|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Self-Driving Cars | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
It all boils down to how the humans respond to the legal language differentiating the technological responsibility versus human responsibility.
If the car malfunctions and causes harm, it is the owners liability---thus if the car hurts the owner, the owner gets the blame.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
jar writes: It appears that this driver, though very human, was relying far too much on GPS technology rather than simply driving slow and observing the area. My point is that there are accidents caused solely by human error, accidents caused solely by driverless technology, and accidents caused by an ill-conceived synthesis between the two. quote: And the picture shows a car without the additional pods seen on the uber self-driving cars so it is very likely that it was just a normal car. Perhaps a valid question which we need to ask ourselves is this:As technology and computer systems advance, which tasks should we entrust to the robotic computers and which should we keep for ourselves in the interest of retaining mental sharpness? My sister relies on her smartphone GPS device to guide her to locations that she is unfamiliar with on the city map, whereas I enjoy the challenge of writing down the directions and following the markers to the location myself. Her device actually audibly speaks out instructions to her on which direction to turn whereas I make those decisions on my own, based on my familiarity with the spatial layout of the city itself. Of course, were I in a strange city, I might rely on the GPS voice more than I do here, but I still like to feel as if I am choosing the directions versus having them spoken at me by that annoying Siri. Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Perhaps they could someday have a lane on major highways dedicated solely to driverless vehicles.
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I took a minute to read your last two latest posts. I didnt know that you had a semi-automatic car...I guess that those are common these days. Your estimation of the technology being 20-30 years off sounds quite logical--and you being from the field of study that you were in makes you well equipped to analyse these news stories and provide reasonable critique. Here is my 2 cents:
Many of the younger Millennials who are in the industry that designs and builds this technology are, in my opinion, far removed from the nuts and bolts technology of an actual car, not to mention the early technology involved in computer design. They have grown up around virtual reality gaming and how computers work in that environment, yet are not as aware of the real world limitations of such technology. Driver reaction time is one primary example. In an RPG game, the "driver" is the player and is totally immersed in the game. In the example of a self-driving car, there seems to be a fantasy of...as you say...watching videos and texting on your phone while the car gets you across town. The problem is, among other things, the real world of the town that must be navigated is not designed and built within the confines of the "game". One may well build a SIMS car for their SIMS characters in a game, having built and designed the game from the floor up. One cannot as easily integrate the dynamic demands of an onboard computer to navigate around any city. Do you understand what I'm attempting to say? Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
Stie writes: I agree. They wanted to design a system as cost-effectively as possible. It would be like building an RPG game trying to get it competitive with the market. The glitch in the "system" is human as much as it is programming. The technology may or may not exist to build the right vehicles, but if they are under pressure to get it marketable and "just good enough" they have the wrong approach. And again...the way I see it the other glitch is designing the technology to coexist with the real world. Not an artificial simulation of the real world. I wonder where the issue lies here. Options I can think of (can certainly be more than 1 going on at a time): 1 - Hardware (radar, lidar, visions system, sensors...) was not purchased at a level it should have been for the application.That is, the company saved money on "cheaper equipment" that could only be right most-of-the-time instead of all-the-time for this scenario. -fault is on designers 2 - Programmers were not very good. Bad programmers = bad programming = they simply "didn't think" that this scenario would come up.-fault is on programmers 3 - Programmers were good, but not given enough time to setup the system to the levels the equipment is capable of... they were pushed to get something out that was "good enough" even though it could have been better given more time/money.-fault is on leaders (owners/managers...) Taking the quote literally "the system was set up to ignore objects that it should have attended to" implies to me that it's more on the programmers and/or leaders. But it's possible this wording is not meant to be taken that literally and it's still a design problem.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18343 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
If the software in question is something like a schedule calendar or photo album then the consequences of bugs are minor, but if the software is for a nuclear power plant or a space shuttle or a self-driving car then the consequences of bugs can be deadly. You are saying it better than I can. Technology is great, but humans need to figure out what they want it to do and what they want to be relieved of the responsibility of doing. Anyone who would buy a self-driving car needs to ask themselves the stakes that they are investing.
Completely self-driving cars are a utopian dream for the foreseeable future. What they can already do is amazing, but what they can't do is formidable and frightening. Google and Tesla and Uber and all the rest can do all the development and testing they want, but for a long time, people are still going to have to drive their own cars. But just crash avoidance systems alone will significantly reduce injuries and deaths due to accidents. Always the optimist! The goal is to forge ahead with the technology with blinders off. We cant be in a hurry to adopt the technology.Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain " ~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
Subjectivism may very well undermine Christianity.In the same way that "allowing people to choose what they want to be when they grow up" undermines communism.~Stile
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024