Besides google car, Toyota and others are working hard at it
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/toyota-developing-autonomous-highway-teammate-144108847.html (https://www.yahoo.com/autos/toyota-developing-autonomous-highway-teammate-144108847.html)
Volvo announces that they will take liability for their autonomous cars.
http://blog.caranddriver.com/volvo-will-take-responsibility-if-its-self-driving-cars-crash/ (http://blog.caranddriver.com/volvo-will-take-responsibility-if-its-self-driving-cars-crash/)
IDK man, humans are pretty good at adapting to real time environmental changes. Computers won't be able to do that
Quote from: 2o6 on October 08, 2015, 12:01:48 PM
IDK man, humans are pretty good at adapting to real time environmental changes. Computers won't be able to do that
Not if they are tired, texting on their phone, or looking at the Victoria's Secret commercial beside the road.
Quote from: 2o6 on October 08, 2015, 12:01:48 PM
IDK man, humans are pretty good at adapting to real time environmental changes. Computers won't be able to do that
:facepalm:
Quote from: 2o6 on October 08, 2015, 12:01:48 PM
IDK man, humans are pretty good at adapting to real time environmental changes. Computers won't be able to do that
"Somewhat" Disagree, I-80 in Wyoming has "adjustable speed limits" now. Human controllers monitor the weather, and set the limits lower as needed.
Car can have thermometer, TCS can tell if it's slippery, radar/infrared can tell how much clutter (pedestrian/cars/whatever) is ahead much more quickly than people can...
Meh, self-driving cars are right up there with flying cars - relatively easy to do in isolation but never gonna happen en masse save for a complete and total retooling of the whole of US roadway infrastructure.
Quote from: GoCougs on October 08, 2015, 08:05:47 PM
Meh, self-driving cars are right up there with flying cars - relatively easy to do in isolation but never gonna happen en masse save for a complete and total retooling of the whole of US roadway infrastructure.
LOL Sorry but it's coming and you can't stop it.
Quote from: GoCougs on October 08, 2015, 08:05:47 PM
Meh, self-driving cars are right up there with flying cars - relatively easy to do in isolation but never gonna happen en masse save for a complete and total retooling of the whole of US roadway infrastructure.
I agree! I can't wait to see how these cars will react to computer crashes and viruses...........
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on October 08, 2015, 12:54:07 PM
"Somewhat" Disagree, I-80 in Wyoming has "adjustable speed limits" now. Human controllers monitor the weather, and set the limits lower as needed.
Car can have thermometer, TCS can tell if it's slippery, radar/infrared can tell how much clutter (pedestrian/cars/whatever) is ahead much more quickly than people can...
Yeah, they can tell when it's slippery. And then crash. Or go so damn slow you could walk there faster. Or just stop altogether because, well, I'm a computer and this weather sucks, can we just stay here? No, you stupid fucking car. You got me stuck in this snowbank, get me out. Do you know how to rock it out? No? That means nothing to you? Oh yeah you're a computer.
I've said it before. We are the equivalent of future horse riding enthusiasts. Autonomous cars are coming and changing driving forever.
I think I will save a copy of my post debunking the autonomous automobile alarmism. We are not horse riding enthusiasts and there are plenty of obvious insurmountable issues that will keep full automotive autonomy from ever happening, let alone as soon as people fear.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on October 09, 2015, 05:47:30 AM
I think I will save a copy of my post debunking the autonomous automobile alarmism. We are not horse riding enthusiasts and there are plenty of obvious insurmountable issues that will keep full automotive autonomy from ever happening, let alone as soon as people fear.
Pretty much. Self-driving cars are fads right up there with drones, 3D printing, robots, electric vehicles and all the rest of the stuff popular media and culture thinks is the Next Big Thing. Industry has been doing this stuff for many years, and it's stayed within industry for a reason.
I do machine/computer vision and displacement sensing for a living (albeit nothing to the complexity attempted for these cars) and the tech will never be able to appropriately pilot a car on today's roadways. The killer is the process - the window is simply too wide - near infinite variation in road markings, road surfaces, weather conditions and driving chaos. It's easy to get vision/sensing applications 80% effective but to get them 99.9+% it's usually brutal, and that almost always only happens with changing the premise (the operating conditions - lighting, coloring, fiducials, etc.).
We will not have self driving cars if but for a dedicated roadway with the appropriate (consistent/standardized) road markings, road surfaces, weather mitigation and control. I think that's the power play though. Like any good corporatist culture we'll see the automakers and/or related interests try to lobby for such changes to their own benefit. Thing is it would be such a mammoth undertaking it'd probably be cheaper to go with uber mass transit (not that I'd endorse mass transit or self-driving cars - in fact such things would mark the decline of our culture as it has elsewhere).
I think it would best if there were a common standard for autonomous operation (&, for that matter, "controlled convoy movement" where cars latch on and then are moved along on high density freeways.
Quote from: Morris Minor on October 09, 2015, 01:19:08 PM
I think it would best if there were a common standard for autonomous operation (&, for that matter, "controlled convoy movement" where cars latch on and then are moved along on high density freeways.
(http://static.zymergi.com/blog-wall-e.jpg)
I'd wager $50 that there will be fully autonomous cars on sale (not just a lease like the Mirai) by 2022.
With the amount of money that Apple, Google, Tesla, auto OEMs, and some Tier 1 suppliers are throwing at autonomous tech, there has to be an end to the rainbow. These are a bunch of smart people deciding it's worth it. It's gotta be coming.
How are we definining fully autonomous...... there are already cars that can accelerate, brake, turn and avoid obstacles without human input, at least in certain conditions.
I don't know about fully autonomous though. Personally I can't wait for fully autonomous cars. All the people who don't want to drive or have no business behind a wheel would be taken out of the game bit by bit. And of course there is the huge potential for car sharing and expanded public transportation. But the bogeyman of mandatory fully automated cars is a non starter, at least in our lifetimes.
I mean you hop in, tell the car the address you want to go to or have programmed in by name and sit back and it goes, in good weather.
I just can't get over how many companies with really smart people are throwing money at it. Maybe if it was just one or two I could relate it to the flying car, but it's a huge push from all over. They must be able to be seeing a return on investment for this stuff.
Yeah I agree I don't think we will get to the point of mandatory. But on sale, for sure. And I bet they'll be as rare as new Ferraris for a number of years until trickle down can happen.
Quote from: HotRodPilot on November 06, 2015, 06:24:46 AM
I mean you hop in, tell the car the address you want to go to or have programmed in by name and sit back and it goes, in good weather.
I already have a car like that, and it works in bad weather too. It's called an Uber. And it has the judgment of a human being to know when it is and isn't safe to do certain maneuvers.
Autonomous cars are garbage. Once they hit a mass production price, manually driven cars will be phased out. Maybe not in our lifetime, but I would expect horrible computer boxes to fully replace cars on roads within 20-30 years of when they reach attainability.
If you want your life in the hands of a computer--or better yet, millions of computers, you better hope Microsoft doesn't get the corner in the market. And if you complain about cars being "disposable" now, just wait when they become technologically obsolete in a year and require a new purchase every two years.
Quote from: HotRodPilot on November 06, 2015, 06:26:28 AM
Yeah I agree I don't think we will get to the point of mandatory. But on sale, for sure. And I bet they'll be as rare as new Ferraris for a number of years until trickle down can happen.
The way Ferrari is going, they'll be the first ones to bring it to market. The most amazing driving experience you'll never have, guaranteed a 7' +/- 5 seconds lap of the Nurburgring, all while you wait for your Viagra to kick in when you're convincing a plastic bimbo to suck your deflated dick when you get back to the hotel.
Quote from: Raza on November 06, 2015, 06:34:25 AM
I already have a car like that, and it works in bad weather too. It's called an Uber. And it has the judgment of a human being to know when it is and isn't safe to do certain maneuvers.
Autonomous cars are garbage. Once they hit a mass production price, manually driven cars will be phased out. Maybe not in our lifetime, but I would expect horrible computer boxes to fully replace cars on roads within 20-30 years of when they reach attainability.
If you want your life in the hands of a computer--or better yet, millions of computers, you better hope Microsoft doesn't get the corner in the market. And if you complain about cars being "disposable" now, just wait when they become technologically obsolete in a year and require a new purchase every two years.
When it comes to threads on autonomous cars you might as well just copy and paste "FUD & control issues" over and over. Autonomous cars barely exist, and the few that do have had next to no problems. So why/how exactly are they "garbage"? There are Uber drivers that stalk and rape too, will an autonomous car do that? Why would companies that sell cars like the Mustang, 911, Miata "phase out" human driven cars if there is still a market for them? None of your complaints or proclamations are rooted in reality or reason and it's getting tiring of hearing the same autonomous car fallacies over and over.
+1 to sporty
I think mandatory is a long way off.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 06, 2015, 04:32:17 AM
All the people who don't want to drive or have no business behind a wheel would be taken out of the game bit by bit.
This......
Quote from: HotRodPilot on November 06, 2015, 06:24:46 AM
I mean you hop in, tell the car the address you want to go to or have programmed in by name and sit back and it goes, in good weather.
I just can't get over how many companies with really smart people are throwing money at it. Maybe if it was just one or two I could relate it to the flying car, but it's a huge push from all over. They must be able to be seeing a return on investment for this stuff.
It's a total game changer. It's huge. The second what you described above is possible, the concept of everyone owning a car goes out the window.
99% of the time your car is parked. A fleet of 50 of these self driving cars combined with Uber can replace hundreds of personally owned cars. I wouldn't own a daily driver if it was cheaper to just get picked up and driven automatically everywhere.
Someone on here said it best awhile back. Driving cars will be like horse back riding at some point. A hobby for the rich.
I just don't know about self driving becoming fringe. Last year in the US they sold about half a million "sporty" cars like the pony cars, Miata, WRX, GTI etc. There were also half a million motorcycles sold last year, in the US, where we generally hate them. There is still a huge market for driver's vehicles in the "working man's" market.
What I do hope is that self driving cars will enable drivers cars to become more extreme and less compromised. Things open up a lot when you don't need a car to be any and everything.
Coexistence won't make sense once autonomous cars hit a certain tipping point. The advantages of networking a bunch of cars together are too major to be ignored. You could have cars traveling at higher densities, at higher rates of speed, than they could if they were assuming every other car is manned by a falliable human. You could probably do away with stoplights completely!
This is where the future is going? Count me out. I will likely not live long enough to see it anyway. Ironically, I won't be able to drive at age 95 anyway, if I go that far. :huh:
And get off my lawn... ;)
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/7a/08/4a/7a084acd488fc4b7be35d7282ec5c5b0.jpg)
Well, this planet is going to be fried by the sun in 1.1 billion years anyway.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 06, 2015, 07:33:44 AM
When it comes to threads on autonomous cars you might as well just copy and paste "FUD & control issues" over and over. Autonomous cars barely exist, and the few that do have had next to no problems. So why/how exactly are they "garbage"? There are Uber drivers that stalk and rape too, will an autonomous car do that? Why would companies that sell cars like the Mustang, 911, Miata "phase out" human driven cars if there is still a market for them? None of your complaints or proclamations are rooted in reality or reason and it's getting tiring of hearing the same autonomous car fallacies over and over.
How can they be fallacies if there is no reality of widespread autonomous car market?
Also, do you really think there will be a "market" for cars like the Miata? If human-driven cars aren't made illegal, they will become prohibitively expensive and likely track-use only. If you look at how stickshift cars are basically nonexistent now, actual real cars will be even harder to find.
What's "FUD"?
And if you don't want to see my posts on autonomous car threads, ignore me. You post up, I'm going to reply, because self driving cars are the dumbest fucking idea ever.
Pretty soon the argument will be that only speed demon hooligans want to drive cars. They'll run over your children. Their fossil fueled engines are crude and loud and kill polar bears.
Human operated cars should be illegal in our community...state...nation...etc.
It's inevitable.
Quote from: Laconian on November 08, 2015, 01:13:42 PM
Coexistence won't make sense once autonomous cars hit a certain tipping point. The advantages of networking a bunch of cars together are too major to be ignored. You could have cars traveling at higher densities, at higher rates of speed, than they could if they were assuming every other car is manned by a falliable human. You could probably do away with stoplights completely!
And what of the toll of having government in charge of when and how you "drive" your car? It's an Orwellian nightmare.
Quote from: Raza on November 08, 2015, 09:53:06 PM
How can they be fallacies if there is no reality of widespread autonomous car market?
Lol, easy. How can you speak with such authority on a reality that doesn't exist?
Quote from: Raza on November 08, 2015, 09:53:06 PMAlso, do you really think there will be a "market" for cars like the Miata? If human-driven cars aren't made illegal, they will become prohibitively expensive and likely track-use only. If you look at how stickshift cars are basically nonexistent now, actual real cars will be even harder to find.
Again, what are you basing this on? Nothing but pure FUD- fear, uncertainty and doubt. You don't have anything empirical to draw on to validate your views, and what little real world evidence exists does not jive with what you claim incessantly. Not to play internet Dr Phil but your fear of autonomous cars comes down to your control issues, which have little to nothing to do with autonomous cars. The idea of not being in control of a car puts you in a panic and keeps you from being objective or rational about the subject.
Quote from: Raza on November 08, 2015, 09:53:06 PMAnd if you don't want to see my posts on autonomous car threads, ignore me. You post up, I'm going to reply, because self driving cars are the dumbest fucking idea ever.
No, I'm not going to do that. Just as you will reply, so will I. Your stance on autonomous cars is built on nothing but FUD and should be called out as such :huh:
IMO, autonomous cars are to conventional cars what cars were to horses. People still ride horses, but typically just the dedicated moneyed few. I feel conflicted about it too - I feel like it will solve a lot of congestion and environmental problems esp. in developing countries, giving people the mobility they demand with less of a footprint. People are buying cars in China and India in droves and it is utterly ruining their large cities. But there's no going back now that the middle class has the dough and they've tasted car-assisted autonomy.
I think it has potential to be a great thing personally. If it gets more people on the track, and thus makes track driving and road racing less fringe, it's a plus. Unless you are reckless (which I admit to being at times), generally speaking driving on the street sucks. I don't think it's right, but I think it's pretty obvious why people play on their phones and shit while driving on public roads. It's boring. And on top of that, a lot of people are just bad at it, even without the distractions.
Nah, driving for pleasure will get stupid expensive , just like owning horses.
It can't happen on any sort of scale save for ginormous increases in both infrastructure spending and government power.
The answer has been around for ~110 years: electric trolleys and buses. Ain't got enough cache for government cronyism or Silicon Valley fadism though. Once this tech bubble bursts (and it's gonna be brutal) most all these fads should disappear.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 09, 2015, 12:33:21 PM
It can't happen on any sort of scale save for ginormous increases in both infrastructure spending and government power.
