- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Driverless cars could cripple police departments.....those unions will fight
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:07 pm to LordSaintly
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:07 pm to LordSaintly
Building the optimization logic is not the issue. You and I may not have the skills to do that but there are brilliant minds that do this on a daily basis in every industry.
0
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:28 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
That can be cast as an optimization problem. Computers solve these kinds of problems every day in fractions of seconds.
Not to mention, with the appropriate sensor packages, a computer will be simultaneously aware of its entire envelope of existence. If someone cuts out in front of the car, the computer will already know that it needs to decelerate and change lanes as there is an opening 6 feet to the rear drivers side. It won't have to "check the mirrors". Not to mention the computer will know precisely how much force to apply to the brakes, and based upon the speed its traveling, relatively know how long it will take to stop the car.
You're only dealing with 2 dimensions of interaction, unlike automated flight systems that deal with 3 dimensions.
I mean, some luxury cars already have driver assist sensors which will brake/turn the wheel if it detects a hazard. This concept is not that far fetched. Honestly, I think the navigation issue is the limiting factor of having this integrated into our daily lives already.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:31 pm to elprez00
quote:
Honestly, I think the navigation issue is the limiting factor of having this integrated into our daily lives already.
quantum positioning....1000x more accurate than GPS
Get ready folks
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:36 pm to CptBengal
quote:
1000x more accurate than GPS
Not what I meant. Up until very recently, I don't think precise overlays of roads/streets via GPS existed. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if Google's motivation behind Street View was with this in mind all along.
But Quantum Computing is fascinating.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:38 pm to elprez00
quote:
, I don't think precise overlays of roads/streets via GPS existed. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if Google's motivation behind Street View was with this in mind all along.
the whole idea of the sensors, google is currently using it, is that they dont use the streets as a anything more than a backup. The sensors actually read where the car is driving.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:42 pm to CptBengal
I wonder if this will have a social filter. Like if you get in the car, and tell it "Take me to Walmart", will it ask you if you'd like to "Avoid the ghetto?"
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:42 pm to elprez00
quote:
Like if you get in the car, and tell it "Take me to Walmart", will it ask you if you'd like to "Avoid the ghetto?"
walmart = ghetto.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:45 pm to CptBengal
Or have an app you can install which uploads Census data and avoids areas where the median household income is less than $80K/year.
It'd be like an OT setting.
It'd be like an OT setting.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:46 pm to elprez00
I've always wanted that feature with Google maps, but that is a huge political mess to open up. Imagine how pissed off the people in that area would be if they were referred to as that. I think you could easily say "avoid areas with higher than average robberies, murders, and muggings" as a proxy for ghetto... And it would avoid exactly what you are talking about.
This post was edited on 5/21/14 at 2:46 pm
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:46 pm to elprez00
The question wasn't about avoiding wrecks, it was about choosing what to do to choose 2 lives over 1 in an unavoidable hypothetical wreck. I think it's an unlikely circumstance to plan around TBH.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:47 pm to elprez00
"car...ballermode please"
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:47 pm to elprez00
You would crash the system... It would be an island and you wouldn't be able to cross from one section of town to another
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:48 pm to lynxcat
quote:
I've always wanted that feature with Google maps
there was an app that had that feature. May have been waze.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:51 pm to C
quote:
The question wasn't about avoiding wrecks, it was about choosing what to do to choose 2 lives over 1 in an unavoidable hypothetical wreck. I think it's an unlikely circumstance to plan around TBH.
That's my point. A machine fully aware of its surroundings should logically be thousands of times more capable of avoiding a wreck than a human being only able to be aware in its frame of reference.
If this becomes a reality, I have no doubt that Google will do "crash test" research, placing human drivers and its cars in the same situations, to show that the car is capable of responding much more effectively to random events than a driver.
Even in a catastrophic event that is unavoidable, the car should still be able to reduce the effects of the accident, be it breaking faster/more efficiently, controlling the vehicle, preemptively deploying airbags or other accident countermeasures, etc.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:54 pm to elprez00
quote:
I'll tell you this: as someone that commutes a lot, I'd pay whatever I could to have this tech. Get the read the news and eat breakfast on my way to work in the morning? Finish up last minute things while on my way home, or just relax and watch a movie? Sign me up.
Doesn't this technology already exist in the form of commuter trains? I believe the people who refuse to utilize trains, where they are available, will be the same people that refuse to utilize this technology.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:54 pm to lynxcat
quote:
You would crash the system... It would be an island and you wouldn't be able to cross from one section of town to another
Copr will still have one source of revenue. Tint tickets will go through the roof once people realize they can now safely get the MBJ in traffic on the way home from work. Imagine sitting in traffic, looking over, and seeing your neighbor with a head of hair in his lap bobbing up and down. Looks over at you, and gives you the old nod and salute.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:55 pm to elprez00
quote:
Even in a catastrophic event that is unavoidable, the car should still be able to reduce the effects of the accident, be it breaking faster/more efficiently, controlling the vehicle, preemptively deploying airbags or other accident countermeasures, etc.
I took it as being two cars are heading off a cliff. The computer chooses one car to ram the other car keeping it from falling.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:56 pm to DanTiger
quote:
Doesn't this technology already exist in the form of commuter trains?
No train from Hammond to BR.
quote:
I believe the people who refuse to utilize trains, where they are available, will be the same people that refuse to utilize this technology.
What if you are in sales? Or like me in PM, where I visit multiple jobsites, sometimes daily?
Unless youre in a city like NYC, its not really feasible to be without a car.
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:58 pm to DanTiger
quote:
Doesn't this technology already exist in the form of commuter trains? I believe the people who refuse to utilize trains, where they are available, will be the same people that refuse to utilize this technology.
here is the cop....afraid of losing revenue generation!
YAY!
Posted on 5/21/14 at 2:59 pm to oldcharlie8
quote:
if these cars malfunction and kill one person, the lawsuit will be astronomical.
Yeah because wrongful death suits have never happened before.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News