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 22.90%
No they won't 62 47.33%
It will take longer 22 16.79%
Your poll options suck 35 26.72%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 131. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Old 11th August 2017, 06:41 AM   #1041
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
So who has read some good think tank documents and government reports lately?

This is the one I read last any betters?

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...n-traffic-flow
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 11th August 2017, 06:56 AM   #1042
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Step 1. Yell at people for how stupid they are.

Step 2. Claim an argument from authority because you were an engineer in a software company before your wife left you.

Step 3. Go out in a blaze of glory telling everyone they are stupid and nothing can ever succeed.

Ah, bro, we've seen it before, your wife left you because you're annoying and engineering is not science...

Have a beer, I'll share a joint with you, and we can sort this mess out in a matter of hours.
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 11th August 2017, 07:26 AM   #1043
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 21,161
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Dude, Edison was a genius, he knew full well he was talking nonsense. I guess my point was poorly made, since none of my detractors are aware of the weakness of their positions.

Aw ffs, here I quote myself "Look at these weak cherry-picked articles... in 2017 people are hacking current technology that isn't even ready for public sale, and India poses special challenges for Indian companies..."Like Edison, these concerns are not fabricated wholecloth, but they are highly misleading and irrelevant to the greater conversation.

WTF is this? Every time someone posts an article that wasn't written by the onion that questions anything about driverless people here post it and dance around like they just scored a touchdown with 5 seconds to go its a *********** joke.
You're speaking here about the presumed motivation of those who mention the problems here. I'm talking about the problems themselves. Sure, they may be solved in time, and sure, it may be cherry picking to mention them, but the problems are not fake.

The prediction that driverless cars will be mandatory by 2050 depends, inevitably, on a set of assumptions one is making now, not in 2050. While your assumptions may be correct, I, among others, believe you have not taken everything into consideration. I do not think it is entirely irrelevant, and certainly not bogus and dishonest, to make note of instances where assumptions have met with surprise.

It's up to you and whoever else cares about the issue to decide what to make of the instances. One person can point to them and say that they show how the unexpected can pop up, and another can point to them and say they show how diligently those addressing the issue are even now coping with problems before they arise. Either or both may be right.

Speculating about something like this depends on a lot of assumptions not only on how technology will evolve, but how society and world politics will. For computer technology, a time span of 20 or 30 years is quite large. But for social infrastructure it's variable. A nation can rise and fall in that time, or maybe the proportion of ox carts and pedicabs on the roads will change a little bit.

Of course you're likely to be one-sided on this issue, having decided that driverless cars will be the transportation answer for the future, and maybe they will. Others may legitimately, and not ridiculously, disagree. There are a lot of political, economic, and social forces to overcome for that to happen, and some may well believe that things will be mostly the same in 30 or 40 years, just as they are mostly the same now as they were 30 or 40 years ago, and that many of the inevitable advances in technology will be optional. And others may legitimately and not ridiculously believe that self driving cars are destined to be the equivalent of battery powered buggy whips, because the enemy of safety and sanity is the car itself.

Whatever the outcome, I imagine we'll be dead before the final upshot comes about, and all we can do is watch the process and base our guesses on what is happening. We'll probably do so in better style if we stay off the highest horses.
__________________
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 11th August 2017, 11:13 AM   #1044
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post

Engineers are full of ****.
The same engineers that are essential to perfecting your self driving cars?
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 11th August 2017, 11:21 AM   #1045
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
The same engineers that are essential to perfecting your self driving cars?
I'm pretty sure that dick bruises are a real phenomenon.
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 11th August 2017, 11:22 AM   #1046
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Tough guys everywhere goin whaddya want me to do boss? How about shut the
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 11th August 2017, 11:32 AM   #1047
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
I'm pretty sure that dick bruises are a real phenomenon.
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Tough guys everywhere goin whaddya want me to do boss? How about shut the
Good arguments indeed. I am sure you are bringing more and more people to your point of view. Unfortunately I am not one of them.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 11th August 2017, 11:33 AM   #1048
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 10,757
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/lo...166672082.html

It's starting....

