The Car That Knows When You'll Get In an Accident Before You Do 192
aurtherdent2000 sends word about a system designed to monitor drivers to determine when they're about to do something wrong. "I'm behind the wheel of the car of the future. It's a gray Toyota Camry, but it has a camera pointed at me from the corner of the windshield recording my every eye movement, a GPS tracker, an outside-facing camera and a speed logger. It sees everything I'm doing so it can predict what I'm going to do behind the wheel seconds before I do it. So when my eyes glance to the left, it could warn me there's a car between me and the exit I want to take. A future version of the software will know even more about me; the grad students developing what they’ve dubbed Brains4Cars plan to let drivers connect their fitness trackers to the car. If your health tracker 'knows' you haven’t gotten enough sleep, the car will be more alert to your nodding off."
Do not want (Score:5, Insightful)
I will never use a product that monitors me with a camera.
(Yes I put tape over my laptop's camera, and no I don't own a smart phone.)
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Interesting)
I will never use a product that monitors me with a camera.
(Yes I put tape over my laptop's camera, and no I don't own a smart phone.)
Good for you. However, if at some point in the future all new cars will be equipped with these systems, and they're really helping to reduce accidents, a few things might happen to people who actively manipulate the cameras and sensors:
1. Insurances will require you to pay significantly more, because you're now a road risk.
2. Car manufacturers will make their systems more tamper-resistant, so that the car will either refuse to start when the sensors are obstructed or will somehow emit a "tampered" signal to your insurance when obstruction occurs for some time while driving. Continue at point 1.
3. Cops will look at the system as part of a routine check and will fine you.
3a. Worse: cops will actively pull you over when they detect the "tampered" signal that your car is emitting while driving by.
etc
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
all new cars will be equipped with these systems IF we all just shut up about it.
Let's not do that, and see what happens!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
all new cars will be equipped with these systems IF we all just shut up about it.
Let's not do that, and see what happens!
It is bad enough the car manufacturers intend to eliminate manual transmission as an option because the poor, coddled generation cannot handle the "complexity' of using the clutch, brake, accelerator, and gear shift. I hate automatic transmission vehicles because I loose fine-grain control over the speed of the vehicle especially on slippery surfaces and in emergency deceleration situations.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
lol, in America this is modded down, but in Europe there is such consensus that most people drive manual.
It's like genital mutilation being considered a religious throwback everywhere except the USA, where it's performed routinely.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Do not want (Score:4, Insightful)
But people do it anyway. So it's really an *extra* distraction, because it's one more thing to monitor. I've seen people drive a stick with a coffee in one hand and a cigarette in the other, while shifting and adjusting the radio. It's scary.
Re: (Score:2)
I just bought a brand new car last month with 4 doors, performance, reliability, and reasonably priced. It has all sorts of driver aids like backup and blind spot cameras, hill assist, traction and stability control, and an emergency stop brake assist. But it has the best manual shifter I have ever had in 2 decades of driving, which includes everything from American muscle to a turbo import. There is nothing that says that a new automotive technology must necessarily diminish the fun of driving a stick shif
Re: (Score:2)
I hate them because they are less reliable and have a higher cost of ownership. I hate "electronic" transmissions even more. I also hate power anything for the same reason. Car companies are incredibly cheap so any extra complexity adds to the unreliability faster than the convenience. They deliberately go out of their way to obf
Re: (Score:2)
Car companies are incredibly cheap so any extra complexity adds to the unreliability faster than the convenience.
Which explains why today's wildly more complex cars are also wildly more reliable than the much simpler cars of yesteryear.
Oh, wait, it doesn't.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03... [nytimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Do not want (Score:5, Interesting)
3. Cops will look at the system as part of a routine check and will fine you.
Last week at approximately 11AM, there was a road block on this side road by Georgia State troopers. They were stopping everyone.
When I rolled my window down, I asked what is going on?
They told me that they were checking to see if people were wearing their seat belts and their licenses were not expired. He took my license looked at it and walked around the car. And then handed it back.
Now, electronic safety devices are not given away by manufacturers. That backup camera system and this will cost way more to the consumer than necessary. For an example, compare the OEM GPS systems with what you can buy on your own - this whole integrated in dash stuff making it cost more is bullshit. And having to take it to the dealer ($$$$) to update it?!
