You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Driverless Cars by 2021
April 25 2019 3.15am

Driverless Cars by 2021

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

 

View matthau's Profile matthau Flag South Croydon 20 Nov 17 2.41pm Send a Private Message to matthau Add matthau as a friend

Originally posted by Goldfiinger

The new Teslas have full driverless car tech built in to them ready to be switched on as soon as governments give the green light.

The tech is ready, just need the government to catch up and its good their not that far behind.

As for those that don't want it, blah blah... Simple, they don't have to use it.

Can remember when i was a kid and my mum said she didnt understand why people ue dishwashers....

Took 15 years for her to get one, and now she'd be devastated if she had to wash all the dishes herself.

Plenty of people wont want change, and thats fine. They can stick with what they....

Not this will be a choice... After a few years I'm sure it'll be mandatory

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View croydon proud's Profile croydon proud Flag croydon 20 Nov 17 4.48pm Send a Private Message to croydon proud Add croydon proud as a friend

Originally posted by Stuk

Yep, if there's a viable alternative to people drink/driving or driving until an age, that they accidentally kill someone, before deciding they're unfit to do so then I'd be more for it.

Another negative for me is that we're going to run out of jobs for people to do as it is and automated taxis, delivery vehicles and buses etc. are going to make an enormous number of people unemployed.

yes, the unemployment thing is already happening with technology, and if anyone knows the taxi sexual assault figures in london last year, its 148 minicab sexual assault/rapes, over half of them by uber drivers, and uber covered these facts up, a freedom request finally got tfl to publish figures, and uber want driverless taxis! whats to stop a company who doesnt want to release rape figures by there drivers, let the driverless taxi in 2021 pick up a package, put in by a terrorist, and deliver it to anywhere he pays for, then said package goes up with a massive bang, customer who paid for the driverless taxi nowhere near, but lots of innocent people victims of the driverless taxi bomb!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 20 Nov 17 5.06pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

I'm for it...having witnessed some of the morons driving nowadays the sooner people are removed from the decision making process the better.

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 20 Nov 17 5.10pm


Won't be the same though, that 'Fake Taxi' franchise, once its driverless. Better acted, maybe.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 20 Nov 17 5.12pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

The difference between laboratory conditions and real conditions - I would hazard that driverless cars are far less likely to get into accidents with other driverless cars, that ones driven by meat sacks.

And here in lies the problem. No amount of programing of distances, and scenarios, can account human reactions. Will a human swerve left, right, slam on the breaks, freeze, accelerate to make the decreasing gap...

I think in most cases a driverless car is probably a lot safer than a emotional, unpredicatable meat sack (who's probably tired, caffeinated, thinking about that girl or what Sharon said, desperate for a p*ss or trying to change a CD).

All this talk of what would they do when they can't avoid an accident is bollocks. The entire point is you can program that - Certainly humans have no idea what they'd do in that scenario, and likely will react based entirely on adrenaline shock.

Machines are perfect for when you need to make instant decisions, based on calculated outcomes. Human's are great when it comes to thinking about how to calculated those outcomes, or you need someone to take risks based on poor decision making, that occasionally pay off.

Motor racing has human drivers, because otherwise it would be f**king dull, as there would be no risk or danger element.

You cant test properly in sterile environments...it has to be in the 'real world'

Google et al are forced to release their data on accidents whilst testing for the last few years...and all but a couple have been the fault of Humans driving other vehicles as opposed to the algorithms employed. Still, thats what testing is for right? The number of 'incidents' has also fallen dramatically as a result.

Their cars have driven many millions of miles without incident...its the future.

Re Jobs; as always with an economy there will be a shift...there's a real dirth in programming at the moment which should be picked up by schools sooner than later in my opinion.

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 20 Nov 17 5.15pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by simlaboy

Clarksons not a fan , apparently nearly killed test driving one but won’t reveal who the manufacturer is

Nothing to do with him being a complete luddite and the fact that driverless cars will take away his perceived 'living'...nah thought not

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Lyons550's Profile Lyons550 Flag Shirley 20 Nov 17 5.16pm Send a Private Message to Lyons550 Add Lyons550 as a friend

Originally posted by Pussay Patrol

Actually I live in the Netherlands and they already have driverless buses so I suppose you can design car transportation along the same lines

We have driverless trains...the DLR has been running for over a decade now

 


The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View .TUX.'s Profile .TUX. Flag 20 Nov 17 7.37pm Send a Private Message to .TUX. Add .TUX. as a friend

Originally posted by croydon proud

yes, the unemployment thing is already happening with technology, and if anyone knows the taxi sexual assault figures in london last year, its 148 minicab sexual assault/rapes, over half of them by uber drivers, and uber covered these facts up, a freedom request finally got tfl to publish figures, and uber want driverless taxis! whats to stop a company who doesnt want to release rape figures by there drivers, let the driverless taxi in 2021 pick up a package, put in by a terrorist, and deliver it to anywhere he pays for, then said package goes up with a massive bang, customer who paid for the driverless taxi nowhere near, but lots of innocent people victims of the driverless taxi bomb!