The answer has been around for ~110 years: electric trolleys and buses. Ain't got enough cache for government cronyism or Silicon Valley fadism though. Once this tech bubble bursts (and it's gonna be brutal) most all these fads should disappear.
says the "cars will never be as dependable as horses" guy
We would not need road signs, or traffic lights.
Or, if everyone just starts renting on per use basis , the car sale/rental market would disappear...
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on November 12, 2015, 10:49:13 AM
Or, if everyone just starts renting on per use basis , the car sale/rental market would disappear...
If everyone starts renting cars, the rental market disappears?
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 12, 2015, 11:03:16 AM
If everyone starts renting cars, the rental market disappears?
Dat's some inception level shit. :rastaman:
Quote from: GoCougs on November 09, 2015, 12:33:21 PM
It can't happen on any sort of scale save for ginormous increases in both infrastructure spending and government power.
The answer has been around for ~110 years: electric trolleys and buses. Ain't got enough cache for government cronyism or Silicon Valley fadism though. Once this tech bubble bursts (and it's gonna be brutal) most all these fads should disappear.
Nope. It'll happen incrementally, with autonomous cars coexisting with manually-driven cars, until critical mass is reached. Then Big Gubment throws the big switch for full auto mode and then our freedoms evaporate.
Teslas are already driving themselves.
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 12, 2015, 11:03:16 AM
If everyone starts renting cars, the rental market disappears?
sigh meant sales/ used sales
So much for hurrying during lunch.
Quote from: Laconian on November 12, 2015, 11:24:49 AM
Nope. It'll happen incrementally, with autonomous cars coexisting with manually-driven cars, until critical mass is reached. Then Big Gubment throws the big switch for full auto mode and then our freedoms evaporate.
+1
Just like horse-drawn carriages....
Quote from: Laconian on November 12, 2015, 11:24:49 AM
Nope. It'll happen incrementally, with autonomous cars coexisting with manually-driven cars, until critical mass is reached. Then Big Gubment throws the big switch for full auto mode and then our freedoms evaporate.
Teslas are already driving themselves.
Or it'll happen in specific areas first. I could totally see London going autonomous only.
I could see HOV lanes being converted into autonomous-only lanes too.
I would never want to tow anything with an autonomous vehicle.
Its gonna take so long. At least 20-30 yrs at best. Me no worry :rastaman:
Quote from: Laconian on November 12, 2015, 11:24:49 AM
Nope. It'll happen incrementally, with autonomous cars coexisting with manually-driven cars, until critical mass is reached. Then Big Gubment throws the big switch for full auto mode and then our freedoms evaporate.
Teslas are already driving themselves.
I'm sure They said the same thing about flying cars ;).
Teslas' self-driving feature is basically an incremental step up from land departure warning and radar cruise control. Telling a car to drive you to the store across town is light years more difficult.
The infrastructure investment needed to be enable that cross town (self) drive is better spent on electric buses and trolleys.
The tech is getting irrational amounts of focus and attention because of social media fad and the tech bubble. I'll take the bet that it doesn't ever happen in any meaningful manner.
Electric autonomous buses are a good idea but I think autonomous cars will render trains irrelevant outside of the most crowded cities. Still need a car to get to and most likely from the train.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 12, 2015, 11:55:13 AM
The infrastructure investment needed to be enable that cross town (self) drive is better spent on electric buses and trolleys.
Sure, but that's not what people want. :huh:
Quote from: BimmerM3 on November 12, 2015, 12:12:53 PM
Sure, but that's not what people want. :huh:
Very true, but that doesn't validate the tech.
Quote from: GoCougs on November 12, 2015, 12:47:44 PM
Very true, but that doesn't validate the tech.
Tech doesn't need to be validated in that regard. It will validate itself, then be adopted as people see the advantage.
http://www.thedrive.com/article/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe (http://www.thedrive.com/article/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe)
Quote from: HotRodPilot on December 01, 2015, 02:23:33 AM
http://www.thedrive.com/article/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe (http://www.thedrive.com/article/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe)
Couple of my thoughts while reading that:
1- Hopefully bike riders will start to follow the law better. I expect bikes will be used more in smaller spaces as time goes on.
2- in all the "future" movies with autonomous cars, the people use the journey to call/videochat with people since they don't have to waste attention driving.
3- as the transition from self-driven to computer-driven cars goes on, it will start with the rich, so the self-driver will be at the disadvantage to the court/lawyer system. They will learn to be more cautious UNLESS the court favors them over the computer driven car. I think the money will prevail and the poorer people who can't afford the newest self-drive assists will eventually be forced off the road...
Which is ok, if rentals are available at decent price.
(I heard on the radio this morning since Uber was introduced in Augusta, GA the 49 DUIs in March was down to 7 in August.
Mandatory autonomous cars will not happen in our lifetime, so thinking about scenarios of people not being able to afford autonomous cars is not productive IMO.
I do think the net benefits will far overweigh the downsides. For example the whole DUI thing is a big part of why I don't like going out much. Plus again a lot of people really hate driving and would be better served by a computer.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 01, 2015, 08:51:31 AM
Mandatory autonomous cars will not happen in our lifetime,
And when my grandparents were born no human would ever walk on the moon, TV was a fantasy, not to mention quadcore "super computers" in peoples' pockets.
They might not be mandatory in 50yrs but they certainly will be close to that. As soon as the bugs are worked out and they go on the market, my guess is they will gain traction quickly.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on December 01, 2015, 09:32:46 AM
And when my grandparents were born no human would ever walk on the moon, TV was a fantasy, not to mention quadcore "super computers" in peoples' pockets.
They might not be mandatory in 50yrs but they certainly will be close to that. As soon as the bugs are worked out and they go on the market, my guess is they will gain traction quickly.
Just because we made big tech steps in the past doesn't guarantee anything. By that logic we should have had nuclear powered flying cars by now. And the big hurdles to autonomous cars aren't technological. The tech is easy and is pretty much here already. The challenge will be, among other things, destroying/retrofitting/replacing the 300+ million cars on the road, especially as folks keep cars for longer and longer. Even if you assume that all auto makers will come out with full lineups of automated cars next year, and that everyone who buys a new car next year gets an automated one, it would take at least 20 years to replace everything on the road. Similarly we don't spend money on infrastructure as is so anything that requires infrastructure reconfiguration is out. I think we will continue to see what we already have- increasingly sophisticated driver's aids at bite away at more and more of the requirement of actually driving without completely (and legally) replacing it. There is already cruise control, lane departure control, automatic braking and I think Volvo just came out with stop and go traffic cruise. There is parallel parking and stuff as well. But as this article shows even with how far tech has come there is still a long way to go with that, and that is on top of the huge logistical and legal issues I mentioned. The autonomous alarmism is not warranted.
Who said alarmism? I just think it will come sooner than you do.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on December 01, 2015, 02:25:35 PM
Who said alarmism? I just think it will come sooner than you do.
I'm alarmed.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 01, 2015, 02:17:33 PM
Just because we made big tech steps in the past doesn't guarantee anything. By that logic we should have had nuclear powered flying cars by now. And the big hurdles to autonomous cars aren't technological. The tech is easy and is pretty much here already. The challenge will be, among other things, destroying/retrofitting/replacing the 300+ million cars on the road, especially as folks keep cars for longer and longer. Even if you assume that all auto makers will come out with full lineups of automated cars next year, and that everyone who buys a new car next year gets an automated one, it would take at least 20 years to replace everything on the road. Similarly we don't spend money on infrastructure as is so anything that requires infrastructure reconfiguration is out. I think we will continue to see what we already have- increasingly sophisticated driver's aids at bite away at more and more of the requirement of actually driving without completely (and legally) replacing it. There is already cruise control, lane departure control, automatic braking and I think Volvo just came out with stop and go traffic cruise. There is parallol parking and stuff as well. But as this article shows even with how far tech has come there is still a long way to go with that, and that is on top of the huge logistical and legal issues I mentioned. The autonomous alarmism is not warranted.
Word, save that the alarmisim is a bit warranted, as fad is a strong driver of unseemly government action (think of such boondoggles like ethanol and Solyndra).
Truly autonomous cars have three requirements - standardized roadway infrastructure, inter-vehicle communications, widespread/universal adoption - that will keep as pipe dreams for many many years.
Lol no. GPS and super-high bandwidth wireless communications will null most requirements.
Verizon plans to start testing 5g in 2017. 17 times faster than 4g....
GPS already shows me what the road looks like. Very little standardization needed.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on December 01, 2015, 07:36:50 PM
Lol no. GPS and super-high bandwidth wireless communications will null most requirements.
Verizon plans to start testing 5g in 2017. 17 times faster than 4g....
GPS already shows me what the road looks like. Very little standardization needed.
GPS gives you a rough idea of where the road is. Plus you need a GPS signal for it to work. So wireless data is irrelevant. The system can use GPS but it can't rely on it.
And fast wireless data doesn't overcome the issues of legal hurdles and high adoption speeds for this to happen at the pace that's necessary for us to see widespread adoption in our lifetimes. I see increased adoption/penetration but full on assimilation is indeed a pipe dream.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 02, 2015, 06:23:26 AM
GPS gives you a rough idea of where the road is. Plus you need a GPS signal for it to work. So wireless data is irrelevant. The system can use GPS but it can't rely on it.
GPS is currently good to 30ft. GPS signal comes from the sky, if you have a clear view of the sky it works. Cellphone towers can give an even better fix on location, if providers want to.
Quote
And fast wireless data doesn't overcome the issues of legal hurdles and high adoption speeds for this to happen at the pace that's necessary for us to see widespread adoption in our lifetimes. I see increased adoption/penetration but full on assimilation is indeed a pipe dream.
Disagree. My car has a more powerful computer in it than NASA used to go to the moon. Legacy's computer was designed to do impossible for human calculations of when to fire sparkplugs, when to adjust all kinds of variables etc...
The ONLY issue with autonomous cars at this point is integration on the same streets as unpredictable human drivers. The Google cars and MB's self-driving semi truck do just fine on the roads by themselves.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on December 02, 2015, 06:48:54 AM
GPS is currently good to 30ft. GPS signal comes from the sky, if you have a clear view of the sky it works. Cellphone towers can give an even better fix on location, if providers want to.
Disagree. My car has a more powerful computer in it than NASA used to go to the moon. Legacy's computer was designed to do impossible for human calculations of when to fire sparkplugs, when to adjust all kinds of variables etc...
The ONLY issue with autonomous cars at this point is integration on the same streets as unpredictable human drivers. The Google cars and MB's self-driving semi truck do just fine on the roads by themselves.
The only issue? So getting rid of 300 million cars and developing the legal framework for liability has already been figured out? Like I said the tech is already here for the most part. It's the implementation that is the problem. Would you let the govt scrap your cars and force you to buy 2-3 brand new autonomous rides tomorrow?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 02, 2015, 07:25:23 AM
The only issue? So getting rid of 300 million cars and developing the legal framework for liability has already been figured out? Like I said the tech is already here for the most part. It's the implementation that is the problem. Would you let the govt scrap your cars and force you to buy 2-3 brand new autonomous rides tomorrow?
Ok, so not only issue. It's the biggest hurdle though.
-most people buy new cars every 2-3 years anyway. I'm an anomaly that I've had the same since 2008.
-the liability piece will be worked out by corporate lawyers. They're already on it, long before the google car stopped at the first stop sign....
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 02, 2015, 06:23:26 AM
GPS gives you a rough idea of where the road is. Plus you need a GPS signal for it to work. So wireless data is irrelevant. The system can use GPS but it can't rely on it.
And fast wireless data doesn't overcome the issues of legal hurdles and high adoption speeds for this to happen at the pace that's necessary for us to see widespread adoption in our lifetimes. I see increased adoption/penetration but full on assimilation is indeed a pipe dream.
GPS? Where the car is is irrelevant to the discussion. Variation in roads even in just a particular area is immense - black vs. gray pavement, horizontal vs. vertical traffic lights, LED vs. incandescent traffic lights, fog lines and/or lane markers vs. not, blinking yellow vs. not, etc., etc., plus the variation in weather and road conditions is just as immense. Now sum that over the whole of the USA. lol - on autonomous cars on being anything other than a curiosity for many years to come.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 02, 2015, 09:38:14 AM
GPS? Where the car is is irrelevant to the discussion. Variation in roads even in just a particular area is immense - black vs. gray pavement, horizontal vs. vertical traffic lights, LED vs. incandescent traffic lights, fog lines and/or lane markers vs. not, blinking yellow vs. not, etc., etc., plus the variation in weather and road conditions is just as immense. Now sum that over the whole of the USA. lol - on autonomous cars on being anything other than a curiosity for many years to come.
LOL road color doesn't matter. You're thinking everything guided by cameras. Once all cars are automated there is no need for cameras, except to identify unexpected pedestrians or deer etc...
As long as the car knows where it is (GPS or magnetic guidance,) and controls become automated for autonomous cars (wireless signal replacing traffic lights, etc...) the cameras won't matter.
The next car I buy, whenever that will be, will have as many of the safety gadgets as I can find: collision avoidance, lane keeping, adaptive cruise control, night vision, radar, cameras, etc.
The reason for this is my age. Your driving skills peak around your 40s - good balance of reaction times, mental acuity, emotional control, & experience. Now I'm 59 and I recognize that my perception and reaction times aren't exactly going to improve. So I figure, if the tech is out there, and it's viable, why not use it?
Quote from: Morris Minor on December 11, 2015, 08:45:47 AM
The next car I buy, whenever that will be, will have as many of the safety gadgets as I can find: collision avoidance, lane keeping, adaptive cruise control, night vision, radar, cameras, etc.
The reason for this is my age. Your driving skills peak around your 40s - good balance of reaction times, mental acuity, emotional control, & experience. Now I'm 59 and I recognize that my perception and reaction times aren't exactly going to improve. So I figure, if the tech is out there, and it's viable, why not use it?
It's a great Idea- Kevin loves the stuff on his Outback. My in-laws were showing off the blindspot indicator on their Sorrento, seems handy.
(Beeps at you if you put blinker on when someone is next to you)
And now we have the Tesla "hands off" crash that shows this technology has a way to go.
Quote from: shp4man on July 02, 2016, 12:48:52 PM
And now we have the Tesla "hands off" crash that shows this technology has a way to go.
From the sound of it the guy was really pushing his luck.
Quote from: Rockraven on July 02, 2016, 02:04:05 PM
From the sound of it the guy was really pushing his luck.
Watching Harry Potter from what I understand. :facepalm:
Quote from: shp4man on July 02, 2016, 02:07:41 PM
Watching Harry Potter from what I understand. :facepalm:
On a portable DVD player... If that's true, it's beyond facepalm
Harry Potter is really good though. That Hermione....:wub:
Quote from: Morris Minor on July 03, 2016, 02:27:50 PM
On a portable DVD player... If that's true, it's beyond facepalm
Well the built in player is disabled when the car is in drive, what choice did he have?