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn 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 11th August 2017, 11:34 AM   #1049
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,963
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped 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 11th August 2017, 11:54 AM   #1050
StackOverflow
Student
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
So you have no evidence to provide, you demonstrate clear lack of taste and knowledge of what is funny in this argument, and you attack me for my addiction issues which I make fun of in a self depreciating manner which means I will laugh twice as hard at anyone who thinks it will hurt me for mentioning it... wow dude go back to reddit and stack overflow where those heartstrung cyber hippies give a **** about this pathetic nonsense.
The fact that you can't make a hard prediction for the year 2050 and expect anyone to support it still stands, though.
StackOverflow 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 11th August 2017, 12:20 PM   #1051
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Good arguments indeed. I am sure you are bringing more and more people to your point of view. Unfortunately I am not one of them.
You're one of those people who cares about how they are perceived by others, I care about saving lives with technology and facts, this relationship was doomed from the start.
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 11th August 2017, 12:21 PM   #1052
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by StackOverflow View Post
The fact that you can't make a hard prediction for the year 2050 and expect anyone to support it still stands, though.
You think making hard predictions makes one hard? Come back when you get a clue.
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 11th August 2017, 12:26 PM   #1053
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
The same engineers that are essential to perfecting your self driving cars?
Im not the only person here who has seen people waving around the engineering degree while calling everyone else retards. I dont care if you have a robotics degree from mit, means nothing to me. NOTHING. Argue in good faith or go home. Or maybe you feel safer in other forums where people are expected to kiss your goofy ring?
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 11th August 2017, 03:25 PM   #1054
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Im not the only person here who has seen people waving around the engineering degree while calling everyone else retards. I dont care if you have a robotics degree from mit, means nothing to me. NOTHING. Argue in good faith or go home. Or maybe you feel safer in other forums where people are expected to kiss your goofy ring?
I have no degree and the only ring I own is my wedding ring. This does not change the fact that, without good engineers, self driving cars would be nothing but science fiction. "Engineers are full of ****" is denigrating the only people that have the knowledge to make your dream of mandatory self driving cars a reality.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 11th August 2017, 03:29 PM   #1055
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
You're one of those people who cares about how they are perceived by others, I care about saving lives with technology and facts, this relationship was doomed from the start.
Am l? How would you know? And I do hope you are not suggesting that you and I have some sort of relationship. You mean nothing to me as a person, but I do find some of your comments interesting.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 11th August 2017, 06:56 PM   #1056
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,409
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Tough guys everywhere goin whaddya want me to do boss? How about shut the
"There's no answer to that"- Eric Morecombe
__________________
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 11th August 2017, 08:14 PM   #1057
Steve
Master Poster
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,829
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
I mean nothing to you as a person, **** bro, like if my girl comes on here and lets you know I died, you'll feel nothing? Great. Hilarious
You got it in one. Well done. But that's nothing special. There are more than 7 billion other people who's deaths would affect me exactly the same way.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve 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 11th August 2017, 08:35 PM   #1058
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
"There's no answer to that"- Eric Morecombe
Yeah I'm really hurt that the guy who ***** on efforts to save millions of lives and trillions of dollars thinks Im dumb. Why dont you do some really good skeptic work and tell live aid that people still die in africa
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 11th August 2017, 08:43 PM   #1059
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Apparently no one with a clue is against driverless cars anymore, guess my job here is done.
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 13th August 2017, 09:39 AM   #1060
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,938
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Apparently no one with a clue is against driverless cars anymore, guess my job here is done.
It's amazing how important being right was to him.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon 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 13th August 2017, 10:09 AM   #1061
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,445
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Researchers Find a Malicious Way to Meddle with Autonomous Cars




http://blog.caranddriver.com/researc...utonomous-cars
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Self-Driving Cars Are Flummoxed by India's Chaotic Roads




http://www.thedrive.com/tech/12032/s...-chaotic-roads
Precisely what was positing about earlier.

Real world is nightmare.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Apparently no one with a clue is against driverless cars anymore, guess my job here is done.
Level of self delusion is brutal. He ignored every counter argument or dismissed it with nonsense and kept just believing. Too bad at best one of his sock puppet will be around when there will be attempt at wider use of self-driving cars...