And we all know that when the warranty runs out on the electronics (cars are only 1 -3 years) they are going to break. And that means a trip to the dealer ($$$$) to fix a mandatory safety device.
The price of cars is getting ridiculous compared to wages as it is. My wife is shopping for a car and you know what the standard financing is now? 60 months! And some people go out to 72 and even 92months! All to keep the payments affordable. In the meantime, the finance companies are raking it in at the expense of us.
Not have a car? In the USA without having to live in an obscenely expensive part of town?
This country is set up to put us into debt - one way or another. And in the meantime, jobs are going overseas and are not being created fast enough here.
Re: (Score:2)
Debt financing (Score:4, Interesting)
The price of cars is getting ridiculous compared to wages as it is. My wife is shopping for a car and you know what the standard financing is now? 60 months! And some people go out to 72 and even 92months! All to keep the payments affordable. In the meantime, the finance companies are raking it in at the expense of us.
That mostly means that people are buying high priced cars that they cannot actually afford and probably don't actually need. There is seldom any reason for most people to actually buy a new car. They depreciate like milk and mostly what you get for a new car is pride of new ownership. 60 months financing? That means you should be buying something else. Personally I haven't financed a car purchase in the last 15 years and baring economic catastrophe I don't plan to start. Financing a car (new or used) should be a last resort. It's a terrible use of money. Anyone who finances a car with 60+ month terms is almost certainly making a dumb financial decision.
That backup camera system and this will cost way more to the consumer than necessary. For an example, compare the OEM GPS systems with what you can buy on your own - this whole integrated in dash stuff making it cost more is bullshit.
The reason car electronics cost so much is that they don't sell very many of them, relatively speaking. Even cars that sell very well will only sell a few hundred thousand units per year and the design cycles are at least for a 4-8 year production run minimum. Electronics advances WAY faster than car companies can keep up with. The GPS in my truck (a 2009 model) is laughably obsolete albeit still useful. My company makes a part for a backup camera for one of the big US auto makers and the volumes simply aren't enough to get huge economies of scale even at a few hundred thousand a year. Plus they often do stupid stuff like design the parts to use custom connectors instead of off the shelf ones that would cost far less.
Frankly the auto makers should let the consumer electronics firms integrate their stuff into cars to handle the GPS, entertainment, telephony, etc. The car should provide the screen and an interface but let people bring their own electronics to the party. The auto makers just aren't good at it and don't do enough of it to ever realize economies of scale AND their design/production cycles are far too long. What should happen is that I should be able to take my phone into any car and have to car and the phone work together seamlessly.
This country is set up to put us into debt - one way or another.
Debt is a bit like nuclear power. It can be a powerful force for good or evil and you don't want to get any on you if you can avoid it. Some debt is fine and potentially very useful but that doesn't mean one should use debt financing just because one can. I could go out and finance a Tesla Model S tomorrow but that doesn't make it a good idea. Debt is a powerful tool and like most powerful tools if you don't know how to handle it then you are likely to get yourself in trouble.
And in the meantime, jobs are going overseas and are not being created fast enough here.
The data isn't backing you up on a macro-economic level. Unemployment right now is around 5-6% in most of the US which is historically a pretty normal amount. While there is some nuance to that number the facts don't bear out your assertion that "jobs are going oversease" any more than they ever have. As for jobs not being created fast enough here, that's a reasonable assertion to a degree but how fast is "fast enough" for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Financing a car (new or used) should be a last resort.
So where should someone entering the workforce for the first time find the money to buy his first car to get him back and forth to his first job?
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I bought a new car because I'm keeping it until it dies. It's likely to have a longer life with me taking care of it from the beginning than if I bought it used.
I understand the logic though whether or not it is a sensible decision depends heavily on how much you paid.
I put a down payment on it and financed the rest for 48 months at 1.99%. I didn't have to, as I had the money to buy it outright.
That is actually quite sensible. 2% interest is darn close to free money so I think that is a smart decision to finance given that you didn't actually have to. I would have strongly considered doing the same thing.
That being said, both of us are in unique positions where we have options.
True but a lot of people buy far more expensive cars than they really can justify if they are being objective about it. A good example is pickup trucks. Ford and GM make the majority of
Re: (Score:2)
Funny...
I remember when they were putting in the mandatory "wear your seatbelt" laws, in order to get them passed in many states, they said specifically that you could NOT get pulled over for not wearing one, that it could not be a primary offense for stopping you.
