Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8936 total)
40 online now:
Captcass, Tanypteryx, zihuanew (3 members, 37 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,704 Year: 16,740/19,786 Month: 865/2,598 Week: 111/251 Day: 64/24 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Self-Driving Cars
PaulK
Member
Posts: 15375
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 121 of 142 (845123)
12-12-2018 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Percy
12-12-2018 9:10 AM


Re: Blowing own horn again...
Uber is much worse - at least with cars. Ars Technica


“A car was damaged nearly every other day in February," Miller said. "We shouldn’t be hitting things every 15,000 miles."

(The Computer Science department at Uni had a DEC 20 - I used it quite a bit)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Percy, posted 12-12-2018 9:10 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Stile
Member
Posts: 3844
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 122 of 142 (845131)
12-12-2018 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Percy
12-12-2018 9:10 AM


Crickets of agreement
I simply still agree with you when we talked about this earlier:

Stile writes:

Percy writes:

Naturally rain and mud and snow also interfere with visual cameras. If mud or slush or snow splashes up your visual camera, what then?

Concerns like this go away if a company decides to stick at a Level 3-ish area.
What then? Swap to manual. Slow down, pull over. Same conclusion for every detection of "not operating within valid parameters."
Then the data be analyzed in the shop under completely safe VM environmental conditions and maybe the problems will get solved.
Once they're all solved (or some threshold of reduced problems over time is reached) - move to Level 5-ish.
If they never get solved, then I agree that Level 5-ish isn't something to aim for with so many questions still floating about.

I don't think a goal of time for going to Level 5 is reasonable.
I think the goal should be "meeting some threshold of reduced problems over time."
There's nothing wrong with getting to such a goal as-fast-as-possible... but the goal for moving to fully automatic vehicles should be measured in "safer than human drivers by x amount" terms... not "within x years" terms.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Percy, posted 12-12-2018 9:10 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8860
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 123 of 142 (845135)
12-12-2018 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Tangle
12-12-2018 11:23 AM


Tipping Points
Some disruptive technologies have tipping points built into the adoption process. Once that point is reached, however slowly, things suddenly go very, very quickly.
I've driven all 3 of the Tesla models and after my Audi my next car will not be a gas burning dinosaur. What it will be and when is still to be decided. If battery costs continue as they have then the tipping point for EVs will be 3 to 5 yrs out. Only a minority of people will want anything else after that.

With autonomy of cars I think the tipping point will be when your insurance to drive without the "AI" on will be too expensive. This will go from not an issue to a deciding factor all of a sudden. When will that be? I'd guess 2 to 4 years. It won't be that we will have level 4 or 5 capabilities necessarily. It will just be that driving without the car helping out will be expensive, then too expensive and then prohibited.

As hinted at by Tesla's numbers (and though biased they may know more than anyone - they have 1/4 of a million devices gathering statistics out there) there may be enough to change insurance within the next few months even.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Tangle, posted 12-12-2018 11:23 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 124 of 142 (845151)
12-12-2018 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by Diomedes
12-12-2018 10:09 AM


Re: Part Of The Problem
Diomedes writes:

One great example I always think about when it comes to bad predictions is the movie 2001 A Space Odyssey. It came out in 1968. It depicted a future (in 2001) with space habitats, a presence on the moon, routine commercial space travel, etc. Well, here we are in 2018 and we don't have hardly any of that. With the exception of the International Space Station, which is no where near as advanced as what was depicted in the movie.

In the winter of early 1968 my sophomore high school class bussed into New York City to see 2001: A Space Odyssey in Cinerama, a surround screen and surround sound experience. The shuttle approach to the space station to the music of Straus's Blue Danube was spectacular and unforgettable:

I was so stunned I bought the movie soundtrack (though I had no record player) and bought and learned the piano music to the Blue Danube.

The movie's visionaries conceived of a shuttle vehicle nearly identical to the eventual space shuttle not launched until 14 years later, but we've never seen anything like the space station, not in the year 2001 and not now and not for the foreseeable future.

But the real interesting portion was the Hal 9000 computer. Now in 2018, our computer technology is impressive. The have the World Wide Web. We have computers in our pockets in the form of cell phones. Near instant communication with anyone. But when it comes to AI, or Artificial Intelligence, we don't have anything remotely close to what the Hal 9000 was. That was a fully sentient, artificial intelligence. As Percy mention above, the only thing that has some commonality with Hal is Watson. Yet it is clearly not self aware. It is basically a very advanced big data mechanism.

When I was at Carnegie Mellon in the mid-1970's there was a project called Hearsay whose goal was to understand human speech. While I was there they mastered the small chess vocabulary, as in "Pawn to queen four" and "Bishop takes knight." Project leads spoke of the promise of speech recognition, saying it was already on the horizon, just a few more years. Now, forty years later we're just getting there. And that's just speech recognition - speech comprehension is a much bigger task.

I played around with Apple's speech recognition using Swift while I was writing the RideGuru app (see Calling All Rideshare Fans), and it was really good at recognizing addresses like "95 East Main Street, Springfield, Massachusetts," but really bad at addresses with place names with odd spellings and/or silent letters, so I left speech recognition out of the app.

