Self drive and snow

El_Duderino 09

Bruthal wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Cars are full of electronically controlled parts that they can be hacked right now. It’s not really something I spend much time worrying about. Does anyone?

No, but we are not depending on it keeping us in lane at 120kph just yet.

Sone cars do exactly that right now.

But take a more mundane example. Do you think the brakes in your car are purely mechanical and couldn’t possibly be hacked?

eeguy

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sone cars do exactly that right now.

But take a more mundane example. Do you think the brakes in your car are purely mechanical and couldn’t possibly be hacked?

Sure even if the brakes are mechanical they can still be physically hacked.

snip snip:cool:

CiniO

billbond4 wrote: »

Taking a guy who works on self driving cars, he says he huge amount of computing power needed to work out all the possible scenrios etc on a public road is years away probably 30 to 40.
Motorway driving in self driving is relatively easy as theres less variables

As I said - I don't see self driving car able to drive in all conditions until we really develop quantum computers and artificial intelligence.
This might be 30 to 40 years.
Or might be 200-300 years.
Or might be never.

Artificial intelligence wasn't at much higher state than today in the 80's so progress is very slow.

Bruthal

eeguy wrote: »

Planes actually have to do a lot of this to get down to the correct runway at the correct time in the correct slot.

Avoid pedestrians and cyclists?

A plane is a steel tube 10km above the earth with anywhere from 50 to 850 passengers.

At least the altitude has been updated, not sure about the steel bit though. But anyway, aircraft were all that long before autopilot existed.

The risks are so much greater than a car.
Bird strikes, co-ordinating with ATF, engine failure, system failures, weather anomalies and a million other things can go wrong with a plane. One small issue can snowball to catastrophe.

The main parameter an autopilot deals with is navigation. Much easier in the air than on a road. A series of waypoints compared to following a road, passing other cars, overtaking tractors, cyclists, avoiding driving into a big pothole at 100kph, driving into a flood, squeezing past a car on a road not wide enough for 1 car, while barely avoiding going into the ditch.

Autopilot can deal with most of these, and in fairness, most pilots should leave autopilot alone to deal with it, but there's always going to be scenarios where the computer is out of it's depth, or human intervention is needed to physically repair something.

Nearly all car problems can be rendered safe by pulling over to the side of the road and calling the AA.

That was always the case with cars and not planes.

Your example isn't accurate either. We're talking about cars and airplanes, carrying people along predefined paths, not a quadcopter than can take off anywhere, fly anywhere and land anywhere, with no regard for the area around it.

The drone can be pre programmed with a list of waypoints, and it will fly the course along them. Would that be as easy to program into a car to drive waypoints on a busy road? Aircraft dont have to deal with passing cyclists, tractors, wheel destroying potholes etc etc.

I have a drone here that will not fly into restricted airspace. Or above a certain altitude.

Now before you dismiss all you dont agree with, I agree in principal. I do not suggest automated cars wont happen, or that they wouldnt make cars safer. It is just my opinion, that 2022 is slightly optimistic for cars to fully drive unaided between any points we want. I could be wrong, its not a contest. Its a simple opinion.

Bruthal

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sone cars do exactly that right now.

But take a more mundane example. Do you think the brakes in your car are purely mechanical and couldn’t possibly be hacked?

Well id say it would be tricky to upload new firmware to them

But hacked/modded was in the context of altering something in the setup to avoid a restriction or such, or to improve something in the firmware. Im not sure what firmware mod people want to apply to their brakes at present.

Bruthal

eeguy wrote: »

Sure even if the brakes are mechanical they can still be physically hacked.

snip snip:cool:

What would that do to upgrade the car?

Del2005

Bruthal wrote: »

What would that do to upgrade the car?

It's not an upgrade its a dangerous fault being induced, by remote or other means.

Stheno

CiniO wrote: »

Artificial intelligence wasn't at much higher state than today in the 80's so progress is very slow.

Google ibm and watson to see how wrong your statement is

A fleet of self driving cars were used as taxis at the consumer electronics show this year, they still have to have a driver due to regulation but there is plenty of articles on how they performed interacting with normal traffic

CelticRambler

Ger Roe wrote: »

One more question on the safety aspects.. I read all the time how the self drive cars can anticipate problems ahead and stop in emergency situations but will they also swerve or accelerate to avoid collisions like humans sometimes have to do?

Simple answer: yes, they can already. See these Veritasium/Mercedes-Benz videos episode 1 episode 2 episode 3

Kat1170 wrote: »

Ah, the old question. What if the evasive action is going to kill a pedestrian(s) or no evasive action is going to kill the cars occupant(s).

Ah the old irrelevant argument: what if we develop a system that changes the whole transport ecosystem and then try to use it's failure to be as bad as the one we have now to undermine its legitimacy. This "kill or be killed" dilemma just won't exist. Either something will happen that is entirely unforeseen by the vehicle's detection systems, in which case it will crash - just like a human does; or it will anticipate the incident and adjust not only its own speed and direction, but also communicate that information to all other vehicles in the vicinity, so that no-one gets killed. :rolleyes:

Once there is a sufficiently large database of accident reports and it's shown that humans are dreadful drivers, the insurance premium for choosing to drive an old-fashioned human-controlled vehicle on a public road will take 90% of the idiot drivers out of the equation. Maybe even 99%! :cool:

Bruthal wrote: »

Planes dont have to avoid pedestrians, keep in lane, emergency brake, park, stop at red lights, squeeze past other traffic on narrow back roads with one having do squeeze into the edge of the ditch........

Consumer drones these days can be sent on fully automated flights from takeoff to landing back at the exact same spot, after flying kms away.

My drone does all of the above - great fun playing chasing with it in the back garden, and when it's had enough, it tells me to feck off and finds itself somewhere to land.

Bruthal

CelticRambler wrote: »

My drone does all of the above - great fun playing chasing with it in the back garden, and when it's had enough, it tells me to feck off and finds itself somewhere to land.

Ive heard that alright. I tried it with the rc car the other day, it ran into the garden wall.

CiniO

Stheno wrote: »

Google ibm and watson to see how wrong your statement is

A fleet of self driving cars were used as taxis at the consumer electronics show this year, they still have to have a driver due to regulation but there is plenty of articles on how they performed interacting with normal traffic

Yes, sure...

But remember that Ancient Greeks also had some form of airplanes 6000 years ago, which probably could even fly for a bit in rightly controlled environment.
Wright brothers though were born only in 19 century, and it wasn't really until after WW2 before general public were allowed to travel by air on a large scale.

eeguy

CiniO wrote: »

Yes, sure...

But remember that Ancient Greeks also had some for of airplanes 6000 years ago, which probably could even fly for a bit in rightly controlled environment.
Wright brothers though were born only in 19 century, and it wasn't really until after WW2 before general public were allowed to travel by air on a large scale.

Ehh what? Ancient greeks had airplanes? Yeah...no they didn't.

In 1901 Wilbur Wright said it would take 50 years before humans would fly.
It actually took less than 50 years from the Wright Bros first powered flight in 1903 to Chuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier in 1947.

Technological progress happens in the blink of an eye if there's money and need.

CiniO

eeguy wrote: »

Ehh what? Ancient greeks had airplanes? Yeah...no they didn't.

They didn't have airplanes per se, but they thought they were close to flying.
That's my whole point.

In 1901 Wilbur Wright said it would take 50 years before humans would fly.
It actually took less than 50 years from the Wright Bros first powered flight in 1903 to Chuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier in 1947.

Technological progress happens in the blink of an eye if there's money and need.

Technological progress is different thing.
Fully self driving car requires artificial intelligence, which we don't currently have, and are very unlikely to have anytime soon.

I'm not saying that it's not possible to create a car which will be able to drive on it's own in certain conditions.
But having car which will make it in all possible conditions, roads, and scenarios is IMO very far away.

BeastyIsThe coolest cyclist on_the_road!

