The Kobayashi Maru test is upon us

[tlgerdes]

Where is Captain Kirk when you need him? :thumbsup:

http://www.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/390730,should-your-robot-driver-kill-you-to-save-a-child8217s-life.aspx?eid=19&edate=20140807&utm_source=20140807&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter&nl=daily (http://www.pcauthority.com.au/Feature/390730,should-your-robot-driver-kill-you-to-save-a-child8217s-life.aspx?eid=19&edate=20140807&utm_source=20140807&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter&nl=daily)

Interesting quandary.

[multiweb]

The tunnel problem :lol: Here we'd have the kangaroo problem. Override Kill Kill Kill :driving:

[tlgerdes]

What if the car determines that by hitting the kangaroo it is going to come through the windscreen and kill you?

[multiweb]

It's a smart car and a dumb roo. The roo will not move. So it'll have to avoid real quick. There should be a way to add static objects to the database such as roos. Like adding speed cameras. :)

In urban conditions though I can see the insurance claims coming. Your claim has been denied because you have been hit by a car running version 1.2 of the software and it appears that your firmware is still version 1.1. :eyepop:

[el_draco]

Living in an area where wildlife is slaughtered on a daily basis by bogan morons, I imagine a car with the computing equivalent of a broken toaster would make more ethical judgements than most "humans". :screwy:

[AndrewJ]

I reckon every person needs to be forced to carry ( or be implanted with ) an IFF chip so the car knows who you are ( and as a secondary benefit, you can be tracked by the state for your safety ).
Then to help defray the costs of this mad new world, and keep the capitalist insurance system running, you will be able to buy for yourself ( or your pets ), a ranking that means the car will kill "the cheaper option".
No messy ethics involved, just let the market decide.
Hmmm, wonder if i can patent that idea????
Gunna be fun :-)

[TrevorW]

Would not the wisest thing be when we reach the stage of total autonomous vehicles to have the technology built in to avoid accidents or mitigate the outcome of one eg: lightning fast reaction time, extraordinary braking ability, total driver/passenger protection etc, then the dilemma is solved.:question:

[Camelopardalis]

The technology already exists...a number of German cars have had night vision available for several years, which works well at night for detecting threats in the cross path and emergency braking, not sure how well it'd work in the Australian sunshine :lol:

[sn1987a]

I think the answer is obvious, someone should sneak in at night and disable the tunnel. Kobayashi Maru.:P

[AndrewJ]

All well and good if you drive in a city where everything is perfect.

If you are driving at night in the bush and a roo jumps in front of you, the computer may detect it and put on the brakes, but if the simple laws of physics detemine that the braking force via the tyre to road interface wont stop you in time, you are custard. Its all well and good until it doesnt work.
If you want a self driving car, its simple, get a taxi, bus or train.


Andrew

[Camelopardalis]

It's not designed for working in the City, it's designed for detecting and reducing the risk of impacts from "wild" objects on country roads at night.

As for traction...the computers on cars these days are more capable than the drivers ever are at understanding the laws of physics and assessing the road conditions and acting accordingly. Northern European winters can be pretty foul weather-wise, likewise many parts of the US, and given the litigious nature of their society for it to be sold there it'd have to be fairly robust.

The proof is in the pudding of course...

[AndrewJ]

Gday Dunk

I lived in Nth Germany for a year. ( No wildlife sighted :-) )
If you want to "totally" trust yr life to a computer chip go for it,
black ice on cobblestones aint funny ( and neither is driving on unsurfaced
outback roads )
I must admit, doing 120kph at an intersection without actually moving
cos my wheels were spinning on ice was a new sensation :-)

You only need these "computer" technologies to save you
if you have descended to the level of driving like an idiot
or you just dont give a $hit cos the computer will do it all for you.
Ie like those people who drive their UAVs ( urban assault vehicles )
with their thumb up their bum, their brain in neutral
and their attention applied 99% to their
iDevice/phone/entertainment systems .

The computers are programmed by a human, and work accordingly.
I seem to remember several problems recently with cars not stopping ( Ford territory ), or stopping unexpectedly on a freeway at speed ( volksies ), both resulting in deaths.
I still like to control my own destiny.

Andrew

[MortonH]

Why do we even need autonomous cars? How frickin' lazy is that???

[el_draco]

I think the idea is to reduce the number of "incidents" and by allowing the cars to communicate with each other and the infrastructure, smooth traffic flow. You can never eliminate the random factors that influence driving including the archetypal roo so many of the posters seem adamant to kill but its correct in saying the vehicle has the "intelligence" these days to have a significant input, whether you know it or not.