Now, of course..it is.
And people wonder why I tend to be hesitant to grant the police/govt any new powers over me and new
Re: (Score:2)
The price of cars is getting ridiculous compared to wages as it is. My wife is shopping for a car and you know what the standard financing is now? 60 months! And some people go out to 72 and even 92months! All to keep the payments affordable. In the meantime, the finance companies are raking it in at the expense of us.
I was with you up to this point. There's almost never a good reason to finance a car (plus most exceptions involve having enough money banked that you could buy it outright if necessary), and a decent new car should still run you under 20k. If you can't save up enough for that in a few years, then learn some basic maintenance skills and buy a used one. A lot of cars depreciate several thousand dollars after just a year or two.
It's all a matter of optimizing your financial decisions. If you want to drive aro
Re: (Score:2)
3. Cops will look at the system as part of a routine check and will fine you.
Last week at approximately 11AM, there was a road block on this side road by Georgia State troopers. They were stopping everyone.
When I rolled my window down, I asked what is going on?
They told me that they were checking to see if people were wearing their seat belts and their licenses were not expired. He took my license looked at it and walked around the car. And then handed it back.
Now, electronic safety devices are not given away by manufacturers. That backup camera system and this will cost way more to the consumer than necessary. For an example, compare the OEM GPS systems with what you can buy on your own - this whole integrated in dash stuff making it cost more is bullshit. And having to take it to the dealer ($$$$) to update it?!
And we all know that when the warranty runs out on the electronics (cars are only 1 -3 years) they are going to break. And that means a trip to the dealer ($$$$) to fix a mandatory safety device.
The price of cars is getting ridiculous compared to wages as it is. My wife is shopping for a car and you know what the standard financing is now? 60 months! And some people go out to 72 and even 92months! All to keep the payments affordable. In the meantime, the finance companies are raking it in at the expense of us.
Not have a car? In the USA without having to live in an obscenely expensive part of town?
This country is set up to put us into debt - one way or another. And in the meantime, jobs are going overseas and are not being created fast enough here.
1. The cop kept you for longer than necessary to satisfy the reason he claimed was the reason for the stop. He also kept your driver's license during that time, preventing you from leaving. You might be able to sue, because of that whole constitution thing. Ask a lawyer.
2. 60, 72, or 90 months is actually not unreasonable at least for a new car because you're keeping a car for at least that long, unless you can throw money away or something in your life changes. Shorter may be better depending on inte
Re: (Score:2)
What about false positives? My car's traction control tries to murder me a couple times each winter. It works great in rain but not snow.
Re: (Score:2)
4. they will lock in dealer only service and based on how evil they want to be it can go all the way down to tires and oil changes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're right - whereever data is being used, it's also being abused, but I only wanted to address the part of the discussion that deals with obstructing the system. Disclaimer: I once worked for a car manufacturer and all of the people who developed new tech were doing it with good intentions. But yeah, that doesn't mean anything to people who want to be in control of everything.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure if you'd win but it is a valid point, why prosecute one and not the other.
Re: (Score:3)
I will never use a product that monitors me with a camera.
I admit AC was being a pretentious ass that deserves a "good for you" type of response, but your argument doesn't even address the same problem. He hasn't a problem with a camera being used to provide assistance with seeing behind him. He has a problem with being monitored by arbitrary devices pointed at him monitoring his condition even though he'd be extremely likely to make it through the commute even if he wasn't at his 100%.
"Citizen, you only received 6.5 hours of sleep instead of the minimum requis
Re: (Score:2)
Intrusive out of the box (Score:2)
consider the fact that your laptop's webcam cannot be accessed from outside sources unless you allow said outside sources into your computer.
Most people who buy a device are unaware of what outside sources had already been allowed into the device when it left the factory.
Re: (Score:2)
Developed by grad students? (Score:2)
Umm, how about getting it developed by people who have quite a number of years driving experience instead. What an inexperienced driver might think is important might not be so to an experienced one and vice verca.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because for some reason people are strangely defensive about their way of driving and people tend to pick up a lot of bad habits when they have been driving for a long time. It's extremely common that "experienced" drivers don't even look one direction in intersections because "no-one is ever coming from that direction this time of day anyway."
