- 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: Google Unveils Self-Driving Cars
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:11 am to liquid rabbit
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:11 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
25 mph? Doesn't improve my time.
25mph is not some ultimate driverless car speed limit... the test cars have been driving faster than that. And it does still improve your time efficiency since you won't actually be driving... you are free to use that time to do other productive things.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:13 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
What if you have an emergency, have to speed to get to the hospital for your wife about to give birth? Can you override the computer?
Do you think you are the first person to ask these questions? Do you think emergency situations have never crossed the mind of anyone working on this?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:14 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
What if you have an emergency, have to speed to get to the hospital for your wife about to give birth? Can you override the computer?
The driverless cars will presumably let you turn off the feature any time you want.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:15 am to Korkstand
quote:
Do you think you are the first person to ask these questions? Do you think emergency situations have never crossed the mind of anyone working on this?
These are questions the consumer needs the answers for. Of course, the government is going to regulate everything and limit your options.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:16 am to 4WHLN
quote:
Yes this aspect of the self driving car is great and all but now it will be easier than ever for the government to track/trace your every move.
#1 Do you think anyone cares about your every move?
#2 Do you think they aren't already tracking your every move via cell phone, OnStar, or whatever?
#3 Stop being so paranoid
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:17 am to TigerBait1127
quote:
Most people drive with their cell phones anyways
This IS there choice to do so
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:19 am to liquid rabbit
quote:
These are questions the consumer needs the answers for.
You are asking questions about the speed limit of very early prototypes. You will have answers sometime in the next 15-20 years before these cars become common. Your pregnant wife will be fine.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:19 am to 4WHLN
quote:
This IS there choice to do so
It's also your choice to ride a bike.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:24 am to Korkstand
quote:
#1 Do you think anyone cares about your every move?
#2 Do you think they aren't already tracking your every move via cell phone, OnStar, or whatever?
#3 Stop being so paranoid
#1 Someone does, I dont. I could care less what you do or where you go.
#2 Thats your choice to buy a product that enables a third party to track your location.
#3 Im not paranoid. Just dont like our government in my shite 24/7 without say so
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:28 am to 4WHLN
quote:
4WHLN
You said that self-driving cars are a "horrible idea", as if you think they are a big plan to track everyone. Why not go the cheaper route of just Lojacking everyone, assuming all of our cars aren't Lojacked already?
quote:So just dumb, then?
Im not paranoid.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:31 am to 4WHLN
quote:
#3 Im not paranoid. Just dont like our government in my shite 24/7 without say so
Do you expect the government to mandate that all cars be driverless?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:32 am to Korkstand
quote:
You said that self-driving cars are a "horrible idea", as if you think they are a big plan to track everyone. Why not go the cheaper route of just Lojacking everyone, assuming all of our cars aren't Lojacked already?
I bet this guy owns or will own at some point in the future, a car equipped with GPS navigation.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:43 am to 4WHLN
quote:
Im not paranoid. Just dont like our government in my shite 24/7 without say so
You should have logged off a decade ago.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:27 pm to TigerBait1127
quote:
use radar and data collection to react to it.
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?
What if it encounters a ball popping out between two parked cars... Will it be able to deduce that there might be a child nearby running after it?... Or will it just "stop and wait" every friggin time it encounters something that doesn't figure into its logic routines?
quote:
The car would probably make the correct decision to not drive at all
Yeah, that's a realistic approach.
quote:
but I think they can probably make that trip already. Just very slowly.
And what is "very slowly" relative to 25 mph? Walking speed?
quote:
Is it not impressive that they already drive better than 99% of the people on the road?
But that's not anywhere near the case.
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).
quote:
In what world is reducing or eliminating traffic accidents and fatalities, while also improving both time and fuel efficiency a "horrible" idea?
Another thing, people seem to forget that ALL automated systems are ultimately programmed by humans. Aside from sensor failures/damage (or obstructions due to snow, rain, mud...), there are bound to be software bugs and crashes. I mean, how many Windoze crashes have there been over the years? I've yet to encounter a piece of software, no matter how well written and stable, that doesn't have some kind of bug that makes it do something it shouldn't do, or do it in an incorrect manner. All that is inconsequential on a PC (from a safety's standpoint), but in a driverless car?? I'm not sure I'd want to imagine a scenario where one of these cars bugs out while driving though a school zone.
