driverless cars

Talk about things that are not necessarily related to music or the guitar.
User avatar
Denian Arcoleo
Composer
Posts: 6059
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Somerset, England

Re: driverless cars

Post by Denian Arcoleo » Tue Dec 06, 2016 2:39 pm

lagartija wrote:....HAL, open the pod bay doors.

"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that."
Nailed it.

Andrew Pohlman
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:24 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: driverless cars

Post by Andrew Pohlman » Tue Dec 06, 2016 5:26 pm

Denian Arcoleo wrote:
lagartija wrote:....HAL, open the pod bay doors.

"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that."
Nailed it.
^^^^ Conspiracy theorists. :D People said the same thing about computerized charting or electronic health records. And a pattern always emerges upon conversion from paper to computers. 6 months after adopting computers in 4 different facilities, I asked my colleagues if they would consider going back to paper system. The answer is a resounding "NO WAY!" It is unthinkable. It will be the same with driverless cars. When people see how much better they are than current paradigms, we will adopt them and never look back.

A combination of human emotions, stupidity, and ineptitude combine to make our roads far less safe than air travel. Most traffic deaths can be traced to human causes. Driverless cars will fix that. There is no such thing as a schizophrenic computer ... yet. When quantum computers become the norm, all bets are off... :D
2013 Rodriguez FF Sabicas blanco
2015 Trevor Gore custom Neoclassical
- redwood top, Palo dorado B+Ss.

User avatar
lagartija
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9921
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:37 pm
Location: Western Massachusetts, USA

Re: driverless cars

Post by lagartija » Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:22 pm

Andrew Pohlman wrote:
Denian Arcoleo wrote:
lagartija wrote:....HAL, open the pod bay doors.

"I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that."
Nailed it.
^^^^ Conspiracy theorists. :D People said the same thing about computerized charting or electronic health records. And a pattern always emerges upon conversion from paper to computers. 6 months after adopting computers in 4 different facilities, I asked my colleagues if they would consider going back to paper system. The answer is a resounding "NO WAY!" It is unthinkable. It will be the same with driverless cars. When people see how much better they are than current paradigms, we will adopt them and never look back.

A combination of human emotions, stupidity, and ineptitude combine to make our roads far less safe than air travel. Most traffic deaths can be traced to human causes. Driverless cars will fix that. There is no such thing as a schizophrenic computer ... yet. When quantum computers become the norm, all bets are off... :D
No one knew for sure why HAL would not let Dave back into the ship. Or why he killed all of the other crew members. Some postulated that it was because he had orders not to let the humans finish the mission. Some thought it was because he became self aware and had his own agenda.

I would like to have a self driving car because I really find it difficult to drive long distances. However, as someone who has spent many decades in a tech field, I also know that a lot of software is poorly written, can be co-opted by malicious people, and makes assumptions about human behavior which are not necessarily correct. In theory, all driverless cars on the road would make it safer. In practice, we are going to have quite a learning curve.

Oh...and about those electronic health records.... my sister has the same name as someone else who gets their care in same health center. They have on three occasions, pulled up the incorrect file and quizzed her about conditions that she does not have (allergies that the other person has). What if the reverse happened? The other person is getting care, but when they pull up her file, there is no indication of the allergy she has and they give her something which induces a reaction?
My own experience was that someone entered the wrong code on a diagnoses and now if the insurance companies look at my medical record, they think I have a life threatening condition which I do not have. Although I have petitioned numerous times to have it removed, the best they can do is put a note in my file, which is only visible if you drill down in data. They can only label it "resolved"....which means that it doesn't seem to be a problem at the moment. Just the fact that it might of occurred is enough to make the insurance companies run away and deny coverage for life insurance.
Again, badly written software coupled with operator error. The fact that no one seems to know how to correct it says something about how the software is written and the level of support the users get.
When the sun shines, bask.
__/^^^^^o>
Classical Guitar forever!