Uber is desperate. Its business model may not allow it to ever make money as long as it has to pay human drivers, spend massive resources to recruit them, and deal with the fallout when they cause problems. So it has been furiously working on self-driving technologies. And now it’s taking a small-scale experimental program to the big league – starting in 2019.
Volvo Cars, which is owned by China’s Zhejiang Geely Holding Group Co., announced today that it has signed a “framework agreement” to sell Uber “tens of thousands of autonomous driving compatible base vehicles between 2019 and 2021.”

I'll still happily pay more and get a black cab.

 


Buy Litecoin.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 20 Nov 17 7.53pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly

There will be less congestion and improved traffic flow in driverless lanes/zones.
1. How does the car fill itself with fuel ?
2. How would it differentiate between 2 passengers, or one really fat bloke ?
3. Vehicle collision or breakdown. What happens ? Obviously you need a dash-cam for evidence, but that doesn't solve the immediate problem(s)

I'm sure the boffins are on the case

1) They'll be electric and will know when they have to head to a charging station, which will be wireless
2) Why does that matter? If it does, they can use seat sensors - that we have already as they shut down the passenger airbags when there's not enough weight to be an adult in the front seat.
3) These systems exist already: automatic collision detention has been around for years. The car can send out a bat signal for assistance. And, yes, they will have cameras all around so that a monitoring service can review the footage and decide whether emergency services are required. Also, I'm sure they can install a big red button for the passenger to hit.

All this technology exists already.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 20 Nov 17 7.57pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by Goldfiinger

The new Teslas have full driverless car tech built in to them ready to be switched on as soon as governments give the green light.

Perhaps more notably, Tesla just unveiled a self-driving, electric tractor unit for hauling 18-wheelers. That will be taken up way before passenger vehicles get going, because the driving performance has the promise to exemplary, will never degrade due to tiredness, illness or distraction, and doesn't need mandatory rest periods. It will just hop from charging station to charging station until it reaches its destination.

Edited by Ray in Houston (20 Nov 2017 8.24pm)

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 20 Nov 17 8.04pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by jeeagles

They will use sensors and the sensors react a lot faster than humans ever could which is why they will reduce accidents.

But they will still need to decelerate and there may not always be time.

It's enviable that at some point there will be an accident in which the circumstances requires picking the least bad of two options.

Here's a better explanation:

[Link]


I am sure that the autonomous vehicle will default to the equivalent of just letting the trolley run; i.e. it will do what's best for its occupants. That way, it's not at fault for hurting anyone, even though it hurt people, because they put themselves in its way, not the other way around. Presuming that an autonomous vehicle is driving according to all regulations, limits and road markings, hitting a bunch of kids in the middle of the road is not its fault.

Of course, the car will be able to make about a billion calculations in a split second, so it's entirely possible that it could find a way out of the situation better than a human driver could. It's all going to be down to the weighting built into the programming between hurting others and hurting the occupants.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ray in Houston's Profile Ray in Houston Flag Houston 20 Nov 17 8.16pm Send a Private Message to Ray in Houston Add Ray in Houston as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

I think in most cases a driverless car is probably a lot safer than a emotional, unpredicatable meat sack (who's probably tired, caffeinated, thinking about that girl or what Sharon said, desperate for a p*ss or trying to change a CD).


Two examples: a driver for one of my clients was on his way to church (in his company pick-up) and wanted to put on a CD of church music (it was in Oklahoma). He dropped the CD, bent down to pick it up and, in that moment, crossed the center line and had a head-on collision with a car coming the other way. Everyone in the pick-up was ok, the other car was a mother and her two kids. The mother was pregnant with her third child. One kid survived but is very badly permanently crippled; everyone else died.

Same company, different day. An employee in his company pick-up is driving to town with his girlfriend and her child. He rounded a blind corner too fast and ran straight into the back of a tractor-trailer unit that was stopped because of a parade in town. The driver received cuts and bruises; everyone else in the pick-up died.

Driverless cars will not commit such errors. The Tesla fatality was a wake-up call for the company - that its software was not up to snuff (they claim now to have fixed the parameters that made it not see the crossing vehicle). However, that crossing vehicle was making a very poorly conceived effort to cross a fast, busy road while towing a trailer (which is what the Tesla didn't see and so hit). Had the crossing vehicle been driverless, it would not have been stranded across the street at that moment.

Taking the human error out of driving is going to save millions of lives. The more self-driving is replaced by autonomous vehicles, the safer it will get.

 


We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Driverless Cars by 2021