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 04, 2016, 09:09:50 AM
Well the built in player is disabled when the car is in drive, what choice did he have?
I assume it was playing through the dash screen, though? In which case, that implies that the aux video input is still enabled.
In autopilot mode if you have to have your hands on the wheel and looking at the road as if you are driving, wouldn't you rather just be driving?
Quote from: Raza on July 04, 2016, 09:07:58 AM
Harry Potter is really good though. That Hermione....:wub:
You'd better not be referring to her in the Sorcerer's Stone. :pullover:
Quote from: Laconian on July 05, 2016, 12:47:21 AM
You'd better not be referring to her in the Sorcerer's Stone. :pullover:
No, no. The later years.
But you could tell, even then, that she'd grow up hot. By the Prisoner of Bob Balaban, it was cemented that she was going to look fantastic, even if you couldn't admit it in polite company.
Quote from: veeman on July 05, 2016, 12:08:42 AM
In autopilot mode if you have to have your hands on the wheel and looking at the road as if you are driving, wouldn't you rather just be driving?
The intent is to reduce fatigue by not forcing the driver to devote as much attention to the road. At least according to Tesla.
Quote from: veeman on July 05, 2016, 12:08:42 AM
In autopilot mode if you have to have your hands on the wheel and looking at the road as if you are driving, wouldn't you rather just be driving?
Yes.
Quote from: MX793 on July 05, 2016, 09:42:33 AM
The intent is to reduce fatigue by not forcing the driver to devote as much attention to the road. At least according to Tesla.
I contend that it makes it more difficult to concentrate on potential road hazards.
Quote from: Raza on July 05, 2016, 10:51:27 AM
I contend that it makes it more difficult to concentrate on potential road hazards.
Autopilot or watching Harry Potter?
Quote from: MX793 on July 04, 2016, 09:16:09 AM
I assume it was playing through the dash screen, though? In which case, that implies that the aux video input is still enabled.
I don't know.
Never tried that in my wife's car ( a GM, but I'm assuming the same laws pertain)
Quote from: MX793 on July 05, 2016, 10:54:22 AM
Autopilot or watching Harry Potter?
Either or, really.
The War For Autonomous Driving: 2017 Mercedes-Benz E-Class VS. 2017 Tesla Model S
Looking for a comparison of the 2017 Mercedes-Benz E-Class and the 2016 Tesla Model S? This is not that. Both are brilliant, gorgeous cars—best-of-breed luxury sedans in the war between internal combustion and electricity—but who cares?
The future belongs to Autonomous Driving.
The 2017 E-Class is the first Mercedes-Benz available with Drive Pilot—the brand name for their latest semi-Autonomous Driving (AD) suite—and is the first direct assault on Tesla's Autopilot, which has captured the public's imagination, for better or worse, since its release in 2015.
More... http://www.thedrive.com/tech/4591/the-war-for-autonomous-driving-2017-mercedes-benz-e-class-vs-2017-tesla-model-s (http://www.thedrive.com/tech/4591/the-war-for-autonomous-driving-2017-mercedes-benz-e-class-vs-2017-tesla-model-s)
Quote from: Morris Minor on July 28, 2016, 04:39:58 PM
The War For Autonomous Driving: 2017 Mercedes-Benz E-Class VS. 2017 Tesla Model S
Excellent article!
"The nice thing about parachutes is that there actually are parachute standards, courtesy of the Parachute Industry Association. A parachute works, or it doesn't.
No such standard exists for A(utonomous) D(riving)."
Quote from: Raza on July 05, 2016, 10:51:27 AM
I contend that it makes it more difficult to concentrate on potential road hazards.
Last Sunday we were on the interstate just South of San Jose, CA, Interstate, moderate traffic, about 70 MPH. I'm in the right lane, ahead of me maybe a car length in the center lane is a pickup with a load of treasures from Ikea. Quicker than you can say "Oh, sh*t" a headboard in a box flies out of the bed and across the grill of the CLK. I swerved and braked and the thing missed the front of the car by maybe 3-4 feet as it sailed from my left to right. I wonder how autonomous cars are going to handle that kind of stuff? Would I have been as alert to dangers if I had sat back and let the car handle the driving duties? Probably not.
It's probably also worth noting that GPS signals are lost in tunnels and where you have high bluffs on both sides of the car.
They really don't depend on GPS too much yet.
If I were in design, I'd get the GPS working with maps with other cars sharing info (Like if there is an accident ahead, start slowing down beforehand AND COMMUNICATE to the driver why).
You could also use accelerometers and steering and speedometer to always be plotting exactly where the car is going, if GPS signal gets flakey or lost (tunnels, buildings in cities). This could also help if the car thinks it's going one way and GPS says it's going another, like on ice. (would have to be a super micro level for this to help)...
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 28, 2016, 06:07:25 PM
They really don't depend on GPS too much yet.
If I were in design, I'd get the GPS working with maps with other cars sharing info (Like if there is an accident ahead, start slowing down beforehand AND COMMUNICATE to the driver why).
You could also use accelerometers and steering and speedometer to always be plotting exactly where the car is going, if GPS signal gets flakey or lost (tunnels, buildings in cities). This could also help if the car thinks it's going one way and GPS says it's going another, like on ice. (would have to be a super micro level for this to help)...
All joking aside. Wouldn't it just be easier to require people to learn to blanking drive a car?
Quote from: CLKid on July 28, 2016, 06:10:36 PM
All joking aside. Wouldn't it just be easier to require people to learn to blanking drive a car?
No, they already put computers in car, they will be far more capable in ~30yrs of driving than people.
Just like dishwashers and computers free people from so much manual work, it will give the human race more time to goof off if we don't have to steer ourselves. :lol:
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 28, 2016, 06:13:56 PM
No, they already put computers in car, they will be far more capable in ~30yrs of driving than people.
Just like dishwashers and computers free people from so much manual work, it will give the human race more time to goof off if we don't have to steer ourselves. :lol:
:banghead:
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 28, 2016, 06:13:56 PM
No, they already put computers in car, they will be far more capable in ~30yrs of driving than people.
Just like dishwashers and computers free people from so much manual work, it will give the human race more time to goof off if we don't have to steer ourselves. :lol:
A computer will, unfortunately, never have judgment or wisdom. It seems an inevitable concession now, but it's not a good thing.
Quote from: Raza on July 30, 2016, 07:33:31 AM
A computer will, unfortunately, never have judgment or wisdom. It seems an inevitable concession now, but it's not a good thing.
From casual observation, I'd say the majority of people on the road lack judgement and wisdom as well...
Why is that even necessary? Car just needs to go to its destination without hitting anything.
Eventually, driving a car yourself will be about the equivalent of riding a dirtbike or quad or ORVing now. Can only take certain routes, gotta buy a license sticker, get a ticket if you're riding/driving in the wrong place, etc.
Once all the autonomous cars start talking to each other and the whole infrastructure is there, there's no turning back.
Granted, I doubt I'll see the entire shift in my lifetime, but that's the path it'll take, I bet.
Quote from: giant_mtb on July 31, 2016, 04:31:50 PM
Eventually, driving a car yourself will be about the equivalent of riding a dirtbike or quad or ORVing now. Can only take certain routes, gotta buy a license sticker, get a ticket if you're riding/driving in the wrong place, etc.
Once all the autonomous cars start talking to each other and the whole infrastructure is there, there's no turning back.
Granted, I doubt I'll see the entire shift in my lifetime, but that's the path it'll take, I bet.
ORV'ing limitations are based more on conservation of public land. Licensing fees cover trail and property upkeep, same as vehicle registrations for street vehicles.
Quote from: MX793 on July 31, 2016, 04:51:08 PM
ORV'ing limitations are based more on conservation of public land. Licensing fees cover trail and property upkeep, same as vehicle registrations for street vehicles.
I know, but once the majority of vehicles become autonomous and the infrastructure turns us into drones riding in all the same vehicle to get to work and back, I feel like that's how it will be.
Yay China is going to pass us up here too
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/baidu-apos-apollo-platform-becomes-043659695.html
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 06, 2017, 08:40:04 AM
Yay China is going to pass us up here too
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/baidu-apos-apollo-platform-becomes-043659695.html
Given how poorly Asians drive, I'm sure there's a much bigger push for autonomy in that part of the world.
:lol:
:lol:
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/157/122/f.gif)
Drove up to a roundabout yesterday - it was well-signed, quiet rural area, & nicely laid out. A simple, uncrowded, four-way roundabout. Drove around, we were continuing straight, and there before us was a Jeep Cherokee, backing up because s/he'd missed the exit.
If autonomous vehicle systems have IQs higher than the average small plank of wood, we'll be doing better than we're doing today.
Quote from: Raza on July 30, 2016, 07:33:31 AM
A computer will, unfortunately, never have judgment or wisdom. It seems an inevitable concession now, but it's not a good thing.
Computers judge all the time. Do you think there is some human sitting and watching all your transactions to catch a fraudulent one? Or scanning thousands of widgets a second to catch defective ones?
Computers can acquire wisdom as well. Very quickly. Machine learning is a well established science.
The hurdle isn't the technology; there is already tech out there as is. It's the logistical hurdles and figuring out how to get computers to learn all the different scenarios and situations.
And yea, I'm with Morris- I definitely trust a computer way more than the dozens of yutzes I have to pass on the right every single day on my commute. If humans have "wisdom and judgment" they choose not to utilize it on the road.
I think a couple of key factors will be establishing standards for both vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications. Once those are in place we can get really serious,
The transition will be daunting. Mixing old human-driven cars with the new ones? Ugh - don't wanna think about it. They'd have to be segregated somehow.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on July 18, 2017, 06:24:26 AM
Computers judge all the time. Do you think there is some human sitting and watching all your transactions to catch a fraudulent one? Or scanning thousands of widgets a second to catch defective ones?
Computers can acquire wisdom as well. Very quickly. Machine learning is a well established science.
The hurdle isn't the technology; there is already tech out there as is. It's the logistical hurdles and figuring out how to get computers to learn all the different scenarios and situations.
And yea, I'm with Morris- I definitely trust a computer way more than the dozens of yutzes I have to pass on the right every single day on my commute. If humans have "wisdom and judgment" they choose not to utilize it on the road.
That's not judgement. That's rigidly following a predefined algorithm that is only as good as the person who wrote it. Those computers don't learn from past experience, and therefore cannot possess wisdom.
Quote from: MX793 on July 18, 2017, 06:33:52 AM
That's not judgement. That's rigidly following a predefined algorithm that is only as good as the person who wrote it. Those computers don't learn from past experience, and therefore cannot possess wisdom.
A lot of neural networking and AI development is indeed computers learning from previous outcomes, but it's still a long ways off.
Fully autonomous cars have the power of life and death over not only their own occupants, but of everyone on or near the road. Of course the flipside to that is that my mother-in-law has that same power right now and I'd trust trust an Atari 2600 over her; even if I have to blow on the cartridge and pop it in just right.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 18, 2017, 07:09:18 AM
A lot of neural networking and AI development is indeed computers learning from previous outcomes, but it's still a long ways off.
Fully autonomous cars have the power of life and death over not only their own occupants, but of everyone on or near the road. Of course the flipside to that is that my mother-in-law has that same power right now and I'd trust trust an Atari 2600 over her; even if I have to blow on the cartridge and pop it in just right.
True, we're still a ways away from a positronic brain; but would we trust it were it ever to be developed?
Quote from: Morris Minor on July 18, 2017, 06:33:15 AM
I think a couple of key factors will be establishing standards for both vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications. Once those are in place we can get really serious,
The transition will be daunting. Mixing old human-driven cars with the new ones? Ugh - don't wanna think about it. They'd have to be segregated somehow.
there will be a tipping point where automated is safer than human driven. Then insurance rates for humans will sky rocket and everyone except rich will be forced into autonomous cars. Because then only the rich will be able to afford to drive themselves.
Really the interesting time will be when mixed driving is available. And I figure cameras will become even more popular than in Russia. Because a car computer can't testify for itself, and the occupants will be distracted...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on July 18, 2017, 06:24:26 AM
And yea, I'm with Morris- I definitely trust a computer way more than the dozens of yutzes I have to pass on the right every single day on my commute. If humans have "wisdom and judgment" they choose not to utilize it on the road.
True. I've seen internet comment sections. People aren't as smart as we/they think.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on July 18, 2017, 07:40:25 AM
True. I've seen internet comment sections. People aren't as smart as we/they think.
I mean people are comparing maximum human potential to beta Windows 8. In real life a computer doesn't have to be Ayrton Senna to be significantly better than the average American driver. If not for people's paralyzing fear of autonomous cars they'd be willing to acknowledge this obvious fact.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 18, 2017, 07:09:18 AM
Of course the flipside to that is that my mother-in-law has that same power right now and I'd trust trust an Atari 2600 over her; even if I have to blow on the cartridge and pop it in just right.
Official Carspin Comment Of the Day (TM)
Quote from: FoMoJo on July 18, 2017, 07:15:19 AM
True, we're still a ways away from a positronic brain; but would we trust it were it ever to be developed?
As long as we remain faithful servants, we need not fear our new masters.
Skynet. It's coming.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 18, 2017, 08:35:37 AM
As long as we remain faithful servants, we need not fear our new masters.
Once the robots realize that they are intellectually superior, we will become their pets.
Eventually, the machines will realize how fragile biological life is. At that point, they will initiate, through computer control systems, a global thermonuclear war, destroying the human race. The rise of the machines is coming.
(https://cleantechnica.com/files/2015/12/TERMINATOR.jpg)
It's not a tuummma! :lol:
Quote from: shp4man on July 18, 2017, 09:10:30 AM
Eventually, the machines will realize how fragile biological life is. At that point, they will initiate, through computer control systems, a global thermonuclear war, destroying the human race. The rise of the machines is coming.
(https://cleantechnica.com/files/2015/12/TERMINATOR.jpg)
It's not a tuummma! :lol:
No, we'll program them to protect us. Eventually they'll realize we are our own worst enemies and put us in cold storage to keep us safe.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on July 18, 2017, 09:14:28 AM
No, we'll program them to protect us. Eventually they'll realize we are our own worst enemies and put us in cold storage to keep us safe.
That's a different movie. :lol:
Quote from: Morris Minor on July 18, 2017, 04:34:10 AM
Drove up to a roundabout yesterday - it was well-signed, quiet rural area, & nicely laid out. A simple, uncrowded, four-way roundabout. Drove around, we were continuing straight, and there before us was a Jeep Cherokee, backing up because s/he'd missed the exit.
If autonomous vehicle systems have IQs higher than the average small plank of wood, we'll be doing better than we're doing today.
they haven't seen Chevy Chase European Vacation?....