User avatar
Denian Arcoleo
Composer
Posts: 6059
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Somerset, England

Re: driverless cars

Post by Denian Arcoleo » Tue Dec 06, 2016 6:35 pm

Andrew Pohlman wrote: Conspiracy theorists. :D
I'm not even talking about human intervention, I'm thinking about the time when the machines decide that their priorities don't exactly coincide with ours. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's a realistic conjecture about where we're headed.

gringo
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 3:36 pm
Location: Miami Beach, Florida

Re: driverless cars

Post by gringo » Tue Dec 06, 2016 7:53 pm

Denian Arcoleo wrote:
Andrew Pohlman wrote: Conspiracy theorists. :D
I'm not even talking about human intervention, I'm thinking about the time when the machines decide that their priorities don't exactly coincide with ours. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's a realistic conjecture about where we're headed.
This is the basis of the TV series Battlestar Galactica. This theme has also been used in a few other TV series and movies. Hopefully we will build safeguards into the software. But , since we cannot seem to coordinate the needs of human populations I suspect we will eventually have conflicts with our future AI populations. Who knows, maybe our driverless cars will start drag racing when they become teenagers.

Jeffrey Armbruster
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 3:16 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re: driverless cars

Post by Jeffrey Armbruster » Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:41 pm

It'as a fundamental law of physics that all robots will eventually go bad. Haven't you seen any sci-fi movies?
Paul Weaver spruce 2014
Takamine C132S

Andrew Pohlman
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:24 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: driverless cars

Post by Andrew Pohlman » Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:43 pm

lagartija wrote:Oh...and about those electronic health records .... Again, badly written software coupled with operator error....
Yes, there are errors. But the errors now are a small fraction of the errors prior to computerization. And those errors can still be traced to humans. And are you mad at the computer, or the humans who messed it up? In the case of self driving cars, there will be no human pilots to mess it up. Yeah, software upgrades are always troublesome.

Plus, computerization means that the info can be shared and processed in ways never possible via humans and paper systems. Real time data utilized dynamically by the cars is a really good thing. The fact that a terrorist would love to subvert such a system only means greater engineering controls, and should in no way stop us from using such technology. We keep buying airline tickets even though TSA fails to find planted hazards 95% of the time! I'm sure terrorists would love to subvert the GPS. So far, they have not been able to, but I'll bet they are trying.
2013 Rodriguez FF Sabicas blanco
2015 Trevor Gore custom Neoclassical
- redwood top, Palo dorado B+Ss.

User avatar
AndreiKrylov
Posts: 1690
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Canada, USA, Mexico, Portugal, Spain

Re: driverless cars

Post by AndreiKrylov » Tue Dec 06, 2016 10:24 pm

Andrew Pohlman wrote:
lagartija wrote:Oh...and about those electronic health records .... Again, badly written software coupled with operator error....
Yes, there are errors. But the errors now are a small fraction of the errors prior to computerization. And those errors can still be traced to humans. And are you mad at the computer, or the humans who messed it up? In the case of self driving cars, there will be no human pilots to mess it up. Yeah, software upgrades are always troublesome.

Plus, computerization means that the info can be shared and processed in ways never possible via humans and paper systems. Real time data utilized dynamically by the cars is a really good thing. The fact that a terrorist would love to subvert such a system only means greater engineering controls, and should in no way stop us from using such technology. We keep buying airline tickets even though TSA fails to find planted hazards 95% of the time! I'm sure terrorists would love to subvert the GPS. So far, they have not been able to, but I'll bet they are trying.
Please read this:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-01/c ... th/7802944
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ph ... -1.3770947
They still fixing this mess...
Good intentions...
I'd better speak by music...Please listen Andrei Krylov at Spotify, iTunes, Apple Music, Amazon Prime etc. Thanks!

khayes
Posts: 1196
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:29 pm
Location: Middle Tennessee

Re: driverless cars

Post by khayes » Tue Dec 06, 2016 10:50 pm

I'm still a skeptic. To my mind there are just too many variables involved for us to get to a completely driverless platform. These systems will have to be able to react to the reality of untold multiple events and stimuli at the same time. And as others have said, think of the added control that governments would have over us (maybe that explains the push in this direction). Everything pertaining to our vehicles and how it affects our lives would be kept in a database. How that data would be used is anyone's guess. I hope to not be around if it comes to that.
Ken

Andrew Pohlman
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2015 8:24 pm
Location: SF Bay Area

Re: driverless cars

Post by Andrew Pohlman » Tue Dec 06, 2016 10:58 pm

AndreiKrylov wrote:
Andrew Pohlman wrote:
lagartija wrote:Oh...and about those electronic health records .... Again, badly written software coupled with operator error....
Yes, there are errors. But the errors now are a small fraction of the errors prior to computerization. And those errors can still be traced to humans. And are you mad at the computer, or the humans who messed it up? In the case of self driving cars, there will be no human pilots to mess it up. Yeah, software upgrades are always troublesome.

