| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404079 is a reply to message #404001] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 16:59   |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 18:32:28 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5ffae4f4.2933438@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> Like so many, you focus on the technical challanges to the exclusion of
>> everything else.
>>
>> How will traffic officers direct self-driving cars?
>
> By waving at them, same as they direct everyone else.
>
> They do have cameras, you know. That's how they know the light is red.
Ah, so anyone who steps into the street and makes the appropriate gestures
can direct a self-driving car at their whim? That should be fun for the kids.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404080 is a reply to message #404068] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:04 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2021-01-11, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On 11 Jan 2021 20:39:20 GMT
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On the other side of the coin, I read a science fiction story where
>> someone's autonomous car pulled over, locked the doors, and refused
>> to let the occupant out until he agreed to buy what was being
>> advertised on the infotainment centre's screen.
>
> Yay, a marketing opportunity The Space Merchants missed, there
> aren't many.
Indeed. That book was one of the few that saw the threat as coming
from somewhere other than the government.
Gotta go, time for another cup of Coffiest...
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Some of you may die,
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | but it's a sacrifice
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | I'm willing to make."
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Lord Farquaad (Shrek)
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404081 is a reply to message #404078] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:06 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <5ffcc9c6.11909845@news.dslextreme.com>,
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> And somehow autonomous cars will recognize the difference between a police
> officer and some civilian who just walks out into the middle of the street and
> makes the appropriate hand signals? Will autonomous cars recognize the
> difference between a real police uniform and a Halloween costume as well?
Probably not, but human drivers don't handle those situations all that
well, either.
When traffic signals fail, people who are not police sometimes stand
in intersections and direct traffic., Attendants at events direct
people where to park. Somehow we figure out that when someone is
waving at us and it is not otherwise obvious where to go, going where
they point is usually a good idea.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404083 is a reply to message #404070] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:18 |
John Levine
Messages: 1405
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <5ffcc927.11751077@news.dslextreme.com>,
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> And then you have the issue of the last person to use the car and what
>> condition he left it in.
>
> Almost always an issue with any shared resource. Tragedy of the commons and all
> that. That some people will use self-driving taxis and rideshare vehicles as
> "party cars" is just one of many foreseeable problems.
You think nobody ever throws up in a taxi? These are not new problems.
--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404084 is a reply to message #404073] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:22 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:55:39 GMT
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> The second is that if self-driving cars do become a reality as you expect,
> people won't find a way to do something stupid with them anyway. (grin)
Oh I guarantee people will find ways to do stupid things with them,
hopefully not too many of them lethal.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404086 is a reply to message #404078] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:37 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:58:58 GMT
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 21:20:22 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> If the self driving car doesn't understand the standard signals
>> then it is not ready to be a fully autonomous vehicle IMHO. If it does
>> then the cop doesn't need to know or care.
>
> I admit to ignorance, but I don't know if there are actually standard
> signals for traffic officers other than just pointing.
There are certainly standard signals for use in directing traffic
here and in the UK. That being said I have come across an accident scene at
night and in the blaze flashing lights in yellow, blue and red I had real
trouble seeing where I was being directed to go and nearly got it wrong.
> If you've seen
> video clips of flamboyent NYC traffic officers directing traffic -- and I
> think there's another well-known example in Korea -- then it's clear
> there's a wide variation in how it is done.
Ah.
> In any case, traffic
> officers would have to be more rigorous about making unambigous hand
> signals to facilitate their recognition by autonomous vehicles.
They are trained to be rigorous in hand signals here, I rather
assumed they were everywhere.
> And somehow autonomous cars will recognize the difference between a police
> officer and some civilian who just walks out into the middle of the
> street and makes the appropriate hand signals?
Civilians are allowed to direct traffic here when needed, for
example around an accident or to prevent one. Yes I can see where this
could go wrong with autonomous vehicles but that's just a variant on the
ancient fake diversion gag.
> Will autonomous cars
> recognize the difference between a real police uniform and a Halloween
> costume as well?
Will people ?
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404087 is a reply to message #404076] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 17:42 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
> possible negative consequences before they occur.