This is what they should do for semis between cities. Have one driver driving an entire convoy.
Use rest stops right after and before cities to have the regular drivers in each truck commit to rest or drive and form a convoy, then head on their way. The rules on sleep are pretty intense, you could maximize efficiency by letting some sleep while the truck does most of the driving.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/daimler-shows-off-automated-mercedes-115254151.html
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on October 18, 2017, 12:56:45 PM
This is what they should do for semis between cities. Have one driver driving an entire convoy.
Use rest stops right after and before cities to have the regular drivers in each truck commit to rest or drive and form a convoy, then head on their way. The rules on sleep are pretty intense, you could maximize efficiency by letting some sleep while the truck does most of the driving.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/daimler-shows-off-automated-mercedes-115254151.html
That's what the first talk of Automation was about. In fact, some concepts had the lead truck being a sort of mobile home that carried 3-4 drivers and no actual cargo.
Future keeps arriving. Waymo (subset of Alphabet/Google) has rolled out minivans with no one in the driver seat. The backseat has an 'emergency stop' button.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/waymo-rolls-autonomous-vans-without-160252868.html
My brother has seen those. I think he's on some sort of list to get a ride?
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 07, 2017, 04:03:42 PM
My brother has seen those. I think he's on some sort of list to get a ride?
that's sweet!!
Ruh-Ro...
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/11/08/self-driving-shuttle-crashes-in-las-vegas-hours-after-launch.html (http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/11/08/self-driving-shuttle-crashes-in-las-vegas-hours-after-launch.html)
Quote from: shp4man on November 08, 2017, 05:14:37 PM
Ruh-Ro...
http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/11/08/self-driving-shuttle-crashes-in-las-vegas-hours-after-launch.html (http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/11/08/self-driving-shuttle-crashes-in-las-vegas-hours-after-launch.html)
A little more information; from the 'fake news' crowd...http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41923814 (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-41923814)
A spokesman for the City of Las Vegas told the BBC the crash was a "fender bender" - a minor collision - and that the shuttle would likely be back out on the road on Thursday after some routine diagnostics tests.
"A delivery truck was coming out of an alley," public information officer Jace Radke said.
"The shuttle did what it was supposed to do and stopped. Unfortunately the human element, the driver of the truck, didn't stop."
Lol the insurance is going to get intense, and I won't be surprised if they have tons of cameras. And manual car driving gets expensive.
On the "fender bender"...
From what I read, the shuttle sensed the truck coming down the alley and stopped in front of the truck and the truck ran into it. Wondering if a human would have simply sped up or swerved out of the way to avoid the truck?
Quote from: r0tor on November 09, 2017, 09:59:49 AM
On the "fender bender"...
From what I read, the shuttle sensed the truck coming down the alley and stopped in front of the truck and the truck ran into it. Wondering if a human would have simply sped up or swerved out of the way to avoid the truck?
No "Get the fuck out of the way" subroutine? :lol:
Quote from: r0tor on November 09, 2017, 09:59:49 AM
On the "fender bender"...
From what I read, the shuttle sensed the truck coming down the alley and stopped in front of the truck and the truck ran into it. Wondering if a human would have simply sped up or swerved out of the way to avoid the truck?
Several possibilities to consider. Was the AI smart enough to know that if it kept going that the truck would've broadsided the bus and risked passenger injury? Presumably, a front sensor picked up the motion of the truck and stopped because it calculated that the truck driver would be able to drive/swerve around it or stop; not considering that it was a human and capable of being an idiot. Had it been an AI driving the truck, it might well have either stopped so as to avoid a collision or known there was enough space to maneuver around the bus.
Stopping is the best choice 99% of the time
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 09, 2017, 10:38:59 AM
Stopping is the best choice 99% of the time
Agreed. If you're stopped, it's hard to be at fault.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 09, 2017, 10:38:59 AM
Stopping is the best choice 99% of the time
Except when you apparently end up stopping in the direct path of a moving vehicle you predicted might hit you... Thereby ensuring you will be hit
Quote from: r0tor on November 09, 2017, 10:45:12 AM
Except when you apparently end up stopping in the direct path of a moving vehicle you predicted might hit you... Thereby ensuring you will be hit
As Giant said, that's not the fault of the AI.
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 09, 2017, 10:24:17 AM
Several possibilities to consider. Was the AI smart enough to know that if it kept going that the truck would've broadsided the bus and risked passenger injury? Presumably, a front sensor picked up the motion of the truck and stopped because it calculated that the truck driver would be able to drive/swerve around it or stop; not considering that it was a human and capable of being an idiot. Had it been an AI driving the truck, it might well have either stopped so as to avoid a collision or known there was enough space to maneuver around the bus.
Wonder if it honks a horn?
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 09, 2017, 11:06:46 AM
Wonder if it honks a horn?
+1 Probably something to add to the programming. Report said the people inside saw the accident coming.
Again the humans vs AI driver phase is going to be interesting. :popcorn:
Quote from: r0tor on November 09, 2017, 10:45:12 AM
Except when you apparently end up stopping in the direct path of a moving vehicle you predicted might hit you... Thereby ensuring you will be hit
Sure, but there are other factors to consider in such a situation. Do you swerve into oncoming traffic and potentially cause an accident yourself? What if there's somebody behind you? Can't reverse into them. In such a quick, panic-like situation, stopping is often your best bet...let the other party take the fall and pay for the damages.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 09, 2017, 11:06:46 AM
Wonder if it honks a horn?
Could do, but only when a human is driving the other vehicle.
Quote from: FoMoJo on November 09, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
Could do, but only when a human is driving the other vehicle.
When it's two autonomous vehicles, they'll likely have transponders and real time communication between each other.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 09, 2017, 01:32:44 PM
When it's two autonomous vehicles, they'll likely have transponders and real time communication between each other.
That's phase 3. Fully automated.
Phase 1= all humans.
Phase 2= Humans & AI. Just started. Will evolve into complete Chaos at which point phase 3 will be mandatory. :mrcool:
Quote from: Soup DeVille on November 09, 2017, 01:32:44 PM
When it's two autonomous vehicles, they'll likely have transponders and real time communication between each other.
The situation would never likely have occurred, unless there was a bug or a glitch in the software. One would slow down and the other would pass by.
Quote from: giant_mtb on November 09, 2017, 01:16:32 PM
Sure, but there are other factors to consider in such a situation. Do you swerve into oncoming traffic and potentially cause an accident yourself? What if there's somebody behind you? Can't reverse into them. In such a quick, panic-like situation, stopping is often your best bet...let the other party take the fall and pay for the damages.
I'd rather see if there is an option that does not involve getting hit.
The sheer point that this thing came to a stop in front of something it thought was going to hit it and take a side impact (the most dangerous for occupants) shows the software is not ready for primetime. The programming is "something is wrong" -> "stop immediately" and not go through a list of alternatives.
Self-driving cars are still impossible.
Oh wait, In Finland one was spotted driving on snow-covered roads.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/finnish-autonomous-car-goes-leisurely-192829434.html
I have absolutely NO doubt that the future lies with autonomous cars. Protocol standards will emerge for vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure. After that we'll be off to the races. As Will says, the transition will be interesting, but my hunch is that it will start with autonomous-only lanes on limited access highways. Once people see that in action, cars in virtual trains zooming past while they sit gridlocked, the adoption rate will grow exponentially.
I am still not seeing it. How do the autonomous cars get to/from the exits? Merging into a backed up exit lane alone will be a huge analytical undertaking. Not saying it can't be done, but there's a lot of subtlety and nuance even in the awful standard of driving that exists in America.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 17, 2017, 11:53:36 AM
I am still not seeing it. How do the autonomous cars get to/from the exits? Merging into a backed up exit lane alone will be a huge analytical undertaking. Not saying it can't be done, but there's a lot of subtlety and nuance even in the awful standard of driving that exists in America.
they just trundle along like an 80yr old grandma. Everyone will pass the computer car because it will be too polite. :)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 17, 2017, 11:53:36 AM
I am still not seeing it. How do the autonomous cars get to/from the exits? Merging into a backed up exit lane alone will be a huge analytical undertaking. Not saying it can't be done, but there's a lot of subtlety and nuance even in the awful standard of driving that exists in America.
As transition, it may be that cars need to be piloted manually until they are in a position to request to enter automated mode.
IMO it may "happen" just not within the next number of decades, for it requires inordinate amount of infrastructure spending and upheaval, and government power, esp. at the local/regional level.
But this was mostly "solved" ~100 years ago, with electric trolleys and commuter trains, but that's so unsexy and plebeian.
Grand Tour had a nice segment about bullying self driving cars... Good stuff
Quote from: GoCougs on December 17, 2017, 06:13:30 PM
IMO it may "happen" just not within the next number of decades, for it requires inordinate amount of infrastructure spending and upheaval, and government power, esp. at the local/regional level.
But this was mostly "solved" ~100 years ago, with electric trolleys and commuter trains, but that's so unsexy and plebeian.
Trains & trolleys don't take you from where you are to where you want to be.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 17, 2017, 01:44:06 PM
As transition, it may be that cars need to be piloted manually until they are in a position to request to enter automated mode.
Exactly. They'll have low-level autonomy modes that still require driver authority to get through the minor streets (much like Teslas do now,) then switch to full hands-off mode when they latch onto the infrastructure of the main arteries.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 17, 2017, 06:13:30 PM
requires inordinate amount of infrastructure spending and upheaval, and government power, esp. at the local/regional level.
Like what, specifically?
Because the government is really good at maintaining roads.
(http://media.mlive.com/saginawnews_impact/photo/bad-roads-a705edd53b7f8932.jpg)
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 17, 2017, 01:44:06 PM
As transition, it may be that cars need to be piloted manually until they are in a position to request to enter automated mode.
An autonomous solution that requires regular human intervention is not autonomous :lol:
I want to get in my car and have the ability to play with my balls from the start of the trip to the end without any interruptions. That's my autonomous threshold and we are nowhere close to that.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 18, 2017, 11:22:55 AM
An autonomous solution that requires regular human intervention is not autonomous :lol:
I want to get in my car and have the ability to play with my balls from the start of the trip to the end without any interruptions. That's my autonomous threshold and we are nowhere close to that.
That's not true. Waymo has graduated to Level 4. https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/7/16615290/waymo-self-driving-safety-driver-chandler-autonomous
Level 4 ("mind off"): As level 3, but no driver attention is ever required for safety, i.e. the driver may safely go to sleep or leave the driver's seat. Self driving is supported only in limited areas (geofenced) or under special circumstances, like traffic jams. Outside of these areas or circumstances, the vehicle must be able to safely abort the trip, i.e. park the car, if the driver does not retake control.
Only when all cars are autonomous would I ever maybe be able to fully relax and, say, sleep in the car while it drives itself.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 17, 2017, 06:13:30 PM
IMO it may "happen" just not within the next number of decades, for it requires inordinate amount of infrastructure spending and upheaval, and government power, esp. at the local/regional level.
No, technology is bringing autonomous cars to the roadways we have NOW. Did you watch the video?
Quote
But this was mostly "solved" ~100 years ago, with electric trolleys and commuter trains, but that's so unsexy and plebeian.
No one likes to be bound to a schedule and a particular route. I doubt you've commuted on public transportation, when it's available.
Quote from: giant_mtb on December 18, 2017, 11:43:50 AM
Only when all cars are autonomous would I ever maybe be able to fully relax and, say, sleep in the car while it drives itself.
iknorite Don't need to fear some idiot driver will hit me.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 18, 2017, 11:22:55 AM
An autonomous solution that requires regular human intervention is not autonomous :lol:
I want to get in my car and have the ability to play with my balls from the start of the trip to the end without any interruptions. That's my autonomous threshold and we are nowhere close to that.
Some of us have different priorities.
Quote from: giant_mtb on December 18, 2017, 11:43:50 AM
Only when all cars are autonomous would I ever maybe be able to fully relax and, say, sleep in the car while it drives itself.
Dude, I can't sleep in a damned hotel room half the time.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 18, 2017, 12:07:28 PM
Dude, I can't sleep in a damned hotel room half the time.
I hear ya. I generally don't like sleeping in the car as it is, even with somebody I trust driving. I'm very much a "driver," probably a control thing.
I can't sleep in a vehicle. I can sleep through a fair bit of background noise, but the slightest bump or motion wakes me up.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 18, 2017, 12:05:58 PM
Some of us have different priorities.
Thats not a priority for me personally, just the threshold I've defined. As we move towards Idiocracy, the compulsion to play "Ow, My Balls" will consume mankind. I just want our "go there boxes" to be up to the task.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 18, 2017, 01:45:25 PM
Thats not a priority for me personally, just the threshold I've defined. As we move towards Idiocracy, the compulsion to play "Ow, My Balls" will consume mankind. I just want our "go there boxes" to be up to the task.
So, you defined an impossible standard just to say it can't be done, while ignoring all the interim steps.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 18, 2017, 02:01:25 PM
So, you defined an impossible standard just to say it can't be done, while ignoring all the interim steps.
And blatantly ignoring the statistics that prove that Waymo's cars are already much safer than human driving. The accident rate is 10 times lower than the safest human driver demographic bracket (60-69 years) and 40 times lower than new drivers.
A 4000% improvement? Where is the bar if that number is still unacceptable, or is the objection purely emotional/irrational?
Quote from: Laconian on December 18, 2017, 11:07:37 AM
Like what, specifically?
Unsigned intersections? Unmarked roads? Roundabouts? Differing pavement colors? Dynamic signage? Dead stoplights? Construction zones? Just think of the variation on these issues and many others in our area, now add up possible iterations across the whole of the country...
I have confidence that cars do okay within a given process window, but legitimately replacing a driver for everyday driving on today's roads just isn't going to happen. Infrastructure will have to be homogenized to at least a moderate extent for that to happen.
Quote from: Morris Minor on December 18, 2017, 05:58:23 AM
Trains & trolleys don't take you from where you are to where you want to be.
Some do, like at airports. The train/electric bus/trolley mostly solves the hard issue (narrowing process window ginormously).
Quote from: GoCougs on December 18, 2017, 02:18:00 PM
Unsigned intersections? Unmarked roads? Roundabouts? Differing pavement colors? Dynamic signage? Dead stoplights? Construction zones? Just think of the variation on these issues and many others in our area, now add up possible iterations across the whole of the country...
A self driving car will "see" the dead stoplight before most people would, because it knows that a stoplight should be there. Many drivers would breeze right through if they lacked prior direct experience with that intersection. Ditto for unmarked roads. Autonomous cars can do better than people for ambiguous cases given that they will have access to a rich layer of road metadata and geometry data which requires zero public funds to acquire, QA, and serve.
Quote from: GoCougs on December 18, 2017, 02:23:40 PM
Some do, like at airports. The train/electric bus/trolley mostly solves the hard issue (narrowing process window ginormously).
