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 23.08%
No they won't 61 46.92%
It will take longer 22 16.92%
Your poll options suck 35 26.92%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Old Today, 11:16 AM   #1081
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,484
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Hardline proponents of robocars would probably say that all the car needs is better GPS+mapping.
This particular hardline proponent of robocars says that if they need GPS+mapping to drive safely, they aren't ready for prime time yet.

I've read that the google cars wandering about in California and Texas require detailed and up to date maps. If that's true, then they aren't ready.

(ETA: And we know they aren't ready, anyway, but I'm saying that they never will be if they can't operate without GPS and mapping, or without special roadway built for driverless cars.)
__________________
On vacation.

Last edited by Meadmaker; Today at 11:17 AM.
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 Today, 11:32 AM   #1082
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,395
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
This particular hardline proponent of robocars says that if they need GPS+mapping to drive safely, they aren't ready for prime time yet.

I've read that the google cars wandering about in California and Texas require detailed and up to date maps. If that's true, then they aren't ready.

(ETA: And we know they aren't ready, anyway, but I'm saying that they never will be if they can't operate without GPS and mapping, or without special roadway built for driverless cars.)
I gether that large teams of Google employees sit and define every damn item of 'street furniture' of any significance in Google hq country - mailboxes, fire hydrants, telephone and light poles etc etc etc, yet still Google car has serious limitations even on its home turf.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB 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 Today, 12:26 PM   #1083
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,484
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
I gether that large teams of Google employees sit and define every damn item of 'street furniture' of any significance in Google hq country - mailboxes, fire hydrants, telephone and light poles etc etc etc, yet still Google car has serious limitations even on its home turf.
It's difficult to say what the real limitations are, because of course so much of the work is proprietary. I say that it's all very well and good to have a map with the fire hydrants marked, but if they can't recognize a fire hydrant and react appropriately, without a map, then they aren't ready.

For my part, I'm occasionally reading the not s0 proprietary stuff published in academic journals, and I see the improvements happening at a very rapid pace. It's hard to say when it will reach commercial availability, but 10 years ago I would not have believed we would be where we are today.
__________________
On vacation.
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 Today, 12:37 PM   #1084
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,974
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
This particular hardline proponent of robocars says that if they need GPS+mapping to drive safely, they aren't ready for prime time yet.
They don't need GPS to drive safely. They can drive safely without. They need it to know where to go.

Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
I gether that large teams of Google employees sit and define every damn item of 'street furniture' of any significance in Google hq country - mailboxes, fire hydrants, telephone and light poles etc etc etc, yet still Google car has serious limitations even on its home turf.
You gather wrong. The Google cars (now Waymo cars) have been doing that all by themselves.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn 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 Today, 02:06 PM   #1085
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,484
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
They don't need GPS to drive safely. They can drive safely without. They need it to know where to go.

You gather wrong. The Google cars (now Waymo cars) have been doing that all by themselves.
My guess is that the incredibly detailed maps that humans are putting together of those areas are primarily to "check the work" of the algorithms on the cars.

However, I have read that the cars can only drive in areas with very detailed maps. So, who knows? Of course, what I read two years ago is almost certainly not true today. Things are moving very quickly.
__________________
On vacation.
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 Today, 03:12 PM   #1086
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,394
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Are you some kind of ****** moron? That's why I linked the *********** ideas of GPS and mapping. Did you miss the ******** mapping part? If the damn car doesn't know exactly where it is then those pedestrians might or might not be in the road itself. GPS says roughly where, mapping and sensors say exactly where. Anyway, there will be uniquely-identifiable beacons every 2 metres along the way, because science is great, so it's not a problem really.
[/Joey M]
You don't understand how regular driving works so how can you understand how a computer would replicate it?

The GPS just tells the car where to go. It doesn't see pedestrians. It doesn't see anything. The GPS tells the car which road to drive on, the car's other sensors identify objects, their trajectory, and speed. The computer then sends out instructions on how the car is to respond.

Google has a video from years ago explaining how it works in their cars and showing the system in action. The issue for autonomous cars is that they can't yet interact with humans the way other humans can. When you see a pedestrian approach a corner you can tell through eye contact if that person is going to stop. The computer can't do that yet. It knows exactly where the pedestrian is, where it and the pedestrian will intersect, but it can't tell if the pedestrian will stop or step out. The safe mode is that the car slows until a signal is received on the intention, ie. the pedestrian slows or stops.

The other thing that is affecting this is that human drivers get a special pass when they injure someone that an autonomous car would never get. If you kill someone wit your car the automatic assumption is you did everything you could to avoid the accident but if an autonomous car kills someone many believe the car intended to kill that person, or that the car is obviously defective. It's why statistics are used to figure out what is really happening with autonomous cars and not knee jerk lawsuits like what happened with the Runaway Toyota gong show of a few years back.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak 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 05:55 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.