25 mph is absolutely practical for in city driving and as a taxi service, especially as a prototype

Also, the Lexus and Toyota's that are 700,000+ miles accident free go well over that speed

quote:
How many airline disasters have been linked to malfunctioning software or "sensors?"

I bet that failure rate of the software is lower than humans. The big issue has actually been how reliable the software has been. Pilots aren't as skilled outside of the autopilot

quote:
Will Google collect real-time data on individual workers and/or police directing traffic? Will the radar's back-end (software) be "smart" enough to accurately read hand signals 100% of the time?

yes. Hell, they already do this.

Also, I'm not sure why you think it operate 100% perfectly.

quote:
BIs it not impressive that they already drive better than 99% of the people on the road?

But that's not anywhere near the case.

quote:
These things only perform "well" within sterile/controlled parameters and testing environments... and as long as those myriad "sensors" remain functioning and unobstructed (which is why I brought up the winter storm scenario).

or the actual road where they've been driving. They're apparently incredibly accurate at it. Once again, you keep forgetting that this isn't supposed to be a finished project yet

quote:
Often, the worst part of driving is other drivers and pedestrians, but Google says, "What looks chaotic and random on a city street to the human eye is actually fairly predictable to a computer." The cars now model things like the likeliness of a car running a red light, and they can detect cyclists, read their hand signals, and predict their movement. Google's cars have also learned to not run down pedestrians and cyclists at crosswalks, and they can even track objects behind them.

quote:
And you and I differ greatly in how much credit we give computers (or automation in general).

quote:
Google notes that over 30,000 people die in traffic accidents in the US every year. A self-driving car will never get tired, distracted, or drunk, and it can see farther than its human counterparts, see at night, and see in 360 degrees. This is one of the rare projects that could change the world, and Google says it's "optimistic" that a self-driving car is an achievable goal.

but keep comparing it to windows. You're assuming that google doesn't have the a redundancy of controls. They have radar sensors, roof sensors, camera sensors, etc. For some reason, you believe that they have to have a 0% failure rate. Their record will be less than perfect, but it will be perfectly acceptable.

This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 6:26 pm

1 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Posted by em745

Member since Nov 2013

138 posts

Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:43 pm to TigerBait1127

quote:
25 mph is absolutely practical for in city driving and as a taxi service

quote:
Also, the Lexus and Toyota's that are 700,000+ miles accident free go well over that speed

Again, all under very controlled circumstances.

quote:
yes. Hell, they already do this.

Really now? They can accurately interpret a policeman's hand signals and other gesticulations (which can get quick and ambiguous depending on the situation)? Are they able to "see" who the signals are meant for?

Will these sensors be able to see/interpret a traffic wand at night, amongst a background of headlights, flashing emergency lights, and street lights? What if it's a regular joe (w/o a wand) doing the traffic control until the cops arrive?

We're not talking about the simple act of a cyclist signaling a left or right turn here.

quote:
quote:
How many airline disasters have been linked to malfunctioning software or "sensors?"

I bet that failure rate of the software is lower than humans.

Let's combine software failure with sensor, electronic and mechanical failures and see how they compare then.

quote:
The big issue has actually been how reliable the software has been.

The flip-side argument to all this is that I can come up with a ~dozen cases where an airline disaster was averted because of the improvised actions of a brilliant flight crew.

quote:
Pilots aren't as skilled outside of the autopilot.

I have a really hard time accepting the notion of an autopilot being able to successfully pull off a "Sullenberger" all by itself.

quote:
A self-driving car will never get tired, distracted

They're also incapable of adapting to unforeseen (i.e. not programmed) situations, and on-the-fly problem solving.

quote:
or drunk

Much tougher DUI laws would go a longer way in eliminating DUI related fatalities.

quote:
and it can see farther than its human counterparts, see at night, and see in 360 degrees.

I see they left bad weather out of the equation... again.

quote:
but keep comparing it to windows.

Are Micro$oft products the only ones that are buggy?

quote:
They have radar sensors, roof sensors, camera sensors, etc.

All of which are susceptible to software glitches, hardware malfunctions, blockages from snow, ice, mud... not to mention regular ol' road damage from flying rocks.

1 Jump to Post ...

Report Post Jump to Post

Tech Board - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board