It will require a generational change I suspect. 100+ years ago it was, " There aint no dang way I'm going up in that dern contraption! If'n the Lard had wanned us to FLY, he'd a dang well gived us wangs!".

Of course, there are those of us that would HEARTILY agree with such a statement! :thumbsup:

Personally, I wouldn't trust a computer with my life at 100+km an hour if the arse end of a BP fuel tanker heading in my direction came adrift... My last audio memory, "Input Exception error.... Rebooting" :eyepop:

[MortonH]

Yeah. Wouldn't get me in a car running Windows!

[multiweb]

:lol: The blue screen of death would take on a whole new meaning. :scared:
...or your car will momentarily reboot while we apply the new updates... while cruising on the highway.

[AstralTraveller]

So, who is going to buy a car that doesn't put the owner's life as the #1 priority? Are we that altruistic? Sure many people swerve to avoid a roo but, I suspect, because they don't process or understand the consequences quickly enough.

What if it isn't a child in front of the car but an octogenarian? What if there is a child in the back seat of the car? Can the car tell the difference between a person and a roo? What about an emu (another tallish biped)?

Should the car always slow down near danger spots so that the passive safety devices will always protect humans, even if that lengthens travel times?

My brain hurts.



No worries there. Stationary cars never have accidents.

[Camelopardalis]

Hey, I'm not disagreeing, I enjoy driving, but the time is nary upon us... already insurers are offering lower premiums to owners of cars that have these features fitted as standard, and as we submit to autonomous cars it's the details of the incidences of road-related deaths that will change is all.

Having been driving in Sydney for over a year now, autonomous cars seemingly can't come soon enough, as the way the vast majority of the cars are being "driven" here is shocking :eyepop:

[Camelopardalis]

Are you proposing a scoring system, a la Death Race 2000? :lol:

[rally]

Surely there is an automatically activated manual overide - just like cruise control - but I guess if the "driver" is busy making lunch, doing a makeover or using social media - they'd be incapable of a decision or in fact any awareness !
Not to mention user selectability (turn it off on country roads) and yet further some user defineable options and parameters.

I regularly work with some fairly sophisticated machines that in theory only have known conditions to deal with - when an unforeseen error occurs - eg broken wires, faulty sensor, stuck relay, broken input/output etc - it can be pretty funny to see what happens when the PLC encounters an error the programmer never considered.
The usual issue is an immediate stop or shutdown and a meaningless error message - That wouldn't be so funny in a motor vehicle travelling at 110kmh on a windy outback road with fog, roos, fallen branches at night !

[Octane]

As for why we need autonomous cars, check out the technology Lexus is working on (and, has already implemented). Pretty damn amazing!

Their rationale for autonomous vehicles is to allow the older generation to still enjoy getting on the road and going for a drive.

I originally saw the article in a Wheels magazine a couple of months back while waiting for a pizza, but, here's a web version:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/7/3843232/lexus-self-driving-car-ces-2013

H

[AstralTraveller]

Sorry, I haven't seen the movie but I think I get the drift. I'm not proposing anything, just pointing out the layers of complexity in making ethical decisions.

[AndrewJ]

IIRC, with one of the earlier "runaways", the car was an auto with drive by wire throttle. The computer wouldnt allow the car to be forced to neutral ( or allow the engine turned off ) if going above a set speed. The throttle didnt respond so all they had was a foot on the brake, that the cruise control fought.
And as you noted, once implemented, all normal driving "skills" will be lost quite rapidly, so manual override would probably be useless. The person would just have to sit there and see what happens.
I do see one benefit tho, Taxis would know where to go :lol:

Andrew

[AndrewJ]

After listening to the radio this morning, there are other "needs" coming along too.
The discussion regarding "pay for ALL road use based on time, location, distance travelled" is getting raised again. One option mooted was to put cameras everywhere, but the new one thats becoming more and more viable is that ALL cars MUST be fitted with govt authorised GPS trackers that are readable by the government roads dept. ALL your travel gets logged and different "toll" rates apply based on type of road, time of day etc multiplied by the km you drive at each rate. Sounds like another way for the Govt to keep "metadata" on where everyone goes, and at the same time, get the poor off the roads so the rich can get a faster trip.
Sometimes i think technology isnt always here to help .

Andrew

[Camelopardalis]

Rock and hard place anyone? Autonomous car or Sydney cab driver :lol:

[Octane]

It's all doom and gloom, Andrew. :P

H

[AndrewJ]

Gday H


If idiots like the think tank bod this morning get there way it will be.

At least 2 pollies have since replied that they wont be doing it (yet)
but you have to wonder what these idiots will come up with next,
esp when technology makes it "simple".

Andrew