Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #41  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:39 AM
bojan's Avatar
bojan
amateur

bojan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mt Waverley, VIC
Posts: 7,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave View Post
....I regularly drive from Tabulam to Sydney and back so I would love to hand over the driving to a compter managed car. No doubt it would talk to you as well and point out places of interest and would lfill the void of loneliness on a long trip.
Alex, wouldn't it be much more fun to use (proper) public transport then?
Talking to real people instead of dumb machine?

PS
It seems we are all slowly but surely developing the phobia towards other people...
"Caves of steel" and other Asomov's novels come to my mind..

Last edited by bojan; 01-03-2016 at 11:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:23 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Public transport from here to there does not work when you are 30 klms out of a one horse town as is the case for me.
It is others loneliness I consider.
I am happy when alone as I don't have to worry about helping people and can enjoy my thoughts.
The trip is hard on my legs is my main issue.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 07-07-2016, 02:37 PM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Just reading up on self drive cars and saw the following today
http://www.news.com.au/technology/in...95ac826e0ee378
I hadnt heard of the earlier death.???
I know its not a true self drive car yet, but if technology that can't see a semi in front of it on a freeway is currently deemed OK, how "un"complicated is "safe" city driving going to be.
Wanna be a test pilot yet???

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 07-07-2016, 04:32 PM
torana68's Avatar
torana68 (Roger)
Registered User

torana68 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ACT/NSW
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
Just reading up on self drive cars and saw the following today

Andrew
don't know what that article said but I hear the truck was across the road (90% to) so as you can imagine there wasn't anything to "see" (if you think about the height of the trailer behind a truck, the sensor would have seen clean air). Driver "may" have been distracted as in that car if you take your hand off the wheel it stops, suggestion was he was watching a DVD, not the road ahead.............
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 07-07-2016, 05:29 PM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Roger
As i qualified, it wasn't a true self driving car, but it was supposed to have sensors to detect front on crashes.
Driving into headlights at night or the sun during the day are some of the worst conditions i normally detect
Your comment that "the sensor would have seen clean air" sort of implies that the system cant cope with "all" real world situations yet, as there really was a truck there.
I'm not knocking the push for self drive cars, just how lax the systems are that allows obviously unready technology onto the roads.
These systems MUST allow for the fact that humans are still involved.
Just look at the increasing number of twits that are earning Darwins for using "devices" whilst driving. These new automated driving "assistance" systems must take that into account ( ie the driver will just zone out ), or not be allowed ( yet )

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 07-07-2016, 06:35 PM
torana68's Avatar
torana68 (Roger)
Registered User

torana68 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ACT/NSW
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
Gday Roger
As i qualified, it wasn't a true self driving "the sensor would have seen clean air" sort of implies that the system cant cope with "all" real world situations yet, as there really was a truck there.
Andrew
It was a Tesla and it was in "Autopilot" mode I"m guessing the sensor will be upgraded shortly.
"Exactly how Autopilot failed Brown in the fatal accident isn’t entirely clear. Indications are that Brown didn’t brake the Model S. The driver of the truck told local media he believed that Brown was watching video at the time of the crash. And in its blog post, Tesla stated clearly that Autopilot was engaged in the Model S when the accident occurred.
“Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky,” Tesla said in its blog post, “so the brake was not applied. “The high ride height of the trailer combined with its positioning across the road and the extremely rare circumstances of the impact caused the Model S to pass under the trailer, with the bottom of the trailer impacting the windshield of the Model S.”
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 07-07-2016, 07:00 PM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Roger
“Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky,”
I would hazard a guess that the driver wasnt actually watching, as he thought the "automated" safety systems had him covered.
ie he probably had his thumb up his bum and his brain in neutral
Once you introduce these systems, people believe they are safe ( irrespective of the real limits in the automation ), so they need to be foolproof.
Quote:
and the extremely rare circumstances of the impact caused the Model S to pass under the trailer,
"extremely rare" has to be defined more closely, as i'm not sure a truck swerving in front of a car is "extremely rare".
You should driving down the south eastern feeway in Melbourne in peak hours to see how common it is.
Just because the sun was out shouldnt result in a persons death.
Again, i have no probs with the process of developing self drive cars, just the cavalier release of it without proper testing for all the possibilities.
This appears to be a crash that the most basic of systems should have prevented.

