EPTAsk and answer stupid questions here! - Page 512
| Forum Index > General Forum |
KwarK
United States44203 Posts
| ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On October 13 2016 05:50 KwarK wrote: I feel like rather than make a second set of roads they'll just ban non AI drivers for being too dangerous. It'll hugely increase the efficiency of traffic to have cars at an intersection able to communicate with each other and solve problems optimally. No more need for traffic lights etc. I'm somewhat reconciled that I'll never teach my as yet unborn kids to drive. Driving won't be a thing anymore by then. Driving will be a leisure, a sport, as it should be, that'll only exist on private or special roads, or offroad. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
Hack the network for driverless cars Tell them all to make hard lefts and accelerate Kill tonnes of people They'll work out the kinks and the bugs to driverless cars I'm sure but it may take a little longer than expected considering some of the many challenges. Either way, I like driving and find it rather fun in a non-congested area. I suppose if my car becomes a pod of comfiness where I can just program what I want and then sit in a bed and not pay attention that'd be lovely. But something tells me I'll have to sit there holding the wheel while the car drives me to my destination for the first decade of the technology as they work out the kinks. On October 13 2016 05:59 OtherWorld wrote: Driving will be a leisure, a sport, as it should be, that'll only exist on private or special roads, or offroad. "As it should be?" This will just kill driving in general. No one will buy an expensive tool that carries them from point A to point B just for leisure. Car companies won't manufacture many of them anymore either because they're not profitable. No one is going to take their car out on the special roads, if they're even allowed to drive them out of their driveway or parking space to get to those special roads in the first place. "Self driven cars a problem as they cause accidents on their way to the special roads." | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 13 2016 05:13 Simberto wrote: The main problem with this is that there isn't a separate set of roads available for use for self-driving cars. In fact, the largest appeal of self-driving cars is that they could use the roads that are already there. If you are going to create a new set of roads, some sort of tracks would probably be better than roads. To me, the main question for self-driving cars is "Are they safer than humans?". As far as i know, they already are. Yes, AI cars will produce some deaths. That is inevitable. But so do human-driven cars. The measure should not be "absolutely safe", it should be "Safer then the status quo". Yes, the exact details for the programming need some thought, and laws need to be changed to fit driverless cars. But that is not the big question. The big question is if you would want driverless cars. After you have figured that out, you need to think about details. But details shouldn't stand in the way of the big question. In my opinion, once driverless cars become widespread, the days of human-driven cars are limited. There is simply not a lot that speaks for a human driver over a machine, except for tradition. They are less safe, and you waste multiple hours every day just sitting in front of the wheel steering a car, which you could otherwise use for productive tasks or leisure. Also, driving is stressful and makes people angry. All it takes is paint and signs to transform some roads into AI roads. We already have it for bikes, commuter lanes, carpool lanes, one way lanes, we restrict trucks from some lanes on the freeway, etc... Something as simple as "Lanes of ____ color is for AI, unpainted lanes for drivers" creates this system automatically. The issue is that we already have this--its called public transit. Imagine we ban all cars, and tell people they have to take a bus/taxi/train to get to work/mall/etc... It would be the same function as driverless cars but we already have the technology. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On October 13 2016 05:50 KwarK wrote: I feel like rather than make a second set of roads they'll just ban non AI drivers for being too dangerous. It'll hugely increase the efficiency of traffic to have cars at an intersection able to communicate with each other and solve problems optimally. No more need for traffic lights etc. I'm somewhat reconciled that I'll never teach my as yet unborn kids to drive. Driving won't be a thing anymore by then. You're a lot more optimistic than I am about the timeline of autonomous car development. On October 13 2016 06:03 SK.Testie wrote: Be a terrorist Hack the network for driverless cars Tell them all to make hard lefts and accelerate Kill tonnes of people They'll work out the kinks and the bugs to driverless cars I'm sure but it may take a little longer than expected considering some of the many challenges. Either way, I like driving and find it rather fun in a non-congested area. I suppose if my car becomes a pod of comfiness where I can just program what I want and then sit in a bed and not pay attention that'd be lovely. But something tells me I'll have to sit there holding the wheel while the car drives me to my destination for the first decade of the technology as they work out the kinks. "As it should be?" This will just kill driving in general. No one will buy an expensive tool that carries them from point A to point B just for leisure. Car companies won't manufacture many of them anymore either because they're not profitable. No one is going to take their car out on the special roads, if they're even allowed to drive them out of their driveway or parking space to get to those special roads in the first place. "Self driven cars a problem as they cause accidents on their way to the special roads." Car hacking is already very much possible. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22488 Posts