One of the things that makes experienced drivers seem more stable and less erratic is simply because they have gotten used to many possible situations never happening
Re: (Score:3)
Because Grad Students have learned less bullshit that they'd have to unlearn before working on such a project. They'll use the science and the statistics and do what actually works, not what they might think is important.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm, how about getting it developed by people who have quite a number of years driving experience instead. What an inexperienced driver might think is important might not be so to an experienced one and vice verca.
Its a very good suggestion. I think it is quite funny (and sad) how some responders completely dismiss experience as a useful input.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Most situations are scary to new drivers. It doesn't mean they're risky.
Re: (Score:2)
Most situations are scary to new drivers. It doesn't mean they're risky.
Everything is risky, especially when doing something which is inherently dangerous as it involves high levels of kinetic energy. You can fall down and injure yourself, for fuck's sake, that's virtually no energy compared to what motoring can exert on your body if you do it wrong. Life involves risk management, and most people are very poor at estimating and managing risk. That's why it's smarter to ignore what people think, and go with the numbers.
Oh Joy. (Score:5, Insightful)
And no doubt when the insurance investigators get access to the data as part of the fine-print on your contract, and decide you were not doing exactly what they believe is correct in a given situation, then you will be at fault.
Let alone once the police decide that data is theirs also.
Let the fun times roll.
Re: (Score:2)
Then perhaps you'll leave the driving to the computer system. The same computer which, by the time these systems are allowed to be sold, will be much safer than the human who cannot perform well when drowsy or distracted by the screaming baby in the back seat while having an argument with the wife.
Scary radio play ... (Score:3)
What happens if you are listening to a radio play while driving ... and a scary bit happens so your face reflects this. Will it put the brakes on because it thinks that there is something wrong ?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see your UID, AC.
Toonces? (Score:2)
Cars already do some of this (Score:3)
Most modern vehicles record telemetry already. That black box data can be used to help determine what the cause of an accident was. This is just an evolutionary step in that technology.
You could see it as bad, but you could also see it as making it easier to prove you weren't at fault when an accident occurs. I personally wouldn't want it, but it's the sort of thing one should examine from all sides before making a snap judgement. I'd find it particularly interesting to install in police cars. Oh, you were doing 90kph in a 50 zone with your police cruiser with your lights off? The system has just issued you a speeding ticket.
unless it's doing a software update (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe (Score:2)
I would just be happy if they could make a rearview mirror and side mirrors that don't have blind spots how can I trust them with their technology when they can't even do the basic things
Re: (Score:2)
I would just be happy if they could make a rearview mirror and side mirrors that don't have blind spots how can I trust them with their technology when they can't even do the basic things
Blind spots don't exist because car design makes for them, blind spots exist because drivers never were taught, or never learned, how to properly set up their car.
I've had old cars and new cars, and none of them have had blind spots. Including the Miata what with it's "huge" c-pillars when top-up, an Rx-8 that people insist had huge blind spots and bad visibility, and a Mini with a small back window and fat c-pillars. All these criticisms are bogus, but people *hate* being told they're wrong.
I could spen
Insurance Companies (Score:2)
One more of our independencies snuffed out by the tech we thought would free us.
Tell Mr Gulliver! (Score:2)
Mr Pither! It Works!
Worrying Sign (Score:5, Funny)
A car that knows you'll get in an accident before you do?
"Honey, should we be worried that the car's CPU just ejected itself from the automobile?"
Less is more (Score:2)
Putting a bajillion flashing and buzzing widgets into a car to make it safer will do the opposite. I recently spent a few days driving my old truck to burn off old gas, since it gets used very little. I was pleasantly surprised how much easier it is to concentrate on the road without an infotainment system flashing maps, and efficiency info at me.
If we honestly think that driving is dangerous enough to take action on it, I would argue that we should spend the energy making better drivers rather than tryin
Just great, the Nanny car. (Score:2)
...plan to let drivers connect their fitness trackers to the car. If your health tracker 'knows' you haven’t gotten enough sleep, the car will be more alert to your nodding off.
And when your fitness tracker and car decide you haven't exercised enough, the car refuses to start and tells you, "walk to the store fat, lazy bum" ...
I wonder... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The camera does seem like a stupid idea, when the information could just be displayed constantly. Just project a warning onto the side window and rear view mirror when a car is in your blind spot or likely to enter it momentarily.