When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
Self driving cars will be no different.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404088 is a reply to message #404083] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 18:26 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:18:24 -0000 (UTC)
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5ffcc927.11751077@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> And then you have the issue of the last person to use the car and what
>>> condition he left it in.
>>
>> Almost always an issue with any shared resource. Tragedy of the commons
>> and all that. That some people will use self-driving taxis and
>> rideshare vehicles as "party cars" is just one of many foreseeable
>> problems.
>
> You think nobody ever throws up in a taxi? These are not new problems.
Easily solved too, internal cameras detect that a cleanup is needed
and the car goes to where it can get one. If the last user made a big mess
they get billed for the cleanup at an extortionate rate that may make them
behave in future.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404089 is a reply to message #404083] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 18:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:18:24 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5ffcc927.11751077@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> And then you have the issue of the last person to use the car and what
>>> condition he left it in.
>>
>> Almost always an issue with any shared resource. Tragedy of the commons and all
>> that. That some people will use self-driving taxis and rideshare vehicles as
>> "party cars" is just one of many foreseeable problems.
>
> You think nobody ever throws up in a taxi? These are not new problems.
But you're trying to argue that people will put up with that rather
than have their own cars just because the taxi doesn't have a human
driver.
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404090 is a reply to message #404057] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 18:52 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 12:15:59 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 09:07:26 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>
>>>> My complaint is that you won't hear that put so plainly by self-driving
>>>> advocates. They spin a yarn of unparalleled safety, of cars that never make a
>>>> mistake. They act like this science-fiction future is inevitable.
>>>
>>> I believe this is fiction.
>>>
>>> I think if we ever create self driving cars that are safer than human
>>> driven cars it will be a boon.
>>> However, none of the rest of your claims apply to me and I can't
>>> remember anyone else making such claims.
>>>
>>> If there are such people, I'd guess there are very few people that
>>> fit in that category.
>>>
>>> As for the boon, well, better safety would be nice, it could save
>>> a few lives or injuries, but at least at first I don't think that
>>> would be substantial. What would be substantial is the fact that
>>> no one would have to own a personal car. We could probably get by
>>> with a fifth of the number of cars we have today.
>>
>> I don't know where people like you get the notion that "no one would
>> have to own a personal car" or why you consider that to be a desirable
>> state of affairs. I know you have this rosy vision of there being an
>> unlimited number of unoccupied cars waiting in a queue seconda away
>> from every point on Earth but I see no reason to believe that that's
>> how it is going to work. I envision many long cold wet waits for the
>> car to show up, and much lugging of stuff around that I don't want to
>> be lugging because I have to empty the car every time I get out of it.
>>
>
> People already don’t have to own cars in large cities, they have these
> things called “taxis” and “ubers”.
So what will driverless cars actually change then? The argumnent
presented was that "no one would have to own a personal car", not that
taxis and ubers would become self-driving.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404096 is a reply to message #404078] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 21:45 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Radey Shouman
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 21:20:22 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>> If the self driving car doesn't understand the standard signals
>> then it is not ready to be a fully autonomous vehicle IMHO. If it does then
>> the cop doesn't need to know or care.
>
> I admit to ignorance, but I don't know if there are actually standard signals
> for traffic officers other than just pointing. If you've seen video clips of
> flamboyent NYC traffic officers directing traffic -- and I think there's another
> well-known example in Korea -- then it's clear there's a wide variation in how
> it is done. In any case, traffic officers would have to be more rigorous about
> making unambigous hand signals to facilitate their recognition by autonomous
> vehicles.
My first experience with traffic officers was as a civilian employee on
an army post. Every morning and evening an MP would direct the traffic
rush. They had obviously been trained to direct traffic the army way --
face the traffic that is meant to stop, side towrards the traffic that
may go, use snappy military hand signals for finer shades of meaning.
When I moved to Massachusetts, years later, I discovered that traffic
direction was completely different. Some guy with a reflective vest
waving a donut at you, or maybe someone else. Half the time I had no
idea what they wanted. I yearned for MPs.
> And somehow autonomous cars will recognize the difference between a police
> officer and some civilian who just walks out into the middle of the street and
> makes the appropriate hand signals? Will autonomous cars recognize the
> difference between a real police uniform and a Halloween costume as well?