Like another said, I'm not a luddite. I'm not anti-progress and I'm all for driver aids that help in emergency situations. It's driver replacements that I have a huge problem with. No matter how "smart" computers get, they can never be programmed for adaptive reasoning and creative problem solving, things that an averagely smart human can manage without much fuss.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:44 pm to em745
quote:
Another thing, people seem to forget that ALL automated systems are ultimately programmed by humans. Aside from sensor failures/damage (or obstructions due to snow, rain, mud...), there are bound to be software bugs and crashes. I mean, how many Windoze crashes have there been over the years? I've yet to encounter a piece of software, no matter how well written and stable, that doesn't have some kind of bug that makes it do something it shouldn't do, or do it in an incorrect manner. All that is inconsequential on a PC (from a safety's standpoint), but in a driverless car?? I'm not sure I'd want to imagine a scenario where one of these cars bugs out while driving though a school zone.
you know planes are controlled mostly by computer?
I welcome the future on this, I think this will be totally awesome. and it will really enable car sharing across the community. My car sits unused 99% of the time. If I could just have access to the car when i need it, it would be awesome.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:49 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
car sharing
Yep, as long as the cars are self-cleaning, shouldn't be a problem.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:04 pm to em745
quote:They already read hand signals from people riding bicycles on the sidewalk and react appropriately, so if they don't already know how to obey other hand signals, it's definitely in the works.
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?
quote:This is one of the very first "selling points" I remember when these cars were first talked about. If something pops out from between parked cars, it knows something is there. Otherwise, it always drives at a safe speed and distance on the assumption that something/someone could be there.
What if it encounters a ball popping out between two parked cars... Will it be able to deduce that there might be a child nearby running after it?
quote:Well it's definitely not going to drive over the ball. If the roadway is clear, it can resume driving safely on the assumption that a child is nearby.
Or will it just "stop and wait" every friggin time it encounters something that doesn't figure into its logic routines?
quote:I only said that the cars could probably make that trip because I'm pretty sure it's possible. But there is no way they are ready to turn these things loose in bad weather yet.
And what is "very slowly" relative to 25 mph? Walking speed?
quote:A million incident-free miles makes a pretty strong case that they are better than most drivers.
But that's not anywhere near the case.
quote:You mean, like, on the road with thousands of other cars? That "controlled" environment?
These things only perform "well" within sterile/controlled parameters and testing environments...
quote:These cars have sensors for almost everything imaginable, and sensors checking the sensors. If the car isn't 100% sure that it is making the right decision, it won't do it.
and as long as those myriad "sensors" remain functioning and unobstructed (which is why I brought up the winter storm scenario).
quote:While bugs are almost always possible, there are ways to practically eliminate (if not 100% eliminate) them. Stringent coding requirements, extensive testing, etc. Also failsafes for the failsafes.
Another thing, people seem to forget that ALL automated systems are ultimately programmed by humans. Aside from sensor failures/damage (or obstructions due to snow, rain, mud...), there are bound to be software bugs and crashes.
quote:Thankfully, the cars don't run on Windows 98.
I mean, how many Windoze crashes have there been over the years?
quote:You talk about desktop software as if it is written to the same guidelines as software that is responsible for the safety of human beings. Planes fly themselves every day, you know.
I've yet to encounter a piece of software, no matter how well written and stable, that doesn't have some kind of bug that makes it do something it shouldn't do, or do it in an incorrect manner. All that is inconsequential on a PC (from a safety's standpoint), but in a driverless car??
quote:Uh, I don't think any "creative" problem solving is necessary (or desirable) for driving. Adaptive reasoning, though, definitely. That's pretty much how these cars work, through machine learning. They can even learn from humans as they navigate through different scenarios, and then do the same thing except safer.
No matter how "smart" computers get, they can never be programmed for adaptive reasoning and creative problem solving
quote:
things that an averagely smart human can manage without much fuss.
You and I differ greatly in how much credit we give human drivers.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:08 pm to Korkstand
Are the prototypes not meant for the road? BC I thought they had a law that states the car has to have a manual override.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 5:08 pm to liquid rabbit
quote:
Yep, as long as the cars are self-cleaning, shouldn't be a problem.
just allow people to report unclean cars, shouldn't be an issue.
Car2Go are huge where I live, and i have yet to hear one complaint about cleaniliness.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News