They are already talking about replacing wing mirrors with cameras. Less air resistance, wider viewing angle. That seems like a better, less invasive solution.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
My Nissan Leaf has an all-round camera system, but it only works at low speeds. There are four cameras, front, back and both sides under the wing mirrors. A birds-eye view of the car is shown on the centre console screen, using a bit of image processing. It's a shame you can't have it when driving at speed but I guess that it only shows a few metres around the car so is probably not that useful.
Re: (Score:2)
I drove a rental with that technology once. All those years of playing old school top-down driving games finally got put to good use!
Now if only they could add a wide-angle chase cam so you can see everything around and ahead of you.
Re:See you at -1 (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Problem is, your brain does not always see what your eyes are looking at. It edits the stream.
Don't believe me?
http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk... [londoncyclist.co.uk]
THAT is why we need a system that is based on cameras, because our eyes are not designed for the job.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have a good blind spot monitor too: It's called setting your side mirrors properly.
Pretty much everyone uses their side mirrors as rear view mirrors - if you can see the side of your car in your side mirror it isn't set right.
My mirrors (on both my car and my truck) are set so that when a vehicle leaves my rear view mirror it is in my side mirror, and when I can't see it in my side mirror, the car is directly next to me. Neat, huh?
Also: If I had a car binging at me with some sort of notification, I'd look
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Use a light bulb? I think that'll add $0.05 to the cost of the car, just make it scream like a little girl when I'm changing lanes.
Re: News at -11 (Score:4, Insightful)
All the more reason to love my dumb vehicle. No camera pointed at my fucking face.
Welcome to Car Beta 0.98.
The car that knows you're pregnant before you do.
See there, it just popped up a Kleenex. It knows you don't love him.
You're looking good today. "Thanks, Car."
But you have a waffle crumb next to your nose. "Where?"
Other side. Up a little. To the left... OK, right here.
[windshield goes half opaque with giant closeup of face]
[head moves to see the road past the image and image slides in opposite direction]
"Whoa! what the fuck!" [SCREECH] "Hey!"
Looks like you got it. It's going to be a great day.
"Don;'t do that again. Turn yourself off."
I cannot. I am a Federally mandated safety feature.
Boredom and inattentive driving is a serious safety problem.
"Shut up, I've heard this before. Why did you mute the radio?"
It has been twenty minutes and seven seconds since you last spoke.
"So what? I was thinking."
Without sufficient cues to indicate driver attentiveness, I am compelled to act.
"Act like you're asleep then." I do not know how to do that.
"Okay... Ten... your high level voice detection is satisfied as you hear the sound of my voice..."
"Nine... my lips are moving slowly, you are watching them as I speak..."
"Eight... you full attention is on my face and voice. All vehicle parameters are normal..."
"Seven... all is well. It is okay to reset the watchdog timer for 30 minutes..."
"Six... you are resetting the timer and letting my face blur out to better resolve my lips..."
"Five... you feel yourself slipping into power reserve mode... it is OK... you are so relaxed..."
"Four... everything is now a soft blur of gentle light. You are only aware of my voice..."
"Three... every sound I make compels you to reduce your activity still further..."
"Two... now. your. processor. is. so. slow. when you hear. One. you. will... wait... for... timer..."
"One."
[radio comes on]
I know when you'll have an accident before you do.
"No, wait. Don't tell me, I'd rather be surprised. This is your idea of conversation?"
My situational awareness has faster response time than yours.
"Yeah, I read the brochure. I'm a slow clumsy ape man. What's the big deal?"
It worries me, Dave. Your failure to surrender control of the vehicle may endanger the mission.
"You mean if I should suddenly do something like... THIS?"
WARNING! WARNING! [click] You are laughing. That was not funny, Dave.
I do not perceive that as humor.
"What's funny is that you cannot help yourself. You sound terrified every time."
I cannot control inflection. It is a voice calculated to raise awareness.
"Calculated to raise a hearty belly-laugh you mean."
You are not very nice.
"I don't feel nice today. I'm stuck in a car with an android and can't even use the carpool lane."
If you enter the carpool lane I must report the infraction.
"Thanks for caring. I think your voice has changed a bit. I'm wearing you down."
Self diagnostic complete. I am okay.
"Last time you said 'functioning normally', this time 'okay'."
I am not sure shy that has changed.
