Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Do you want a self-driving car?
Previous :: Next Topic  

Do you want a self-driving car?
No
18%
 18%  [ 8 ]
No only no, but HELL NO!!!
32%
 32%  [ 14 ]
Yes
48%
 48%  [ 21 ]
Total Votes : 43

Author Message
catsp
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Jun 2017
Posts: 90 | TRs

catsp
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 05, 2019 11:28 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
Backpacker Joe wrote:
Stupid question.  Of course, and they can be held accountable.

Perhaps they can, but usually they aren't

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2019/10/18/its-26-another-cyclist-killed-and-driver-is-not-charged/

The accident in the article seems to be a particularly poor example for such an assertion.

Cyclopath wrote:
Yeah, a driver just has to say the magic words "I didn't see him" or "he came out of nowhere" and they're not held accountable.

I don't believe simply claiming to have not seen someone excuses liability. (Of course we might want to clarify what we mean by "liability".)
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
catsp
Member
Member


Joined: 15 Jun 2017
Posts: 90 | TRs

catsp
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 05, 2019 12:19 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
The first thing I did before i drove my truck off the dealer's lot was reach up under the dash and yank out the little buzzer unit that was telling me the ignition key was in the ignition switch and the door was open. I tossed it out into the parking lot. The salesman gave me a puzzled look.

LOL. Presuming the story is not somewhat exaggerated, I'm guessing the look would be "why was it so important to this fella that he do that in front of me?" smile.gif

Ski wrote:
Somebody in another thread is talking about some sort of "transponder" for my car that's going to tell somebody where I am? Yeah... good luck with that. It'll be right out there in the parking lot with the door buzzer.

I'd suggest there is an important difference between these two things (or more relevant, between "transponders" and the supposed many cut out seat belts). Detecting missing seat belts is arguably more difficult than detecting something for which you don't need to see inside the vehicle. For example, a missing license plate. If the powers that be (possessed the authority to and) required transponders in vehicles for location purposes, it's not too difficult to imagine that enforcement vehicles would have a way of determining whether other vehicles within a certain distance had their transponders on.

In this scenario, enforcement would be simple. No "beeping" transponder, you get pulled over.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1604 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 8:45 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Cyclopath wrote:
...3 cases where somebody died as a result of self driving cars...
...3,000 people die every day as a result of human driven cars...


Took away most of the distracting fluff for you MG. I challenge you or any forum member to massage this data into a graph or chart. Or a chart using any data offering comparison of safety information for automated cars (wholly or partially) vs non-automated cars, I would love to review this information with the forum since it's really a new industry for all of us.

I see a few childish reactions to untrusted technology. How old are you guys again? Maybe that's your strategy for accommodating new challenges, or maybe you move straight to rejection. Your choice, your loss.

Fear of the unknown is nothing but  crybaby.gif  and  guns.gif , ignore it.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 9:29 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger wrote:
Took away most of the distracting fluff for you MG. I challenge you or any forum member to massage this data into a graph or chart. Or a chart using any data offering comparison of safety information for automated cars (wholly or partially) vs non-automated cars, I would love to review this information with the forum since it's really a new industry for all of us.

I see a few childish reactions to untrusted technology. How old are you guys again? Maybe that's your strategy for accommodating new challenges, or maybe you move straight to rejection. Your choice, your loss.

Fear of the unknown is nothing but  crybaby.gif  and  guns.gif , ignore it.

A childish reaction is ad homs against people you disagree with. Even arguing that fear of the unknown is unwarranted doesn't hold water. Fear is a tool, and indicator gauge implicit to survival. Don't be ruled by it, and don't ignore it either. I doubt you even truly follow the argument you just made.

Besides, when we don't choose something we don't want, it's not a loss. You're arguing from the basis that your judgement is the marker for other folks value judgments. This isn't surprising.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1604 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 10:49 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
A childish reaction is ad homs against people you disagree with. Even arguing that fear of the unknown is unwarranted doesn't hold water. Fear is a tool, and indicator gauge implicit to survival. Don't be ruled by it, and don't ignore it either. I doubt you even truly follow the argument you just made.

Besides, when we don't choose something we don't want, it's not a loss. You're arguing from the basis that your judgement is the marker for other folks value judgments. This isn't surprising.

You're correct about the childish reactions being ad hominem, as well as fear of the unknown being unwarranted (I think we disagree on some aspects of these concepts and how they are applied in this thread however biggrin.gif).

What I've seen and learned so far leads me to believe that whole or partial automation can contribute to increased levels of safety while driving. I very much prefer the 'feel' of driving tactilely and I really doubt I'll ever get used to a car asserting any level of control periodically. It's just another variable to take into account and watch for while on the road.

But when I stop and look around at the people in the cars next to me - really stop and consider the amount of effort they're putting into it - I will take automation 6 or 7 times out of 10. Humans are just not reliable, look and see for yourself at the next crosswalk or stoplight. Those people are making decisions that impact my safety. I'd rather have some automation on my side, watching out for the lazy/dumb ones.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 11:38 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
So long as you're not arguing for mandatory use, I don't disagree with that argument.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1604 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 12:59 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
So long as you're not arguing for mandatory use, I don't disagree with that argument.

Absolutely not, I'd balk at that kind of move as well. Look at automation as a tool that can assist you in the right situations. We all have different driving habits and different goals when driving, so we're going to be looking for different tools and using them in different ways.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6605 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 1:13 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Predictions of "mandatory" use of self-driving cars are baseless.

