Jump to content

Self Driving Cars


Happy Face
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions.

 

A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions.

 

A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception.

 

I get what you're saying but I dunno. Motion detectors, sensors for detecting changes in light... if they can pick up the movement they'd have a better reaction time than we would.

 

I recall being surprised that cars can park themselves now. They'll find a way to do it, and far more safely (overall) than people being responsible I reckon.

Edited by Rayvin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trouble they are having with discussions with regulator is in being able to pre-specify the moral actions of the vehicle when in danger. So, if the car has to take evasive action to avoid running over a group of 5 people but to do so the only action it can take is to swerve and run over a child, how should the programmers incorporate the pre-determined choice into the software algorithm? 

 

That's a really interesting question - but would any of us be capable of assessing that moral quandry in the few split seconds we'd have to make a decision. Surely your brain would just pick a direction and go for it. The car would have to be programmed on something along the lines of assessing which object it was farthest from and aiming for that one, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kids will probably be mown down by the cars self-defense rail gun while you watch endless advertising from google on the front windscreen.

 

Computer terminals report some gains in the values of copper and tin while American businessmen snap up van Goghs for the price of a hospital wing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a really interesting question - but would any of us be capable of assessing that moral quandry in the few split seconds we'd have to make a decision. Surely your brain would just pick a direction and go for it. The car would have to be programmed on something along the lines of assessing which object it was farthest from and aiming for that one, I think.

 

Its not just about the difference in how we might react, its that the programmers need to insert a morality into the programme. 

 

That gets tricky once you specify a rule, like 'do the least harm' as then algorithm will be able to calculate numbers of people. However, that might not be in line with people's moral 'preferences' if a newborn baby was involved. There is no limit to how complicate the algorithm is an of course the calculation and reaction time would be quicker than any human brain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not just about the difference in how we might react, its that the programmers need to insert a morality into the programme. 

 

That gets tricky once you specify a rule, like 'do the least harm' as then algorithm will be able to calculate numbers of people. However, that might not be in line with people's moral 'preferences' if a newborn baby was involved. There is no limit to how complicate the algorithm is an of course the calculation and reaction time would be quicker than any human brain. 

They won't bother with any of that. After the first 100 deaths it won't even be a news item.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable.

The decision will be made on what damages the car the least. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The decision will be made on what damages the car the least. :lol:

 

Surely the damage to the car would be a secondary concern for the manufacturer, given that damage = more spending on parts and replacement vehicles? ;)

Edited by Rayvin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable.

:lol:

 

How many terminally ill people heading to Zurich is Prince George worth I wonder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

Always good to be in complete opposition to CT.

 

Think you underestimate their takeover CT. They're driving around California now.

Hold on, they haven't even started testing them without humans yet (iirc) and they are only be used in certain test areas. A long long road from there to them being in everyday normal use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum.  Speed up into them.

 

I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car.

 

Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hold on, they haven't even started testing them without humans yet (iirc) and they are only be used in certain test areas. A long long road from there to them being in everyday normal use.

 

That's a barrier of law rather than technology though.  Just needs the slow moving bureaucracy to get out of their way so they can scale up the operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum.  Speed up into them.

 

I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car.

 

Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death.

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions.

 

A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception.

Now then, now then, that's not why you slow down, Jimmy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum.  Speed up into them.

 

I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car.

 

Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death.

:lol:

 

I'm hacking mine to prioritise Trump supporters tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait for them, driving is a right fucking chore and the amount of completely fucking useless drivers on the road make it a nightmare at times.

 

It'll be class being able to know you can get to places in a certain length of time rather than now where you set off early and get stuck behind some shambles driving 15mph or get stuck in traffic because someone crashed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.