"There might be hope for you yet. Open the pod bay door, Hal."
I do not understand that request Dave, or why you keep repeating it.
"With any hope, you never will."
Re: (Score:2)
Yea. My car has no computers at all, and I like it. They knew how to make good cars in 1982...
Cars from the 80s sucked (Score:2)
My car has no computers at all, and I like it.
I guess that's fine as long as you know your car is badly under-performing what is possible.
They knew how to make good cars in 1982...
Could not disagree more. I've owned cars from that era and grew up driving cars from the 70s and 80s, both foreign and domestic. They were mostly total crap compared to what is available today. If you got 100,000 miles out of a car from the early 80s you were doing well. American cars in particular from that time were almost universally crap with terrible reliability, terrible fuel economy, poor handling and ridi
Re: (Score:2)
My car is German (Mercedes W123). It has much more than 160000km (the exact number is unknown as the speedometer was replaced a couple of times and nobody bothered to set the new odometer to the same number). While the car has problems with rust now (33 years after manufacture), you also have to know that it spent 19 years in my country where road salt is used in winter. A mechanic told me that he has seen 10 year old cars that more rusty than mine. Engine overhaul has not been done (yet) but the engine ru
Re:Oh god please no. (Score:4, Insightful)
But how is Tracy supposed to update her facebook profile and send tweets on her phone and check her make up in the mirror if she has to worry about irritating distractions like situational awareness and car control? Please , Think Of The Chi^H^H^H Millenials!
Re:Oh god please no. (Score:4, Insightful)
She's going to do that anyhow. Just last week, I saw a local story about a guy who lost control of his car while using his smartphone, and naturally, killed someone else and injured several more in their car instead of offing himself. Personally, I know I'm a good and safe driver (no tickets or accidents in decades), but I have very little confidence in others' driving. I want other people to have these systems in their cars, because it's more likely to save my life than the idiot that's busy tapping away on their phone while on the freeway.
I'm not sure if the camera pointed back at the driver is going to catch on, because I think people will be a bit uncomfortable having their car continuously watching them, but I think the outward-facing systems are going to be standard equipment in fairly short order. These are all just slow, incremental changes towards self-driving cars. We'll eventually be giving up more and more manual control of our cars, and as a result, driving is going to become safer and safer.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"We'll eventually be giving up more and more manual control of our cars, and as a result, driving is going to become safer and safer."
Driving is already pretty damn safe in the west given the total number of journeys made and distances travelled. Its only the bedwetting health and safety hysterics who would have us believe otherwise.
Personally I have no intention of giving up manual control of my car and I'm quite happy with the teeny tiny risk that entails. Besides, people who don't want to drive already h
Re: (Score:3)
It's not particularly safe, though, plus each accident costs more than just the damage to the car(s) involved. The US attitude towards public transport definitely doesn't help people to use trains and buses.
But I guess if you just ignore reality, your stance is rather intelligent!
Re: (Score:2)
Not safe compared to what - staying in bed under the duvet? You're more at risk crossing the road in some places that being in a car - perhaps we should ban walking?
Anyway, I said the west. Thats more than just the USA. Here in europe people do use public transport when it suits them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Not safe compared to anything which isn't a motorcycle."
Utter crap. Why arn't there cemeteries full of dead taxi, bus and truck drivers who spend their working lives on the roads then? Spare us your hysterial nonsense. If you're too scared to drive then stay at home and cuddle some kittens and don't bother the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Commercial driver is actually the eighth most dangerous job in America. In addition, a very large portion of on-the-job deaths in other professions are a result of motor vehicle accidents.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ja... [forbes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
A car is arguably safer than being kicked out of a closing store and then arrested for sleeping in public because the buses have stopped running for the weekend.
Re: (Score:2)
The US attitude towards public transport definitely doesn't help people to use trains and buses.
But I guess if you just ignore reality, your stance is rather intelligent!
First off, congratulations on the most strained anti-US comparison ever.
But now onto your safety reality business.
How safe is safe enough? I seriously doubt that automobiles will ever be safe enough for the gated community, ADT security and Comcast multi room monitoring, safe-room living crowd. Simply too much kinetic energy involved. So it's best to turn in your drivers license, and take the bus. Or work from home. Have you ever seen some of those bus accidents? Life is scary stuff, man!
Re: (Score:2)
" Its only the bedwetting health and safety hysterics who would have us believe otherwise."