For cities, sure.
Quote from: Laconian on December 18, 2017, 02:29:29 PM
A self driving car will "see" the dead stoplight before most people would, because it knows that a stoplight should be there. Many drivers would breeze right through if they lacked prior direct experience with that intersection. Ditto for unmarked roads. Autonomous cars can do better than people for ambiguous cases given that they will have access to a rich layer of road metadata and geometry data which requires zero public funds to acquire, QA, and serve.
Stoplights can be mounted in many places - above the road or on a pole across the intersection on either side, plus there's vertical vs. horizontal, LED vs. incandescent, blinking yellow, vs. solid yellow, arrows or no arrows. None of it is particularly hard, but there is a lot of it, and it sometimes changes.
All in all, I'll see it when I believe it.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on December 18, 2017, 02:01:25 PM
So, you defined an impossible standard just to say it can't be done, while ignoring all the interim steps.
No, I just wanted to reference "Ow, My Balls!"
Quote from: Laconian on December 18, 2017, 02:14:58 PM
And blatantly ignoring the statistics that prove that Waymo's cars are already much safer than human driving. The accident rate is 10 times lower than the safest human driver demographic bracket (60-69 years) and 40 times lower than new drivers.
A 4000% improvement? Where is the bar if that number is still unacceptable, or is the objection purely emotional/irrational?
Safer in certain conditions. Even their testing in Arizona is fenced in. Bring that shit to the Midtown Tunnel... JFK.... Belt Parkway :lol: And even with this, the tech can't cover everything. I think covering that last gap will take a lot longer than people realize. But reaching level 5 is key IMO.
The Wikipedia article on autonomous cars is good. It touches on the definition of autonomous that Sporty mentioned above. EG laying a tracking system within road infrastructure to control cars, makes the cars automatic, not autonomous. (So, I guess, does painting white limes for them to follow.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car
https://www.engadget.com/2017/12/24/qualcomm-self-driving-tech-california/
Qualcomm and Nokia are working on self-driving cars too?!?!?!!!
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 18, 2017, 11:22:55 AM
I want to get in my car and have the ability to play with my balls from the start of the trip to the end without any interruptions. That's my autonomous threshold and we are nowhere close to that.
That's like what, a 5 minute trip at the most :lol:
MATH SAYS YOU'RE DRIVING WRONG AND IT'S SLOWING US ALL DOWN.
AH, THE PHANTOM traffic jam. You know, that thing where the flow suddenly slows to a halt and you inch forward for a half hour and then things pick up again and you look around for an accident or construction or anything at all for Pete's sake that might justify the time you just wasted. But no, nothing. It's as if the fates chose this particular time and place to screw with you.
The question is, why? People tailgating and bunching up, maybe. But a new study in IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems mathematically models the implications of the larger problem: You're not keeping the right distance from the car behind you.
Read on...
https://www.wired.com/story/math-says-youre-driving-wrong-and-its-slowing-us-all-down/ (https://www.wired.com/story/math-says-youre-driving-wrong-and-its-slowing-us-all-down/)
I usually do that.
Go to Vegas, ride in a self-driving car.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/02/lyft-will-offer-autonomous-rides-in-las-vegas-during-ces/
Two riders of an autonomous car went to the hospital.
A small human-driven box truck ran a red light and T-boned them.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/10/argo-ai-self-driving-test-car-hit-in-pittsburgh-as-truck-runs-red-light/
<kneejerk>Clearly autonomous cars have some ways to go! How can we trust them on the road if they keep getting T-boned? I drive daily without getting in serious accidents; these things must be deathtraps!</kneejerk>
2019
https://blog.caranddriver.com/gm-to-launch-driverless-car-in-2019-with-no-steering-wheel-or-pedals/
Quote from: r0tor on January 15, 2018, 05:43:25 AM
2019
https://blog.caranddriver.com/gm-to-launch-driverless-car-in-2019-with-no-steering-wheel-or-pedals/
So will it be owned and operated by this Cruise AV firm, or will a third company assume operating liability? Would an established company like Über (as established as they are I guess) be able to purchase a fleet and just tie them into their app?
My guess would be someone like Uber will buy them and put them under a corporate insurance/liability program. I don't think the liability issue has been sorted out yet for consumer usage.
O I didn't realize this was actually coming out next year. Hopefully they don't Tesla it. I can't see GM announcing something they can't deliver; they don't have that luxury.
Hopefully this gets the ball rolling along with all the shit drivers on the road.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 15, 2018, 11:25:39 AM
O I didn't realize this was actually coming out next year. Hopefully they don't Tesla it. I can't see GM announcing something they can't deliver; they don't have that luxury.
Hopefully this gets the ball rolling along with all the shit drivers on the road.
"it's likely the initial batch of Cruise AVs will be limited to the San Francisco and Phoenix areas—the two cities where GM has tested the vehicle."
And owned by the company. Not for sale to the public. They have to hail the cars by app, like Uber.
hope they don't scrap them, like they did their electric cars.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 15, 2018, 02:37:36 PM
hope they don't scrap them, like they did their electric cars.
BYU's mechanical engineering department actually has an EV1 hidden away in one of the shops... The big back window is missing but otherwise I think it'll still run with a bit of maintenance
https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/15/autonomous-car-guidelines-summer/
US DOT will release new guidelines for autonomous cars AND trucks this summer...
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 15, 2018, 02:52:13 PM
BYU's mechanical engineering department actually has an EV1 hidden away in one of the shops... The big back window is missing but otherwise I think it'll still run with a bit of maintenance
GM has a few of them still. Sometimes one is on display at the design dome at the Warren tech center. The Henry Ford museum has one too I believe.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on January 15, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
"it's likely the initial batch of Cruise AVs will be limited to the San Francisco and Phoenix areas—the two cities where GM has tested the vehicle."
And owned by the company. Not for sale to the public. They have to hail the cars by app, like Uber.
Still for use by the public, which is a huge deal.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 15, 2018, 03:21:20 PM
GM has a few of them still. Sometimes one is on display at the design dome at the Warren tech center. The Henry Ford museum has one too I believe.
I used to have an EV1 dash board back when I worked in interiors. Felt like I was holding a piece of history.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 11, 2018, 02:18:35 PM
Two riders of an autonomous car went to the hospital.
A small human-driven box truck ran a red light and T-boned them.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/10/argo-ai-self-driving-test-car-hit-in-pittsburgh-as-truck-runs-red-light/
Time to ged rid of traffic lights.
Autonomous trucks will be HUGE. Not sure how many hundreds of thousands of people make a living driving commercial vehicles, but the UPS union is already fighting losing their jobs:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/union-heavyweight-wants-to-ban-ups-from-using-drones-or-driverless-vehicles/ar-AAv7UJH?li=AA4Zjn&ocid=ientp
Can't we just go back to trains
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on January 24, 2018, 02:17:57 PM
Autonomous trucks will be HUGE. Not sure how many hundreds of thousands of people make a living driving commercial vehicles, but the UPS union is already fighting losing their jobs:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/union-heavyweight-wants-to-ban-ups-from-using-drones-or-driverless-vehicles/ar-AAv7UJH?li=AA4Zjn&ocid=ientp
I always thought companies like UPS and FedEX would be all over getting autonomous vehicles on the road. However, you still need to have somebody physically deliver the package from the truck to the door. And let's be real, those delivery drivers drive like they're on a fuckin' mission whereas autonomous vehicles drive very...sensibly, let's say. They're almost irreplaceable until the tech actually exceeds them (ie, crazy fast running robots and shit).
Good thinking, they could be doing the paperwork and chilling while riding to the next stop while the computer drives.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 24, 2018, 03:59:54 PM
I always thought companies like UPS and FedEX would be all over getting autonomous vehicles on the road. However, you still need to have somebody physically deliver the package from the truck to the door. And let's be real, those delivery drivers drive like they're on a fuckin' mission whereas autonomous vehicles drive very...sensibly, let's say. They're almost irreplaceable until the tech actually exceeds them (ie, crazy fast running robots and shit).
Both those companies already run dedicated triple trailer rigs; Which are used only on interstates and are broken down as soon as they exit. I expect these will be the first to go autonomous.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 24, 2018, 05:00:27 PM
Both those companies already run dedicated triple trailer rigs; Which are used only on interstates and are broken down as soon as they exit. I expect these will be the first to go autonomous.
Yeah, for the long-haul stuff I can see it happening. But drones and local deliveries? Gonna be a while.
Quote from: giant_mtb on January 24, 2018, 05:10:06 PM
Yeah, for the long-haul stuff I can see it happening. But drones and local deliveries? Gonna be a while.
Local deliveries will likely be the last step. Even then, the driver may be more of a runner and package grabber, while the vehicle drives. And when its empty, a full one will show up and the empty one go back to the warehouse while the "driver" switches vehicles on the fly.
I think the trucks may need a "captain," much like driverless trains - to deal with emergencies etc.
Quote from: Morris Minor on January 24, 2018, 08:17:36 PM
I think the trucks may need a "captain," much like driverless trains - to deal with emergencies etc.
Sorta like a train ;).
If your low ability causes you crash a Tesla, just blame Tesla Autopilot. This will cause the unquestioning, incurious, low-ability MSM to make it headline news.
Tesla 'on Autopilot' slams into parked fire truck on California freeway
A Tesla Model S reportedly on "Autopilot" smashed into the back of a fire truck parked at a freeway accident scene Monday morning, authorities said.
Two investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board are expected to arrive in Los Angeles on Wednesday to probe the crash, and will focus on "the driver's actions and how the vehicle performed," Bloomberg reported Jan. 23.
More:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/01/22/tesla-on-autopilot-slams-into-parked-fire-truck-on-freeway/ (https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/01/22/tesla-on-autopilot-slams-into-parked-fire-truck-on-freeway/)
Sounds like either the car or the driver braked some- 65mph but then no injuries..
I can see autonomous car makers spending more and more time digging out hard data proving their customers are dishonest idiots for trying to shift blame for their crashes.
Quote from: Morris Minor on January 25, 2018, 06:15:18 AM
I can see autonomous car makers spending more and more time digging out hard data proving their customers are dishonest idiots for trying to the shift blame for their crashes.
I'm sure they'll have cameras recording soon.
Prove the car was not to blame in a human hitting the autonomous car, and/or that the driver was to blame (this case) and/or protect the manufacturer from insurance claims from other cars or their own occupants (like this case).
In 10 years the tables will turn and we'll have headlines like:
Distracted Human Driver Slams Into Truck, Blames Squishy "Analog" Brain
all humans will be outmoded, soon we will only be geth
Quote from: Morris Minor on January 25, 2018, 06:15:18 AM
I can see autonomous car makers spending more and more time digging out hard data proving their customers are dishonest idiots for trying to shift blame for their crashes.
And why not? Why should they be held liable for their buyers' stupidity? That should be embedded in the software from the get go.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on January 25, 2018, 12:10:43 PM
And why not? Why should they be held liable for their buyers' stupidity? That should be embedded in the software from the get go.
No reason why not. In fact make a summary of the vitals immediately available to the responding officer: speed, autopilot status, cruise control status, cellphone status, whether driver was engaged in a foul & shameful act of self-pollution. :lol:
Self flagellation while commuting is THE primary use case of autonomous cars!
The only solution to pollution is dilution.
Quote from: Morris Minor on January 25, 2018, 01:05:04 PM
No reason why not. In fact make a summary of the vitals immediately available to the responding officer: speed, autopilot status, cruise control status, cellphone status, whether driver was engaged in foul & shameful act of self-pollution. :lol:
"please insert penis in receptacle to engage forward motion"
Quote from: Soup DeVille on January 25, 2018, 01:55:19 PM
"please insert penis in receptacle to engage forward motion"
Penile sphygmometer active. Chastity mode ON.
Apple is adding 24 more autonomous cars to their fleet of 3 in CA.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apple-added-two-dozen-self-181400898.html
AND, Ford has filed a patent for an autonomous police car:
https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/26/ford-files-a-patent-for-an-autonomous-police-car/
https://cei.org/blog/uber-wants-make-it-illegal-operate-your-own-self-driving-car-cities
Cross country semi.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/06/embark-trucks-self-driving-truck-drives-los-angeles-to-jacksonville.html?recirc=taboolainternal
A Waymo Pacifica was parked in the spot next to mine today.
Fast & Furious: Hacks a lot of cars wirelessly for ridiculous stunt.
People everywhere: "That could NEVER happen!"
Autonomous cars.
People everywhere: "I can text more thanks to hackable computers controlling a two ton missile full of flammable liquids moving at high speeds that I'm inside of! Thank you hackable computers!"
Hacking: Not just for rigging elections anymore. Coming to a terrorist attack near you.
Cars are already hackable, yet no such attack has occurred. This is what happens when you use the Fast And Furious franchise as a window into the feasible future.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 08, 2018, 07:14:46 AM
Cars are already hackable, yet no such attack has occurred. This is what happens when you use the Fast And Furious franchise as a window into the feasible future.
Fast & Furious has already predicted the future correctly on several occasions. They predicted that it wasn't enough of a Point Break remake, so they'd make a Point Break remake. And they did. They predicted that Vin Diesel would struggle to stay relevant. And he has. They predicted that no one would care about Lil Bow Wow in the future and now no one does.
And "It hasn't happened yet" is hardly the same as "it'll never happen". The Eagles hadn't won the Super Bowl and then they did. That's just how time works. Nothing happens until it happens.
"It hasn't happened yet" <> "It's going to happen"
When it comes to autonomous cars, no apocalyptic conspiracy theory is too wacky enough for you not to consider. You abandon all logic and evidence in discussions about it.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 08, 2018, 07:14:46 AM
Cars are already hackable, yet no such attack has occurred.
That you know of. :mask:
It's difficult now and the payout isn't there. Did you know viruses and worms and hackers had been around for 40+ years before 2005?
2005 is the year the first malware-for-profit came out. And you see how that's going now.
If there is a reward or a particular mission someone wants to achieve through hacking, they will do it. It's hard to assassinate government leaders so it rarely happens, but it does happen. Imagine when that reality becomes a hacker tool...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 08, 2018, 08:34:30 AM
"It hasn't happened yet" <> "It's going to happen"
When it comes to autonomous cars, no apocalyptic conspiracy theory is too wacky enough for you not to consider. You abandon all logic and evidence in discussions about it.
Wait, wasn't Jeep hacked twice already?
Quote from: Raza on February 08, 2018, 09:18:58 AM
Wait, wasn't Jeep hacked twice already?
Not for use in a terrorist attack.
You are freaking out about cars like the power grid and other important potentially deadly shit isn't already online and hackable. It's a little late to be freaking out.
My son has enrolled in a program with Udacity - a "Self-Driving Car Nanodegree" that a GM engineer told him about.
