ARE SELF-DRIVING CARS A THREAT ??

self driving ridgelines that will want revenge, that's how skynet will start

 

Your avatar is perfect for this thread I believe.

Space Odyssey, correct?

 

This is correct, and in addition to the bus, we have ride sharing apps like Uber, which are negating some of the need for car ownership in the first place-a least in metropolitan areas- remote places, not so much.
Uber is (or was) one of the driving forces behind autonomous vehicles, ever wonder why?
link to an old article about this:
http://www.economist.com/news/leade...aluable-startup-leading-race-transform-future

 

No way 4 kids run into a 45mph street, ignored the rest.

 

Most drivers need a self driving car. I welcome them.

 

I've been reading your i-Robot responses, and I get it. I think that programming in factors with that kind of resolution is still up in the air. There will be accidents, and there will be questions, debates, laws written and activism both for and against the ways that they are programmed. (note , I said the way they are programmed, not whether or not automated cars are part of our future.)

I really think that in your scenario, the programming at least initially would be to take the course of least resistance. You have two hard objects that can't move, and soft objects up front, on come the brakes, the front suspension dips to drop the bumper and a giant airbag deploys from your Skewp. Kids bounce unharmed into oncoming traffic. New firmware is released.

 

Well that 2010 RAM is already full of computers, ready to deploy airbags, prevent the brakes from locking up, controlling your drive train and keeping the inside comfortable.
If the fear is the reliability of a computer will compromise the reliability of your vehicle, then your truck is already too new to avoid that. You can't even push start the truck unless you have enough juice in the battery to first boot up your computers.

What do you mean stupid? Anyway;

True, but watch the trends. More and more legal OHV trails are restricting vehicle size. The future of offroading will belong to the ATV/UTV/Side by Sides. They are already loaded with their own computers, but they will remain hobby/recreation vehicles that "those crazy people actually drive". I can most certainly see a world where AI or at least augmented driving will be required in most highways to start, then metro areas, and finally on public roads.

By the way, in I-Robot, Will Smith's character can drive his Audi in manual mode, and owns a motorcycle. Sometimes reality copies fantasy.

 

Now if this is real, that's really impressive. There wasn't a single accident that I think I would have seen before the computer did.

 

Lol

 

So this is a very American response. We absolutely hate anything that we interpret as something that is taking our freedoms away. THIS is going to be the biggest obstacle to automated cars, not the technology, not the laws. Certainly not the decision to mow over children vs having a head-on collision with a bus full of kids. There will be a long period where the privilege to drive is considered a "right to freedom". But is it at all? Don't we already have toll scanners that track and photo our vehicles? Don't we already have vehicles with automatic brakes, radar controlled cruise control and blind spot traffic warning, and automatic parallel parking?

Don't get me wrong @herbertgerg, I'm not picking on you. Love your name by the way, very German. My middle name is Herbert after meine Opa, Herber Scheurrich.

And Germans are chomping at the bit for this. Imagine the commercial, this is what our "freedom" is up against:
The demand in this country is there, and is only going to increase.

 

At least self driving cars aren't operated by people on their phones

Or maybe they are... way in the future but ya know what I mean

 

And so this is why Americans hate cell phones, correct, since they are a huge invasion of our right to privacy.....lol

 

Curious how they plan for people to receive deliveries, get emergency vehicle access and move their furniture in.

 

Now see? that's a great point. Smartphones, social networks and the internet at large have done us a huge discervice by taking our right to privacy away. We largely do forgive all that though, even those who have had their identity stolen or other terrible experiences answer to it by buying another, better smartphone. But Why?
Because we decided (through marketing, peers, and general convenience) that the freedom of HAVING a smartphone, and all the communication, information and entertainment that comes with it is more valuable to us then the risks.

I wager the prospect of traveling in privacy, to do as you please, to have the freedom to "drink what I want", "get some sleep" , or "diddle myself" in my own space, while traveling efficiently and potentially more safely, would be considered more freedom than not.

 

You can't push start a vehicle with an alternator unless the battery has enough power to excite the field windings. This happened long before computers.

 

Naw, you can push start a vehicle with out an alternator at all, as long as there is enough juice for your ignition, and fuel pressure and computers if so equipped. Had a few alternators fail on me where I could run with my headlights off, but not with them on.
A push start barely moves an alternator enough to generate anything.

 

I guess the better way would have been just saying a no-win scenario where the car has to make a decision of which group of people to hit. If what you took from that conversation was me trying to prove there were four kids in America oblivious/distracted enough to run into traffic then probably best you just stopped reading there.

 

I'm glad I stopped.