Posted on 08/21/2016 10:17:53 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
And those call centers...yeah, Bangalore.
Driverless cars will be a big boost to the economy in so many ways.
At least a real life cabby has a chance to say no or report the situation. Who will do so with an explosives-ladden self-driving car?
Vision wrote: “What technology works perfectly? None. Why would anyone trust their life with it and try to trust other lives with it too?”
Driver less cars are already on the road. Many have been involved in accidents. Overwhelmingly, the accidents are caused by human drivers, not by the driver less cars.
Driver less cars are inherently more safe. Why would you trust your safety to the recklessness of human drivers? Drivers who are more interested in playing Pokeman, streaming video, texting, etc.?
Vision wrote: “When a driver less car kills someone the company should be sued.”
When a car with a driver causes an accident, the company that built the car will be charged with reckless endangerment for allowing a human to drive.
For many people the need to own a car will cease. It will also give many seniors another option to go out and about.
Say no to what? Suit cases in the trunk? What cabbie is going to say no to that? Then of course there’s a million other ways to get a car. Remember the WTC and OKC bombings were done with a rental trucks. If bad guys want a vehicle, they’re gonna get a vehicle. Since half the guys blow themselves up with the bomb they can always use their own, not gonna need it later.
“You are assuming that Google (and other self-driving car developers) haven’t thought of all these things already and have developed ways to deal with them.”
I am not assuming anything. I am showing with great clarity a direct quote from a Google engineer, which demonstrates that the car is not autonomous in any way, shape or form.
Those who believe it is autonomous are the ones doing the assuming.
“We are In the early years. The very early years. But it’s coming. The technology is there. It’s amusing that so many seem afraid of it.”
Essentially, this is the equivalent of the 1960’s predictions of flying cars.
Again, I am not afraid of it - what I find ‘amusing’ is how many people are ‘falling for it’.
A Google car could not traverse a parking lot on its own yet.
The short answer is no. First self driving cars help in lots of ways. No need for drivers licenses. Old people can quit driving and keep their independence. Drunk driving will diminish. And many people who have a car for occasional trips will no longer need one.
That being said. Things will change. Taxi’s will be less common. They won’t go away. They will be a luxury service. Cars will still get into accidents. And cars will still break down. So, we will still need most of the people associated with cars. Plus roads will have to be better. Self driving cars require lots of road signals to make sure they are on the road and that they are going the right speed, and obeying the laws. Right now most of the signage is loosey goosey. That won’t work for a car robot.
Get your ass to Mars and take a Johnny Cab. Lol
“It means that the ‘self driving’ car has an incredibly limited ability to process data and make decisions ‘on-board’, and it relies on pre-mapping and pre-planning by a team of people, much like a space mission.”
The “incredibly limited” data-processing ability is (at least) doubling every two years. It’s already millions of times more powerful, than the on-board Apollo mission computers.
Google Maps, every GPS receiver, etc. already collect data, in real time, from their millions of users. That data goes to update road conditions in real time. Similarly, every autonomous vehicle will collect new data on road conditions, road markers, and other characteristics of the environment. The information will be available to all other autonomous vehicles.
You miss the point, a driverless car is just that driverless. No suicide bomber. And if it requires a warm body they grab and incompacitate a person and strap them in.
Raise your hand if you’ve ever worked with LIDAR.
Oh wow, my hand is raised. So I’ve got a notion of how large the data files from a LIDAR scan can be. I also now that the one venture my company is working on that involves on board processing (not in an automobile and I really can’t say what) includes an air conditioner that would normally be found on a reefer trailer, in order to cool the stack of computers.
Again, without the advantage of pre-mapping a route, a Google car could not make it across a parking lot on its own. This is where we are at now - zero point. This is why I find the fantastical claims (and snarky comments about non-believers) to be so interesting.
What you said was silly, I was just pointing out that the person stating one shouldn’t put one’s safety in the hands of technology was saying it on one of the finest pieces of technology mankind has ever invented. Think about it.
Too many people own cars and need money to end up with Uber replacing its drivers.
I don’t think my comment was the least bit snarky.
“Again, without the advantage of pre-mapping a route, a Google car could not make it across a parking lot on its own.”
So, once the route has been pre-mapped; why does this matter? Off-road use may be a problem — for a while.
The bottom line is driver less cars are inherently safer than cars with drivers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.