I'm looking forward to the third part component of our motor insurance coming down with self drive !

eeguy

CiniO wrote: »

They didn't have airplanes per se, but they thought they were close to flying.
That's my whole point.

Did they? Where did you read that?

CiniO wrote: »

Technological progress is different thing.
Fully self driving car requires artificial intelligence, which we don't currently have, and are very unlikely to have anytime soon.

True, but nobody is jumping straight to a fully capable self driving car. Most companies are looking at a Level 4, which is achievable with a neural network, and this is what everyone is developing and refining right now. A car that can drive itself 98% of the time and only hands over when something really unexpected happens.
It may be it hands over control to a call centre somewhere.

Bruthal

eeguy wrote: »

Did they? Where did you read that?


True, but nobody is jumping straight to a fully capable self driving car. Most companies are looking at a Level 4, which is achievable with a neural network, and this is what everyone is developing and refining right now. A car that can drive itself 98% of the time and only hands over when something really unexpected happens.
It may be it hands over control to a call centre somewhere.

It will be interesting whatever happens anyway.

CiniO

eeguy wrote: »

Did they? Where did you read that?

Wikipedia

Antecedents
Many stories from antiquity involve flight, such as the Greek legend of Icarus and Daedalus, and the Vimana in ancient Indian epics. Around 400 BC in Greece, Archytas was reputed to have designed and built the first artificial, self-propelled flying device, a bird-shaped model propelled by a jet of what was probably steam, said to have flown some 200 m (660 ft).[8][9] This machine may have been suspended for its flight.[10][11]

True, but nobody is jumping straight to a fully capable self driving car. Most companies are looking at a Level 4, which is achievable with a neural network, and this is what everyone is developing and refining right now. A car that can drive itself 98% of the time and only hands over when something really unexpected happens.
It may be it hands over control to a call centre somewhere.

Yes, but in reality that's not a self driving car anymore if it can drive only in certain circumstances (even if it was 98% which I doubt).

eeguy

CiniO wrote: »

Antecedents
Many stories from antiquity involve flight, such as the Greek legend of Icarus and Daedalus, and the Vimana in ancient Indian epics. Around 400 BC in Greece, Archytas was reputed to have designed and built the first artificial, self-propelled flying device, a bird-shaped model propelled by a jet of what was probably steam, said to have flown some 200 m (660 ft).[8][9] This machine may have been suspended for its flight.[10][11]

What? The Greeks thought they were close to manned flight because they made up some stories and one guy invented a bottle rocket?
Are you seriously using this as an example?

CiniO wrote: »

Yes, but in reality that's not a self driving car anymore if it can drive only in certain circumstances (even if it was 98% which I doubt).

Really? So what would you call a car that can self-drive 98% of the time? A normal car?

Lantus

There are 1.2million deaths worldwide each year due to road accidents. It's a simply staggering waste of human life that autonomous cars have the potential to massively reduce. Anyone who opposes cutting that disgusting statistic is unsane.

El_Duderino 09

eeguy wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sone cars do exactly that right now.

But take a more mundane example. Do you think the brakes in your car are purely mechanical and couldn’t possibly be hacked?

Sure even if the brakes are mechanical they can still be physically hacked.

snip snip:cool:

This is it. If someone wants to tamper with your car by hacking or physically damaging it, they can already do it. It would be much the same with self driving cars.

The fear some people have is unreal.

El_Duderino 09

Bruthal wrote: »

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sone cars do exactly that right now.

But take a more mundane example. Do you think the brakes in your car are purely mechanical and couldn’t possibly be hacked?

Well id say it would be tricky to upload new firmware to them

But hacked/modded was in the context of altering something in the setup to avoid a restriction or such, or to improve something in the firmware. Im not sure what firmware mod people want to apply to their brakes at present.

I think you're going out of your way to avoid the point. If someone wanted to hack your car right now to cause harm, they could. I doubt you spend much time worrying about it though. The paranoia around hacking self drive cars is unnecessary unless you already worry about hacking current cars.

