HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
How well did this driverless car do on the streets of Washington D.C.? Let's just say we're not quite there yet, but close.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Driverless Car Hits The Streets Of Washington D.C.
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
macksomerville
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 18, 2000
- Messages
- 1,986
I relish the day when we can remove 55+ million morons from the decision making process of driving a car. States are gonna be pissed when they realize all the money they wasted on road expansion projects because idiots cant figure out how to drive in congestion, much less merge or signal properly
Insula Gilliganis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,469
Wow.. already that time again for our weekly "driverless car" propaganda??
I will care in 10 years when, perhaps, the average person will have the opportunity to purchase one.
Why the fascination with driverless cars? Is it to save lives? Deaths have already been steadily since the early 1970s..
Someone/somebody/something is really pushing for driverless cars, and you have to wonder why and for what end. Perhaps Millennials who want to be lazier and in front of an Internet connected device all the time. Like losing the ability to write longhand, Millennials will lose the ability to drive a car!! Merging of the Matrix and Idiocracy taking place!!
I will care in 10 years when, perhaps, the average person will have the opportunity to purchase one.
Why the fascination with driverless cars? Is it to save lives? Deaths have already been steadily since the early 1970s..
Someone/somebody/something is really pushing for driverless cars, and you have to wonder why and for what end. Perhaps Millennials who want to be lazier and in front of an Internet connected device all the time. Like losing the ability to write longhand, Millennials will lose the ability to drive a car!! Merging of the Matrix and Idiocracy taking place!!
kirbyrj
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2005
- Messages
- 30,693
Or perhaps the baby boomers want to continue to drive after their skills have declined to the point of being dangerous.
Hornet
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 6,624
Self driving cars would be perfect for those who are constantly putting on makeups, eating, and texting while behind the wheel.
boomboy2k1
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 403
It'd be perfect for taking a nap on a long trip.
Skripka
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2012
- Messages
- 10,791
Wow.. already that time again for our weekly "driverless car" propaganda??
I will care in 10 years when, perhaps, the average person will have the opportunity to purchase one.
Why the fascination with driverless cars? Is it to save lives? Deaths have already been steadily since the early 1970s..
Someone/somebody/something is really pushing for driverless cars, and you have to wonder why and for what end. Perhaps Millennials who want to be lazier and in front of an Internet connected device all the time. Like losing the ability to write longhand, Millennials will lose the ability to drive a car!! Merging of the Matrix and Idiocracy taking place!!
How about stopping drunk driving?
We've tried just about everything and there are millions of DWIs written every year despite just about everyone knowing and admitting it is a fucking stupid thing to go and do. Every year 18,000 people get killed by intoxicated idiots driving and in the last decade that number has not gone down.
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
I would love to have a car drive me, rather than relying on me to drive.
Advantages:
1. They don't speed. They know the speed limit of the area, if they are programmed correctly, and they go that speed or slower.
2. They don't get distracted. They monitor everything that is going on around them, and they don't focus on just one thing. This way, they can see and react to everything, where humans get distracted by a phone call or text, or a billboard, or a pretty girl walking down the street.
3. they don't get mad. There's simply no chance of getting in a road rage accident with self driving cars.
4. properly equipped, in the future, they wouldn't get blinded by fog or rain. It will be a while before we see these, but it wouldn't be hard or expensive to equip a car with FLIR or other scanners to be able to see and monitor in bands much wider than human vision. They won't get blinded by certain weather conditions that would blind a human driver. Besides, they need IR monitors of some type anyway to adjust to snowy and icy conditions and know when to slow down. This will come in time, be sure of it.
5. reaction time is much faster than humans. They'd be able to avoid accidents that we can't.
6. no aggressive driving. Computers won't cut people off, tailgate, or take other aggressive actions.
Disadvantages:
1. possible blind spots where the car can't adjust. It would be possible to have a poorly designed self driving car with blind spots. We must watch out for this.
2. no predictive instinct. a computer can't watch other drivers and figure out which ones are going to cut them off, tailgate, or take other aggressive actions. A computer could not predict troublesome circumstances that humans could see coming. Of course, if all cars become self driving (I'm hoping to see this in my lifetime) we wouldn't have to worry about this.
3. road construction and layout will have to be adjusted. As things are, a self driving car would get stuck in an ending lane. There are many poorly designed roads with ending lanes that would cause a self driving car to get caught and mess up traffic. (Example: the I-225 and Parker Road interchange in the Denver area. the right lane is forced to exist. the second to the right lane could exit or go straight, but then ends after a short distance, causing all sorts of hell in traffic during rush hour, as jerks use the ending lane as a passing lane. I have no idea what the road designer was thinking not forcing both lanes to exit, but obviously the design is idiotic.) We're going to have to have people designing the roads with some real expertise in it, not the frequent incompetent fools we have today.
4. software glitches. There will inevitably be some software glitches that the manufacturers would miss. The better they test, the more they'll be able to catch, but there will always be some they couldn't catch. This will cause accidents and may cause deaths. However, this would still be far, far better than humans driving. Humans make mistakes, whether programming cars or actually driving. However, with testing, software glitches can be significantly reduced, where human error during driving can't be so much. Replacing human driving error with software glitches is still a significant step forward. This is the part where most people fear, but in reality, it is far better than what humans can do.
Obviously, to me, there are far more advantages than disadvantages. It's the stupid people who fear change that are causing such an uproar.
Advantages:
1. They don't speed. They know the speed limit of the area, if they are programmed correctly, and they go that speed or slower.
2. They don't get distracted. They monitor everything that is going on around them, and they don't focus on just one thing. This way, they can see and react to everything, where humans get distracted by a phone call or text, or a billboard, or a pretty girl walking down the street.
3. they don't get mad. There's simply no chance of getting in a road rage accident with self driving cars.
4. properly equipped, in the future, they wouldn't get blinded by fog or rain. It will be a while before we see these, but it wouldn't be hard or expensive to equip a car with FLIR or other scanners to be able to see and monitor in bands much wider than human vision. They won't get blinded by certain weather conditions that would blind a human driver. Besides, they need IR monitors of some type anyway to adjust to snowy and icy conditions and know when to slow down. This will come in time, be sure of it.
5. reaction time is much faster than humans. They'd be able to avoid accidents that we can't.
6. no aggressive driving. Computers won't cut people off, tailgate, or take other aggressive actions.
Disadvantages:
1. possible blind spots where the car can't adjust. It would be possible to have a poorly designed self driving car with blind spots. We must watch out for this.
2. no predictive instinct. a computer can't watch other drivers and figure out which ones are going to cut them off, tailgate, or take other aggressive actions. A computer could not predict troublesome circumstances that humans could see coming. Of course, if all cars become self driving (I'm hoping to see this in my lifetime) we wouldn't have to worry about this.
3. road construction and layout will have to be adjusted. As things are, a self driving car would get stuck in an ending lane. There are many poorly designed roads with ending lanes that would cause a self driving car to get caught and mess up traffic. (Example: the I-225 and Parker Road interchange in the Denver area. the right lane is forced to exist. the second to the right lane could exit or go straight, but then ends after a short distance, causing all sorts of hell in traffic during rush hour, as jerks use the ending lane as a passing lane. I have no idea what the road designer was thinking not forcing both lanes to exit, but obviously the design is idiotic.) We're going to have to have people designing the roads with some real expertise in it, not the frequent incompetent fools we have today.
4. software glitches. There will inevitably be some software glitches that the manufacturers would miss. The better they test, the more they'll be able to catch, but there will always be some they couldn't catch. This will cause accidents and may cause deaths. However, this would still be far, far better than humans driving. Humans make mistakes, whether programming cars or actually driving. However, with testing, software glitches can be significantly reduced, where human error during driving can't be so much. Replacing human driving error with software glitches is still a significant step forward. This is the part where most people fear, but in reality, it is far better than what humans can do.
