Kevin Carr's Gloves 3894 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 I can't wait for them as I can't abide driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4725 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions. A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 (edited) Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions. A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception. I get what you're saying but I dunno. Motion detectors, sensors for detecting changes in light... if they can pick up the movement they'd have a better reaction time than we would. I recall being surprised that cars can park themselves now. They'll find a way to do it, and far more safely (overall) than people being responsible I reckon. Edited October 3, 2016 by Rayvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 3, 2016 Author Share Posted October 3, 2016 Always good to be in complete opposition to CT. Think you underestimate their takeover CT. They're driving around California now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Kids will probably be mown down by the cars self-defense rail gun while you watch endless advertising from google on the front windscreen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 The trouble they are having with discussions with regulator is in being able to pre-specify the moral actions of the vehicle when in danger. So, if the car has to take evasive action to avoid running over a group of 5 people but to do so the only action it can take is to swerve and run over a child, how should the programmers incorporate the pre-determined choice into the software algorithm? That's a really interesting question - but would any of us be capable of assessing that moral quandry in the few split seconds we'd have to make a decision. Surely your brain would just pick a direction and go for it. The car would have to be programmed on something along the lines of assessing which object it was farthest from and aiming for that one, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15529 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Kids will probably be mown down by the cars self-defense rail gun while you watch endless advertising from google on the front windscreen. Computer terminals report some gains in the values of copper and tin while American businessmen snap up van Goghs for the price of a hospital wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 That's a really interesting question - but would any of us be capable of assessing that moral quandry in the few split seconds we'd have to make a decision. Surely your brain would just pick a direction and go for it. The car would have to be programmed on something along the lines of assessing which object it was farthest from and aiming for that one, I think. Its not just about the difference in how we might react, its that the programmers need to insert a morality into the programme. That gets tricky once you specify a rule, like 'do the least harm' as then algorithm will be able to calculate numbers of people. However, that might not be in line with people's moral 'preferences' if a newborn baby was involved. There is no limit to how complicate the algorithm is an of course the calculation and reaction time would be quicker than any human brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Computer terminals report some gains in the values of copper and tin while American businessmen snap up van Goghs for the price of a hospital wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Its not just about the difference in how we might react, its that the programmers need to insert a morality into the programme. That gets tricky once you specify a rule, like 'do the least harm' as then algorithm will be able to calculate numbers of people. However, that might not be in line with people's moral 'preferences' if a newborn baby was involved. There is no limit to how complicate the algorithm is an of course the calculation and reaction time would be quicker than any human brain. They won't bother with any of that. After the first 100 deaths it won't even be a news item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable. The decision will be made on what damages the car the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 (edited) The decision will be made on what damages the car the least. Surely the damage to the car would be a secondary concern for the manufacturer, given that damage = more spending on parts and replacement vehicles? Edited October 3, 2016 by Rayvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renton 21626 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 I would go for whatever saves the most lives, and we all just accept and live by that basic rationality. Each life weighed equally against the next. Sure there'd be horror stories where some small child is killed in place of 5 terminally ill old people on their way to a euthanasia clinic, but overall, I think the rule would be acceptable. How many terminally ill people heading to Zurich is Prince George worth I wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4725 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Always good to be in complete opposition to CT. Think you underestimate their takeover CT. They're driving around California now. Hold on, they haven't even started testing them without humans yet (iirc) and they are only be used in certain test areas. A long long road from there to them being in everyday normal use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 3, 2016 Author Share Posted October 3, 2016 The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum. Speed up into them. I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car. Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 3, 2016 Author Share Posted October 3, 2016 Hold on, they haven't even started testing them without humans yet (iirc) and they are only be used in certain test areas. A long long road from there to them being in everyday normal use. That's a barrier of law rather than technology though. Just needs the slow moving bureaucracy to get out of their way so they can scale up the operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum. Speed up into them. I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car. Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 44881 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Pleased I'll be long dead before these ever become common place. Personally I can't see how they could ever be safer than a human in everyday normal driving conditions. A whole part of your driving test is hazard perception. I'm not convinced this can be built into a car. Even in my own cul-de-sac I know there's a house with very small children that have a habit of darting out from a concealed entrance. I therefore drop to a few mile per hour passing that house. Nee robot can have that personal localised hazard perception. Now then, now then, that's not why you slow down, Jimmy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30611 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 Apparently there has been problems with the Italian prototype.... ...........only goes in reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 The setting should be to punish the people who step out late and cause the conundrum. Speed up into them. I like the idea of cars having a split second to make a rational decision and humans programming morality that exponentially increases the decision making time into an existential crisis for the car. Google vehicles smacked up in alley ways wondering about what kind of God gave themm this power over life and death. I'm hacking mine to prioritise Trump supporters tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howay 12496 Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 I can't wait for them, driving is a right fucking chore and the amount of completely fucking useless drivers on the road make it a nightmare at times. It'll be class being able to know you can get to places in a certain length of time rather than now where you set off early and get stuck behind some shambles driving 15mph or get stuck in traffic because someone crashed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5223 Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 I'll be pleased when they arrive as well tbf. Not that big a fan of driving that I wouldn't prefer to just watch a movie while the car takes me to where I need to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted October 4, 2016 Share Posted October 4, 2016 Yeah I think they'll be brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now