Some dude with a gun, in the middle of the street, raises his hand in
the stop signal. That's a poser.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404097 is a reply to message #404081] |
Mon, 11 January 2021 21:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Radey Shouman
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> writes:
> In article <5ffcc9c6.11909845@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> And somehow autonomous cars will recognize the difference between a police
>> officer and some civilian who just walks out into the middle of the street and
>> makes the appropriate hand signals? Will autonomous cars recognize the
>> difference between a real police uniform and a Halloween costume as well?
>
> Probably not, but human drivers don't handle those situations all that
> well, either.
>
> When traffic signals fail, people who are not police sometimes stand
> in intersections and direct traffic., Attendants at events direct
> people where to park. Somehow we figure out that when someone is
> waving at us and it is not otherwise obvious where to go, going where
> they point is usually a good idea.
But if we don't understand, we can converse with them using spoken
language. For a machine driving competently may well be approximately
as hard as carrying on a conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404105 is a reply to message #404077] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 07:06 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:22 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:59:28 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
> wrote:
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 13:31:14 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> > On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 09:13:35 -0500, Dan Espen
>>>> > <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> How will traffic officers direct self-driving cars?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>With a transmitter?
>>>> >
>>>> > Then how will they direct non-self-driving cars?
>>>>
>>>> With their hands?
>>>
>>> So the cop's standing there at an intersection and he's having to
>>> figure out for each car "is this self-driving or human driven" and
>>> apply the appropriate signal.
>>
>>
>> You're a smart guy, figure out how to make it work. I suspect that
>> the "transmitter" would be transmitting to all cars with a certain
>> heading on specific routes, and the officer wouldn't give shit
>> which are the autonomous vehicles and just give directions to all
>> vehicles.
>>
>> They've been talking about meshing all autonomous vehicles for
>> a decade now.
>
> Great! Because we know how to safely and securely interconnect
> heterogeneous computer systems and prevent hacking, spoofing, malware
> intrusions, deliberate misinformation, and other malicious actors.
> Just look at the Internet for an example!
>
> What could possibly go wrong?
>
The Internet we have now is far from perfect, but we accept it; the same
will happen with cars, IMO.
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404108 is a reply to message #404064] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 10:24 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:00:38 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <8g7pvftdfcfg9pogmdeckio380fll3s1c4@4ax.com>,
> JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> True; however, traffic to hurricane approaching areas is limited ...
>
>>> If they know that a bunch of empty autotaxis are coming in to evacuate
>>> people, why do you imagine that they wouldn't adjust the rules to
>>> allow them in to do the evacuations?
>>
>> I just don't see it happening. If it does, well, there are people who
>> will claim those vehicles aren't safe.
>
> What do you expect them to say to the people who have no other way to
> evacuate? "Safe" is a relative term when a hurricane is on the way.
There were buses for New Orleans, but they were sent too late, and too
few.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404109 is a reply to message #404077] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 10:31 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:22 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:59:28 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 13:31:14 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> > On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 09:13:35 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> >>usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> How will traffic officers direct self-driving cars?
>>>> >>
>>>> >>With a transmitter?
>>>> >
>>>> > Then how will they direct non-self-driving cars?
>>>>
>>>> With their hands?
>>>
>>> So the cop's standing there at an intersection and he's having to
>>> figure out for each car "is this self-driving or human driven" and
>>> apply the appropriate signal.
>>
>>
>> You're a smart guy, figure out how to make it work. I suspect that
>> the "transmitter" would be transmitting to all cars with a certain
>> heading on specific routes, and the officer wouldn't give shit
>> which are the autonomous vehicles and just give directions to all
>> vehicles.
>>
>> They've been talking about meshing all autonomous vehicles for
>> a decade now.
>
> Great! Because we know how to safely and securely interconnect heterogeneous
> computer systems and prevent hacking, spoofing, malware intrusions, deliberate
> misinformation, and other malicious actors. Just look at the Internet for an
> example!
>
> What could possibly go wrong?
Saw on Discovery Science channel a few years ago about a group that
has built small cars with a small cargo area. This was in Europe. Four
wheels. They can hook up and 'build' a longer 'car'. Up to 8 or so of
them.
When your exit is coming up, you do something, I don't remember what,
the car in front of you and behind you unhook, and you make your turn
off the highway. He said they had a few bugs to work out.
Haven't seen anything since then.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404110 is a reply to message #404087] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 10:36 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>
>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>
> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>
> Self driving cars will be no different.
Have any of you seen early, 1930s and 1940s, films on what people
living back then thought the 1960s or later would be like ?
Some are on youtube. And they pretty much get it wrong. In the 1939
World's Fair, there was a large diorama, with small moving cars, that
showed what the near future would look like. They got the many lane
highways, but not the rest.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404119 is a reply to message #404113] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:27 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
wrote:
> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> self-shifting car.
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>> transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>> disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>
> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
"Microsoft Stync".
>> Google "preselector gearbox".
>
> Hmmm, interesting... (BTW DuckDuckGo finds it too.)
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404120 is a reply to message #404083] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:41 |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:18:24 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5ffcc927.11751077@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>> And then you have the issue of the last person to use the car and what
>>> condition he left it in.
>>
>> Almost always an issue with any shared resource. Tragedy of the commons and all
>> that. That some people will use self-driving taxis and rideshare vehicles as
>> "party cars" is just one of many foreseeable problems.
>
> You think nobody ever throws up in a taxi? These are not new problems.
Human-driven taxis don't have the same problem with being used as "party cars"
the way an autonomous vehicle would.
Anyway my point, before it gets lost in pedantry, is that somebody should tell
the advocates of self-driving cars who think they are going to result in the
wholesale elimination of private car ownership. They are the ones who seem to
be ignoring these old problems.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404121 is a reply to message #404105] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:42 |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 12:06:23 -0000 (UTC), "Kerr-Mudd,John" <notsaying@127.0.0.1>
wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:22 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:59:28 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 13:31:14 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> >> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 09:13:35 -0500, Dan Espen
>>>> >> <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> How will traffic officers direct self-driving cars?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>With a transmitter?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Then how will they direct non-self-driving cars?
>>>> >
>>>> >With their hands?
>>>>
>>>> So the cop's standing there at an intersection and he's having to
>>>> figure out for each car "is this self-driving or human driven" and
>>>> apply the appropriate signal.
>>>
>>>
>>> You're a smart guy, figure out how to make it work. I suspect that
>>> the "transmitter" would be transmitting to all cars with a certain
>>> heading on specific routes, and the officer wouldn't give shit
>>> which are the autonomous vehicles and just give directions to all
>>> vehicles.
>>>
>>> They've been talking about meshing all autonomous vehicles for
>>> a decade now.
>>
>> Great! Because we know how to safely and securely interconnect
>> heterogeneous computer systems and prevent hacking, spoofing, malware
>> intrusions, deliberate misinformation, and other malicious actors.
>> Just look at the Internet for an example!
>>
>> What could possibly go wrong?
>>
> The Internet we have now is far from perfect, but we accept it; the same
> will happen with cars, IMO.
Computers and laptops just sit on/under peoples' desks, etc. The consequences
may be much more dire, even fatal, by letting millions of autonomous 2000-pound
computer-controlled robots loose on the roads if they are subject to all the
same weaknesses as computers on the Internet.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404122 is a reply to message #404081] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:43 |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:06:42 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> In article <5ffcc9c6.11909845@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> And somehow autonomous cars will recognize the difference between a police
>> officer and some civilian who just walks out into the middle of the street and
>> makes the appropriate hand signals? Will autonomous cars recognize the
>> difference between a real police uniform and a Halloween costume as well?
>
> Probably not, but human drivers don't handle those situations all that
> well, either.
>
> When traffic signals fail, people who are not police sometimes stand
> in intersections and direct traffic., Attendants at events direct
> people where to park. Somehow we figure out that when someone is
> waving at us and it is not otherwise obvious where to go, going where
> they point is usually a good idea.
Of course people figure these things out. How is a self-driving car going to do
it? It's a social issue, not a technical one.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404123 is a reply to message #404087] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:43 |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>
>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>
> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>
> Self driving cars will be no different.
Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the opportunity
to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should instead make same old
mistakes because we've always done it that way?
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404124 is a reply to message #404120] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:48 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 21:41:05 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:18:24 -0000 (UTC), John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>> In article <5ffcc927.11751077@news.dslextreme.com>,
>> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>>>> And then you have the issue of the last person to use the car and what
>>>> condition he left it in.
>>>
>>> Almost always an issue with any shared resource. Tragedy of the commons and all
>>> that. That some people will use self-driving taxis and rideshare vehicles as
>>> "party cars" is just one of many foreseeable problems.
>>
>> You think nobody ever throws up in a taxi? These are not new problems.
>
> Human-driven taxis don't have the same problem with being used as "party cars"
> the way an autonomous vehicle would.
Some of my shipmates when I was in the US Navy would disagree with
that claim.
[snip]
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404125 is a reply to message #404079] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 16:36 |
mjb
Messages: 32
Registered: April 2013
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
In article <5ffcca25.12005623@news.dslextreme.com>,
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> Ah, so anyone who steps into the street and makes the appropriate gestures
> can direct a self-driving car at their whim? That should be fun for the kids.
.... once they graduate from standing one either side of the road,
leaning back and miming that they are holding a taut rope across the
street.
Wonder if the car's eyesight is good enough to pick up that there's
no rope, drive through!? Or if the AI has been pre-programmed to ignore
that gag?
--
--------------------------------------+--------------------- ---------------
Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404129 is a reply to message #404123] |
Tue, 12 January 2021 18:47 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 21:43:45 GMT
usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
> Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the
> opportunity to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should
> instead make same old mistakes because we've always done it that way?
Should ? No.
Will ? Almost certainly.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404154 is a reply to message #404069] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 09:07:26 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) writes:
>>> My complaint is that you won't hear that put so plainly by self-driving
>>> advocates. They spin a yarn of unparalleled safety, of cars that never make a
>>> mistake. They act like this science-fiction future is inevitable.
>>
>> I believe this is fiction.
>>
>> I think if we ever create self driving cars that are safer than human
>> driven cars it will be a boon.
>> However, none of the rest of your claims apply to me and I can't
>> remember anyone else making such claims.
>
> Elsewhere in this thread I specifically stated I did not hold any participants
> in this group to be responsible for those claims.
>
>
>> If there are such people, I'd guess there are very few people that
>> fit in that category.
>
> Most of them, actually. Advocates for autonomous vehicles paint rosy pictures
> of a utopian future, and never bring up any possible negative consequences.
>
>
That’s always the way - think of the advocates of atomic energy in the 50s.
Makes you wonder what fusion energy will bring.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404155 is a reply to message #404072] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:00:35 -0500, Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 11:28:50 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>> Have you considered for a second that the current driver assist is
>>>> an essential step in developing full self driving ?
>>>
>>> No, because they are only a tiny part of what is required for driving.
>>
>> Hitching a quadruped to a handcart was only a tiny part of what is
>> required for a self-driving car, but it was an essential step.
>
> If you're going to go back that far, why stop there? The smelting of iron or
> the development of written communication were essential steps too.
>
> You have to put your stake somewhere. I think people underestimate how
> complicated driving is.
Nerd that I am, every once in a while, while driving, I wonder what someone
from a prior century would have made of it. Not that they probably couldn’t
soon become proficient, but their early reactions would be something to
see.
> Highlighting driver assist features as essential steps
> is like praising a precocious eight-year-old for having done some advanced adult
> activity. (I dunno, winning a model car race or building a telescope.) It's an
> achievement, but it doesn't mean that they're ready to go out into the adult
> world and make it on their own. It's just a little part of growing up.
>
>
>> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>> self-shifting car.
>
> Incrementalism isn't going to help with the systemic problems that are social,
> not technological.
>
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404156 is a reply to message #404073] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 21:02:40 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>> No dispute there, that's a shortcoming of Tesla's Autopilot - it's
>> a real shame that people are stupid enough to need a nanny like that but
>> it seems they are.
>
> You've been making two big assumptions throughout this discussion. The first,
> which you acknowledge, is that self-driving cars are inevitable, and will
> eventually be safer than human drivers.