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 07-07-2016, 07:26 PM
torana68's Avatar
torana68 (Roger)
Registered User

torana68 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ACT/NSW
Posts: 786
"............Once you introduce these systems, people believe they are safe ( irrespective of the real limits in the automation ), so they need to be foolproof."

nothing will ever be 100% foolproof you cant fix "stupid" with electronics. People think they are safe now with airbags , ABS etc and forget to drive to conditions and not do stupid things.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 07-07-2016, 09:06 PM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Roger
Quote:
nothing will ever be 100% foolproof you cant fix "stupid" with electronics. People think they are safe now with airbags , ABS etc and forget to drive to conditions and not do stupid things.
Fully agree, and hence "safe" autonomous driving cars are essentially impossible :-). Ie people arent "expected" to drive to the conditions, the computer does it for them, and the computers arent ready yet.
( Just listen to "The Eighth day" by Hazel O'Connor to see the results )
Currently airbags, ABS, auto lane correction etc are all designed to remove the driver from the situation, and hence we end up with "not expected" situations causing grief as the driver is zoned out.
I wrote in an earlier post that we have spent Billions of dollars trying to make planes fully autonomous, ( and we arent there yet )
Autonomous cars wil be a quantum leap more complex than planes, so i am not holding my breath on them being truly "safe" any time soon.
They will certainly be introduced ( as big business stands to make a killing from the introduction ), but i know who will die along the way to improve the concept.

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-07-2016, 12:22 AM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,999
A 1 July 2016 article at the Institution of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
(IEEE) Spectrum magazine web site by Evan Ackerman entitled
"Fatal Tesla Self-Driving Car Crash Reminds Us That Robots Aren't Perfect"
details the 7th May Tesla Model S crash with the tractor-trailer.

See http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-t...-arent-perfect

A 6 July 2016 article by Mark Harris also at the IEEE web site entitled
"Tesla Autopilot Crash Exposes Industry Divide" exposes a
philosophical design fault-line running through the self-driving car industry.

See http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-t...slas-autopilot

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Harris IEEE
The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) classifies automation systems from Level 1, sporting basic lane-keeping or anti-lock brakes, through to Level 4, where humans need never touch the wheel (if there is one).
The Telsla's Autopilot is a beta-test of a Level 2 automation system which
requires driver oversight.

Early on, Google decided that they would aim for a Level 4 system which
does not require or allow for any human input at all. This decision came
about during an early trial when an employee who was in the
driver's position was caught rummaging around in the back-seat looking
for a notebook computer. Google engineers then decided that Level 4
should be a mandatory design goal as a human driver could not be trusted.

The Google cars employ more sophisticated sensors such as LIDAR
mounted on the roof which take 360 degree measurements at up
to 1.3 million readings per second. RADAR is employed in the front
and rear bumpers and in some test cars SONAR is also employed
along with stereo cameras. The Google test cars also pack more compute
power than the Tesla S production cars.

Since the fatal accident, some commentators have questioned whether
Elon Musk, who had been dismissive of LIDAR, might re-consider its
adoption into future Tesla models.

See https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...rash-elon-musk

In the U.K. back in the 1890's, "horseless carriages" were, by law, limited
to a speed limit of 4 mph (2mph in towns) and a red flag had to
be carried by a man walking in front.

A group of motoring enthusiasts set up the Self Propelled Traffic Association
and lobbied hard to have these restrictions overturned.

In November 1896 the Locomotives on Highways Act (alias the Red
Flag Act) was passed and the speed limit was raised to 14mph.

Level 4 self-driving cars have already reached a very high level of
sophistication and reading the professional engineering press it is
clear that they are inevitable and will become ubiquitous in
the near-future.

