Posted on 05/29/2018 8:18:00 AM PDT by CodeToad
We spend a lot of time and words on what autonomous cars can do, but sometimes it’s a more interesting question to ask what they can’t do. The limitations of a technology are at least as important as its capabilities. That’s what this little bit of performance art tells me, anyway.
You can see the nature of “Autonomous trap 001” right away. One of the first and most important things a self-driving system will learn or be taught is how to interpret the markings on the road. This is the edge of a lane, this means it’s for carpools only, and so on.
(Excerpt) Read more at techcrunch.com ...
Assassins & terrorists will love self driving cars. Which means that government officials won’t use them...
“(Of course, it’s just a regular car he drives into it for demonstration purposes. It would take too long to catch a real one.)”
—
Wait a minute.
How about long tunnels or parking garages?
I stand by my prediction.
Self-driving vehicles will not survive First Contact with the American tort bar.
I’d say they could navigate them to some degree, but so many parking garages are without any proper marking that a self-driving car would probably go to the top and then just stop.
True, not a real test, but it looks promisingly hilarious!
I gotta say, I think they will become (very) safe.
Very soon. However they still need to work out the minor fudge factors, like the car a couple months ago which actually hit and killed a pedestrian who was walking beside a bicycle, crossing the road.
Not good that. But they are about to become (very) safe. Very soon, I think.
Con men and Phony Shady Back Doctors will bring a quick end to the self driving car.
Seriously the ONLY way to have successful self driving cars is to BAN non-self driving cars.
What happens when there is snow on the road, or if there is no cell coverage?
I would make the manufacturer liable for all accidendents where the car is liable. I am sure they are lobbying to shift the liability already.
Someone laid a trap for one of our local police officers sure he stopped and was brutally murdered. No self-driving car involved.
I completely agree. And regarding the incident with the bicycle walker, I’m reminded of a revelation that was shared with me a year or so ago about this whole concept: self-driving cars don’t have to be perfectly safe. They only have to be at least as safe as human drivers. Human drivers make millions of mistakes, many of them deadly, every single day.
(Note: Single-lane roundabouts are no big deal; but the complexity of dealing with roundabounts goes up astronomically when a second lane is added. Cycling become especially problematic.)
The Turing Test for cars.
With self driving cars the govt is going to decide where you go and when you go and how fast you go. You will loose your remaining freedom. Can’t live there not allowed. It is all part of a utopian wet dream.
“Assassins & terrorists will love self driving cars.”
How about carjackers and freight thieves. Just paint a few lines on the road.
Hell, I bet it's already been passed as an amendment to a farm bill, or some such.
The government wants everybody to be forced to ride in one of these. Except for the ruling elite, of course. They will have chauffer-driven cars with armed guards, while the common herd will be allowed to ride only in these things.
The left wants everybody to be the same, to have the same amount of money, to have the same house, the same car and everything else.
The “self-driving” car is just a way to control us.
Hear, hear...although, you do realize that people are stupid enough to assume FULL LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACTIONS OF A CAR THEY’RE NOT IN OR IN CONTROL OF!?! We shall see!
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.