>
> The second is that if self-driving cars do become a reality as you expect,
> people won't find a way to do something stupid with them anyway. (grin)
>
>
I think all of these are inevitable. The one thing not mentioned is that we
will probably gradually rework our infrastructure to better support
self-driving cars, exactly as the rise of the automobile led to the
construction of paved highways. I’m thinking of things like traffic signs
and signals that broadcast instructions to the cars so they wouldn’t have
to rely on vision.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404157 is a reply to message #404110] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
JimP <chucktheouch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>
>>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>
>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
>> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
>> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
>> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
>> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>
>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>
> Have any of you seen early, 1930s and 1940s, films on what people
> living back then thought the 1960s or later would be like ?
>
> Some are on youtube. And they pretty much get it wrong. In the 1939
> World's Fair, there was a large diorama, with small moving cars, that
> showed what the near future would look like. They got the many lane
> highways, but not the rest.
>
At that point such highways already existed - the Autobahnen in Germany and
a few parkways in the US.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404158 is a reply to message #404119] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>>> Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> > self-shifting car.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>>> transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>>> disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>>
>> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
>
> Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
> something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
> "Microsoft Stync".
>
This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
road?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404159 is a reply to message #404123] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>
>>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>
>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
>> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
>> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
>> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
>> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>
>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>
> Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the opportunity
> to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should instead make same old
> mistakes because we've always done it that way?
>
>
When we moved from horse and buggy to cars a lot of the design stayed the
same, because it worked and people didn’t have to learn a whole new thing.
Cars have evolved, but still have elements that date way back.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404160 is a reply to message #404125] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 15:20 |
usenet
Messages: 556
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tue, 12 Jan 2021 21:36:47 +0000 (GMT), mjb@signal11.invalid (Mike) wrote:
> In article <5ffcca25.12005623@news.dslextreme.com>,
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>
>> Ah, so anyone who steps into the street and makes the appropriate gestures
>> can direct a self-driving car at their whim? That should be fun for the kids.
>
> ... once they graduate from standing one either side of the road,
> leaning back and miming that they are holding a taut rope across the
> street.
>
> Wonder if the car's eyesight is good enough to pick up that there's
> no rope, drive through!? Or if the AI has been pre-programmed to ignore
> that gag?
When I was a child, some of the kids in our mostly rural neighborhood would
stretch a string across the road and hang a piece of paper on it, then hide in
the bushes to watch. Some drivers would speed right through, some would slow
down, some would stop. If the driver got out of their car to chase the kids,
they would run into the woods.
I can only wonder what a self-driving car would do. I would think that if a
couple of sawhorses is all it takes to immobilize an autonomous vehicle, at the
very least we're going to see more of this sort of petty vandalism. A more
serious consequence is that it may be relatively easy to hijack a self-driving
truck and steal its cargo.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404166 is a reply to message #404156] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 16:24 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 21:02:40 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>> No dispute there, that's a shortcoming of Tesla's Autopilot - it's
>>> a real shame that people are stupid enough to need a nanny like that but
>>> it seems they are.
>>
>> You've been making two big assumptions throughout this discussion. The first,
>> which you acknowledge, is that self-driving cars are inevitable, and will
>> eventually be safer than human drivers.
>>
>> The second is that if self-driving cars do become a reality as you expect,
>> people won't find a way to do something stupid with them anyway. (grin)
>>
>>
>
> I think all of these are inevitable. The one thing not mentioned is that we
> will probably gradually rework our infrastructure to better support
> self-driving cars, exactly as the rise of the automobile led to the
> construction of paved highways. I’m thinking of things like traffic signs
> and signals that broadcast instructions to the cars so they wouldn’t have
> to rely on vision.
That might start happening but if they're commonplace enough for it to
be an issue I suspect that they'll already be good at dealing with
traffic lights and signage.
Note that Teslas today can recognize (some? Not sure how good the
recognition is at dealing with different designs) traffic lights--the
issue they have is that they can't tell whether the light for their
lane is green, so they take the safe default and stop for all of them
regardless of color.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404167 is a reply to message #404155] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 16:41 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:35 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 20:00:35 -0500, Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 11:28:50 GMT, usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>> > Have you considered for a second that the current driver assist is
>>>> > an essential step in developing full self driving ?
>>>>
>>>> No, because they are only a tiny part of what is required for driving.
>>>
>>> Hitching a quadruped to a handcart was only a tiny part of what is
>>> required for a self-driving car, but it was an essential step.