But playing with Siri just now I can see that Apple's speech recognition is still pretty powerful. You might imagine that "17 Gloucester Road, Worcester, Massachusetts" would give it trouble because Gloucester is pronounced "Gloster" and Worcester is pronounced "Wooster", but Siri has no trouble with it ("Hey Siri, show 17 Gloucester Road, Worcester, Massachusetts").

But try, "Hey Siri, show 17 Cowesett Road, Warwick, RI" and it will get it wrong time after time no matter how carefully you pronounce "Cowesett." If you've got Android give it a try and see if it does any better. We've got an Alexa Dot that we use a little, and it is much smarter than Siri at answering questions, for one example, "How many Jews were killed during World War II?" But I don't know if it's also better at speech recognition.

This is actually an issue that is becoming more prevalent in software. For Gen Xers like myself, many of us were hobbyists that put computers together by ourselves. Before companies like Dell existed. And we often times had to hand code software without the benefit of more adept development environments like Microsoft Visual Studio or Java Eclipse. Now these dev environments expedite coding and make things easier. But often times, they obfuscate a lot of the particulars of the low level code itself. Millennials having grown up in an environment where the low level code is done for them often are ill equipped to handle certain types of problems.

Give me that old time religion (meaning assembler code).

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Diomedes, posted 12-12-2018 10:09 AM Diomedes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Tangle, posted 12-12-2018 3:32 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 126 by Diomedes, posted 12-12-2018 3:34 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7067
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 125 of 142 (845152)
12-12-2018 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Percy
12-12-2018 3:13 PM


Re: Part Of The Problem
Percy writes:

But try, "Hey Siri, show 17 Cowesett Road, Warwick, RI" and it will get it wrong time after time no matter how carefully you pronounce "Cowesett.

A human would get that wrong every time too - unless they came from there.

All Siri has to do is what a human would do and ask to spell it. Simples :-)


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Percy, posted 12-12-2018 3:13 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 902
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 126 of 142 (845153)
12-12-2018 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 124 by Percy
12-12-2018 3:13 PM


Re: Part Of The Problem
But try, "Hey Siri, show 17 Cowesett Road, Warwick, RI" and it will get it wrong time after time no matter how carefully you pronounce "Cowesett." If you've got Android give it a try and see if it does any better. We've got an Alexa Dot that we use a little, and it is much smarter than Siri at answering questions, for one example, "How many Jews were killed during World War II?" But I don't know if it's also better at speech recognition.

If you want a really good laugh, check out some of the viral videos of people from Scotland trying to use voice recognition. Like so:

Makes me wonder how they pronounce 'Brexit'.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 124 by Percy, posted 12-12-2018 3:13 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by ringo, posted 12-12-2018 3:36 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17283
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


(1)
Message 127 of 142 (845154)
12-12-2018 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Diomedes
12-12-2018 3:34 PM


Re: Part Of The Problem
Diomedes writes:

Makes me wonder how they pronounce 'Brexit'.


Imagine using two Siris to do the negotiations.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Diomedes, posted 12-12-2018 3:34 PM Diomedes has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


(1)
Message 128 of 142 (845159)
12-12-2018 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by kjsimons
12-12-2018 10:14 AM


Re: Blowing own horn again...
kjsimons writes:

'm also a computer guy from way back (also wrote code on PDP-11s, DEC and Data Generals early on)...

I worked for DEC but knew people from DG and Prime - all their company headquarters were in the Boston suburbs. When I joined DEC in 1977 Ed de Castro's (DG's founder) departure was still a recent memory. The story as I heard it was that around the mid-1960's DEC started two competing projects to design the PDP-8 successor. The project team that designed the PDP-11 was selected, and the project team that designed the Nova, led by Ed de Castro, went off and founded DG. DEC would have done well to do whatever it took to retain Ed de Castro, because DG was a tough competitor and a thorn in DEC's side for years.

If you still remember DG's Nova and SuperNova machines fondly and haven't yet read Tracy Kidder's The Soul of a New Machine then it is well worth reading. I met a couple of the principles, but it was years ago and I no longer remember their names. The one name I do remember from the book is Tom West, the project lead. The character I best remember, even though he played a minor role, was the technician who would destroy tools once he felt they were "used up." The vignet I best remember was when one of the hardware designers (salaried, i.e., no overtime) found a technican's (hourly, i.e., overtime) paystub in a wastebasket and discovered the technician was making more than he did (remember paper paychecks?).

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by kjsimons, posted 12-12-2018 10:14 AM kjsimons has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 129 of 142 (845160)
12-12-2018 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by NosyNed
12-12-2018 10:36 AM


Re: sneaking up on us
I think the crash avoidance systems are much better than people. And on a calm clear day on a smooth road with lines that aren't worn away and no construction, then current autonomous capabilities should outperform a human driver.

What often happens with new technologies is that high initial expectations decline and existing capabilities improve. At some point diminishing expectations meet improving capabilities, and then the new technology takes off.