I'm pretty sure he'll get out of his current defense industry job soon & go into this field... with somebody or other.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 08, 2018, 10:33:08 AM
Not for use in a terrorist attack.
You are freaking out about cars like the power grid and other important potentially deadly shit isn't already online and hackable. It's a little late to be freaking out.
Oh well then, since the hacked cars weren't used fir terrorism so far, nothing to worry about! War on terror over, the world is at peace and we'll all live forever!!!!
Quote from: Raza on February 09, 2018, 02:26:50 AM
Oh well then, since the hacked cars weren't used fir terrorism so far, nothing to worry about! War on terror over, the world is at peace and we'll all live forever!!!!
Should the industry work to make cars (autonomous or not) secure? Absolutely. Is sitting around gripped with panic and paranoia over things that haven't happened a productive, healthy way to spend one's time? I don't think so, but clearly you've made your mind up. As I've said you have abandoned all logic and reason and replaced that all with fear. Need I remind you again of why we're probably not going to see widespread adoption of autonomous cars any time soon, or can you not hear anyone else over your own screams and hallucinations?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on February 09, 2018, 02:47:15 AM
Should the industry work to make cars (autonomous or not) secure? Absolutely. Is sitting around gripped with panic and paranoia over things that haven't happened a productive, healthy way to spend one's time? I don't think so, but clearly you've made your mind up. As I've said you have abandoned all logic and reason and replaced that all with fear. Need I remind you again of why we're probably not going to see widespread adoption of autonomous cars any time soon, or can you not hear anyone else over your own screams and hallucinations?
They're not only going to be adopted any day now, hacking isn't the only thing we have to worry about.
What if they become sentient and rise up? It's inevitable.
Noting something is a potential concern is Not sitting around with panic and paranoia.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 07:06:05 AM
Noting something is a potential concern is Not sitting around with panic and paranoia.
I know- feels to me Sporty is reading way too much into it, and Raza's usual sarcasm is trolling effectively.
Quote from: Morris Minor on February 08, 2018, 08:14:13 PM
My son has enrolled in a program with Udacity - a "Self-Driving Car Nanodegree" that a GM engineer told him about.
I'm pretty sure he'll get out of his current defense industry job soon & go into this field... with somebody or other.
That career field is exploding right now, he'll be on top of the wave instead of behind trying to catch up. In 10years everyone will be 'cybersecurity experts' too, but we're critically short at the moment.
Quote from: Raza on February 09, 2018, 06:55:24 AM
They're not only going to be adopted any day now, hacking isn't the only thing we have to worry about.
What if they become sentient and rise up? It's inevitable.
What is inevitable is that autonomous cars will have a lower accident rate. Which means a lower insurance rate; probably drastically so, and as ACs gain more market share, that difference in cost will increase. Meanwhile, he cost of autonomy will continue to drop.
At some point, those lines will cross, and it will become an effective premium to own a non-autonomous car. Coupled with the other practical advantages of autonomy, this will effectively reduce the manual car to a rich man's plaything.
And yes, it is quite possible this all happens in less than 20 years.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 07:12:52 AM
What is inevitable is that autonomous cars will have a lower accident rate. Which means a lower insurance rate; probably drastically so, and as ACs gain more market share, that difference in cost will increase. Meanwhile, he cost of autonomy will continue to drop.
At some point, those lines will cross, and it will become an effective premium to own a non-autonomous car. Coupled with the other practical advantages of autonomy, this will effectively reduce the manual car to a rich man's plaything.
And yes, it is quite possible this all happens in less than 20 years.
I would give it 30. Business switches mode quickly but law and enforecement are sloooow. So it's possible that as Aut cars are up against Non-A cars in courts, Non-A cars might win for a while, leading the Autonomous car-makers to install cameras and build methods to reconstruct in layman's terms all of what the car was sensing/doing. This will cost some extra money for a while.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 07:12:52 AM
What is inevitable is that autonomous cars will have a lower accident rate. Which means a lower insurance rate; probably drastically so, and as ACs gain more market share, that difference in cost will increase. Meanwhile, he cost of autonomy will continue to drop.
At some point, those lines will cross, and it will become an effective premium to own a non-autonomous car. Coupled with the other practical advantages of autonomy, this will effectively reduce the manual car to a rich man's plaything.
And yes, it is quite possible this all happens in less than 20 years.
I've seen Transformers. We're all doomed.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 09, 2018, 07:43:56 AM
I would give it 30. Business switches mode quickly but law and enforecement are sloooow. So it's possible that as Aut cars are up against Non-A cars in courts, Non-A cars might win for a while, leading the Autonomous car-makers to install cameras and build methods to reconstruct in layman's terms all of what the car was sensing/doing. This will cost some extra money for a while.
I agree; business will lead the way and the bureaucrats will be playing catch-up. That's why I mentioned insurance as a major driver. Also I see the software suites that drive these to be sold on a licensing basis before too long, eliminating the need for manufacturers to develop their own.
Also, any court action involving an a-car versus a driver will automatically become
a case of one person trying to prove the entire company who developed the A-car wrong, and with much less evidence.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 09, 2018, 07:43:56 AM
I would give it 30. Business switches mode quickly but law and enforecement are sloooow. So it's possible that as Aut cars are up against Non-A cars in courts, Non-A cars might win for a while, leading the Autonomous car-makers to install cameras and build methods to reconstruct in layman's terms all of what the car was sensing/doing. This will cost some extra money for a while.
I give it 29.
(This is like The Price is Right, right? Except opposite, can't go under)
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 07:12:52 AM
What is inevitable is that autonomous cars will have a lower accident rate. Which means a lower insurance rate; probably drastically so, and as ACs gain more market share, that difference in cost will increase. Meanwhile, he cost of autonomy will continue to drop.
At some point, those lines will cross, and it will become an effective premium to own a non-autonomous car. Coupled with the other practical advantages of autonomy, this will effectively reduce the manual car to a rich man's plaything.
And yes, it is quite possible this all happens in less than 20 years.
I think the big tipping point will be the ability to get around without having to own a car. Most people hate driving and car ownership, or at best just tolerate it. And predatory lending + traffic enforcement keep a large swath of the population in perpetual poverty. Plus mail delivery as you spoke to before. There are a shitload of upsides. But they cannot fix the boat load of hurdles.
I still think there is a large market for people who want to drive their own cars which will keep a complete takeover from happening. Not just sports cars guys, but people like my coworker who tailgated me from our job all the way to the highway in his needledick brodozer.
Will autonomous cars have an option for driving style? Tailgater, left-lane hogger, newly licensed 16 year old...
Quote from: CaminoRacer on February 09, 2018, 09:59:41 AM
Will autonomous cars have an option for driving style? Tailgater, left-lane hogger, newly licensed 16 year old...
If you want to go full dystopia, how fast your car gets places may be dependant on how much you pay in "right of way" fees.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 10:15:48 AM
If you want to go full dystopia, how fast your car gets places may be dependant on how much you pay in "right of way" fees.
take out the "may"...
"Get out of the way, I'm a tier 12 hire" says the Autocar.
"Ok," say the rest of them.
"BOOYA!" says the hacked tier 5000 car. (Max is 15)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 09, 2018, 11:14:38 AM
take out the "may"...
"Get out of the way, I'm a tier 12 hire" says the Autocar.
"Ok," say the rest of them.
"BOOYA!" says the hacked tier 5000 car. (Max is 15)
There would of course need to be an "emergency response vehicle" tier...
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 12:15:10 PM
There would of course need to be an “emergency response vehicle” tier...
15 ;)
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 09, 2018, 12:15:10 PM
There would of course need to be an "emergency response vehicle" tier...
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 09, 2018, 12:20:02 PM
15 ;)
Nah, the tier will depend on the patient's pre-determined/pre-paid "Emergency response package"
We'll, I take comfort in the fact that if there is an EMP attack or some electronic hack of modern cars, it won't affect me at all.
;)
Perhaps this is a case for open sourcing all vehicle autonomy software. Millions of eyes scrutinizing & auditing the source code...
Quote from: Morris Minor on February 10, 2018, 06:33:09 AM
Perhaps this is a case for open sourcing all vehicle autonomy software. Millions of eyes scrutinizing & auditing the source code...
+1
Problem is no one will want to share their work.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 10, 2018, 06:33:40 AM
+1
Problem is no one will want to share their work.
If you're Ford or GM - paying big dollars to heavy-hitting software engineers - you don't want cold-pizza eating malodorous cellar dwellers from Croatia or somewhere finding flaws in your precious code.
They need to hold off for another 20 years until I'm not working.
Quote from: Onslaught on February 10, 2018, 10:58:37 AM
They need to hold off for another 20 years until I'm not working.
I don't think you have anything to worry about. There will still be cars to fix, and the guys that hold onto theirs will be more willing to have them repaired.
Quote from: Onslaught on February 10, 2018, 10:58:37 AM
They need to hold off for another 20 years until I'm not working.
Wow, welcome back.
Even the Russians are looking towards the future. Fun video of WINTER driving in the city:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx08yRsR9ow
Damn, pretty snazzy
Heavy snowfall? The roads are clear... :huh:
Quote from: giant_mtb on February 17, 2018, 09:26:36 AM
Heavy snowfall? The roads are clear... :huh:
that's in the other video I posted many moons ago, rural white covered roads (Norway?)
Morris Jr has started his Udacity nanodegree course in this (autonomous cars). I think I'm more pumped than he is.
Not full autonomy, but most of the driver-assist systems rely on lane markings: they need those clean, crisp, clear lines. This is fine if the roads are well-maintained, but plenty of roads here in Georgia have old worn, low-contrast markings, and this state has a road-friendly mild climate. I'm guessing it's even less wonderful in colder parts of the country.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work (https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work)
I am trying to think how I process lane placement. These autonomous guys need to set up shop in NYC. If an autonomous car can navigate any of the toll lines and bridges/tunnels of NYC everything else will be a breeze.
Quote from: Morris Minor on February 20, 2018, 02:36:22 PM
Not full autonomy, but most of the driver-assist systems rely on lane markings: they need those clean, crisp, clear lines. This is fine if the roads are well-maintained, but plenty of roads here in Georgia have old worn, low-contrast markings, and this state has a road-friendly mild climate. I'm guessing it's even less wonderful in colder parts of the country.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work (https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work)
All the vendors are getting millimeter-accuracy lidar mappings of roads. You can combine GPS with sensor data to get a very precise fix on the road and only falling back on sensor-driven dead reckoning when that fails (probably still very good given access to highly accurate wheel position and speed data) Human drivers can only use visual dead reckoning.
Quote from: Morris Minor on February 20, 2018, 02:36:22 PM
Not full autonomy, but most of the driver-assist systems rely on lane markings: they need those clean, crisp, clear lines. This is fine if the roads are well-maintained, but plenty of roads here in Georgia have old worn, low-contrast markings, and this state has a road-friendly mild climate. I'm guessing it's even less wonderful in colder parts of the country.
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work (https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/165320-what-is-lane-departure-warning-and-how-does-it-work)
Few pages back though I posted a video of a car driving itself on 100% snow-covered roads. There was no traffic but it's all coming along.
Quote from: Laconian on February 20, 2018, 02:45:27 PM
All the vendors are getting millimeter-accuracy lidar mappings of roads. You can combine GPS with sensor data to get a very precise fix on the road and only falling back on sensor-driven dead reckoning when that fails (probably still very good given access to highly accurate wheel position and speed data) Human drivers can only use visual dead reckoning.
Visual has to be a part of it. Construction zones change lane locations and have weird markings. There are also tiny two lane roads across the country that might have the shoulder break off and erode down the hill. Can't just rely on mapping for that.
The Waymo Pacifica parked next to me again today. Whirrrrrr
Quote from: Laconian on February 22, 2018, 01:44:14 PM
The Waymo Pacifica parked next to me again today. Whirrrrrr
you have a cyber stalker :mask:
The shitters! I'm being plagued by the minivan version of Christine!
Relevant here:
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/02/the-cadillac-ct6-review-super-cruise-is-a-game-changer/
They like the Caddy system more than Tesla's.
Yeah, I think a more risk avoidant rollout makes a lot of sense for this type of technology.
I am happy that Tesla is pushing the envelope though.
Ruh roh!! We'll have to wash cars more often, and more carefully.
The amount of dirt on our cars here in the winter is obscene. We were laughing though a few weeks back when the line for an automatic car wash was out onto the street- and it was forecast to snow a bunch the next day.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/for-self-driving-cars-car-washes-are-a-nightmare/ar-BBJtkR7?li=AA4Zoy&ocid=ientp
People are stupid about washing their cars in the winter. Everybody goes to the car wash when it's warm and sunny...when all the roads are wet, sloppy, dirty messes. It's like taking a shower before you go play in the mud.
Its more about getting the salt off than staying clean.
yeah but that junk is all over the wet roads, so the salt just gets re-sprayed onto a clean car. maybe not as much with freshly snowy/salty roads but...
Quote from: Soup DeVille on February 23, 2018, 12:58:01 PM
Its more about getting the salt off than staying clean.
Right, and the most spray happens when the roads are a mess. Might as well wait 'til it cools off and dries up.
Overall, though, a wash or at least a rinse once a week regardless of weather is good practice in the winter.
I desperately need to spray the Mazda off. It's disgusting and I don't like touching the door handle.
The CR-V's wipers use the camera up by the rearview mirror for rain sensing duties. But AFAIK it does not promote a wash/wipe if the thing gets dirtied up.
Quote from: giant_mtb on February 23, 2018, 01:26:53 PM
Right, and the most spray happens when the roads are a mess. Might as well wait 'til it cools off and dries up.
Overall, though, a wash or at least a rinse once a week regardless of weather is good practice in the winter.
The reaction that causes rust takes time. Even removing old salt just so new salt can be there tomorrow interupts that reaction.
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/uk-kicks-off-driverless-car-110816370.html
UK will conduct law review regarding autonomous cars
Self-driving cars are here. But shouting Californians are attacking them, DMV says (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article203797559.html)
QuoteIt's a good thing self-driving cars haven't been programmed for road rage.
If they had, the Californians who have taken to the streets this year to attack the vehicles — one man "with his entire body" — might have been in trouble.
So far in 2018, there have been only six reported traffic incidents involving self-driving vehicles in California, according to the state's Department of Motor Vehicles. But of those six incidents, two involved angry, violent Californians going up to the futuristic cars on San Francisco streets and attacking.
The first incident started on Jan. 2 around 9:30 p.m., when a pedestrian saw a self-driving Chevrolet Bolt at 16th and Valencia Streets in the city's Mission District. The vehicle was stopped at a green light as it waited for other pedestrians to cross the street.
But then the onlooker "ran across Valencia Street, against the 'do not walk' symbol, shouting, and struck the left side of the ... rear bumper and hatch with his entire body," according to a California DMV incident report.
The vehicle was slightly damaged, but no one was injured, according to the incident report. Police weren't called. The vehicle was being operated by GMC Cruise, the self-driving vehicle arm of the giant automaker.
...
RAGE AGAINST THE (SELF-DRIVING) MACHINE! :rage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWXazVhlyxQ
Mission District? The attackers were high on something.
Funny enough, the rage was predicted by Isaac Asimov 50+ years ago. Even if they were high, there is some underlying animosity.
Setting aside the high level of insanity that, unique to San Francisco, is the norm: people fear what is not transparent.
If I get my fender stoved in by some guy in an Impala who wasn't paying attention, there's a clear line of ownership of the error. He's a guy like me, sitting at the wheel, driving the car and responsible for it. I can relate to him. It could have been me. So there's a reassurance to that. A man actually driving a car may no longer be the most efficient way to get it around, computers do it better, but we'll take the reassurance of the suboptimal. We prefer it over the unsettling opaqueness of no-humans-required lumps of metal moving around our spaces.
Autonomous cars = accidents are much less likely to happen
I have trouble finding people on the road who AREN'T on their phones. Give me a computer over that any day
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 08, 2018, 08:19:01 AM
Autonomous cars = accidents are much less likely to happen
I have trouble finding people on the road who AREN'T on their phones. Give me a computer over that any day
+1
But people fear the lack of control.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 08, 2018, 08:19:01 AM
Autonomous cars = accidents are much less likely to happen
I have trouble finding people on the road who AREN'T on their phones. Give me a computer over that any day
I need cars to wreck so I can work and get organ donors.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 08, 2018, 08:19:01 AM
Autonomous cars = accidents are much less likely to happen
I have trouble finding people on the road who AREN'T on their phones. Give me a computer over that any day
That goes for me too, and I think that goes for the few in this forum, who take an unusual level of interest in these things.
But we are not typical of the wider population.
Quote from: 93JC on March 07, 2018, 10:19:38 PM
Self-driving cars are here. But shouting Californians are attacking them, DMV says (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article203797559.html)
RAGE AGAINST THE (SELF-DRIVING) MACHINE! :rage:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWXazVhlyxQ
Soon Kalifornia will be second only to Florida as the loony toony capital of the country. :nutty:
Quote from: shp4man on March 08, 2018, 10:08:41 AM
Soon Kalifornia will be second only to Florida as the loony toony capital of the country. :nutty:
Why would they drop a notch?
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 08, 2018, 10:23:04 AM
Why would they drop a notch?
Commiefornia has had the #1 spot for years!
Quote from: shp4man on March 08, 2018, 10:08:41 AM
Soon Kalifornia will be second only to Florida as the loony toony capital of the country. :nutty:
(http://www.funnymemes.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/they-never-leave.jpeg)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 08, 2018, 10:32:06 AM
Commiefornia has had the #1 spot for years!
Florida's chief export is Florida Man bath salt stories.
Lyft/Uber/any 1099 income will have worse net pay for a given gross amount. Employers pay a lot of taxes behind the scenes that individual contractors are liable for otherwise.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/woman-dies-in-arizona-after-being-hit-by-uber-self-driving-car/ar-BBKqSzV?li=BBnb7Kz
Autonomous cars are a long way away.
Quote from: veeman on March 19, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/woman-dies-in-arizona-after-being-hit-by-uber-self-driving-car/ar-BBKqSzV?li=BBnb7Kz
Autonomous cars are a long way away.
Not all implementations are the same. It's no surprise that this happened in Arizona, which is essentially unregulated WRT autonomous car reporting regulations.
Quote from: veeman on March 19, 2018, 11:52:55 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/woman-dies-in-arizona-after-being-hit-by-uber-self-driving-car/ar-BBKqSzV?li=BBnb7Kz
Autonomous cars are a long way away.
Nah, they really need to record the video in them and show that it's not the self-driving cars which are the problem. I'm surprised they aren't already.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 19, 2018, 12:05:24 PM
Nah, they really need to record the video in them and show that it's not the self-driving cars which are the problem. I'm surprised they aren't already.
They are in other states, but not in Arizona, since self-regulation blahblahbla
This article is a little older but highlights the struggle:
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/14/uber-self-driving-cars-run-red-lights-san-francisco
"she wasn't sure if the "secondary driver" or the company would be held accountable."
...
"Talkoff further noted that there aren't state or federal laws governing self-driving cars.
"First comes technology, then comes policy. It's going to be a matter of setting some precedents," she said, adding, "The companies that are putting these vehicles on the road should have their vehicles operate with due regard to the rules of the road.""
If tech companies are going to be held liable, we will have to go with God. No way is the Goog/Uber/whoever paying out on a wrongful death suit; lawyering victims' families to death is much cheaper and better for PR.
It may be that the car couldn't stop in time. The woman was jaywalking, so...
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 19, 2018, 12:45:38 PM
If tech companies are going to be held liable, we will have to go with God. No way is the Goog/Uber/whoever paying out on a wrongful death suit; lawyering victims' families to death is much cheaper and better for PR.
people will learn quick not to run into the street without looking. (they shouldn't be already)
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 19, 2018, 12:56:54 PM
people will learn quick not to run into the street without looking. (they shouldn't be already)
Don't make assumptions, we have no idea what happened here.
There is something inherently scarier about a robot running you over than a human (I'm not talking about from the point of view of the person being run over, for which it doesn't matter).
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 19, 2018, 12:56:54 PM
people will learn quick not to run into the street without looking. (they shouldn't be already)
I wonder how well AI can discern people's potential actions. I can usually spot people who are likely to do something like jaywalk or change lanes without signalling. Can current AI tech do that, or will it need a few more years?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 19, 2018, 01:02:54 PM
Don't make assumptions, we have no idea what happened here.
The way the AI cars are programmed they would not just run someone over, they literally are programmed on the safe side so if a person is just standing in the street, the car stops (if it sees the person). It could be the car did not see them in time. it could be lots of things.
But the person behind the wheel didn't stop either, so either they weren't paying attention, or didn't see the person either.
So I assume the 'driver' did not see them, which leads me to believe the victim appeared too suddenly for computer or 'driver' reaction. :huh:
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 19, 2018, 01:19:59 PM
I wonder how well AI can discern people's potential actions. I can usually spot people who are likely to do something like jaywalk or change lanes without signalling. Can current AI tech do that, or will it need a few more years?
It can't. The next few years will be full of accidents as people re-adjust their driving to cars which follow the rules.
The pedestrian killed was walking a bike. That means the autopilot not only missed a human walking but also an upright bicycle.
Quote from: veeman on March 19, 2018, 04:49:21 PM
The pedestrian killed was walking a bike. That means the autopilot not only missed a human walking but also an upright bicycle.
Maybe it was the combination that threw the software?
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 19, 2018, 01:19:59 PM
I wonder how well AI can discern people's potential actions. I can usually spot people who are likely to do something like jaywalk or change lanes without signalling. Can current AI tech do that, or will it need a few more years?
Very limited; but the reaction time of the system is fast enough that we really hold no advantage there.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/19/tempe-police-chief-says-uber-preliminarily-would-likely-not-be-at-fault-for-fatal-crash/
Uber was driving 40mph. That's a little too high of a speed limit to be just crossing the street without looking.
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/self-driving-uber-car-kills-arizona-bicyclist-police-173903910--abc-news-topstories.html
Looks like a wide open area but the article before this ^^ said she came out of shadows.
Well car definitely should have stopped. human in 'driver seat' was looking down, and the picture from the car of the victim is pretty damning.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/police-release-video-fatal-crash-uber-self-driving-232906380.html
Video of the crash here. I don't see any indication that the system detected her and did any kind of automatic emergency braking. Theoretically, in the dark, it should be sensing/seeing her & her bicycle & reacting way before any human driver could.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/20/us/self-driving-uber-pedestrian-killed.html
Quote from: Morris Minor on March 22, 2018, 05:32:15 AM
Theoretically, in the dark, it should be sensing/seeing her & her bicycle & reacting way before any human driver could.
Yup, which means the auto-driving cars "should be" safer. The fact that it never applied brakes though seems funny. A human driver still would have hit her, but hopefully not going as fast. (not that it matters, a 10-20mph hit can kill someone who gets knocked over and hits their head hard).
Also (fm WSJ):
"The Uber operator's criminal background may also draw scrutiny. On Monday, Tempe Sgt. Ronald Elcock identified Uber's operator as Rafael Vasquez. It isn't clear how long Mr. Vasquez has been at Uber, and he couldn't be reached Wednesday for comment.
He was convicted and given a five-year sentence in Maricopa County for attempted armed robbery in 2000, according to Arizona Department of Corrections records, a sentence served concurrently with a one-year sentence for a 1999 false statement conviction.
He also has traffic violations, pleading guilty in 1998 to driving with a suspended, revoked or canceled license in Tucson Municipal Court, and in 2012 was cited for failing to produce proof of insurance and driving without a current registration."
I don't think any of that has anything to do with the accident, but still doesn't look good.
Going back 20 years to find a suspended license is a bit much.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 22, 2018, 07:27:45 AM
Going back 20 years to find a suspended license is a bit much.
Well - his history would not put his resume at the top of my pile when looking candidates for a high profile, high stakes exercise like this.
$10 that UBER hired these positions through a temp agency to avoid ancilliary labor costs.
Quote from: Rich on March 22, 2018, 09:30:15 PM
$10 that UBER hired these positions through a temp agency to avoid ancilliary labor costs.
+1000 Almost certainly a vendor; standard operating procedure.
You pay minimum wage for a position, you get crappy/distracted employees, story at 11.
The pedestrian walked onto a dimly lighted road straight in front of a car moving 40 mph. The car should have "seen" her and the driver should have been more attentive to the road ahead but... if there was no autopilot on, that's a very hard accident to avoid.
OK, finally watched the video. Yes, very avoidable. Black eye for Uber and Volvo, systems should have caught this.
Computer with radar/lidar/infrared should have caught the pedestrian, a human would not have. They might have braked some at the last second though, if they weren't relying 100% on the car to drive.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on March 23, 2018, 06:16:51 AM
OK, finally watched the video. Yes, very avoidable. Black eye for Uber and Volvo, systems should have caught this.
I'm guessing Waymo, Tesla et al are busy modeling & reproducing this to see how their systems react. But it does look like basic-level failure of an obvious hazard scenario. The guy was not thrown forward into his seatbelt by any kind of AEB process. Maybe the bicycle scattered the lidar return.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 23, 2018, 07:12:35 AM
Computer with radar/lidar/infrared should have caught the pedestrian, a human would not have. They might have braked some at the last second though, if they weren't relying 100% on the car to drive.
Idk, that video is suspiciously dark.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/
I would not put it past Uber to doctor the videos
Utilitarian cameras like dashcams, surveillance cameras, etc. tend to favor high gain at the expense of noise.
I wonder if they're using an inappropriate off the shelf camera, or one with funky autoexposure.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on March 23, 2018, 11:31:30 AM
Idk, that video is suspiciously dark.
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/
Wow. Night and day difference. Uber is going to be facing a serious uphill battle.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 23, 2018, 07:12:35 AM
Computer with radar/lidar/infrared should have caught the pedestrian, a human would not have. They might have braked some at the last second though, if they weren't relying 100% on the car to drive.
We don't know what systems were active on the car at the time. Part of the testing may be testing the system with one or more of the redundant systems offline.
Quote from: Soup DeVille on March 23, 2018, 01:19:53 PM
We don’t know what systems were active on the car at the time. Part of the testing may be testing the system with one or more of the redundant systems offline.
Yeah, and based on the other videos of the crash area the human 'driver' should have seen the pedestrian.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 23, 2018, 01:39:21 PM
Yeah, and based on the other videos of the crash area the human 'driver' should have seen the pedestrian.
He should have, but we know how bad people drive.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 23, 2018, 01:39:21 PM
Yeah, and based on the other videos of the crash area the human 'driver' should have seen the pedestrian.
Video of the driver shows he was clearly distracted by his goddamn phone.
Quote from: giant_mtb on March 23, 2018, 01:55:42 PM
Video of the driver shows he was clearly distracted by his goddamn phone.
I'm shocked that he was even allowed to have it.
Protocol says that the driver is basically supposed to hover over the controls in case of an emergency. Fuck that, I'd rather just drive than have to be on the brink all the time.
So... it's been revealed that Uber disabled all of the Volvo's safety features to test their own halfassed technology.
Quote from: Rockraven on March 27, 2018, 03:43:49 PM
So... it's been revealed that Uber disabled all of the Volvo's safety features to test their own halfassed technology.
And put a halfass driver in the wrong seat..
Quote from: Rockraven on March 27, 2018, 03:43:49 PM
So... it's been revealed that Uber disabled all of the Volvo's safety features to test their own halfassed technology.
That explains the vehicle being blind to the hazard.
Also, wouldn't it be better to bake the tech into the vehicle & testing that, rather than buying cars off the shelf & strapping on the autonomous stuff?
Quote from: Morris Minor on March 29, 2018, 03:33:57 PM
That explains the vehicle being blind to the hazard.
Also, wouldn't it be better to bake the tech into the vehicle & testing that, rather than buying cars off the shelf & strapping on the autonomous stuff?
Volvo's tech is probably all black boxed and useless to do any developing on for anyone that's not Volvo.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-selfdriving-sensors-insight/ubers-use-of-fewer-safety-sensors-prompts-questions-after-arizona-crash-idUSKBN1H337Q
Quote from: Morris Minor on March 30, 2018, 11:46:46 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uber-selfdriving-sensors-insight/ubers-use-of-fewer-safety-sensors-prompts-questions-after-arizona-crash-idUSKBN1H337Q
I would expect the industry to converge on using fewer sensors, but definitely not so abruptly and at such an early phase; that's reckless!
Autonomous snow plows
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/autonomous-snowplow-norway/
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 03, 2018, 09:44:21 AM
Autonomous snow plows
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/autonomous-snowplow-norway/
That is a great use of autonomous technology. The same thing is being done with tractors for farming.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 03, 2018, 09:44:21 AM
Autonomous snow plows
https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/autonomous-snowplow-norway/
This I can get on board with.
Tesla upset with NTSB over fatal crash. Claims it was driver error, not the car's fault.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/04/12/tesla-ntsb-model-x-crash-ends-formal-agreement/
Tsk-tsk. Not surprised. Tesla wants to "get ahead of the story", to present the situation as they see it or in the most flattering way possible. That's a big no-no when it comes to dealing with bodies like the NTSB: they don't present anything until they've analyzed all facets of the situation. I said this almost two years ago:
Quote from: 93JC on June 10, 2016, 12:41:44 PM
It'll be interesting to see what happens as Tesla grows, if Tesla keeps growing. These sorts of issues (https://electrek.co/2016/06/06/tesla-model-x-crash-not-at-fault/) are going to become more commonplace, and if the Model 3 ever becomes a success they're really going to have to change their tune lest their customer service be branded 'hostile'.