And I knew why I don't have to rush back to thread. His response to my post was predictable irrationality and nonsense...
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax 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 13th August 2017, 10:16 AM   #1062
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,657
Not to defend Joey's weird behaviour, but as he has been banned I'd say it's a little unseemly to start insulting him given that he can no longer respond.
__________________
"... 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 13th August 2017, 10:21 AM   #1063
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,963
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Apparently no one with a clue is against driverless cars anymore, guess my job here is done.
Rip
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped 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 14th August 2017, 11:22 AM   #1064
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,445
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Not to defend Joey's weird behaviour, but as he has been banned I'd say it's a little unseemly to start insulting him given that he can no longer respond.
Good thing then no body insulted him.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400
Klimax 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 14th August 2017, 11:25 AM   #1065
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 64,938
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Not to defend Joey's weird behaviour, but as he has been banned I'd say it's a little unseemly to start insulting him given that he can no longer respond.
Hitting people when they can't fight back is half the fun.
__________________
"Yes. But we'll hit theirs as well. We have reserves. Attack!"
Argumemnon 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 August 2017, 12:29 PM   #1066
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,557
Joey McGee was a lump. A simple minded ne'er-do-well who was mistakenly taught (in a one room schoolhouse? In NJ?) that the louder you are in promoting a technology, the better that technology becomes. His irrational belief that humans are (apparently) so bad at driving yet so (obviously) flawless at creating machines that do it better basically proves he's never reconciled anything "intelligently" in his life. His simple mind wanted the autonomous vehicle question to be "black and white" so badly he was willing to say or do anything stupid to make it true, including getting banned. And I say good riddance, the place is better off without him.
HarryHenderson 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 August 2017, 06:44 PM   #1067
novaphile
Critical Thinker
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 402
One thing that has been bothering me about driverless cars, is how spectacularly they will go wrong, when they do go wrong.

Here's a scenario:

You're driving along, on a back-road, and you see the tail lights of the car in front of you, suddenly point at the sky, before the car disappears. You slam on the brakes, put on your hazard lights, and walk up to the edge of the bridge that is missing a centre section.

In the future...

Every car that passes that way, drives over the edge, killing all the occupants.

Driverless cars can't stop, every time the road "disappears" because they would be unable to go over bridges, or around corners.

Even if a car sends out a "where did the road go" message as it falls, that signal is only meaningful to a car immediately behind (if there is a car there to receive it).

But driverless cars don't "see" anything, because there is no cognition, the failure of a bridge (and it has happened before and will happen again) will just kill everyone on the road. (Bear in mind this class of problem can also occur on any corner if the road subsides etc.)

Apologies if I've posted about this before, but it really does bother me.
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.
novaphile 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 August 2017, 12:41 AM   #1068
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,657
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
One thing that has been bothering me about driverless cars, is how spectacularly they will go wrong, when they do go wrong.

Here's a scenario:

You're driving along, on a back-road, and you see the tail lights of the car in front of you, suddenly point at the sky, before the car disappears. You slam on the brakes, put on your hazard lights, and walk up to the edge of the bridge that is missing a centre section.
Why can't a driverless car assess that same data and react to it in the same way?
__________________
"... 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 August 2017, 01:35 AM   #1069
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 77,742
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Why can't a driverless car assess that same data and react to it in the same way?
Yeah of the many worrisome circumstances this one seems to be such an outlier - how often does this happen. Never mind that technology wise seems one that is already in hand.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat 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 August 2017, 07:23 PM   #1070
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,500
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
One thing that has been bothering me about driverless cars, is how spectacularly they will go wrong, when they do go wrong.

Here's a scenario:

You're driving along, on a back-road, and you see the tail lights of the car in front of you, suddenly point at the sky, before the car disappears. You slam on the brakes, put on your hazard lights, and walk up to the edge of the bridge that is missing a centre section.

In the future...

Every car that passes that way, drives over the edge, killing all the occupants.

Driverless cars can't stop, every time the road "disappears" because they would be unable to go over bridges, or around corners.

Even if a car sends out a "where did the road go" message as it falls, that signal is only meaningful to a car immediately behind (if there is a car there to receive it).

But driverless cars don't "see" anything, because there is no cognition, the failure of a bridge (and it has happened before and will happen again) will just kill everyone on the road. (Bear in mind this class of problem can also occur on any corner if the road subsides etc.)

Apologies if I've posted about this before, but it really does bother me.
I think you are underestimating how much information there is telling it that the road has disappeared.

On the other hand, the basic premise in the first sentence is at least partly true. If they encounter a completely unanticipated situation, their ability to analyze, understand, and react, will be minimal. They'll stop. Driverless cars in the vicinity of natural disasters, terrorist attacks, police situations, zombie attacks, etc will probably not behave well.
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 19th August 2017, 08:01 PM   #1071
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,472
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Driverless cars in the vicinity of natural disasters, terrorist attacks, police situations, zombie attacks, etc will probably not behave well.
Better or worse than humans not behaving well in those situations?
__________________
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 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 August 2017, 08:14 PM   #1072
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,500
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Better or worse than humans not behaving well in those situations?
Worse. Humans are familiar with those situations, at least enough that some of them will do something intelligent.