But take the simple case of a policeman with his hand up indicating stop. It will be a long time before autonomous vehicles recognize this situation, and without that capability these cars should not be permitted on the road without a backup driver. Google claims to have solved this problem, but I don't believe them. I don't believe Tesla's stats, either.

Today me and another car yielded to each other. The driver in the other car signaled me to go and we make eye contact, so I went. I think it will be a long while before LIDAR plus cameras can handle that.

Two cars pull up at the same time at a 4-way stop at right angles to each other. The car to the right doesn't go (doesn't matter why). What does the car to the left do?

Four cars pull up to a 4-way stop at the same time. Reminds me of the joke about the donkey midway between two haystacks. It's the vehicular equivalent of a deadly embrace, or, since it's all just software, it *is* the deadly embrace. This one has simple solutions, I just mentioned it because it seems humorous.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by NosyNed, posted 12-12-2018 10:36 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Tangle, posted 12-12-2018 5:21 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7067
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 130 of 142 (845161)
12-12-2018 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Percy
12-12-2018 4:59 PM


Re: sneaking up on us
Percy writes:

But take the simple case of a policeman with his hand up indicating stop.

Any person in the road would cause the car to stop - I would hope.

But you are imagining a the world as it is now, not how it would be. The first cars in this country had to be led by a chap with a red flag, that didn't last long. Barriers to the inevitable are pushed aside or worked around.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Percy, posted 12-12-2018 4:59 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2314
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 7.2


Message 131 of 142 (845171)
12-12-2018 7:04 PM


It is interesting to see you guys talking about self driving cars and the rules of the road changing on a scale less than 5 years. Other than riding in a Tesla a couple years ago, I don't know anything about this technology.

This spring I bought the first new car since 1977. Mine doesn't have a nav system but they do make them for my model. The do not make an electric version.

If the change in infrastructure to accommodate electric self drivers does indeed happen on these short timescales it will force the poor to lose their access to personal transportation.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Tangle, posted 12-13-2018 3:19 AM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 7067
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 132 of 142 (845185)
12-13-2018 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Tanypteryx
12-12-2018 7:04 PM


Tany writes:

If the change in infrastructure to accommodate electric self drivers does indeed happen on these short timescales it will force the poor to lose their access to personal transportation.

I think it may do the opposite. It should make public transport cheaper and more reliable. But more importantly it removes the requirement to own a car or even rent one. Once cars are self-drive you can just order one for your journey and wave bye-bye to it when it drops you off.

Imagine all those empty parking lots. - all that new space.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-12-2018 7:04 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Pressie, posted 12-13-2018 5:36 AM Tangle has not yet responded
 Message 137 by ringo, posted 12-13-2018 10:50 AM Tangle has responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2074
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 133 of 142 (845190)
12-13-2018 5:36 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by Tangle
12-13-2018 3:19 AM


Yeah, but computers need to get rebooted every so often. They go crazy every now and then. My state-of-the art cellphone needs to get rebooted every now and then. It just stops ringing, then I know it's time for a reboot. Same with my computer and satellite phone and satellite-tv decoder. They just start going crazy sometimes. Hope it doesn't happen in any self driven car I'm a passenger in...
This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Tangle, posted 12-13-2018 3:19 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by AZPaul3, posted 12-13-2018 9:35 AM Pressie has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4511
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 134 of 142 (845197)
12-13-2018 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Pressie
12-13-2018 5:36 AM


Hope it doesn't happen in any self driven car I'm a passenger in...

It will. Hopefully not you, but people are going to get hurt, people are going to die, from these things. Tort and insurance legislation will be used to absorb that risk temporarily while the smart guys figure out how to make these things safer.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Pressie, posted 12-13-2018 5:36 AM Pressie has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Percy, posted 12-13-2018 10:38 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18842
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 135 of 142 (845205)
12-13-2018 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by AZPaul3
12-13-2018 9:35 AM


AZPaul3 writes:

Hope it doesn't happen in any self driven car I'm a passenger in...

It will. Hopefully not you, but people are going to get hurt, people are going to die, from these things. Tort and insurance legislation will be used to absorb that risk temporarily while the smart guys figure out how to make these things safer.

You're absolutely right - people are going to die because of software bugs and glitches, hardware failures, unanticipated situations, etc. But car accidents should decline, and the severity of the car accidents that do happen should also decline. The death and injury rate should decline precipitously. We currently have around 35,000 vehicular related deaths per year, and that should drop below 10,000, probably way below 10,000.

But how are people going to feel about that, about the possibility of dying because of some car failure instead of their own mistake? The people penalized the most will be those who today are the most safe and careful drivers: those who don't tailgate, always look both ways, drive at reasonable speeds, etc. Their chances of vehicular death will decline, too, but not as much as your more, uh, enthusiastic drivers.

But whether we're talking about safe or enthusiastic drivers, how will they feel about having their degree of safety taken out of their hands?

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by AZPaul3, posted 12-13-2018 9:35 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by NosyNed, posted 12-13-2018 10:45 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 140 by AZPaul3, posted 12-13-2018 2:08 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 141 by Pressie, posted 12-14-2018 5:34 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019