Driverless Cars
-
How does everyone feel about driverless cars?
Is there an inherent issue with cars that drive themselves? What about ethical concerns, should a car be asked to make a decision between killing a child or elderly people when an accident is eminent?
Do you think driver less cars will cause society to think less and become more subservient to the government or other entities such as corporations?
-
My take on it as follows...
driverless cars: 1
paraplegics: 1driverless cars: 1
old / frail people: 1driverless cars: 1
drunk drivers: 0driverless cars: 1
wreckless drivers: 0driverless cars: 1
illegal drivers: 0It would be less of an issue when the majority (as in almost all) of the vehicles on the road were driverless vehicles, it would become the norm and thus less questioned.
-
Would you be interested in designing driverless cars in sketchup or other CAD systems?
-
@arcteo said:
Would you be interested in designing driverless cars in sketchup or other CAD systems?
Every car one finds is driverless, not many car modes includes a driver.
-
Whoops! Guess I should rephrase that
Thanks, solo!What I mean was would you want to design the controls or the system for a driverless car or bus. The computer components or the computer station for the attendant. Or would you want to write the code for a driverless car or bus?
-
I have to admit to a liking for old cars anyway. My ol' Bess is coming up for her 45th birthday and she has to be reliable because I have one car which itself is rather unusual. I like the analogue feedback I get from the wheel and controls and the sound is nice too. I can see the logic for a self drive car but seeing as I will not be driving my car after drinking alcohol or while over tired I do not see the need.
The advantage I see with the driverless method is that all those people who have their mobile phones and one hand stuck to the side of their heads, that and the school run mums who have their heads in the car dealing with squabbling kids. Add to this those who are late for whatever and are driving two feet off the rear bumper of the car in front, sometimes in thick fog or driving rain.Good for lazy drivers.
Not so good for people who like the act of driving.
-
@Mike Amos: What make and model is Bess?
-
Tesla Autopilot is now programmed to break the law
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/tesla-autopilot-now-programmed-break-law.htmlAh! So it will be possible to break the speed limit, jump red lights, etc etc
-
"should a car be asked to make a decision between killing a child or elderly people when an accident is eminent?" Sounds like Asimov's three laws of robotics - always good to go back and read that stuff.
I was driving last night in torrential rain, with very shiny, slick, reflective streets (care of climate change NZ's climate has gone sideways, Southern summer is similar to a warmish winter, while the upper North Island is burning - none of it being reported as unusual when it's actually unprecedented ... but I digress) - little traffic about but very hard to see - nearly got hit by a mindless (but not yet driverless) Domino's pizza driver. If these things get going it will be very scary - also driverless cars are just another hackable device. What's wrong with driving anyway - it's a fun activity.
Robopocalypse - Daniel Wilson's (I believe he's a roboticist) dystopia has an AI hijacking all the driverless cars and driving them until the occupants starve, plus actively running over people. I can perfectly imagine this, just a matter of when.
-
-
@arcteo said:
How does everyone feel about driverless cars?
Is there an inherent issue with cars that drive themselves? What about ethical concerns, should a car be asked to make a decision between killing a child or elderly people when an accident is eminent?
Do you think driver less cars will cause society to think less and become more subservient to the government or other entities such as corporations?
Given the technologies available for a driverless car to be safe are increasing all the time, how can the vehicle be made aware of the age of the various people in danger? I do not think this will happen soon.
-
-
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/probing-teslas-deadly-crash-feds-say-yay-self-driving/
"Instead, the agency exculpated Tesla, and then some. It crunched the numbers to find that among Tesla cars on the road, those carrying its Autosteer technology, which can keep the car within clear lane markings, crashed 40 percent less frequently than those without."
-
I think they should be in NASCAR!
So will driverless cars be able to exceed the speed limit? Make me wonder with all the regulations why is ANY street vehicle made without a governor to keep it within the speed limit or a maximum speed determined by highway engineers? I like to speed as much as the next guy but it is stupid. Sure people will cheat but how many can even change a belt on cars the way they are built these days? It's said they are considering that electric vehicles must make noise for the safety of pedestrians. That's half-assed, compared to simply installing governors on all new cars. It's about profit, not safety.
But to answer the question, I don't think the effect will be discernible given the already low state of political awareness.
-
@mike lucey said:
@mike amos said:
@arcteo said:
@Mike Amos: What make and model is Bess?
VW Type 3 Variant. 1600cc boxer engine, twin carbs.
She is a beauty Mike
Thanks, getting there. The paint you see in the shot above was done by a local guy, sadly he short changed me on the prep and she already needs a do over a little over two uyears later. On the cards for this year hopefully soon. As far as altering parameters set by driverless systems well, I can see a whole host of specialist companies willing to tweek settings.
We had Scimittar recce vehicles in Catterick governed to 40mph. On driver training to whitby we regularly got them up to 70mph. Cue jam jar and plod interest. -
@pbacot said:
I think they should be in NASCAR!
So will driverless cars be able to exceed the speed limit? Make me wonder with all the regulations why is ANY street vehicle made without a governor to keep it within the speed limit or a maximum speed determined by highway engineers? I like to speed as much as the next guy but it is stupid. Sure people will cheat but how many can even change a belt on cars the way they are built these days? It's said they are considering that electric vehicles must make noise for the safety of pedestrians. That's half-assed, compared to simply installing governors on all new cars. It's about profit, not safety.
But to answer the question, I don't think the effect will be discernible given the already low state of political awareness.
I have had a go round a pre-built circuit in driverless launch mode, terrifying and amazing at the same time. We covered this a lot when I worked for WIRED and the general consensus is that it seems quite safe when on motorways/highways, and from the recent study I posted earlier (in the US at least) it is safer than non-driving vehicles.