Although, a lot of the self driving cars, if they were also communicating, would take the "alternate route advised" advice coming over their comm systems, whereas the humans would be more likely to press on despite the problem, at least until they actually saw the flashing lights.
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 19th August 2017, 08:29 PM   #1073
novaphile
Critical Thinker
 
novaphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 402
I probably didn't state this very well.

If the car stops whenever it cannot detect the road surface in front, it can never cross any crest, or round a bend on a cliff.

Cars cannot "see" the way we do, there is no mentality to understand anything.

The video of the Tesla performing an emergency stop while driving around a bend, because of pedestrians on the footpath on the opposite side of the road, demonstrates this problem. The car cannot "know" what we instantly know, it can only react to sensors.

A common complaint about my car, is the way the software reacts when in cruise control "following" mode (it maintains a pre-set distance behind car in front, if that car slows, my car slows). The car is confused every time the car in front goes around a bend. It's enough of a problem that users quickly learn to never use the cruise control in that mode if there are going to be bends in the road.

Can you imagine any human driver being confused because the car in front has gone around a bend?
__________________
We would be better, and braver, to engage in enquiry, rather than indulge in the idle fancy, that we already know -- Plato.
novaphile 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 August 2017, 11:55 PM   #1074
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,428
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
I probably didn't state this very well.

If the car stops whenever it cannot detect the road surface in front, it can never cross any crest, or round a bend on a cliff.

Cars cannot "see" the way we do, there is no mentality to understand anything.

The video of the Tesla performing an emergency stop while driving around a bend, because of pedestrians on the footpath on the opposite side of the road, demonstrates this problem. The car cannot "know" what we instantly know, it can only react to sensors.
Hardline proponents of robocars would probably say that all the car needs is better GPS+mapping. It then knows it's on a bend and that those pedestrians are off the road and safe rather than in the middle of the road. If Joey were still here he might say something like that but with a lot of "You gotta be ********* kidding me!!!" thrown in

I have no idea of the eventual maximum accuracy of GPS, but linking it to sufficiently detailed road maps might (or might not) hit technical buffers, let alone 'sheer volume of work' buffers. Could a tight bend on a city backstreet simply exceed the resolution of gps?
__________________
"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 20th August 2017, 12:12 AM   #1075
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,657
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
I probably didn't state this very well.

If the car stops whenever it cannot detect the road surface in front, it can never cross any crest, or round a bend on a cliff.

Cars cannot "see" the way we do, there is no mentality to understand anything.
I think you both misunderstand the nature of cognition and the nature of computing. "Understanding" is just a data processing at a certain level of complexity.

Quote:
The video of the Tesla performing an emergency stop while driving around a bend, because of pedestrians on the footpath on the opposite side of the road, demonstrates this problem. The car cannot "know" what we instantly know, it can only react to sensors.

A common complaint about my car, is the way the software reacts when in cruise control "following" mode (it maintains a pre-set distance behind car in front, if that car slows, my car slows). The car is confused every time the car in front goes around a bend. It's enough of a problem that users quickly learn to never use the cruise control in that mode if there are going to be bends in the road.

Can you imagine any human driver being confused because the car in front has gone around a bend?
It's certainly true that driverless cars aren't there yet. That's very different from suggesting that some particular problems are insurmountable. While the problems you are mentioning may be difficult, I'm not seeing anything that can't be solved in principle.
Do you not expect a lot of progress to be made between now and 2050?
__________________
"... 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 August 2017, 02:55 AM   #1076
Klimax
NWO Cyborg 5960x (subversion VPUNPCKHQDQ)
 
Klimax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Starship Wanderer - DS9
Posts: 11,445
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Hardline proponents of robocars would probably say that all the car needs is better GPS+mapping. It then knows it's on a bend and that those pedestrians are off the road and safe rather than in the middle of the road. If Joey were still here he might say something like that but with a lot of "You gotta be ********* kidding me!!!" thrown in

I have no idea of the eventual maximum accuracy of GPS, but linking it to sufficiently detailed road maps might (or might not) hit technical buffers, let alone 'sheer volume of work' buffers. Could a tight bend on a city backstreet simply exceed the resolution of gps?
GPS and maps can and do fail. Mountains (and nothing high - all one needs are mountains found in Czech Republic to get fun cases)

Or old inner cities in Europe. Like Hradec Králové or Prague.(https://mapy.cz/s/1Y3Yf) Resection of GPS won't help you when there is no signal.

