http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzgIEYxiKjY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzgIEYxiKjY)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rNWbpOsOvI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rNWbpOsOvI)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPARvS31Oq0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPARvS31Oq0)
Autonomous Aerial Vehicles...I want one....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgeGnYODMfg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgeGnYODMfg)
Supposedly flying cars have already been developed and tested years ago; but they were shelved because they were not autonomous; as crazy as people drive cars, I can see the chaos and carnage...
I am still waiting to see what happens with the hover bike... 8)
Seeker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7b5QIDZ13U
http://www.hover-bike.com/ (http://www.hover-bike.com/)
Quote from: the seeker on April 14, 2017, 12:12:44 PM
Supposedly flying cars have already been developed and tested years ago; but they were shelved because they were not autonomous; as crazy as people drive cars, I can see the chaos and carnage...
I am still waiting to see what happens with the hover bike... 8)
Seeker
While I appreciate that all it takes is one "crazy" Person to wreak some havoc, I get a little perturbed when People imply that "all People drive crazy." In fact, statistically speaking, zero People drive crazy. Virtually all People follow the rules of the road, but the TV, movies, and the "news" make it SEEM like We are all crazy drivers. I think there is an agenda afoot to take Our freedom to drive away and replace it with robot cars that the psychopaths in control can...control.
I have no issues with such cars as long as using them is a CHOICE. I do have issues if that CHOICE is taken away.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 14, 2017, 04:41:00 PM
While I appreciate that all it takes is one "crazy" Person to wreak some havoc, I get a little perturbed when People imply that "all People drive crazy." In fact, statistically speaking, zero People drive crazy. Virtually all People follow the rules of the road, but the TV, movies, and the "news" make it SEEM like We are all crazy drivers. I think there is an agenda afoot to take Our freedom to drive away and replace it with robot cars that the psychopaths in control can...control.
I have no issues with such cars as long as using them is a CHOICE. I do have issues if that CHOICE is taken away.
I disagree; you have a very narrow view of the world in general ::)
40,000 people were killed in car accidents in 2016, more than twice that were injured, and that doesn't take into consideration the number of accidents that had no one injured, just in the US...
But you have a penchant for spinning every statement to suit your viewpoint; I stated "as crazy as people drive" which is a generality; I did not say all people drive crazy; that is just your take on it.
Seeker
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 14, 2017, 04:41:00 PM
While I appreciate that all it takes is one "crazy" Person to wreak some havoc, I get a little perturbed when People imply that "all People drive crazy." In fact, statistically speaking, zero People drive crazy. Virtually all People follow the rules of the road, but the TV, movies, and the "news" make it SEEM like We are all crazy drivers. I think there is an agenda afoot to take Our freedom to drive away and replace it with robot cars that the psychopaths in control can...control.
I have no issues with such cars as long as using them is a CHOICE. I do have issues if that CHOICE is taken away.
As an expert on the driving craft, I will weigh in on this issue. A lot of people are terrible drivers. It's the old "can't walk and chew gum at the same time".
The worst drivers are women, elderly men, and teenagers, especially teenage boys. I, personally, feel there is no excuse for men from about age 30 to age 65 to not know how to drive well. Men usually take driving as an art. The exception to this rule always disappointed me.
Anyway, driving is a privilege, not a right, not a choice.
If it were up to me, about 50% of the people on the road today would not have a license.
Quote from: Irene on April 17, 2017, 11:35:53 PM
As an expert on the driving craft, I will weigh in on this issue. A lot of people are terrible drivers. It's the old "can't walk and chew gum at the same time".
The worst drivers are women, elderly men, and teenagers. I, personally, feel there is no excuse for men from about age 30 to age 65 to not know how to drive well. Men usually take driving as an art. The exception to this rule always disappointed me.
Anyway, driving is a privilege, not a right, not a choice.
If it were up to me, about 50% of the people on the road today would not have a license.
We need to go back to having drivers education. My son drives a big rig and people are really stupid not realizing that you cannot stop on a dime. I have had emergency vehicle defensive driving and that has gotten me out of situations that other people have created. Rules of the road... some make up their own rules. I tend to agree with Irene because it is what I encounter here in Florida. Would autonomous driving drones or ground vehicles make a difference. They will only work if you take humans off the road. Even combat drones have human intervention.
