TimG Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 If no one paid insurance, people might take more caution and care when driving, knowing that any mishap will come out of their pocket.I buy insurance because I don't want to lose my house because I had a moment of distraction and slammed into someone. Even the most careful driver can make mistakes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) I buy insurance because I don't want to lose my house because I had a moment of distraction and slammed into someone. Even the most careful driver can make mistakes. I agree , accidents do happen. But many of these accidents a totally preventable. I started riding a motorbike last year. You notice idiots when in a car. You have to be much more aware of them being on a bike. I have insurance on the bike. I can't be on the road without it. However, even if insurance pays out in an accident on the bike, I may not be in a condition to enjoy those 'benefits'. Partly why when I ride, I try to take the roads less traffic on them. Also, wear your damn helmet, jacket, pants, shoes ..... the gear might be expensive. But if you wipe, and you live, you will be glad you spend the extra money. That T-shirt ain't doin shit for you. Edited March 30, 2012 by GostHacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 How many "Car Guys" here,like myself,think this idea blows chunks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 This is one of those times where I kind of want a violent solar flare to kill our power grid Horrible idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) This is the future. I want self-driving cars. I want my own robo-cheffeur. Driving kinda sucks. It's the most dangerous thing we do everyday by a long shot. There are risks in this, like hacking as mentioned, and technical glitches, but if ironed out this could be a revolution. Car accident rates could plummet if they master this tech, so many lives could be saved. And no more a-hole drivers to contend with! Instead of worrying about steering I could catch a nap or read the news on my way to work. I would also like self-driving ride-on lawnmowers so I don't have to cut the grass. And self-driving snow-blowers! Edited March 30, 2012 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stopstaaron Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 And no more a-hole drivers to contend with! Instead of worrying about steering I could catch a nap or read the news on my way to work. I guess you would deserve whatever happens to you then, I'd rather be in control Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) I think the real problem is in how these cars would interact with human driven cars when you have a substantial mix of the two on the roads. For example. What does a computer controlled car do when a human does something stupid and is about to crash into it? Well, it instantly computes the situation and flawlessly carries out some awesome maneuver that keeps everyone safe. What does it do when a human tries to cut it off to get ahead? Necessarily, it does the safe thing and yields. So what happens when there are enough of these on the roads that human drivers learn to expect this behavior? Well, they will be less careful and more aggressive around these robotic cars, knowing the computer in the other car will make sure a collision doesn't happen. They'll budge ahead of the robot cars in the lane over cause they know they can. And the people in the robot driven cars will sit there watching human drivers being jerks and cutting them off, and not be pleased. And what happens when someone thinks the car next to them is robot driven, but it's actually not? Boom, crash. And what about a manual override? You know when these cars become available, being able to take direct control of the vehicle in case of a problem will be a requirement. And yet, someone who is accustomed to being driven around by a robot will lose their driving skills, and may not be prepared to assume control in that situation. That could lead to all kinds of dangerous incidents. I think the reality is instead of fully self-driving cars, we'll just keep getting cars with more and more automatic functions. For example, first we had automatic transmissions. Then we had cruise control. Now some cars have automatic parallel parking. Other prototypes have a follow feature, where you can set it to follow the car ahead of you (great for long highway trips maybe). Some cars have automatic systems to brake when they detect they are about to collide with something. This will keep going, until more and more sub tasks of driving become automated, and slowly we'll get closer and closer to cars driving themselves. But it has to be phased in over time, because the mix of fully automated robotic cars and human driven cars on the road at the same time is not a good situation. Edited March 30, 2012 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 The point is there is no defect in Toyota's electronics. It was a myth created by politicians and trial lawyers looking to cash in. http://www.insideline.com/toyota/driver-error-is-culprit-in-most-toyota-crashes-says-nhtsa.html Yet this fear of a computer error cost Toyota big time - way more than would ever be covered by insurance. The problem here comes from people not computers. Most people don't understand them and fear them while expecting them to be perfect. They do not apply the same standards to other humans. More importantly, people will blame the computer even if it they know it is their fault and the more complex the computer the more difficult it is for companies to protect themselves from people who are lying to cover up their own errors. To put it another way: in the court of public opinion the computer is guilty until proven innocent - the human is innocent until proven guilty. And in the US where juries decide product liability awards the court of public opinion matters. So this is not a simple question of risk management. There needs to be a change in the public attitude towards computers before you will ever see the sale of computers in open ended safety critical applications like driving to consumers in the US. In countries like Japan I could see it. People have been giving up control to computers steadily over all kinds of things with out much complaint. I remember seeing a poll in the 90's that said 96% of people would never consider making a financial transaction on the internet. And yes... it IS a simple question of risk management. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I think the real problem is in how these cars would interact with human driven cars when you have a substantial mix of the two on the roads. For example. What does a computer controlled car do when a human does something stupid and is about to crash into it? Well, it instantly computes the situation and flawlessly carries out some awesome maneuver that keeps everyone safe. What does it do when a human tries to cut it off to get ahead? Necessarily, it does the safe thing and yields. So what happens when there are enough of these on the roads that human drivers learn to expect this behavior? Well, they will be less careful and more aggressive around these robotic cars, knowing the computer in the other car will make sure a collision doesn't happen. They'll budge ahead of the robot cars in the lane over cause they know they can. And the people in the robot driven cars will sit there watching human drivers being jerks and cutting them off, and not be pleased. And what happens when someone thinks the car next to them is robot driven, but it's actually not? Boom, crash. And what about a manual override? You know when these cars become available, being able to take direct control of the vehicle in case of a problem will be a requirement. And yet, someone who is accustomed to being driven around by a robot will lose their driving skills, and may not be prepared to assume control in that situation. That could lead to all kinds of dangerous incidents. I think the reality is instead of fully self-driving cars, we'll just keep getting cars with more and more automatic functions. For example, first we had automatic transmissions. Then we had cruise control. Now some cars have automatic parallel parking. Other prototypes have a follow feature, where you can set it to follow the car ahead of you (great for long highway trips maybe). Some cars have automatic systems to brake when they detect they are about to collide with something. This will keep going, until more and more sub tasks of driving become automated, and slowly we'll get closer and closer to cars driving themselves. But it has to be phased in over time, because the mix of fully automated robotic cars and human driven cars on the road at the same time is not a good situation. I dont see a big problem with having a mix of human controlled and autonomous cars on the road. And the possible benefits of this technology are so broad and so huge that the technology will be embraced before long. But it has to be phased in over time, because the mix of fully automated robotic cars and human driven cars on the road at the same time is not a good situation. Yes its not a good situation because 1/2 the drivers on the road will still be humans that eat, drink, talk on the phone, do their makeup, drive too fast, drive too drunk, etc. But it would be better than what we have now. Humans are crappy drivers and millions of people die because of it and theres billions of dollars worth of property damage. Youre right that these cars will be phased in slowly, but I guarantee you... theyre coming fairly soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) People have been giving up control to computers steadily over all kinds of things with out much complaint.You are completely missing my point. It is not about the williness of people to give up control. It is about the ability of companies selling products to defend themselves when a human screws up and wants to blame the machine. This is easier to do with computerized systems with a specialized purpose and a well defined response to a limited number of inputs. It is extremely hard to do with a system that drives a car where the computer needs to make "judgment calls" that are not objectively right or wrong.When a human makes the wrong decision the human can be vindicated if the human can show that based on the information available at the time the decision was reasonable. If a computer makes a wrong decision it has no escape hatch like that - if it did not have enough information to make a correct decision then it is maker's fault for not ensuring it had that information. There is a huge product liability problem here whether you want to acknowledge it or not it. Edited March 30, 2012 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 I dont see a big problem with having a mix of human controlled and autonomous cars on the road. And the possible benefits of this technology are so broad and so huge that the technology will be embraced before long. Yes its not a good situation because 1/2 the drivers on the road will still be humans that eat, drink, talk on the phone, do their makeup, drive too fast, drive too drunk, etc. But it would be better than what we have now. Humans are crappy drivers and millions of people die because of it and theres billions of dollars worth of property damage. Youre right that these cars will be phased in slowly, but I guarantee you... theyre coming fairly soon. I agree.No doubt there are lots of issues with the technology and the rules of the road to be worked out, but they will be a reality. Just in time for aging baby boomers to keep their transportation independence without worrying about their fitness to drive, and I think that's a good thing for everyone on the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 How many "Car Guys" here,like myself,think this idea blows chunks? Any "Car