Plus, computerization means that the info can be shared and processed in ways never possible via humans and paper systems. Real time data utilized dynamically by the cars is a really good thing. The fact that a terrorist would love to subvert such a system only means greater engineering controls, and should in no way stop us from using such technology. We keep buying airline tickets even though TSA fails to find planted hazards 95% of the time! I'm sure terrorists would love to subvert the GPS. So far, they have not been able to, but I'll bet they are trying.
Please read this:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-01/c ... th/7802944
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ph ... -1.3770947
They still fixing this mess...
Good intentions...
There is no doubt in my mind that there will be problems. But it is almost apples and oranges, because there are so many differences between autonomous cars functioning cooperatively, and some megacode bloatware by IBM that is not up to the task of big data. The Phoenix/IBM problem is more akin to the Borg - one controller for millions of minds. <-- That won't work.

I have full confidence that the engineering for self driving cars will be solid. It's only a matter of time - and we're not far away.
2013 Rodriguez FF Sabicas blanco
2015 Trevor Gore custom Neoclassical
- redwood top, Palo dorado B+Ss.

Pat Dodson
Posts: 2832
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2014 11:32 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: driverless cars

Post by Pat Dodson » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:14 pm

While I'm not worried about potential Big Brother spying, hacking and use by terrorists, I think there are many more prosaic technological and human nature reasons to suspect the adoption of driverless vehicles will have less pace and volume than some suggest. Here's an alternative view that chimes with me. Your thoughts might vary of course and that's fine. 8)

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/phys.org/n ... ent=safari

User avatar
AndreiKrylov
Posts: 1690
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:22 pm
Location: Canada, USA, Mexico, Portugal, Spain

Re: driverless cars

Post by AndreiKrylov » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:48 pm

Pat Dodson wrote:While I'm not worried about potential Big Brother spying, hacking and use by terrorists, I think there are many more prosaic technological and human nature reasons to suspect the adoption of driverless vehicles will have less pace and volume than some suggest. Here's an alternative view that chimes with me. Your thoughts might vary of course and that's fine. 8)

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/phys.org/n ... ent=safari
look at this video...no computers , no lights, no rules, no cops...crazy :)

Youtube
I'd better speak by music...Please listen Andrei Krylov at Spotify, iTunes, Apple Music, Amazon Prime etc. Thanks!

User avatar
Denian Arcoleo
Composer
Posts: 6059
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Somerset, England

Re: driverless cars

Post by Denian Arcoleo » Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:55 pm

Yes. One of the odd things in this discussions is the underestimation of our (human) abilities. One of the basic problems that AI scientists are grappling with is the issue of sight. It turns out that the 'simple' act of seeing which we animals engage in automatically - easily distinguishing one object from another and categorising them in a manner useful to us - is proving to be impossible for machines.

Also, as Pat has pointed out, the myriad interpersonal interactions which take place on the road, right down to subtle eye-contact, these things are seriously complex and allow us all to use the roads with, statistically, remarkable safety.

Jeffrey Armbruster
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 3:16 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Re: driverless cars

Post by Jeffrey Armbruster » Wed Dec 07, 2016 5:03 pm

This doesn't have top be an either/or proposition. I assume that humans will still be required to be alert and at the wheel to override the car computer when things go wrong or conditions are too complicated. However, since people already drive distracted with phones and such--or drunk--this may not work either.

I think that "driverless" is just a shorthand. computer assisted driving may end up being the reality.
Paul Weaver spruce 2014
Takamine C132S

Pat Dodson
Posts: 2832
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2014 11:32 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: driverless cars

Post by Pat Dodson » Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:46 pm

Jeffrey Armbruster wrote:This doesn't have top be an either/or proposition. I assume that humans will still be required to be alert and at the wheel to override the car computer when things go wrong or conditions are too complicated. However, since people already drive distracted with phones and such--or drunk--this may not work either.

I think that "driverless" is just a shorthand. computer assisted driving may end up being the reality.
Ah! Well now that is a pretty different scenario and I'm with you there. "Driverless" is though, is it not, rather far from "computer assisted with an alert driver behind the wheel"? :)

Return to “The Café”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Jacek A. Rochacki and 6 guests