>>
>> If you're going to go back that far, why stop there? The smelting of iron or
>> the development of written communication were essential steps too.
>>
>> You have to put your stake somewhere. I think people underestimate how
>> complicated driving is.
>
> Nerd that I am, every once in a while, while driving, I wonder what someone
> from a prior century would have made of it. Not that they probably couldn’t
> soon become proficient, but their early reactions would be something to
> see.
In the early 1800s the notion of high speed (50 mph) trains was
considered to be ludicrous because a human could not survive at that
speed.
>> Highlighting driver assist features as essential steps
>> is like praising a precocious eight-year-old for having done some advanced adult
>> activity. (I dunno, winning a model car race or building a telescope.) It's an
>> achievement, but it doesn't mean that they're ready to go out into the adult
>> world and make it on their own. It's just a little part of growing up.
>>
>>
>>> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>> self-shifting car.
>>
>> Incrementalism isn't going to help with the systemic problems that are social,
>> not technological.
>>
>>
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404168 is a reply to message #404158] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 16:46 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 13:15:38 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>>>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>>> > Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> >> self-shifting car.
>>>> >
>>>> > Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>>> > transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>>> > disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>>>
>>> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
>>
>> Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
>> something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
>> "Microsoft Stync".
>>
>
> This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
> idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
> to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
> buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
> road?
Amen. That's one of my objections to Teslas. One of the car
manufacturers (I want to say SAAB but can't find any evidence to that
effect) was careful to make every control different from the others so
that it was difficult to mistake one for another.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404169 is a reply to message #404158] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 16:48 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Radey Shouman
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12 Jan 2021 19:52:11 GMT, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-01-11, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:17:33 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
>>>> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > In article <uo8nvftsoa1vdit7uqrpmof0824r1rie2l@4ax.com>,
>>>> > Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> We'll get to the self-driving car the same way we got to the
>>>> >> self-shifting car.
>>>> >
>>>> > Maybe I'm forgetting, but I don't recall a generation of cars that had
>>>> > transmissions that shifted on their own 80% of the time but sometimes
>>>> > disengaged so you had to step on the clutch and shift manually.
>>>
>>> That's because Microsoft doesn't make cars.
>>
>> Uh, I own a Ford which owes a good bit of its functionality to
>> something commonly referred to by owners of Fords of that vintage as
>> "Microsoft Stync".
>>
>
> This, of course, brings up another point: What genius decided it was a good
> idea to put so many controls into a touch-screen, that requires the driver
> to take his eyes off the road to operate them, as opposed to physical
> buttons and dials that can be operated by touch while still watching the
> road?
That's just "value engineering" -- buttons are expensive in material and
dashboard real estate.
I do really hate the touch screen interface for driving.
|
|
|
|
| Re: autonomous car charging, was: Adobe oddity? [message #404170 is a reply to message #404159] |
Wed, 13 January 2021 16:49 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Radey Shouman
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Questor <usenet@only.tnx> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:42:34 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021 21:57:03 GMT
>>> usenet@only.tnx (Questor) wrote:
>>>
>>>> People should be talking about the issues I've been raising. The
>>>> advocates have contrary interests that preclude them from being
>>>> forthright about the problems. There should be more discussion about
>>>> possible negative consequences before they occur.
>>>
>>> When did the human race ever do anything that way ? While one bunch
>>> are busy discussing the consequences and making plans the rest of the world
>>> is getting on with it and dealing with the problems as they come up
>>> discovering as they do that half the anticipated problems never come up but
>>> unfortunately half the expected benefits never materialise and a whole load
>>> of things good, bad and indifferent happen that nobody saw coming.
>>>
>>> Self driving cars will be no different.
>>
>> Ah. So despite recognizing the errors of the past and seizing the opportunity
>> to do a better job with autonomous vehicles, we should instead make same old
>> mistakes because we've always done it that way?
>>
>>
>
> When we moved from horse and buggy to cars a lot of the design stayed the
> same, because it worked and people didn’t have to learn a whole new thing.
> Cars have evolved, but still have elements that date way back.
Kurt Vonnegut claimed to have seen, in his youth, old farmers hauling
back on the steering wheel and yelling "whoa".
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