Obviously, to me, there are far more advantages than disadvantages. It's the stupid people who fear change that are causing such an uproar.
I don't see how they can realistically have self driving cars unless they do it all in one fell swoop.
I don't care how "good" the systems in a self driving car are.. They are not going to be able to account for all situations that may happen on the road due to other drivers, wildlife, and weather.
What is going to happen when a person road rages against people in a self driving car? The self driving car is not going to speed in order to get away.
What happens when the passenger(s) are sleeping when this happens so they don't know they need to take over?
Lots of problems unless they force everybody to get a self driving car at the same time.
I don't care how "good" the systems in a self driving car are.. They are not going to be able to account for all situations that may happen on the road due to other drivers, wildlife, and weather.
What is going to happen when a person road rages against people in a self driving car? The self driving car is not going to speed in order to get away.
What happens when the passenger(s) are sleeping when this happens so they don't know they need to take over?
Lots of problems unless they force everybody to get a self driving car at the same time.
Think of the self driving car on the road with everyone else like fighting an old school monk.
A multitude of sensors in a 360 degree array will gather enough information from different spectrums including in laymans terms normal vision, IR, UV (to cut thru fog, snow, etc), sonic to determine Doppler effects on objects for predictive course and actions....
To know one's surroundings it to know one's self
Either the programming will allow the vehicle to legally and safely avoid the other vehicle, regardless of them raging or not. In the event of a collision, who do you think the courts are going to side with, the self driving "safe car" with all sorts of data (probably even video in the super expensive models) "proving beyond a reasonable doubt" that it is "YOU" who are at fault. You pay the city all sorts of fines, felony assault with a deadly weapon, intent to kill, your insurance goes up 5000% if anyone will even cover you, if you aren't in jail...
Face detection, heart rate detection, these types of monitors are commonplace now, and if we have a smart driving car, you better believe it's going to be watching you, so it will be able to tell if you are sleeping or not. BEEP BEEP WAAAA WAAAA BEEP BEEP just like an alarm clock, it wakes you up, but for safety and security reasons (aka you freaking out since you just woke up and are likely to overreact, slam on the brakes, turn the wheel crazily, etc) the vehicle won't give you control back. You will now be awake to see one of two things, the smart self driving car save your life, or some asshole needlessly raging against technology ramming you, or maybe something else who knows, but you are awake now before the collision if there is one.
Lots of programming to do sure, but these are not problems that would prevent them from being integrated into the current system. You would not need a 100% self driving car system for them to work, you just have to look at the 'problems' as you say, THINK FOR A FUCKING CHANGE, and design a solution, then implement it.
1. A MASSIVE amount of sensors and an on board computer creates zero blind spots.
2. We have computer programs that calculate trajectory and influence of everything from quarks to quasars and everything in between including terrestrial weather patterns, traffic patterns, trust me the smart cars will be constantly predicting and anticipating accidents, travel route changes because of weather changes, merging to avoid crazy driver X half a mile ahead of you and insane driver Y 2 miles behind you going 140 swerving thru lanes.
3. Road construction in the future could sure be improved, but all we need is accurate mapping for the current road systems and the predictive mapping logic will take care of the rest.
4. Redundancy, Redundancy, Redundancy! Now this doesn't mean all software redundancy, I mean some could be put into place, even a secondary computer system in-case something in the first one went down. An electronic "Manual Control" button that works off of the backup system, AND a 'break glass in case of emergency' BIG RED BUTTON you push to get "Manual" control back over the car controlled by a fly by wire tension release that forces manual control over the transmission and gearbox.
Wow.. already that time again for our weekly "driverless car" propaganda??
I will care in 10 years when, perhaps, the average person will have the opportunity to purchase one.