There is so much out there distracting your attention it is an impossibility to not miss something. If you think your a perfect driver see how nervous you are if a police car is tailing you for a few blocks. I bet you find yourself wondering "how long before I am pulled over?". While autopilot will be much better at not being distracted there is no guarantees in life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzgIEYxiKjY
I wonder what Andreas Epp thinks about this thing?
http://greyfalcon.us/restored/JOSEF%20ANDREAS%20EPP.htm (http://greyfalcon.us/restored/JOSEF%20ANDREAS%20EPP.htm)
Quote from: spacemaverick on April 17, 2017, 11:40:57 PM
We need to go back to having drivers education. My son drives a big rig and people are really stupid not realizing that you cannot stop on a dime. I have had emergency vehicle defensive driving and that has gotten me out of situations that other people have created. Rules of the road... some make up their own rules. I tend to agree with Irene because it is what I encounter here in Florida. Would autonomous driving drones or ground vehicles make a difference. They will only work if you take humans off the road. Even combat drones have human intervention.
I could do a whole thread on my driving pet peeves. I've even seriously considered starting a web site called
howtodrive.org, to teach people how to GD drive.
Some sample subjects -
"How to Make a Left Turn On a Four-Lane Divided"
"Right On Red"
"Who Yields On the Interstate"
"Put Down the Motherf***ing Phone"
"This Is Why a Helmet Is a Good Idea"
Now I'm
all riled up.
Quote from: Irene on April 17, 2017, 11:53:57 PM
Now I'm all riled up.
Well there is that to consider as well... your emotional state and fatigue also play a large role in your attentiveness and your driving habits. I bet you'll calm down before going for a drive now. :)
Some years ago, in Spain, they changed the fines for all dangerous traffic transgressions to much higher values, and they got a reduction in accidents, so I suppose those accidents were more a result of a "I don't care about the others" attitude that changed when it started costing lots of money to a "it's expensive and not worth it" attitude.
PS: I don't drive.
Here your attitude can be "I am going to kill someone as soon as I get my license" so long as you have a perfectly functioning vehicle and can pass the road test your good to go. They just keep adding more cops instead of fixing the problem.
Quote from: Ellirium113 on April 18, 2017, 12:49:35 AM
Here your attitude can be "I am going to kill someone as soon as I get my license" so long as you have a perfectly functioning vehicle and can pass the road test your good to go. They just keep adding more cops instead of fixing the problem.
It isn't any different here, E; what aggravates me is their attitude, especially the snowflakes and the millennials, for they think they are the most important person on the road and we all are supposed to yield automatically. :o
Plus a large number still drive after they lose their license; those peeps should be arrested on the spot and put to work doing public service.
Seeker
Look at this flying man : https://www.facebook.com/Zapataofficiel/
As French administration refuse him any authorisation for fly-test ,
I think he will soon go to Us or another country more comprehensive : (
Anyway , it's a phenomenal engine , if we can trust the videoAll the best !
Guerande
Quote from: the seeker on April 19, 2017, 02:00:13 AM
It isn't any different here, E; what aggravates me is their attitude, especially the snowflakes and the millennials, for they think they are the most important person on the road and we all are supposed to yield automatically. :o
Plus a large number still drive after they lose their license; those peeps should be arrested on the spot and put to work doing public service.
Seeker
And they keep offending. In my state (Florida), they do arrest them and they do put them to work in Public service during their incarceration. Then they get out and do it again...the cycle keeps going. Having dealt with them inside the jail walls...I know. The crazy system is broke.
If I backchatted to my mother I would get all hell let loose on me.
My father we stayed away from, cuz we knew better.
My kids had everything they needed and were sent to private secondary schools.
And what did we get back; "you cant touch me, You will get into trouble."
Bloody insufferable little ............
Quote from: Irene on April 17, 2017, 11:53:57 PM
I could do a whole thread on my driving pet peeves.
How ZORGON drives :Phttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqQwH_Qj1x0
How RUSSIANS drive :Phttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywNfWS8QBFA
It's one thing if you know how to handle a vehicle, it's another when you pretend to know, like many young men.