Guys" here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 30, 2012 Report Share Posted March 30, 2012 Any "Car Guys" here? I'm sure there's still a few...and once upon a time there were probably a few lonely horse and buggy guy's who thought horseless carriages sucked baby barf too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted April 2, 2012 Report Share Posted April 2, 2012 Ever drive behind a person on a cell?? All over the damn road. I actually got hit (while on foot) by some little cu....by some young lady in a parking lot who was texting. It knocked me down. I live a contended life of happy equanimity, but man! Was I angry! I tore that poor young thing a new one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 (edited) I think the real problem is in how these cars would interact with human driven cars when you have a substantial mix of the two on the roads. Tesla under investigation after first Autopilot-related death The car may have been confused by white trailer and bright sky. Story. l contend that if the truck had been on auto pilot it probably would not have made the turn that resulted in the crash. In a fully automated transportation system for individuals vehicles in proximity to one another would be in constant orchestrated communication. But it has to be phased in over time, because the mix of fully automated robotic cars and human driven cars on the road at the same time is not a good situation. Nope. It has to be phased in toot suite for the very same reason; the mix of fully automated robotic cars and human driven cars on the road at the same time is not a good situation. Edited July 2, 2016 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 They're never getting me in one, so the mix will around for a while. God preserve us from Siri. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 They're never getting me in one, so the mix will around for a while. God preserve us from Siri. I think the next small step should be a computerized monitoring system - call it BSD (Back Seat Driver) which monitors all systems and driver reactions. It would allow single folks the ability to experience the same assistance that married folks get. It would be a vocalized system which would tell you (Hey, keep your eyes on the road!) and (Slow down, you are driving too fast!) and (You are driving too close to the shoulder!) and (Pass that jerk, we are running late!) and (we are out of gas, I told you to fill up before we left!) ... It could be programmed to simulate, male, female, mother-in-law, parental etc. voices. An added bonus is that it would probably decrease the number of times your kids want to borrow the car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 2, 2016 Report Share Posted July 2, 2016 I think the next small step should be a computerized monitoring system - call it BSD (Back Seat Driver) which monitors all systems and driver reactions. It would allow single folks the ability to experience the same assistance that married folks get. It would be a vocalized system which would tell you (Hey, keep your eyes on the road!) and (Slow down, you are driving too fast!) and (You are driving too close to the shoulder!) and (Pass that jerk, we are running late!) and (we are out of gas, I told you to fill up before we left!) ... It could be programmed to simulate, male, female, mother-in-law, parental etc. voices. An added bonus is that it would probably decrease the number of times your kids want to borrow the car. I think this is a great idea. The only thing missing would be the surreptitious glance at the speedometer from the passenger seat, caught by the corner of your eye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted July 11, 2016 Report Share Posted July 11, 2016 It is now expected that there will be 10 million self driving cars on the road by 2020. http://www.businessinsider.com/report-10-million-self-driving-cars-will-be-on-the-road-by-2020-2015-5-6 What is the advantage of a self-driving car? Is it safer to drive in that it makes fewer mistakes or ... There is an interesting moral and ethical question about the programming of these cars: When an accident is imminent should it prioritize the health of the driver or minimize the carnage or whatever. http://hothardware.com/news/self-driving-cars-will-likely-have-to-deal-with-the-harsh-reality-of-who-lives-and-who-dies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted July 11, 2016 Report Share Posted July 11, 2016 There is an interesting moral and ethical question about the programming of these cars: When an accident is imminent should it prioritize the health of the driver or minimize the carnage or whatever. http://hothardware.com/news/self-driving-cars-will-likely-have-to-deal-with-the-harsh-reality-of-who-lives-and-who-dies The answer is simple. People will only buy cars that they know won't suicide themselves to save someone else. But, self-driving cars will still be much safer than humans. So, to achieve the greatest "public good", what you are aiming for is a car that behaves like a human driver, except with perfect attention, perfect vision, perfect reflexes. A human would not typically make the choice to kill themselves to save a pedestrian on the road, and neither should the car (or no one would buy it)... instead it should swerve around the pedestrian if possible or slam the brakes to reduce the chance of death/injury, like a human would. The other "ethical" choices about how a self-driving car should be programmed can all be relatively easily answered in the same way. A human confronted with a situation where there are suddenly pedestrians ahead of them and no time to avoid them will slam the brakes, not spend time looking at which pedestrians are what age and deciding which ones they should crash into. A car should do the same, and will likely reduce the chance of death/injury relative to a human because it can react precious seconds faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.