In our lifetimes they will probably be our first and most common form
of interaction with a class of robots.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 08-07-2016, 09:18 AM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Gary
Thanks for the specific links. An interesting read, and again highlights the lack of allowance for "humans" in the current Tesla model.
As the Tesla model of operation currently requires the human to stay alert, do you know if they also use any of the new eyeball tracking systems to determine the alertness of the driver???
( That would finish off the designer sunglasses tho :-).
Another human foible to overcome )

One thing that does concerm me still is how much automation, and layers of safety are going to be required to make it all work, and how will it be maintained. Making new is cheap these days, but maintenance costs a fortune, so i know what will suffer once it becomes a consumer product.

I wonder what the true cost of maintaining these beasties will be, as sensor failure rate will be an interesting thing to track.
All very interesting

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 08-07-2016, 10:08 AM
torana68's Avatar
torana68 (Roger)
Registered User

torana68 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ACT/NSW
Posts: 786
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
Gday Gary.............
Making new is cheap these days, but maintenance costs a fortune, so i know what will suffer once it becomes a consumer product. ...........
I wonder what the true cost of maintaining these beasties will be, as sensor failure rate will be an interesting thing to track.
All very interesting

Andrew
Andrew,
Not sure if you or many have noticed that the ONLY way forward is to buy new, were being programmed to buy new, old is bad, we MUST keep the factory's going otherwise the GDP falls (in that country as we seem to be happy to let others make things for us), unemployment goes up, therefore you MUST buy that new updated automated car, (or knock down that old house for a new one), you must not maintain anything, get a new one and to hell with the planet...... So........ I don't see maintenance or sensor life being an issue as you'll probably find legislation to remove anything over 2 years old appearing to prevent (as if) loss of life from those horrible old autopilot cars.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 08-07-2016, 11:08 AM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Roger
Quote:
Not sure if you or many have noticed that the ONLY way forward is to buy new
Dunno. My car is just over 20 yrs old, has done near 200,000k and i can still get it fixed for most problems ( I agree it is getting harder tho )
It cost a bit more initially, but the quality of up front design and build more than makes up the longer depreciation time.
Still runs no problems, and can even play CDs :-)
Quote:
I don't see maintenance or sensor life being an issue as you'll probably find legislation to remove anything over 2 years old appearing
That will make it unaffordable for the hoi poloi.
Even for the wealthy, who might now buy a new car every 2 years, their old car is sold secondhand and thus keeps depreciation lower than a full 2 year writeoff, and people lower down the foodchain get a cheaper purchase along the way.
The alternative I noted earlier in the thread is if personal car ownership is banned, and multinationals supply bot cars on an as required basis. It would mean no need for carparks, driveways, garages, etc, and traffic flow would be massively improved as no parked cars would ever block a road again. That could provide a cost balancing factor into the equations ( just on land sales to developers ), but im not sure how well that model would work outside the CBD and suburbs of the major cities.
Its certainly not a cost effective model for any semi rural areas.
Again, its going to be an interesting evolution.

Andrew

And just as a "human" thought, and maybe Gary can help here.
If i lived in the bush under this new regime, will i be able to hire a bot car and reprogram it to do circle work in the mud on my farm???????

Last edited by AndrewJ; 08-07-2016 at 11:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 08-07-2016, 02:58 PM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewJ View Post
Gday Gary
Thanks for the specific links. An interesting read, and again highlights the lack of allowance for "humans" in the current Tesla model.
As the Tesla model of operation currently requires the human to stay alert, do you know if they also use any of the new eyeball tracking systems to determine the alertness of the driver???
Hi Andrew,

Unlike the eye tracking systems that have been fitted to some Mercedes
for several years, apparently the Tesla does not have it.

Here is a video published by Drive.com.au last October whilst they
test drove a Tesla S with Autopilot across the Sydney Harbour Bridge -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aGXEJ_9G3Y

I have a friend who owns a Tesla S and the impression I get is that the
car's primary attraction is its phenomenal torque. It was some months
before he even got around to trying Autopilot but he did show me
an impressive video of using it on a U.S. highway.