I've watched a lot of the Russian videos on YT because the Russians are hilarious to watch. Their driving videos amaze me. They do not, routinely, check for traffic and drive too GD fast for conditions.
Most people have no "seat of the pants" intuition. They do not or cannot "feel" their vehicle and environment, and that is an instinct you cannot teach. It's onboard when you're born.
In the 90's I lived in the country with my ex. He had a Saab turbo. There was one particular hill on the way to work that he would hit just right and we would almost go airborne. What a blast!
I give it less than a week that someone will try and make the drone car do loop de loops or barrel rolls for their 5 minutes of youtube fame. I think 2 license system should be in order if not 3. Driver's license, drone pilot license (for remote operation), and pilot's license. What sorts of mechanics will be qualified to work on these things? Will automotive / aircraft mechanics need dual trade?
One of the things I noticed is the relatively short battery life on these units, roughly 30 minutes and then recharge them :o that isn't going to be very practical, even for a cab company unless they have a slew of them; and what happens when you punch up your destination and it's 45 minutes flight time in a 30 minute craft? Stop, get out, and change cabs? Sounds like a cluster in the making...
8)
Seeker
Quote from: the seeker on April 19, 2017, 11:14:00 PM
One of the things I noticed is the relatively short battery life on these units, roughly 30 minutes and then recharge them :o that isn't going to be very practical, even for a cab company unless they have a slew of them; and what happens when you punch up your destination and it's 45 minutes flight time in a 30 minute craft? Stop, get out, and change cabs? Sounds like a cluster in the making...
8)
Seeker
Back to the drawing board....go back to the Omega discus and start there. :)
Quote from: Irene on April 19, 2017, 04:29:24 PM
Most people have no "seat of the pants" intuition. They do not or cannot "feel" their vehicle and environment, and that is an instinct you cannot teach. It's onboard when you're born.
That's something we can see when we see people driving, some people do it as naturally as walking, while other people appear to be struggling against the car.
My mother was the first type, my father was a little of the second. :)
I remember as a kid maybe 5 or 6 years old trapped in the back seat of the grandparent's car as they drove through the city was a treat. Grandma would be yelling at Grandpa "You need to be in the other lane" while you couldn't squeeze a pedestrian between the vehicles in the traffic. She would harass him to no end while he drove and for the most part silently tried to focus on the road. All the 2nd hand smoke from the 2 of them back in the day always made getting home the most fun any trip could ever have been. Ah those were the days... ;D
Quote from: the seeker on April 17, 2017, 11:17:47 PM
I disagree; you have a very narrow view of the world in general ::)
40,000 people were killed in car accidents in 2016, more than twice that were injured, and that doesn't take into consideration the number of accidents that had no one injured, just in the US...
But you have a penchant for spinning every statement to suit your viewpoint; I stated "as crazy as people drive" which is a generality; I did not say all people drive crazy; that is just your take on it.
Seeker
I guess it's "narrow..." Lessee... 40,000 is... 0.013% of a population of 300 million. Now granted, 300 million is lower than the actual population, and not all those 300+ million drive... But Let's say 1/2 drive (likely more than that in reality) and use the 300 million - so 40,000 is what percentage of 150 million... 0.027%! Guess what? That is statistically insignificant. Sure, 40K SOUNDS like a lot - and that is one of the things the psychopaths use to skew perspective. Even if We add in "more than twice that were injured," it likely won't hit 0.1%.
Seriously, MOST drivers drive well.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 23, 2017, 12:25:08 AM
Seriously, MOST drivers drive well.
You've obviously never been in the driver's seat of a squad car. ::)
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 23, 2017, 12:25:08 AM
I guess it's "narrow..." Lessee... 40,000 is... 0.013% of a population of 300 million. Now granted, 300 million is lower than the actual population, and not all those 300+ million drive... But Let's say 1/2 drive (likely more than that in reality) and use the 300 million - so 40,000 is what percentage of 150 million... 0.027%! Guess what? That is statistically insignificant. Sure, 40K SOUNDS like a lot - and that is one of the things the psychopaths use to skew perspective. Even if We add in "more than twice that were injured," it likely won't hit 0.1%.
