Self driving cars in the present, good idea or bad idea?

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

You make personal attacks all the time, but if you feel attacked there is a problem? So you are one of those dish it out and can't take it types. You don't know squat about how autonomous cars function. I asked you to prove you did and you came up with NOTHING. Something simple would have sufficed, even if you said "servo motor" I would have given you a pass, but you fell silent.

I responded. I'm not your monkey. More assumptions about my character. Interesting. You've got no information about my profession or my knowledge about self driving cars. You brought up the argument that there are engineering challenges around the wear and tear of sensors. I agreed...

The only assumption or personal attack I've made about you is that you're really eager to let us all know how much smarter you are than the rest of us. Your own words say the same.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by boxcar

What could possibly go wrong with a car on auto pilot? What works for jetliners in the air should work equally as well with cars on land, right?

So far, much less than has gone wrong with cars driven by humans

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

When they are extensively tested and can out perform humans even in extreme conditions and while their upkeep has been substandard. The autonomous car is not a piece of machinery bolted to a concrete slab inside a walled in building that will turn itself off if a component fails, which will happen with increased frequency as the fleet ages and is exposed to the elements.

This is reasonable for the most part. For testing purposes in a state like California, I don't see why the hardware/software needs to be proven for conditions in Colorado.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

When they are extensively tested and can out perform humans even in extreme conditions and while their upkeep has been substandard. The autonomous car is not a piece of machinery bolted to a concrete slab inside a walled in building that will turn itself off if a component fails, which will happen with increased frequency as the fleet ages and is exposed to the elements.

If your requirements for adoption set the bar so high, that even though autonomous cars are at a point where they're in general safer than human drivers, you wouldn't want them on the road, would you feel culpable for the lack of decrease in injuries/deaths?

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

I responded. I'm not your monkey. More assumptions about my character. Interesting. You've got no information about my profession or my knowledge about self driving cars. You brought up the argument that there are engineering challenges around the wear and tear of sensors. I agreed...

The only assumption or personal attack I've made about you is that you're really eager to let us all know how much smarter you are than the rest of us. Your own words say the same.

Never said I was smarter except when a liberal calls me ignorant. I never did that in any threads lately. I do know more about motion control systems than most everyone because I have worked with them for more than half my life and am more intellectually curious than the average person. Either you know nothing about self driving cars or strangely don't mind being accused of being uneducated on a subject when you are in fact educated. I would say the former is correct.

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

Never said I was smarter except when a liberal calls me ignorant. I never did that in any threads lately. I do know more about motion control systems than most everyone because I have worked with them for more than half my life and am more intellectually curious than the average person. Either you know nothing about self driving cars or strangely don't mind being accused of being uneducated on a subject when you are in fact educated. I would say the former is correct.

No one questioned your intelligence on this topic. So again, you're projecting feelings into this argument. In fact, I agree with your argument as it pertains to motion control systems. Yes, there are engineering challenges there. Are you just not reading those statements?

Why would I mind someone I've never met who knows nothing about me calling me uneducated on a subject? I've never made claims about the technology that requires expertise in the area, regardless if I have it or not.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

This is reasonable for the most part. For testing purposes in a state like California, I don't see why the hardware/software needs to be proven for conditions in Colorado.

You are testing the reliability and durability of the systems. They should be tested in extreme conditions, you seem to want to be oblivious to the fact the environment plays a huge role in dependability and durability of the components needed to operate an autonomous vehicle.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

No one questioned your intelligence on this topic. So again, you're projecting feelings into this argument. In fact, I agree with your argument as it pertains to motion control systems. Yes, there are engineering challenges there. Are you just not reading those statements?

Why would I mind someone I've never met who knows nothing about me calling me uneducated on a subject? I've never made claims about the technology that requires expertise in the area, regardless if I have it or not.

Well then stop hurling insults at people that don't think NYC will be under 10 feet of water in 50 years. I know, that's different. What is it about those that live in glass houses should not throw rocks?

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

You are testing the reliability and durability of the systems. They should be tested in extreme conditions, you seem to want to be oblivious to the fact the environment plays a huge role in dependability and durability of the components needed to operate an autonomous vehicle.

I've made no claims that it doesn't. More inference and projection. I asked, for testing on roads in Cali/Arizona/generally friendlier, less extreme conditions, must the parts be tested and approved for the conditions they'd face in Colorado?

[JerryBoyle]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

Well then stop hurling insults at people that don't think NYC will be under 10 feet of water in 50 years. I know, that's different. What is it about those that live in glass houses should not throw rocks?

Haha, I said Georgia. And how is that a personal insult? I didn't say you (or whoever I replied to) was fat, unintelligent, etc. You've now made claim that I'm uneducated, liberal, and sensitive.

[davew]

I voted good idea. They will not change my self-defensive techniques when walking near roads, jogging, bicycling, or driving. They are just another vehicle on the road, that are supposed to be a little better than the average driver. It will also be quite a few years until I give away control of my driving to a computer.

An 8 minute clip on self-driving tractors (will probably cost $400K-$500K)

YouTube

[FakeNameChanged]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

They should have been extensively tested in a lab and on a track before they were turned loose on city streets. I have a strong feeling they have not. You can simulate a lot of real life conditions without putting people at risk. Sharing the road with other drivers is only a small part of it.

ID, Waymo, one of Google's companies has already logged over 5 million test miles on public roads with full autonomous drive technology. A few other comp's have lesser amounts. If you google(sorry for that name again), you can watch a full autonomous drive around San Fran during the day with lots of traffic. They track how often a driver has to interfere with with full auton. and it's very infrequent, like once every 2000 miles going from memory. Sorry I couldn't find it, and several others are much lower. Granted so far, most of the tests have been in fair weather, sunny areas, like, Cal.
Having said, I still am not ready for that until the tech. improved exponentially, and most of cars are equipped with auton. drive technology. From what I've read about it, which is quite a bit since I owned Tesla stock for a couple years, the feeling is its initial appeal will be to taxis, Uber, delivery trucks, etc.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

I figured I will make this a poll question here...

...and see if anyone wants to beat it like a dead horse.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by Whosonfirst

ID, Waymo, one of Google's companies has already logged over 5 million test miles on public roads with full autonomous drive technology. A few other comp's have lesser amounts. If you google(sorry for that name again), you can watch a full autonomous drive around San Fran during the day with lots of traffic. They track how often a driver has to interfere with with full auton. and it's very infrequent, like once every 2000 miles going from memory. Sorry I couldn't find it, and several others are much lower. Granted so far, most of the tests have been in fair weather, sunny areas, like, Cal.
Having said, I still am not ready for that until the tech. improved exponentially, and most of cars are equipped with auton. drive technology. From what I've read about it, which is quite a bit since I owned Tesla stock for a couple years, the feeling is its initial appeal will be to taxis, Uber, delivery trucks, etc.

Thanks for the info. My issue is the situations from A-Z the testing is done on are optimal compared to what will be happening if these things become common place. For everyone who has no worries about system failures in these cars due to environmental conditions maybe you you leave your PC out in the yard when you aren't using it.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by JerryBoyle

So far, much less than has gone wrong with cars driven by humans

Yeah...and how many cards are manually driven compared to those totally on auto pilot?