But the 0 to 100km/h in 3.2 seconds acceleration of the Tesla Model S
P85D is visceral and its 691 hp is impressive for an electric-car and
will give a Lamborghini Aventador a run for its money at a standing start.
Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JEpksZA0JA

In other words, the Tesla S is marketed as an advanced
high-performance all-wheel-drive electric sedan (it has electric
motors on both front and rear wheels) that promises an enhanced
driving experience for the driver. The Autopilot is more akin to
an advanced cruise control rather than a fully autonomous system
in the Google approach.

The Tesla is a commercial offering designed to titillate. The Google
cars are experimental prototypes meant not to titillate but simply deliver
passengers from A to B without drama.

Here is a compilation of people's reactions to the launch feature of the
Tesla 85D taken by an American friend. Behind the wheel is a police
officer who has been trained in advanced driving. His day job is
being on the front-line patrolling a city that had more than 60 shooting
over the 4th July weekend alone and over 2000 shootings this year to date.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFwxlCp_wpU
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 08-07-2016, 04:41 PM
AndrewJ
Watch me post!

AndrewJ is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,905
Gday Gary
Quote:
The Autopilot is more akin to
an advanced cruise control rather than a fully autonomous system
in the Google approach.
Fully understood on that fact.
My initial concern was how it could be advertised with basic safety "plus extras" ( incl collision detect ), but it couldnt detect a truck in front of it.
Reading up on how this might have been caused by how they had programmed it to ignore what they "thought" were overhead signs, makes it even scarier. ( Maybe every sign needs an IFF transponder )
As per one of my earlier posts, making it do what you want is 5% of the effort, avoiding all the rest is 95% :-)

Andrew

Quote:
His day job is being on the front-line patrolling a city that had more than 60 shooting over the 4th July weekend alone and over 2000 shootings this year to date.
Hope its not Dallas :-(
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 08-07-2016, 07:07 PM
el_draco (Rom)
Politically incorrect.

el_draco is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tasmania (South end)
Posts: 2,315
Can you imagine barreling down some highway at 110kmph with a computer in control when all of a sudden you get:

- The blue screen of death on the console...
- A message saying, "Your operating system has been upgraded... Reboot in process"...

- "Fatal system error" appears on the console...

- "Well this is embarrassing..." scrolls across your screen and the vehicle suddenly does a 90 degree hard right towards a self-drive Mack!

Wont happen? Ask the Tesla driver

Tesla said "the high ride height of the trailer combined with its positioning across the road and the extremely rare circumstances of the impact caused the Model S to pass under the trailer, with the bottom of the trailer impacting the windshield of the Model S".... and ripping the driver in half I suspect!

Exception report number 1 of 5 billion "unforeseen circumstances"

I think I'd go back to walking or horseback before I'd trust any self-drive vehicle....
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 08-07-2016, 08:53 PM
rally
Registered User

rally is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 896
Agree with others here

I can imagine a few scenarios that wont work out very well.

So the purpose of the driverless car is to do the driving, it therefore goes that the driver is no longer "driving" the car - ie no longer concentrating or for that matter even looking.

So when the car takes a turn into a US street that is lined with drug dealers and brawling rioters brandishing weapons and fireballing shops and vehicles, with a road blockage some distance further down does the car understand to get the . . . out of here before its too late to retreat ?
I'm guessing not

Does it gently pull you up to a safe stop right in the middle of it ?

You can argue that the driver should be alert and retake control, but the very nature of a drivelesss car will make you less alert because you will be on the phone, playing a game, reading a book, arguing . . . . etc.
You wont be alert because you are being trained not to be and some situations that arent even related to roads and traffic can affect your (or others) safety.

I have no doubt they will be implemented, I just wonder who ends up with the liability when unforeseen circumstances arise that a human could have, should have, would have avoided ?

But its certainly going to be handy to send the car out by itself to pick up the shopping, take itself to the service repairman or take the MIL to the podiatrist !!! What a timesaver that will be.
I can just imagine the possibilities for courier and delivery services.
And those interstate drive yourself holidays from Adelaide to Cairns !
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement