Yeah that not true, they’re also good at killing prostitutes.
737 and driverless or speed limited cars.
- Thread starter andicole0
- Start date
Yeah that not true, they’re also good at killing prostitutes.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
True, but those are probably not time-critical where you couldn't wait another 10-15 mins for a car to come collect you. I'm sure there are times where it would be useful to have instant access to a car but, realistically, for most people those times are very rare.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 9,258
I don’t disagree that they’re not typically time critical but I think outside the big cities where there are other nudges to encourage the transition people might be reluctant to give that flexibility up.
You tell the car where you live and what time you'll be home. You get out of the car and go elsewhere. The car turns up at your house with your luggage later.
In the meantime the car with your luggage ferries a few local taxi jobs that have booked for person plus hand luggage only.
You get another car home when you're done (or the same one if it is nearby and available).
Where's the problem?
I think you underestimate how a lot of car owners feel about their car, I don't even like people I know eating in my car let alone it going to off to a load of strangers with their grubby fingers. They could be sat in the back picking their noses and rubbing it on your nice clean seat
Plus where will everyone sit on their lunch break!
The risk of something going fatally wrong as the car's electronics age will increase. Who would actually feel safe in a 15 year old AV? If something goes wrong there is nothing you can do. Even with manual controls you'll never be able to react in time to take over.
I can't see them ever really being all that safe outside of 20mph city centers tbh. They are far to complex to be reliable in the long term.
And yes anything networked is just asking to be hacked. They are going to have to content with this kind of thing: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-spoofing-attack-suggest-russian-cyberweapon/
I can't see them ever really being all that safe outside of 20mph city centers tbh. They are far to complex to be reliable in the long term.
And yes anything networked is just asking to be hacked. They are going to have to content with this kind of thing: https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-spoofing-attack-suggest-russian-cyberweapon/
Last edited:
and changing gear?
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,706
- Location
- ST4
Humans are pretty terrible at driving, especailly without all the driver aids of modern cars.
I bet some people actually think it's them driving the car rather than just pointing it in the right direction and singing to Abba while the car handles traction control, abs, satellite navigation, automatic trasmistrans etc
I bet some people actually think it's them driving the car rather than just pointing it in the right direction and singing to Abba while the car handles traction control, abs, satellite navigation, automatic trasmistrans etc
Doesn't the history of aviation safety prove that more automation means less risk?
I dont see why automation in cars would be any different.
there is a lot more going on than just automation in aviation over that time period, things like every single accident or near miss getting investigated so that any mistakes are learned from mean that just the increase in training of everyone involved from the mechanic changing a bit of wire for a light to the pilot are less likely to make dangerous mistakes and other new tech
A fairly big example is the improvement in non visual flight aids which aren't "automation", or things like a better understanding (and then methods to detect) clear air turbulence.
To put the improvement in safety solely down to increased automation is missing a massive amount of information.
Aircraft tend to operate in an environment with far fewer obstacles and unforeseen incidents (you don't get a dog running out in front of them, you don't get other aircraft routinely less than a second away, you don't routinely deal with the aircraft having to decide which of several dozen objects at the same time, moving independently is most likely to be a threat within the next 3 seconds).
I suspect automation will reduce a lot of minor incidents such as low speed rear end prangs, but the bigger difference won't come in until every vehicle on the road is automated, and the roads are far more separated from the pedestrian routes.
Humans are pretty terrible at driving, especailly without all the driver aids of modern cars.
I bet some people actually think it's them driving the car rather than just pointing it in the right direction and singing to Abba while the car handles traction control, abs, satellite navigation, automatic trasmistrans etc
Humans still have the ability to anticipate and adapt to situations. Computers can't. But it's needed for driving properly. As you can see from the video above, as soon as the road loses markings and it's perfect it gets confused.
An aircraft auto pilot just needs to fly in a straight with 100s of miles of empty air 99% of the time. It's not the same. If it goes wrong (and it does sometimes), the pilot has ages to correct it.
Last edited:
That managed far better than I thought it would but yeah it has a long way to go. I'm guessing we will have some sort of middle ground where roads start to be designed for autonomous cars to assist with navigation, looks like we'll need some traffic cones that show up on their sensors as well
Undoubtedly, there is a long way to go. People are terrible drivers though, we've thousands upon thousands of road deaths per yer to prove it. Getting people to accept driverless cars, even if they were twice as safe, will be a challenge. People like to be in control of their own demise. Design flaws notwithstanding, automaton of transport systems has saved MILLIONS of lives and will continue to do so at ever greater pace
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Forgetfulness. Yes, old age does have that effect.
But not everyone wants an AV, I don't. I'll keep driving my normal car. They will never make them safe on rural back roads tbh, there's just to many variables.
I don't think so. It will just be a different kind of risk.
On that fact that computers and software do screw up and when you have millions of them driving around the road, many will be screwing up. They are also vulnerable to things that humans aren't.
There will be MANY flaws which won't come to light until the public get their hands on them. Along with security holes and it will be a constant battle against hackers (not just hackers trying to cause chaos, but hackers modding their own cars to go off-spec).
Last edited:
But errors can be programmed out, and programming, sensors, computers etc are constantly improving.
Humans are not, and we screw up far more than computers and software. We're also prone to fatigue, driving when impaired and even driving deliberately dangerously with a bit of road rage.
Automation has happened in so many different aspects of our daily life, and it'll happen to transport too with safety a key driver. You can argue against it if you don't like the idea, but you won't be able to argue against the progress. There are very few aspects of life where automation has been possible and we've chosen to maintain human input or involvement instead.
Humans are not, and we screw up far more than computers and software. We're also prone to fatigue, driving when impaired and even driving deliberately dangerously with a bit of road rage.
Automation has happened in so many different aspects of our daily life, and it'll happen to transport too with safety a key driver. You can argue against it if you don't like the idea, but you won't be able to argue against the progress. There are very few aspects of life where automation has been possible and we've chosen to maintain human input or involvement instead.