On October 13 2016 06:03 SK.Testie wrote: Be a terrorist Hack the network for driverless cars Tell them all to make hard lefts and accelerate Kill tonnes of people They'll work out the kinks and the bugs to driverless cars I'm sure but it may take a little longer than expected considering some of the many challenges. Either way, I like driving and find it rather fun in a non-congested area. I suppose if my car becomes a pod of comfiness where I can just program what I want and then sit in a bed and not pay attention that'd be lovely. But something tells me I'll have to sit there holding the wheel while the car drives me to my destination for the first decade of the technology as they work out the kinks. 1) its already possible to hacks some cars. 2) Why are we networking them in the first place? There is no reason for the car to electronically communicate with other cars or to have ports open. It can already drive around safely as a purely self contained unit. (Yes it would be more efficient if they were but its efficiency vs safety). | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 13 2016 06:16 Gorsameth wrote: 1) its already possible to hacks some cars. 2) Why are we networking them in the first place? There is no reason for the car to electronically communicate with other cars or to have ports open. It can already drive around safely as a purely self contained unit. Syncing them would only be for high scale optimization models to maximize total traffic efficiency across the board (as opposed to maximizing individual car travel) | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On October 13 2016 06:03 SK.Testie wrote: Be a terrorist Hack the network for driverless cars Tell them all to make hard lefts and accelerate Kill tonnes of people They'll work out the kinks and the bugs to driverless cars I'm sure but it may take a little longer than expected considering some of the many challenges. Either way, I like driving and find it rather fun in a non-congested area. I suppose if my car becomes a pod of comfiness where I can just program what I want and then sit in a bed and not pay attention that'd be lovely. But something tells me I'll have to sit there holding the wheel while the car drives me to my destination for the first decade of the technology as they work out the kinks. "As it should be?" This will just kill driving in general. No one will buy an expensive tool that carries them from point A to point B just for leisure. Car companies won't manufacture many of them anymore either because they're not profitable. No one is going to take their car out on the special roads, if they're even allowed to drive them out of their driveway or parking space to get to those special roads in the first place. "Self driven cars a problem as they cause accidents on their way to the special roads." Horses are expensive to maintain, are useless as a transportation tool, yet are still used for sport and leisure. Besides, car racing will always exist. Driverless cars will kill driving for the vast majority of the population - and thank god for that - but niches will always be a thing. And yes, it should be that way, because mass driving by humans is bad for your health, for your bank account, and for your safety. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Cascade
Australia5405 Posts
On October 13 2016 23:53 JimmiC wrote: is there a dumber position then in the USA many people thinking the solution to gun violence is not no guns but more guns? You know very well that there is a thread for that question.  let's contain that particular cancer of US politics in that thread, shall we? | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5195 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18393 Posts
On October 14 2016 00:06 Uldridge wrote: What is more complex: a car or a computer? Define complexity. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9324 Posts
| ||
|
Hryul
Austria2609 Posts
definte "computer". | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18393 Posts
Shhhh, that was the follow up question if Uldridge managed a satisfactory definition of complexity | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
What would be the longest to build from scratch* for 5 persons** : a fully functional four-sroke engine vehicle***, or a ready to use**** 'small' controller (not micro-controller, but not a whole building)? * The average time being taken on average for several random starting positions on a deserted earth (no trace or remaining of human activity). ** They know everything they need to know. No research is needed, only material gathering and building. *** Of course, the vehicle has no micro electronic. **** 'Using' meaning 'being able to program it the way you want'. The vailable functions being the usual basic ones (addition, comparison, memory transfer, stack...) | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On October 14 2016 00:06 Uldridge wrote: What is more complex: a car or a computer? Do you a car as in a purely mechanical car typical of the 50s, or a modern car with plenty of electronics? | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5195 Posts
Here is a computer your standard pc bought at the store with all the possible tweaks. Here is a car a random brand you buy with all the modern extra's. Let's not pimp them out too much if we go full option on both. Also, while a car has computers, these computers are there for very concrete things, while for desktops... it's much broader. So... What is more complex? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
| ||