Seriously, MOST drivers drive well.
No, you are skewing the perspective; 40,000 deaths, more than twice that many injuries, is
not acceptable. This does not include the accidents that didn't have any injuries reported 8) It doesn't matter if you are the safest driver in the world; you get hit head on, you are still dead.
Seeker
Clearly, over the last decade or two, cell phones have increased the number of distracted driving incidents, although Im not sure if deaths have increased.
Also, a lack of concern for fellow citizens while one is concealed behind an armored dickmobile, is an issue, whereas even the most meek person you meet out of their car, will be a total inconsiderate dickhead behind the wheel.
Civility, courtesy, and attentiveness have gone to the wind, for texting, self centered unsafe driving techniques, and a lack of vehicle inspections in many states, has left the daily commute as a frustrating, sometimes dangerous venture.
Do as I do, drive an RV at 55 in the right lane and finally see everything unfold in front of you in full view, it is like watching the worst(best) tragic comedy, sometimes I think autonomous vehicles are the only answer for certain drivers.
Perhaps legislation will allow for those who get DUI's, speeding, and aggressive driving charges, to have to ride in one of these drone cars for a year, to appreciate what they actually have when they drive themselves.
Cheers
Le
Quote from: Irene on April 24, 2017, 03:03:58 PM
You've obviously never been in the driver's seat of a squad car. ::)
Passing all the People who are driving well to deal with One who isn't?
Quote from: the seeker on April 24, 2017, 09:41:33 PM
No, you are skewing the perspective; 40,000 deaths, more than twice that many injuries, is not acceptable. This does not include the accidents that didn't have any injuries reported 8) It doesn't matter if you are the safest driver in the world; you get hit head on, you are still dead.
Seeker
[sigh] I am not skewing the perspective. I gave perspective to the idea that most of Us drive well. Or well enough to get from point A to point B without having an accident. Now, You are saying that well less than 0.05% of drivers that have accidents that kill People is "not acceptable." Please, tell Me WHY? Would You remove ALL risk in life? Is that YOUR idea of a perfect world? Frankly, I'll take the risk for the FREEDOM from being "protected" to death. Again, please tell Me WHY that is "not acceptable."
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 24, 2017, 11:09:41 PM
Passing all the People who are driving well to deal with One who isn't?
Cherry-picking. Pursuit policies have been drastically revised in recent years. Again, you'd have to be in the driver's seat of a squad to understand this.
We have a responsibility to enforce the law. If you don't obey it, within reason, we have a duty to act.
Quote from: Littleenki on April 24, 2017, 10:01:48 PM
Clearly, over the last decade or two, cell phones have increased the number of distracted driving incidents, although Im not sure if deaths have increased.
Also, a lack of concern for fellow citizens while one is concealed behind an armored dickmobile, is an issue, whereas even the most meek person you meet out of their car, will be a total inconsiderate dickhead behind the wheel.
Civility, courtesy, and attentiveness have gone to the wind, for texting, self centered unsafe driving techniques, and a lack of vehicle inspections in many states, has left the daily commute as a frustrating, sometimes dangerous venture.
Do as I do, drive an RV at 55 in the right lane and finally see everything unfold in front of you in full view, it is like watching the worst(best) tragic comedy, sometimes I think autonomous vehicles are the only answer for certain drivers.
Perhaps legislation will allow for those who get DUI's, speeding, and aggressive driving charges, to have to ride in one of these drone cars for a year, to appreciate what they actually have when they drive themselves.
Cheers
Le
Distracted driving due to cell phones has increased dramatically. What has also increased accidents? Cameras and computer interfaces in and on newer cars.
As in some countries overseas, drunks should lose their licenses permanently after a certain number of arrests, perhaps two or three. Even that number makes me uncomfortable.
Two people I knew died in separate drunk driving accidents. They were innocent victims.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 24, 2017, 11:15:12 PM
Please, tell Me WHY? Would You remove ALL risk in life?
I think that removing the risks for people that didn't choose to face them is a step in the right direction.
You want to run risks, that's OK, as long as you don't force other people to run those same risks.
QuoteIs that YOUR idea of a perfect world?
I think it's a step in the right direction, but, obviously, one action doesn't make the world perfect.
I rode shotgun to my son over 10 years ago and when I turned to him he was texting while driving me.
Daughter did the same. I hate when people play with their bloody phones while driving; they still do it.
Spent 20 years in law enforcement/corrections. Our department has the laptops in the vehicles set up to not work while the vehicle is moving. It keeps the officers attention on the road. Most have a Bluetooth setup for their phones. However, in a pursuit with 2 units involved the secondary unit calls in the street numbers while the primary unit maintains contact with the vehicle being pursued. They do not pursue for traffic infractions unless the infraction caused injuries and then they engage our helicopter and put out a BOLO (Be On Look Out) for the vehicle.
Strict protocols are followed at least in our county. We have had officers hurt from people running into them drunk. There are new technologies coming out and even used in some departments to track or shut down vehicles that have committed a forcible felony.
Eventhough I could drive in the States; I wouldn't myself, I'd be worried about being pulled over.
"Can I see your licence mam" gulp.
Quote from: Irene on April 25, 2017, 03:48:55 PM
Distracted driving due to cell phones has increased dramatically. What has also increased accidents? Cameras and computer interfaces in and on newer cars.
As in some countries overseas, drunks should lose their licenses permanently after a certain number of arrests, perhaps two or three. Even that number makes me uncomfortable.
Two people I knew died in separate drunk driving accidents. They were innocent victims.
Im in total agreement Irene, there is no excuse for endangering the lives of others in such a way, I dont have any use for people who drink and dont handle themselves, no sympathy at all when they do get caught and punished..Im not much for government stepping into many things, but since driving is a govt controlled privilege, it makes sense that they can revoke that driving privilege for such cases of anyone who makes the mistake even the first time, especially if they have had alcohol related infractions of other kinds, since it often shows a pattern of alcohol irresponsibility.
I too have seen half a dozen or so through my life gone by way of drunk driving, either themselves or others..and it never gets any easier when the solution is so clear.
My wife always jokes when we drive somewhere, the guy who hits me is going to wish he hadnt..drunk or not..seems the way folks drive these days, it is getting like Mad Max out there. You always hope in the back of your mind though, if someone does hit your car, you just make it out alive.
Be safe,
Le
The question is: Will Autonomous vehicles solve that problem of irresponsible driving?
Quote from: spacemaverick on April 26, 2017, 05:29:14 PM
The question is: Will Autonomous vehicles solve that problem of irresponsible driving?
No. Simple reason is some signs are not placed properly or so vague they are open to interpretation. The A.I. driver may stop at misplaced sign or if a sign is missing may not stop at all causing an accident. It may react unexpectedly when it encounters OTHER drivers not following road rules that may be in proximity to the vehicle. It can not anticipate an accident it can only react to what is happening.
Quote from: Ellirium113 on April 26, 2017, 10:42:27 PM
No. Simple reason is some signs are not placed properly or so vague they are open to interpretation. The A.I. driver may stop at misplaced sign or if a sign is missing may not stop at all causing an accident. It may react unexpectedly when it encounters OTHER drivers not following road rules that may be in proximity to the vehicle. It can not anticipate an accident it can only react to what is happening.
They can anticipate an accident by analysing the available data.
An AI driver with enough data can see that there is any risk of an accident if it does something or if it doesn't do something. For example, in the case of a missing stop sign in what looks like a road with priority over the others: the driving algorithm only needs to see if, even with priority, there's a risk of a collision with other cars that may not follow the rules (or what it thinks are the rules, as the stop sign is missing) to avoid the accident.
And it's no AI magic, it's the same thing a human driver can (and should) do, instead of relying only on part of the available information, if he relies on all the data available (it looks like he has priority, because of the missing stop sign, there's a car approaching at a speed that looks like it's not going to stop before reaching the junction, etc.) and acts accordingly, he can also avoid the collision.
As long as AI doesn't turn into a know it all like those drivers that think that accidents are always other people's fault, accidents resulting from irresponsible driving from AI drivers will not happen.
The key words to me in your post ArMap is "with enough data" it "can".
Tell me if I am wrong, but AI would be engineered by humans, humans make mistakes.
If there is code in AI to make them AI, then maybe some programmer could interfere with that to purposely kill someone. Just thinking out loud. ;)
Quote from: biggles on April 27, 2017, 01:06:10 AM
Tell me if I am wrong, but AI would be engineered by humans, humans make mistakes.
Yes, and that's why there are tests, and sometimes the test phase is longer than the development phase, and the tests are not done by the people that made the development, although those also make tests.
In the development phase the tests are designed by the developers to see if the code does what they want it to do, in the test phase the tests are designed by test engineers, to see if the code behaves as it should.
QuoteIf there is code in AI to make them AI, then maybe some programmer could interfere with that to purposely kill someone. Just thinking out loud. ;)
A programmer can interfere with the code, but it would be hard to make a change to purposely kill someone, they can only change things to behave in a different way.
I read once that all changes in the software used on the Space Shuttle were done somewhere (I don't remember if it was NASA or not), then they were tested by the same organisation for six months, after that they were tested by a different organisation for another six months and then they were installed on the Space Shuttle computers. In all the years the Space Shuttle flew only a minor error was detected after all those tests.
PS: I know, if we are talking about making shortcuts to make more money in less time I'm sure some shortcuts will be made and the probability of errors will be higher, it depends mostly on how things will be implemented and controlled.
Quote from: ArMaP on April 27, 2017, 12:57:13 AM
They can anticipate an accident by analysing the available data.
An AI driver with enough data can see that there is any risk of an accident if it does something or if it doesn't do something. For example, in the case of a missing stop sign in what looks like a road with priority over the others: the driving algorithm only needs to see if, even with priority, there's a risk of a collision with other cars that may not follow the rules (or what it thinks are the rules, as the stop sign is missing) to avoid the accident.
And it's no AI magic, it's the same thing a human driver can (and should) do, instead of relying only on part of the available information, if he relies on all the data available (it looks like he has priority, because of the missing stop sign, there's a car approaching at a speed that looks like it's not going to stop before reaching the junction, etc.) and acts accordingly, he can also avoid the collision.
As long as AI doesn't turn into a know it all like those drivers that think that accidents are always other people's fault, accidents resulting from irresponsible driving from AI drivers will not happen.
AI can't be programmed to react to every situation unless it is programming itself through deep learning. Eventually it will have to make a choice to kill either the occupants of the car or people outside the car when an accident may become unavoidable. At some point AI will drive better than humans but you will never remove the potential for unexpected results arising from unexpected situations.
The OP says "aerial vehicles" so Id venture to say they would testbed this with aircraft, then apply what they learned to roadways..since the infrastructure to monitor and coordinate aircraft is in place already to some degree.
As for irresponsible drivers? there would likely be a separate lane for autonomous vehicles, and human drivers interacting with or using that lane would face hefty fines, so irresponsible drivers, although they might still every now and then affect an autonomous vehicle, would be less of an issue if you were in one of those drones,
A separate lane or segment of roadway for drones would likely be monitored heavily, and anyone breaking the rules regarding it would be quickly identified, and even if they werent pulled over, deputies could visit them at home and enforce the infraction right then and there, likely curbing future transgression for the most part.
I cant figure out, with all the tech in cars today, why every new car doesnt have ample camera and gps information for every trip stored and recorded for insurance, police, and personal use...for some reason, this has evaded us..good lobbying, or do they not want to move closer to a big brother state just yet? Who knows?
Cheers
Le
Quote from: Irene on April 25, 2017, 03:43:06 PM
Cherry-picking. Pursuit policies have been drastically revised in recent years. Again, you'd have to be in the driver's seat of a squad to understand this.
We have a responsibility to enforce the law. If you don't obey it, within reason, we have a duty to act.
Hardly "cherry-picking." Just noting that while in pursuit of a single vehicle misbehaving, there are MANY vehicles being passed that are NOT misbehaving. We have a responsibility to choose Ethical behavior. And stopping One choosing unEthical behavior is an Ethical choice. "laws" are irrelevant.