If the motorway itself can be automated then I see no reason why the speed limit cannot be increased substantially. I have been on the Autobahn in Germany a few times without incident.... touch wood
However a lot more would need to change in infrastructure rather than vehicles themselves to handle say a car having a blowout at 100MPH+ etc.
-
Speed limits are as wrong as weed being illegal.
I have never smoked weed but have, obviously, passed beyond speed limits.
After you do it the first time and feel safe, you get used to the feeling and forget about it.
There is a 120Km/h speed limit on speedways here but nobody respects it, not even in the presence of the police, which, of course, doesn't enforce it.
And if you break it what is the point that you will slow down?
The idea of breaking the limit and being allowed to do it because everybody is doing it is the stupidest and most hypocritical idea in society that I am aware of. If everybody does it and it isn't that wrong then the limit shouldn't be there.
I like the auto-bahn rule of some places having no speed limit.
Almost every car around is able to go 180Km/h. Many of them drive way beyond that threshold and past 200Km/h. Some of them are capable of going around 300Km/h. None of them is legally allowed to do that and still they are sold because they are capable of doing it.
Of course, if you are allowed to break the 120Km/h limit and then it's your own conciousness that imposes a limit, and if you desire to buy a car that is able to almost triple the max speed allowed, then what's stopping you from doing just that. In fact, you will probably do it eventually and talk about that in a dinner party. Nobody will smack you in the face for that. They will actually laugh about
The thing is that if you are breaking the fastest speed limit around, then why not breaking the slowest speed limit too that is 30Km/h on city centers and school/hospital and other certain public facilities proximities?
You eventually do it too as you are already used to breaking the limit.
Then you runover a kid because you were at 48Km/h on a 30Km/h location and things change. Or you top over your car because you were driving 183Km/h on that speedway and kill your own kid and things change.
People might point you a finger and call you killer, but nobody should as they probably also go that fast, they do that too. But those lifes are lost and your life is screwed up.
So, what I'm saying is, that we should look at this in a less hypocritical fashion.
Speed limits should be reconsidered as technology advances. In certain cases they should be abolished, and in some other cases they should be strictly followed so we can preserve lifes.
This should be strictly imposed. But this shouldn't be done whitin a day to the other as it also envolves a cultural change in the way people drive. No cultural change can be done in a day but it should gradually happen.
That cultural change is then what should also be used as a rule for autodriving vehicles.
Final Note:
What if someone wants to assault you in some way and you must flee at full speed? What if they follow in pursuit also at full speed?
I can imagine a 007 movie already... a full speed chase scene at 30Km/h speed limit in a autodriving cars
-
The speed limit point is well made, there are too many people who speed by a wide margin. There used to be a saying a while back, "can you scratch it without tearing it"? I will not mention the part of the anatomy being scratched but I think you get the point. There are degree's of acceptance and of breaking a law/rule and this is why speed camera's are given a margin before firing.
I used to drive at the limit or a very small amount over on dual carriage roads, motorways for shorthand but with an older car now drive at the speed my car runs at which is about 60mph on a motorway. I am worried at a lot of behaviour I see on the roads and MOST of it has nothing to do with speed. When I go through a set of traffic lights as they change to amber, I KNOW someone will go through the red behind me. Not a case of perhaps, they will do it. Mobile phones are a menace but the number of people who drive with their mobile 'life' item stuck to their heads is shocking and proven to kill. Is life so cheap that they do not consider it worthy or is it just that cars are so comfortable now that they are an extension of the home? Has anyone else noticed that their partner will seeth under the surface and then on getting in the car to go somewhere start a blistering argument? How safe is that? My personal thoughts are that the family car is seen as neutral ground but that is conjecture, speed is a minor point in and of itself, it is where and how that speed is used that causes accidents. Driving beyond the individuals ability, the vehicle ability and the weather/road conditions too are much bigger causes of accidents.
Perhaps there will be a time when driving license classes are amended to include a class that can only travel in a self drive vehicle, in the way that some can only drive an automatic gearbox equipped car.
We will probably NEED a license to get insurance at some point whereas now you can buy insurance for a car using the name of a third party and name them as the main driver for learning etc. -
Mike,
The behaviour question is really the issue here.
Now behaviour is a relative thing. Most people that drive past the speed limit, that drive while using their cell phones or while argueing with their wifes are not killers. I don't see myself as a killer but I've done all that. That attitude though, is able to kill.
So, it's my own conciousness of the problem that should change, but there are factors that are delaying me/us from having that conciousness.
Cars are a real weapon but they're that only when you intend to kill. Otherwise they are many things and they are certainly a convenience: they allow a lot of things to happen, they generate money, happiness, enhance society in a lot of ways... Unless we are thinking on a more recent and deviating behaviour of terrorism, people with cars kill without intention and usually this is caused by behaviour not tech.
What causes that behaviour is related to a LOT of things society allows by closing their eyes to them.
Those things will not change, as we have no conciousness of them when we live our real lifes.
I hate driving and I love driving. I'm absolutelly sure that there are situations where if I'd drive way past 200Km/h nothing would happen, while driving below 30Km/h while tuning the radio I could kill someone.
The thing with behaviour is that there is no set of rules that would control it because behaviour is relative and rules are absolute.
The world is relative so, can we create a set of relative rules of engagement to deal with it?
Idealistically we could, if all of us would share the same moral principles, but in reality we can't and we have to abid to the increasingly complex set of absolute rules.
I see no solution to the problem.
-
What it comes down to is "There is no legislation on stupidity". Perhaps we need an intelligence test, in the driving test.
Advertisement