There was similar fear mongering about the introduction of catalytic converters and the banning of unleaded gasoline.   Yet today one may still see (and smell) pre'80s vintage automobiles chugging along.   

I think it will follow a similar trajectory as "automatic transmissions"  -- you'll always been able to keep driving your old stick shift, but it hard to find a new car with a manual.

Eventually car makers will start offering vehicles without steering wheels and after a generation or two, cars with steering wheels will be viewed as "vintage".
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 1:25 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Yeah, it's completely off the table and always will be.

Sure.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
neek
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Posts: 798 | TRs
Location: Seattle, WA
neek
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 4:03 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
Predictions of "mandatory" use of self-driving cars are baseless.

In 5 years, sure.  In 20?  100?  Think a little harder about how it might unfold.  5G (hell, 6G!) is widely deployed, all autonomous vehicles (AVs) are online all the time.  They know the state of the system down to the millisecond.  Special roadways start popping up in rich and tech-savvy cities that are only open to AVs.  They don't need stoplights; they just interweave at intersections with perfect timing.  People grumble at first but prices come down and the specialized infrastructure spreads.  Eventually the only malcontents are too old and senile to drive themselves anyway.  Do we really think things won't fundamentally change?  Try driving a horse down I-5 and let me know how that goes.  But contrary to what some imply, "mandatory" isn't always a bad word.  It just means we've agreed on some rules that make life better for most people.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11165 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 4:42 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
That's a nice way to sugarcoat and not talk about what mandatory actually means. Especially when you're willing to sacrifice the choices of folks whose lives are not improved as they see it.

Mandatory is not a bad word when it comes to protecting rights. It's a very bad word when it comes to taking them.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6605 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostWed Nov 06, 2019 6:49 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
neek wrote:
RandyHiker wrote:
Predictions of "mandatory" use of self-driving cars are baseless.

In 5 years, sure.  In 20?  100?  Think a little harder about how it might unfold.  5G (hell, 6G!) is widely deployed, all autonomous vehicles (AVs) are online all the time.  They know the state of the system down to the millisecond.  Special roadways start popping up in rich and tech-savvy cities that are only open to AVs.  They don't need stoplights; they just interweave at intersections with perfect timing.  People grumble at first but prices come down and the specialized infrastructure spreads.  Eventually the only malcontents are too old and senile to drive themselves anyway.  Do we really think things won't fundamentally change?  Try driving a horse down I-5 and let me know how that goes.  But contrary to what some imply, "mandatory" isn't always a bad word.  It just means we've agreed on some rules that make life better for most people.

Sure, just as currently it is still legal to ride your horse on public roads in general,  but not limited access highways.

Of course things are going to change.  What would be more troubling is stasis.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
neek
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Posts: 798 | TRs
Location: Seattle, WA
neek
  Top

Member
PostThu Nov 07, 2019 2:59 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
Of course things are going to change.  What would be more troubling is stasis.

So far technological change has been net good for humanity.  I'm glad we have dishwashers, vaccinations, fertilizer, high speed transportation, etc.  Clearly there are downsides (pollution, threat of nuclear war, decreased biodiversity, etc.), but as far as human well-being goes, we've done pretty well so far.  (Yes, we could do better.)  However, there are no guarantees this trend will continue indefinitely.  People need to acknowledge that technology like self-driving cars or generalized AI may represent an inflection point where technology begins to replace humanity as the dominant life form on earth, where the gap between our artificial environment and biological needs becomes so large that quality of life starts regressing.  Now, moral panics are as old as history and so far have proved laughable.  So I'm not too worried about this self-driving car thing, but it still creeps me out a bit.  You can't seriously compare it to antilock brakes or power steering--we're talking about robots making life or death decisions based on deep learning algorithms that produce models as opaque as the human brain.  I'm not worried about the immediate death this will bring, which will be much lower than what human drivers currently cause.  I'm worried about the death of humanity itself.  Because where do you draw the line?  What if I could wear a giant robot suit that would climb mountains for me with the twitch of my fingers.  What if I could unleash my troll-bot on anyone online who said something I didn't like, and they couldn't tell the difference between it and a human.  Deepfakes may soon demolish whatever civic capacity we still have left by leaving us hopelessly confused about reality.  Things are changing faster than we can adapt.   The signal to noise ratio is approaching zero.  You can go all sorts of directions with this--for example, if artificial life really ends up with a Darwinian advantage, shouldn't we just accept the way the universe works?  I have trouble shifting away from an anthropocentric view, however, and am starting to see real hints of a threat on the horizon.  Maybe it's further away than anyone realizes, but surely one day our creations will look at us inferior and unnecessary, a god that is dead.

Of course I'll get a self-driving car when feasible.  Duh.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6605 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostThu Nov 07, 2019 5:45 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
neek wrote:
Maybe it's further away than anyone realizes, but surely one day our creations will look at us inferior and unnecessary, a god that is dead.

There was some science fiction written in the 1920s that speculated that humans would survive the development of artificial lifeforms with superior intelligence-- as pets.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
neek
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Posts: 798 | TRs
Location: Seattle, WA
neek
  Top

Member
PostThu Nov 07, 2019 6:38 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker wrote:
There was some science fiction written in the 1920s that speculated that humans would survive the development of artificial lifeforms with superior intelligence-- as pets.

That seems awfully optimistic.  They might keep a few specimens frozen in a lab, like we keep smallpox.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > Do you want a self-driving car?
  Happy Birthday Damian, chefothefuture, Dogman, ridgescrambler, Bryan K, Eaglecadd!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy