I might have to drive over highwaymen, or dodge between 30 or 40 wild boar. I don’t need Asimov’s first law of robotics to confuse my car and make life or death decisions for me.
It’s a skill issue on the driver’s part… or do you want the Tesla to come to a screeching halt on the highway every time the cameras white out from the sun?
Autopilot will let a plane fly a heading, or even follow waypoints and land, but you the pilot still have to be watching the sky and the plane, ready to take over when something goes wrong. And airlines have way more stringent safety measures than cars.
That means auto drive systems still require the meatsack to monitor the driving, ready to take over when something goes wrong.
In this case, either the driver was hooning it and did a full send into the house, or he had a skill issue and put the brake accelerator to the floor in a panic moment.
Right so if autopilot swerves into oncoming traffic faster than the driver can react, that’s the drivers fault? The creators of the software never have any culpability in your eyes?
Personally, I want cars that automate driving to use more than one type of sensor so that they react more realistically in more circumstances. Tesla going camera-only was a mistake and Elon just keeps doubling down on it.
With how all cars are connected these days, we could easily throttle them using GPS data depending on the road you’re on. I don’t really get why cars can even go so fast in general, max should be twenty over the highway limit.
Slamming the brakes on the highway because either map data is incorrect, it misread a sign, or GNSS is misplacing the car is not a drawback, it’s a massive fucking safety hazard.
No a drawback would be a minor nuisance. You can live with a drawback. That would not be a minor nuisance and definitely not something you could live with.
You are arguing semantics and aren’t even right about it. A drawback can be minor or major. We are in agreement but your being silly about the words I use even though they are completely valid. You might want a synonym that’s harsher but that doesn’t make the use of the word wrong.
I’m basically saying it’s a problem and you are going “no fool, it’s a really really big problem”, like no shit, that’s what I said. I even added the word clear to show that’s it’s not a small drawback but a major one.
Shouldn’t the so-called smart technology pick up on the fact that you are driving full speed into a house? Is that not an easy error to avoid?
I mean, I think the reasons that automated systems should allow for overrides by human operators should be pretty apparent.
I might have to drive over highwaymen, or dodge between 30 or 40 wild boar. I don’t need Asimov’s first law of robotics to confuse my car and make life or death decisions for me.
Or my sensor could be bloody malfunctioning.
It’s a skill issue on the driver’s part… or do you want the Tesla to come to a screeching halt on the highway every time the cameras white out from the sun?
This is the system that’s meant to drive the car autonomously?
Autopilot will let a plane fly a heading, or even follow waypoints and land, but you the pilot still have to be watching the sky and the plane, ready to take over when something goes wrong. And airlines have way more stringent safety measures than cars.
That means auto drive systems still require the meatsack to monitor the driving, ready to take over when something goes wrong.
In this case, either the driver was hooning it and did a full send into the house, or he had a skill issue and put the
brakeaccelerator to the floor in a panic moment.Right so if autopilot swerves into oncoming traffic faster than the driver can react, that’s the drivers fault? The creators of the software never have any culpability in your eyes?
If you don’t want that rush you don’t use the software. Simple.
I’d want it to not use sensors that get washed out by the sun. IR lidar, for example, instead of naive visible light cameras.
Personally, I want cars that automate driving to use more than one type of sensor so that they react more realistically in more circumstances. Tesla going camera-only was a mistake and Elon just keeps doubling down on it.
I didn’t have FSD, but this is pretty much what cruise control / lane assist did.
With how all cars are connected these days, we could easily throttle them using GPS data depending on the road you’re on. I don’t really get why cars can even go so fast in general, max should be twenty over the highway limit.
Nobody really wants that though I’m guessing.
When you car slams on the brakes suddenly because it thinks you’re suddenly driving on the jog road next to the highway, don’t complain to me.
The same applies to stopping it from driving full speed into a house. Hence why I said most don’t want that. Some clear drawbacks.
That being said, putting a max speed that is only a bit above highway speed is an easy win imo.
Slamming the brakes on the highway because either map data is incorrect, it misread a sign, or GNSS is misplacing the car is not a drawback, it’s a massive fucking safety hazard.
A massive safety hazard is a clear drawback…
No a drawback would be a minor nuisance. You can live with a drawback. That would not be a minor nuisance and definitely not something you could live with.
You are arguing semantics and aren’t even right about it. A drawback can be minor or major. We are in agreement but your being silly about the words I use even though they are completely valid. You might want a synonym that’s harsher but that doesn’t make the use of the word wrong.
I’m basically saying it’s a problem and you are going “no fool, it’s a really really big problem”, like no shit, that’s what I said. I even added the word clear to show that’s it’s not a small drawback but a major one.
I mean why put limits on roads if we let cars ignore them anyway?