Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
John Stevenson wrote:
I’d love to know what not-made-in-China phones and computers people are using to take part in this discussion. And also, what sort of genocidal dictatorship rich approves of if it’s only communist ones that are a problem ;)LG makes some phones
Rich_cb wrote:
Cheers for the heads up, if all goes well I shall be passing through Portmeirion later this summer, don’t need to leave space in the panniers for a new tea service now!
Why is a job in Britain better than a job in another country, though?For the Brexit benefits?
To be fair, it is titled
To be fair, it is titled “Should you buy your wheels direct from China”. There’s mention of returns going to a local distributor in each country though, so it’d be useful to know if there is one for the UK.
I’m shocked that they tried
I’m shocked that they tried to bribe their way out of reversing it.
An autonomous car overturned:
An autonomous car overturned:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/fishponds-car-crash-man-injured-7207377
Wasn’t that the method used by Sontaran pawns to kill off a journalist?Can’t find that specific chess set
I hope that accusation is in tin foil hat territory?But does lead me onto something – is the Tesla software and its updates valid for the life of the car or do you have to pay a separate subscription for firmware updates etc? Imagine being on a long journey when suddenly you’re told that your car has been bricked…
NHTSA said its analysis indicated that Forward Collision Warnings activated in the majority of incidents just prior to impact and that subsequent Automatic Emergency Braking intervened in approximately half of the crashes.“On average in these crashes, Autopilot aborted vehicle control less than one second prior to the first impact,” the agency added.
NHTSA noted that “where incident video was available, the approach to the first responder scene would have been visible to the driver an average of 8 seconds leading up to impact.”
The agency also reviewed 106 reported Autopilot crashes and said in approximately half, “indications existed that the driver was insufficiently responsive to the needs of the dynamic driving task.”
“A driver’s use or misuse of vehicle components, or operation of a vehicle in an unintended manner does not necessarily preclude a system defect,” the agency said.
You could argue that the Autopilot is supposed to turn over control to the driver in the event of something unexpected and certainly crashing may be described as unexpected, but rescinding control within a second of the collision certainly seems like an easy way to improve the Autopilot figures. What’s needed is to examine the whole system of car, driver and Autopilot and determine how well the parts work together.
It will also be interesting if they sell the service with caveats of “use of this service is at your own risk and we can’t be sued if the car decides to drive into the Thames by itself”. After all who reads the T’s and C’s of most things supplied by Google, Apple, Etc. I’m pretty sure I read somewhere that the current Tesla Autopilot usage is at own risk.Aren’t they accused of turning off the autopilot system just before crashing so that they can blame the driver instead?
Mandatory intelligence tests for all Facebook users!!Hasn’t Facebook just become a low intelligence trap? Surely anyone with sense or a social conscience has closed their account after the Cambridge Analytica scandal?
Mungecrundle wrote:
Not sure if my irony meter is actually broken or wether SocialistHero (comments on Bristol Post article) is too subtle for it. SocialistHero5 HRS AGO Trees are a menace. Cut mire down and make the road wider. I can’t think of any other solutionI reckon it’s ironic, but with car culture being so ingrained, sometimes you can’t tell
“It was a single vehicle
“It was a single vehicle collision, a car collided with a tree.”
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/local-news/car-smashes-tree-yate-police-7194332
Car makers should be obliged to open-source the control software for self-driving cars anyway, and offer a hefty bounty for bugs, so knowledgeable people can check it for errors.This is an industry that’s demonstrated over and over again that it can’t be trusted, yet people think it’ll manage to create safe autonomous vehicles. Pardon the hollow laughter.
I can’t see that politicians would have much sway over the car industries, so I can’t see that happening. They’re more likely to offer driving-as-a-service (that way they could even use GPL software without having to reveal their changes):
Rich_cb wrote:
That’s where the money is so I don’t think level 5 autonomy will ever exist as there’s simply no profit to be made in developing it.This is why I hope that some day we’ll have open source autonomous driving software powering (public) vehicles. Open source has the ability to go beyond just the economic needs of the vehicle manufacturers.
I think you’re making
I think you’re making assumptions about how autonomous systems can be made to work. It’s entirely possible to have AI systems within a framework of rules and they can be programmed to slow down and stop if a situation strays out of known parameters.
The Elaine Herzberg case shows the major problem of having systems that rely on the driver being constantly alert and ready in case the system suddenly decides that it doesn’t know what’s going on. I believe the safety system was also disengaged as they had problems with phantom stopping, but that’s an implementation issue they had rather than a problem with all autonomous systems.