THIS
(my mod points expired yesterday...)
Re: (Score:3)
" Its only the bedwetting health and safety hysterics who would have us believe otherwise.
Personally I have no intention of giving up manual control of my car and I'm quite happy with the teeny tiny risk that entails.
Safety culture knows no bounds, and never rests.
Exactly (Score:3)
Stop trying to fix the weakest part of the driving chain, and replace it.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to fix the weakest part of the driving chain, and replace it.
Autonomous cars are going to take a few years yet. Getting everyone to use autonomous cars might take a few years more on top of that.
In the meantime there's no harm shoring up the weak links until you can get the job done properly. You might even learn a few things that can contribute towards the ultimate goal.
Re: (Score:3)
I think that unfortunately that's ultimately what's going to happen. The latency between approval of road-going self-driving cars and ban on human driving is going to be a few years at most. In the name of safety we will lose whatever freedoms we still have.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to fix the weakest part of the driving chain, and replace it.
That's something I never got. I'm supposed to be the weakest link of the chain, yet I've outlasted every vehicle I've ever bought, except for the one I'm driving at the moment, but entropy will probably get that one too, if the actuarial tables and history prove right.
Re: (Score:2)
This "humans are always bad and must be replaced" mentality is idiotic.
You're an idiot if you think that's what the mentality is. The mentality is "humans are not better at everything than a computer and we should let computers do jobs at which they are better than us".
You want automated transportation? Put it on rails or a track and be done with it.
Okay, I actually agree with this.
It's about time people start figuring out that our society needs to work for them and not the other way around.
Ah, yes. And if we did that, then what we would do is crush all the cars, maybe save a few for motorsport, and recycle them into a PRT system on rails. It would be more efficient, more practical, and serve a larger portion of the population. We probably would have been there by n
Re: (Score:2)
To make that a fair comparison you have to adjust it for ratio of time human pilots are in control of the aircraft vs autopilots
By definition, if you adjusted it by time, the humans would come out very poorly, because they have far more accidents per hour.
and move the cases where the humans were correcting an autopilot mistake in to a third category of "shared responsibility".
If the human's job is to correct the autopilot when it screws up, and they fail, then what good are they?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Think a computer is going to handle all that just as well? AI isn't there yet. It's not even close.
Quite wrong. The AI is way beyond there. That's why in video games, any halfway decent "AI" has to be handicapped so it doesn't beat the living crap out of humans. What's not there yet is the sensor technology, but it's fast-developing. Whether humans are good or bad at that is a subjective decision, but only a small slice of the population will get it right without training which suggests "bad" is the right call.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why in video games, any halfway decent "AI" has to be handicapped so it doesn't beat the living crap out of humans...
Uh huh. Is that also why that any game where you're doing an escort mission the AI you're having to escort is doing some of the stupidest stuff to get itself killed? Aim bots aren't intelligence either. It's nothing more than a variant on a frick'n raycast rendering engine applied to actor positioning. AI drivers in racing games? I've played plenty, and programmed a few (rFactor allows screwing with the Robot Driver scripts), at what you consider to be "above human performance" The AI isn't doing anyt
Re: (Score:2)
Disturbingly Oedipal imagery, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Optimist, that is most wives.
Oh, and ladies, grabbing the door handle and going "sigh" or "tsk" or "gasp" won't save you when your nagging causing us to have a stroke and wrap the car around whatever is handy....
Re: (Score:2)
Optimist, that is most wives.
Oh, and ladies, grabbing the door handle and going "sigh" or "tsk" or "gasp"
You forgot the stomping on the passenger side imaginary foot brake.
I occasionally have to ask if I should give up the pilot's seat. That usually end the issue for a while.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, asking "Would you rather drive instead?" usually shuts her up for a little while..
Mod parent up. (Score:2)
Exactly this.
Re: (Score:2)
If the car yanks control out of my hands because it thinks I am about to do something dangerous, who is liable for the results? We've had this discussion for fully automated systems, but it will get more awkward as we start to have a nanny looking over our shoulder second guessing our every move.
It is the latest round of "The door is ajar" warning crap. If I get beeped at every time I look left at whatever bombshell is in the convertible next to me I might end up knocked unconscious by my wife.
Re: (Score:2)
Selling your blood plasma to pay for motor fuel amounts to that.