Del2005

Lantus wrote: »

There are 1.2million deaths worldwide each year due to road accidents. It's a simply staggering waste of human life that autonomous cars have the potential to massively reduce. Anyone who opposes cutting that disgusting statistic is unsane.

The world is already over populated.

More people die from starvation and lack of water. If we want to have a big impact on humans we should be tackling food shortages and lack of clean water, which will improve the life of billions, not remote control cars.

mloc123

Somewhat related... I met a model X while out driving on Saturday. the road had just two tyre tracks dug down and about 1ft either side. I pulled in a bit and expected him to do the same... nope. Just sat in the middle of the road After a stand off he finally moved over enough to pass.

Perhaps he was using self drive and it didn't know how to react.... perhaps he was just a dick.

Bruthal

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think you're going out of your way to avoid the point. If someone wanted to hack your car right now to cause harm, they could. I doubt you spend much time worrying about it though. The paranoia around hacking self drive cars is unnecessary unless you already worry about hacking current cars.

I think you missed the point.

Bruthal wrote: »

Just about every electronic, or computer controlled device gets hacked, or modded etc.

Hacked/modded is not only about other unknowns altering a software system, or cutting brake lines with a snips. Obviously some posters believe we will be driving around in 2022 in fully automated cars. And that`s fair enough. Maybe we will.

It will be handy for the bad weather to keep control of the national flock anyway, a central command to make sure no one goes out driving in the snow:pac:

eeguy

mloc123 wrote: »

Somewhat related... I met a model X while out driving on Saturday. the road had just two tyre tracks dug down and about 1ft either side. I pulled in a bit and expected him to do the same... nope. Just sat in the middle of the road After a stand off he finally moved over enough to pass.

Perhaps he was using self drive and it didn't know how to react.... perhaps he was just a dick.

That cars worth 100k. I wouldn't be risking it either

Del2005 wrote: »

The world is already over populated.

More people die from starvation and lack of water. If we want to have a big impact on humans we should be tackling food shortages and lack of clean water, which will improve the life of billions, not remote control cars.

So there's too many people so we should let them die? Bit harsh.
Should we close the hospitals and have random sterilisation too just to thin the herd?

Bruthal

Lantus wrote: »

There are 1.2million deaths worldwide each year due to road accidents. It's a simply staggering waste of human life that autonomous cars have the potential to massively reduce. Anyone who opposes cutting that disgusting statistic is unsane.

We could just ban cars. Who would oppose that is if saves 1 million a year?

55 million die a year. Terrible, isnt it.

Eventually everyone will be dead, unless immortality comes about.

When will we have worldwide fully automated cars, 2022, 2032, 2090?

Bruthal

eeguy wrote: »

That cars worth 100k. I wouldn't be risking it either

Yes, the more expensive car owners feel they have priority then... Will the auto drive cars take that into account?

So there's too many people so we should let them die? Bit harsh.

If a driver makes an error, and gets killed, did we let him die?

El_Duderino 09

Del2005 wrote: »

The world is already over populated.

More people die from starvation and lack of water. If we want to have a big impact on humans we should be tackling food shortages and lack of clean water, which will improve the life of billions, not remote control cars.

That’s a terrible attitude towards road deaths It seems any old argument will do for those who don’t want the technology to develop.

El_Duderino 09

Bruthal wrote: »

I think you missed the point.

Bruthal wrote: »

Just about every electronic, or computer controlled device gets hacked, or modded etc.

Hacked/modded is not only about other unknowns altering a software system, or cutting brake lines with a snips. Obviously some posters believe we will be driving around in 2022 in fully automated cars. And that`s fair enough. Maybe we will.

Maybe I did miss the point. What was the point in relation to self driving cars vs current cars?

As far as I’m concerned, both could be tampered. It’s not something I would waste time worrying about. Do you worry about someone tampering with your car?

Lantus

Del2005 wrote:

More people die from starvation and lack of water. If we want to have a big impact on humans we should be tackling food shortages and lack of clean water, which will improve the life of billions, not remote control cars.

Agreed. But this is just the car forum.

Humans are stupid beyond reason and it continues to cause suffering and pain on a global scale.