emulate it with your own fine tuned braking skills.

If you think fuel management is simple, try to get a mechanical fuel injection system working without enlisting the help of an old German craftsman.

Quote:
Systems needing to operate with, to borrow a mechanical term, very close tolerances while dealing with the exponentially greater number of issues which arise in every moment of travel that humans have long taken into account and for granted.
Interesting that you don't think the above mentioned systems work in very close tolerances, but I'll address the bigger picture.

Why do you think humans are better at multi-tasking than computers?

Most of driving is monitoring the surroundings and reacting. Humans need good lighting, clear sight lines and three mirrors to even come close to monitoring the surroundings. Even then we have blind spots and can only look in one direction at a time.

Our reaction time is measured in what, half seconds, quarter seconds at best. That is an eternity to even a rudimentary braking control unit. And that assumes our attention is focused in the right direction at the right time.

Taking such routine tasks out of our flawed hands just makes sense when we can build tools that are better at it than we are.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

Last edited by Dr. Keith; 23rd May 2017 at 02:33 PM.
Dr. Keith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 03:02 PM   #958
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 6,784
Originally Posted by baron View Post
The last thing an automated ECU will be is 'closed and dedicated'... Think Windows, not a toaster, then add a few dozen extra communication channels and increase the complexity by two orders of magnitude.
Not at all, but...

Isn't that irrelevant for your case anyway? You said self-driving cars wouldn't happen because flying cars would take over first. That's a very different argument from one that says they wouldn't happen because the technology can't work; the one about flying cars allows for the possibility that self-driving ground-car technology could be perfectly functional, just irrelevant. Are you going with both: that it can't work, but also, even if it could, flying cars would prevent it anyway? How would you reconcile that with the amount of automation that would be necessary for flying cars?

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Now let's take away your steering wheel.
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
You have no steering wheel now. Go!
I don't get what kind of response you're looking for with these. Is there a point they're supposed to be making? Are they meant as a question?

Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
the only real absurdity with regard to this discussion is the infatuation so many apparently have with this proposed brave new world of driverless cars.
Claims of what the people on the other side must feel are the kind of behavior people typically resort to when they can't come up with some real support for their own side. If you can, then why not present that instead?
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:09 PM   #959
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,064
Originally Posted by baron View Post
LOL! Sensors that identify deers' eyes. Ah, the future, it's going to be grand!
A bit of a problem with moose.

It would be interesting to see how an automated car would fare compared to a human driver in detecting a moose at night soon enough to avoid it. If one can do it, it would be a useful adjunct even for non automated cars. A moose warning system would be a nice half step in that direction.
__________________
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an understanding. (Samuel Johnson)

I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:15 PM   #960
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,359
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Has anyone called driverless cars a waste of research dollars?
The amount of money being spent is beyond just a casual R&D project. If they spend that much money and don't end up with a self-driving car that they can sell, there's going to be some mighty upset people in the board of directors.
__________________
Don't blame me. I voted for Kasich.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.