Why the fascination with driverless cars? Is it to save lives? Deaths have already been steadily since the early 1970s..
Someone/somebody/something is really pushing for driverless cars, and you have to wonder why and for what end. Perhaps Millennials who want to be lazier and in front of an Internet connected device all the time. Like losing the ability to write longhand, Millennials will lose the ability to drive a car!! Merging of the Matrix and Idiocracy taking place!!
Regulations have made cars no funs to drive and too expense to make anymore lavish. They're necessities. People don't get excited about necessities. People even in their 40's grew up in the shadow of the muscle car so the way they look at car's place is substantially different from someone in their 20's.
The effect is working as intended to get people to live in cities in shoebox apartments using mass transit. Get you the f. out of the countryside (including the suburbs). The countryside belongs to the little critters and the elite.
TwistedAegis
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2009
- Messages
- 8,958
No, they'll be pissed when they lose the massive revenue stream of traffic enforcement tickets.
I remember reading some towns in Texas were voting to remove the red light cameras - because they worked so well in making people stop running red lights, they were losing huge amounts of revenue.
Shotglass01
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Messages
- 1,992
I'll take one!
Could sleep while it drives me to work. And if I die because it messed up, I wouldn't know about it anyway.
Could sleep while it drives me to work. And if I die because it messed up, I wouldn't know about it anyway.
DejaWiz
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2005
- Messages
- 21,825
Well, they chose a good city for testing. If a self driving car can successfully navigate shitty D.C. traffic, then it can anywhere in the world, save for almost all cities in Asia and India...
I just want the driving bits and guts put into a black 1982 Trans-Am with a red sweeping LED array on the nose.
I just want the driving bits and guts put into a black 1982 Trans-Am with a red sweeping LED array on the nose.
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
I just want the driving bits and guts put into a black 1982 Trans-Am with a red sweeping LED array on the nose.
I second this.
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
Yeah, but you know there are going to be companies out there who will skimp on the sensors, software complexity, and software testing. GM and Ford both managed to put cars on the road that would blow up when hit from behind.
I think they were trying to help create a way to clear the road of all debris after an accident by causing it to all explode leaving nothing. They just failed at making it large enough and hot enough.
I third this!!!Well, they chose a good city for testing. If a self driving car can successfully navigate shitty D.C. traffic, then it can anywhere in the world, save for almost all cities in Asia and India...
I just want the driving bits and guts put into a black 1982 Trans-Am with a red sweeping LED array on the nose.
I would agree, hence the Ford Exploder (aka Explorer)
Everyone things people where they live drive the worst. That pretty much describes all drivers everywhere. All that changes are the number of people on the roads and as such the number of idiotic drivers that you see. Layout of the roads also effects that, the easier it is to get around the less time you spend on the roads and as such the fewer people you are expected for long periods of time, places where you are around people longer you are exposed to the idiots longer and thus it seems worse.
Lets say that 1/10th of the people on the roads are idiots. Lets look at two different places where you need to drive 3 miles. One where you cross paths with 75 different people during this 3 miles and the other 2000. That alone means that one person only sees about 7.5 idiots while the other sees 200. Lets look at the two places with the 200 idiots. lets say one place allows you to get the 3 miles driving 60mph with no stops, at worse you are dealing with these idiots for 3 minutes. Lets look at another place where when moving you get to travel 30mph but you have stops every 1/4th mile. Driving alone you are looking at 6 minutes then add in whatever the time for a red to green light light is times 10 (we will imagine you don't have one at the start and end). For this argument lets say lights stay red for 3 minutes, you are looking at being around those 200 idiots for 36 minutes then instead of the 3.
Everywhere you go people are texting or something else while driving and going in and out of their lane, they are trying to pass cars with oncoming traffic, driving while drunk or on drugs, driving unsafely on roads during various bad weather, driving while half awake (or asleep), speeding way over the speed limit to get where they want to go faster...