ETA: And number of fails of navigations is bit too high.
__________________
ModBorg

Engine: Ibalgin 400

Last edited by Klimax; 20th August 2017 at 02:57 AM.
Klimax 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 August 2017, 03:14 AM   #1077
StackOverflow
Student
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
It's certainly true that driverless cars aren't there yet. That's very different from suggesting that some particular problems are insurmountable. While the problems you are mentioning may be difficult, I'm not seeing anything that can't be solved in principle.
Do you not expect a lot of progress to be made between now and 2050?
Sigh. Joey is gone, now the next person is predicting the future.

What about my prediction that Earth will be a nuclear wasteland by 2030? Not as plausible as driverless cars by 2050? LOL

Another one: Driverless cars will be completey useless because full fledged, commercial teleportation will be available by 2040. You know, because of progress 'n stuff
StackOverflow 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 August 2017, 08:42 AM   #1078
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,500
Originally Posted by novaphile View Post
I probably didn't state this very well.

If the car stops whenever it cannot detect the road surface in front, it can never cross any crest, or round a bend on a cliff.

Cars cannot "see" the way we do, there is no mentality to understand anything.
Even on sharp bends and sudden dips, the driver of a car never loses sight of the road completely. He just might not have a very distant view of it. People go slowly on bendy or hilly roads because they don't know what's around the bend or over the bump. Camera driven cars can do the same thing.

Not yet, but there's no fundamental technological hurdle involved. It's a programming issue at this point.

I would also disagree about lack of "understanding". That part is what an awful lot of researchers are working on right now. They need to work on not just recognizing that there is an object of a certain size and a certain position going at a certain rate of speed, and instead recognize the identity of that object, and have a behavioral model that allows it to predict possible future actions. (i.e. a motorcycle+driver and a moose might have similar size/position/velocity characteristics, but their expected behaviors are very different)

Today's cars have very little of that knowledge. Until they do, there will not be a true self driving car. However, they have more of that knowledge than they had last year, and less than they will have next year.
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 20th August 2017, 09:25 AM   #1079
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,394
Originally Posted by GlennB View Post
Hardline proponents of robocars would probably say that all the car needs is better GPS+mapping. It then knows it's on a bend and that those pedestrians are off the road and safe rather than in the middle of the road. If Joey were still here he might say something like that but with a lot of "You gotta be ********* kidding me!!!" thrown in

I have no idea of the eventual maximum accuracy of GPS, but linking it to sufficiently detailed road maps might (or might not) hit technical buffers, let alone 'sheer volume of work' buffers. Could a tight bend on a city backstreet simply exceed the resolution of gps?
You've got to be ******* kidding me! (Sorry, my grammar was always somewhat better than Joey's.)

The car doesn't drive based on GPS accuracy. The GPS gives the car a rough position, the right street perhaps, and from there other systems take over to monitor immediate driving vicinity. That's pretty much what you do when you use a GPS to get you across town and there are plenty of videos by almost every manufacturer of their vehicles doing it extremely well online.

And GPS is accurate enough that the last city I lived in used it to issue tickets for parking violations. The computer could read 6 licence plates per second as the car it was mounted in drove by and tickets were automatically issued to the owners of vehicles whose cars were parked in places the GPS showed were illegal. Research showed the system was nearly flawless.

Your GPS doesn't drive you across town and neither will the GPS in autonomous vehicles. That's not what GPS is for.
__________________
"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
Old 20th August 2017, 10:19 AM   #1080
GlennB
In search of pi(e)
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie City, Arcadia
Posts: 20,428
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
You've got to be ******* kidding me! (Sorry, my grammar was always somewhat better than Joey's.)

The car doesn't drive based on GPS accuracy. The GPS gives the car a rough position, the right street perhaps, and from there other systems take over to monitor immediate driving vicinity. That's pretty much what you do when you use a GPS to get you across town and there are plenty of videos by almost every manufacturer of their vehicles doing it extremely well online.
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]
__________________
"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
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 01:50 AM.
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.