Quote from: Amaterasu on April 27, 2017, 03:14:03 PM
Hardly "cherry-picking." Just noting that while in pursuit of a single vehicle misbehaving, there are MANY vehicles being passed that are NOT misbehaving. We have a responsibility to choose Ethical behavior. And stopping One choosing unEthical behavior is an Ethical choice. "laws" are irrelevant.
This is all I need to know.
Incidentally, you should review the definition of ethics. It doesn't apply here. Stopping someone who's violated a traffic law isn't an ethical issue. How the law is applied is.
Based on your logic, we shouldn't stop drunk drivers either.
Driving is a privilege, earned, not a right. I think that is more your ethical "dilemma". You think you should be able to do whatever you want behind the wheel because you're "special".
It doesn't work that way.
Quote from: Irene on April 27, 2017, 03:47:08 PM
This is all I need to know.
Incidentally, you should review the definition of ethics. It doesn't apply here. Stopping someone who's violated a traffic law isn't an ethical issue. How the law is applied is.
Based on your logic, we shouldn't stop drunk drivers either.
Driving is a privilege, earned, not a right. I think that is more your ethical "dilemma". You think you should be able to do whatever you want behind the wheel because you're "special".
It doesn't work that way.
Uh... Endangering Others is unEthical, so no... Based on My logic, We absolutely SHOULD stop drunk drivers.
And wow. Just wow. How You went from Me pointing out that for every One driver that chooses to behave poorly there are hundreds of thousands who do not to Me "think[ing] [ I ] should be able to do whatever [ I ] want behind the wheel because [I'm] "special"" is beyond Me to comprehend. Almost as if You have an agenda here... I'm sure You don't, so perhaps You can explain Your thought sequence. I'm stumped.
I quote you from above -
Quote"laws" are irrelevant.
Who says such a thing? People who think the law doesn't apply to them. People who think they can break the law whenever they want.
People who think they're special.
Agenda? No. I'm retired, so I'm not interested in advancing any cause.
Ever rode the subway? Or Amtrak? The MARTA rail system in Atlanta? The only one out of the three I just named that has a human element involved is Amtrak; If the drone system is autonomous, explain the difference to me 8)
The only free will involved is choosing to ride it, which train you choose, and where to get off...
With approximately 10 million vehicles on the road in America, I don't want to think about having that many Jetson cars zooming about...
Seeker
Quote from: Ellirium113 on April 27, 2017, 12:20:45 PM
AI can't be programmed to react to every situation unless it is programming itself through deep learning. Eventually it will have to make a choice to kill either the occupants of the car or people outside the car when an accident may become unavoidable. At some point AI will drive better than humans but you will never remove the potential for unexpected results arising from unexpected situations.
An unavoidable situation is not irresponsible driving.
Quote from: Ellirium113 on April 27, 2017, 12:20:45 PM
AI can't be programmed to react to every situation unless it is programming itself through deep learning. Eventually it will have to make a choice to kill either the occupants of the car or people outside the car when an accident may become unavoidable. At some point AI will drive better than humans but you will never remove the potential for unexpected results arising from unexpected situations.
Exactly. That is the point I was going to bring up.
There was a discussion about this on news radio last week.
The hypothetical was you are driving along a hillside with a cliff on one side and a hill on the other.
A little girl wanders into the road and your vehicle has to decide between killing the little girl or driving you off the cliff.
The decision comes down to the programming in your car.
When buying one of these vehicles you have to ask the manufacturer whether it is programmed to save you or the pedestrians on the road.
Ooh, that's a very good point.
Quote from: Irene on April 27, 2017, 04:48:58 PM
I quote you from above -
Who says such a thing? People who think the law doesn't apply to them. People who think they can break the law whenever they want.
People who think they're special.
Agenda? No. I'm retired, so I'm not interested in advancing any cause.
There's a difference between "laws" and Laws. There are three Laws of Ethics. "laws" (small "l") are acts, bills, codes, statutes, mandates, edicts, regulations, declarations, rules, ordinances, etc. There are only three Laws. They are the Laws of Ethics. I do not consent to the legal system as it thwarts Ethics
far more than serves them. Did You know They're trying to make legal something They have already been doing? Experimenting on Us
without Our consent! How unEthical is that???
No... I am not "special." I expect ALL of Us to choose Ethical behavior.