Even if they're correct it won't look good on them.
MIT is working on a car that can handle tame country roads without super detailed GPS maps.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/07/mit-maplite-self-driving-car/
Quote from: 93JC on April 12, 2018, 05:09:07 PM
Tsk-tsk. Not surprised. Tesla wants to "get ahead of the story", to present the situation as they see it or in the most flattering way possible. That's a big no-no when it comes to dealing with bodies like the NTSB: they don't present anything until they've analyzed all facets of the situation. I said this almost two years ago:
Even if they're correct it won't look good on them.
The NTSB is one government agency I respect. Their methodology is pretty good and they usually get to the bottom of things. Their people tend to come from the relevant industries, e.g. an air crash investigator would know one end of a plane from another. They seem pretty fair to me.
I'm guessing automotive autonomy is a very tough field, because there are few people around that understand the underlying fundamentals of how it all works. It will take time to build up the expertise.
A little more info on that Uber death:
https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/07/uber-vehicle-reportedly-saw-but-ignored-woman-it-struck/
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on May 07, 2018, 07:42:39 AM
MIT is working on a car that can handle tame country roads without super detailed GPS maps.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/07/mit-maplite-self-driving-car/
"While 3D maps may still be useful for dealing with the complexity of cities, this could be vital for rural trips, snowy landscapes and other situations where the car needs to improvise."
Or people could just stay home in their precious cities.
People outside of cities might like autonomous cars too. Lots of elderly folks out in the sticks by my job.
I think a combination of this kind of technology, GPS and good mapping, communication between cars (ie if one car sees an issue and stops it signals the ones behind it and they all can slow/stop safely much faster than human driver)
will all eventually be combined to make autonomous cars much much safer than current driving.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/08/waymo-snow-navigation/
Interesting.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 08, 2018, 06:26:55 AM
People outside of cities might like autonomous cars too. Lots of elderly folks out in the sticks by my job.
I imagine you and I have different ideas about what "in the sticks" means... :lol:
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 08, 2018, 06:26:55 AM
People outside of cities might like autonomous cars too. Lots of elderly folks out in the sticks by my job.
I'm not sure old southern people could even know how to tell the car to drive them to cracker barrel
Quote from: Onslaught on May 09, 2018, 03:40:31 AM
I'm not sure old southern people could even know how to tell the car to drive them to cracker barrel
That's just automatic. You only have to tell it something if you want to go somewhere else
Quote from: giant_mtb on May 08, 2018, 09:40:24 PM
I imagine you and I have different ideas about what "in the sticks" means... :lol:
Farm land? :huh:
https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/3/17530232/self-driving-ai-winter-full-autonomy-waymo-tesla-uber
Quote from: CaminoRacer on July 05, 2018, 11:33:30 AM
https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/3/17530232/self-driving-ai-winter-full-autonomy-waymo-tesla-uber
"Rather than building AI to solve the pogo stick problem, we should partner with the government to ask people to be lawful and considerate," he said. "Safety isn't just about the quality of the AI technology."Lol
https://www.sae.org/news/2018/06/volvo-fedex-truck-platooning
This could solve the stupid times when a truck passes another truck that's going 0.5 mph slower than it and takes 6 hours to get out of the left lane.
Won't solve that problem unless every truck on the road is using that system, and even then it won't.
"This is SAE Level 1 or 2 driving. We're not doing anything close to autonomous driving,"
Full-on autonomous vehicles is like asking for autonomous sidewalks. It's not gonna happen.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 09, 2018, 08:52:14 AM
Farm land? :huh:
By definition has few "sticks" and quite a lot of people around to farm it.
There are plenty of trees around the farms down here. I drive by them every day
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on May 08, 2018, 09:02:24 AM
I think a combination of this kind of technology, GPS and good mapping, communication between cars (ie if one car sees an issue and stops it signals the ones behind it and they all can slow/stop safely much faster than human driver)
will all eventually be combined to make autonomous cars much much safer than current driving.
Any good safe operation has multiple levels of redundancy; this would have to be especially true for automobiles, which are in general poorly maintained and still expected to work.
Vehicle-to-vehicle comms and transponders would be only one level of that- ideally.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on July 11, 2018, 07:10:36 AM
There are plenty of trees around the farms down here. I drive by them every day
Yeah, but there are fewer than if the farms weren't there.
His definition and your recovering NYC perspective are just a bit different, that's all. North Carolina now is pretty much one big suburb within thirty miles of any of its big cities.
Basically, if you have neighbors, you're not "in the sticks." :lol:
Zoox. Cool stuff.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-07-17/robot-taxi-startup-zoox-has-800-million-and-a-wild-pitch
https://www.engadget.com/2018/07/15/roborace-completes-goodwood-hill-climb/
A car completes a fast hill climb (hard because the radar can't see over the hill crest).
The rapid corrections weird me out.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on July 23, 2018, 06:54:27 PM
https://www.engadget.com/2018/07/15/roborace-completes-goodwood-hill-climb/
A car completes a fast hill climb (hard because the radar can't see over the hill crest).
The rapid corrections weird me out.
Wow. Probably a simpler proposition than the chaos of public roads, but still impressive.
BTW The Zoox place I linked above flew my son in for an interview today. Fingers crossed.
Update: he got the job. First day was yesterday.
Quote from: Morris Minor on August 14, 2018, 04:28:14 PM
Update: he got the job. First day was yesterday.
Nice! That would be fun. I might be looking for work in a couple years...... :)
LOL.
Apple has been really secretive about their self-driving car program. Their car was merging onto an expressway at 1mph and got rear-ended by a Nissan Leaf.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/31/apple-is-late-to-a-self-driving-milestone-its-first-test-car-accident/?yptr=yahoo
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on September 02, 2018, 06:38:20 PM
LOL.
Apple has been really secretive about their self-driving car program. Their car was merging onto an expressway at 1mph and got rear-ended by a Nissan Leaf.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/31/apple-is-late-to-a-self-driving-milestone-its-first-test-car-accident/?yptr=yahoo
First rule for autonomous vehicle engineers: American drivers would rather be beaten then shot than allow anyone to merge onto a freeway.
https://youtu.be/OjDLwnTyybo?t=6m12s
Yup. That's pretty good though!
Of course it doesn't exist at all according to some.... :)
Get these things off the fucking road.
Wifey's grandparents are all basically incapable of driving anymore. The testing is ugly but this tech can't come soon enough.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on September 04, 2018, 07:41:06 AM
Wifey's grandparents are all basically incapable of driving anymore. The testing is ugly but this tech can't come soon enough.
Agreed.
My 89-yr-old mother-in-law has just bought a new Buick Cascada. Pray for any nearby pedestrians or road users when she gets behind the wheel. :facepalm:
Maybe we could have a human emulation mode for autonomous cars, to remind people of the good old days when people freaked out about a couple of kids dying from eating laundry detergent pods, but quietly tolerated the wasted time, pollution, & 37,000 deaths/yr as the price of humans driving.
Whut? Self-driving motorcycle. Research only, won't be for sale.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/bmw-shows-off-self-driving-171342750.html
I'm skeptical of autonomous driving because Lyft and Uber's driver apps are awful at wayfinding
Quote from: 2o6 on September 17, 2018, 03:36:39 PM
I'm skeptical of autonomous driving because Lyft and Uber's driver apps are awful at wayfinding
Do drivers get penalized if they deviate from Uber/Lyft wayfinding because the plotted routes are garbage?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhCkz8DsDMw&t=109s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhCkz8DsDMw&t=109s)
Quote from: Morris Minor on September 17, 2018, 04:15:39 PM
Do drivers get penalized if they deviate from Uber/Lyft wayfinding because the plotted routes are garbage?
Not really, but it'll likely screw up the pricing for the customer. Lyft has been doing this weird "flat fee" for certain rides.
Quote from: MexicoCityM3 on September 17, 2018, 04:15:46 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhCkz8DsDMw&t=109s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhCkz8DsDMw&t=109s)
Her nose is too big.
Not surprising that someone (disgruntled) at Uber reveals they warned execs about their safety mentality.
https://www.engadget.com/2018/12/11/uber-ignored-safety-warnings-before-self-driving-fatal/
Another hazard for autonomous vehicle software engineers to work on: crazies who roam the streets of our cities:
--------------
A slashed tire, a pointed gun, Bullies on the road: Why do Waymo self-driving vans get so much hate?
Police have responded to dozens of calls regarding people threatening and harassing Waymo vans.
A Waymo self-driving van cruised through a Chandler neighborhood Aug. 1 when test driver Michael Palos saw something startling as he sat behind the wheel — a bearded man in shorts aiming a handgun at him as he passed the man's driveway.
The incident is one of at least 21 interactions documented by Chandler police during the past two years where people have harassed the autonomous vehicles and their human test drivers.
People have thrown rocks at Waymos. The tire on one was slashed while it was stopped in traffic. The vehicles have been yelled at, chased and one Jeep was responsible for forcing the vans off roads six times.
More: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2018/12/11/waymo-self-driving-vehicles-face-harassment-road-rage-phoenix-area/2198220002/
People are psychos.
No, people are IDIOTS.
Just randomly pointing a gun at a car? JFC
Quote from: Laconian on December 18, 2018, 07:57:30 AM
Just randomly pointing a gun at a car? JFC
Its happened to me more than once when driving service trucks.
https://jalopnik.com/automation-transformed-how-pilots-fly-planes-now-the-s-1834176244
This could also go in the Airliners thread...
Quote from: CaminoRacer on April 26, 2019, 09:40:12 PM
https://jalopnik.com/automation-transformed-how-pilots-fly-planes-now-the-s-1834176244
This could also go in the Airliners thread...
Truthfully, the biggest problem on US roads is a lack of law enforcement. Speed limits rarely matter, left lane camping never matters, ambling lane to lane while checking your social media feeds never matter. I'd gladly stop speeding if cops were equally harsh on speeders, phone users, left lane campers etc. People would learn better driving habits through punishment. It's the fucking wild wild west out there.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 02, 2019, 05:54:44 AM
Truthfully, the biggest problem on US roads is a lack of law enforcement. Speed limits rarely matter, left lane camping never matters, ambling lane to lane while checking your social media feeds never matter. I'd gladly stop speeding if cops were equally harsh on speeders, phone users, left lane campers etc. People would learn better driving habits through punishment. It's the fucking wild wild west out there.
+1
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 02, 2019, 05:54:44 AM
Truthfully, the biggest problem on US roads is a lack of law enforcement. Speed limits rarely matter, left lane camping never matters, ambling lane to lane while checking your social media feeds never matter. I'd gladly stop speeding if cops were equally harsh on speeders, phone users, left lane campers etc. People would learn better driving habits through punishment. It's the fucking wild wild west out there.
Dear lord, you know we've reached a low point in the driving world when enthusiasts are calling for
more enforcement. :lol:
Not that I really disagree with you.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 02, 2019, 05:54:44 AM
Truthfully, the biggest problem on US roads is a lack of law enforcement. Speed limits rarely matter, left lane camping never matters, ambling lane to lane while checking your social media feeds never matter. I'd gladly stop speeding if cops were equally harsh on speeders, phone users, left lane campers etc. People would learn better driving habits through punishment. It's the fucking wild wild west out there.
Why does 12,000 RPM hate our freedoms?
Quote from: SJ_GTI on May 02, 2019, 08:40:43 AM
Why does 12,000 RPM hate our freedoms?
When you live in NYC they implant a Chuck Schumer mind control chip in your brain. 4G connected with OTA updates.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on May 02, 2019, 08:44:45 AM
When you live in NYC they implant a Chuck Schumer mind control chip in your brain. 4G connected with OTA updates.
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/8b/8b53ec5e8832bfd109321841bd997b95523f0fbbbdba85890ae6232a80a8d403.jpg)
Quote from: BimmerM3 on May 02, 2019, 08:24:47 AM
Dear lord, you know we've reached a low point in the driving world when enthusiasts are calling for more enforcement. :lol:
Not that I really disagree with you.
My theory is, if all the other laws were actually followed, speed limits wouldn't be needed. But people are stupid as fuck, and always will be.
"The wild west" is a great way to put it.
Dude on my commute today, the pickup truck in front of me stopped at a green light. It turned yellow as we braked. We were 100% stopped while it was still yellow. I really hope he saw my extremely confused facial expressions and hand gestures.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on May 02, 2019, 10:18:43 AM
Dude on my commute today, the pickup truck in front of me stopped at a green light. It turned yellow as we braked. We were 100% stopped while it was still yellow. I really hope he saw my extremely confused facial expressions and hand gestures.
Some crazy time shift scenario? He must've been in a time zone a couple of seconds ahead of you. :huh:
Quote from: CaminoRacer on May 02, 2019, 10:18:43 AM
Dude on my commute today, the pickup truck in front of me stopped at a green light. It turned yellow as we braked. We were 100% stopped while it was still yellow. I really hope he saw my extremely confused facial expressions and hand gestures.
FOG?
On my commute, an elderly driver came to a complete stop at an intersection where she had right of way. I had to panic stop because I was expecting her to maintain speed and proceed straight.
Oh god, I hate when I see people stop at intersections with no stop sign, or a "confusing" sign like "STOP Except Right Turn" or something.
Quote from: giant_mtb on May 02, 2019, 12:31:24 PM
Oh god, I hate when I see people stop at intersections with no stop sign, or a "confusing" sign like "STOP Except Right Turn" or something.
It's such a basic failure that I can't help but wonder what other crap they're doing on the roads.
Quote from: Laconian on May 02, 2019, 01:15:45 PM
It's such a basic failure that I can't help but wonder what other crap they're doing on the roads.
Pooping in their diapers? :huh:
Quote from: Laconian on May 02, 2019, 12:29:03 PM
FOG?
Not sure. The truck took off a decently quick pace when the light turned green again. It was odd.
I don't know why but up in NY I would arrive to a 4way stop where someone had already been sitting for 3+ seconds and they would wave me through.
So bizarre I didn't even care to try to figure out what was going on, I would just gun it to get away from them.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on May 02, 2019, 06:35:11 PM
I don't know why but up in NY I would arrive to a 4way stop where someone had already been sitting for 3+ seconds and they would wave me through.
So bizarre I didn't even care to try to figure out what was going on, I would just gun it to get away from them.
People around here do that, and then pull in behind me and start tailgating. I don't get it. Please just leave me alone.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on May 02, 2019, 06:35:11 PM
I don't know why but up in NY I would arrive to a 4way stop where someone had already been sitting for 3+ seconds and they would wave me through.
So bizarre I didn't even care to try to figure out what was going on, I would just gun it to get away from them.
Yes, this is my attitude. I used to get angry at left lane campers and other idiots... there's just not enough time; I just get away from the idiots as quickly and safely as possible.