GasGas:
GM faces lawsuit after crash between motorcyclist and self-driving car - The Verge…and so it starts
“Even before Nilsson’s crash, the Cruise vehicles had been in 13 crashes that were reported to the California DMV, Reuters reported in October.”
14 collisions to date, some would say it started some time ago. Amazing how all those collisions have been kept out of the mainstream media. Hmm, on second thoughts, maybe not.
Freight Dog:
muckles:
Despite what many Tesla drivers seem to think Tesla’s aren’t fully automated.That is somewhat concerning
Tesla Autopilot is just like an planes autopilot. It doesn’t automate or run on it’s own. It requires the driver/pilot to use it correctly.
It’s only the idiots that are using autopilot incorrectly. In fact there’s been a few accidents with Tesla drivers saying that their Autopilot did something to cause an accident. What we’ve seen before is driver error or just plain lies. But that doesn’t stop the click bait articles!
There have been a few automated car incidents recently and once the data is made public it’s all come out in the wash, as it were!
ChaosFleabag:
Tesla Autopilot is just like an planes autopilot. It doesn’t automate or run on it’s own. It requires the driver/pilot to use it correctly.
It’s only the idiots that are using autopilot incorrectly. In fact there’s been a few accidents with Tesla drivers saying that their Autopilot did something to cause an accident. What we’ve seen before is driver error or just plain lies. But that doesn’t stop the click bait articles!There have been a few automated car incidents recently and once the data is made public it’s all come out in the wash, as it were!
Surely it’s a cause for concern if the people who are trained to test these things are overconfident in their abilities and not using them properly. What hope does the average deiver have?
Captain Caveman 76:
GasGas:
GM faces lawsuit after crash between motorcyclist and self-driving car - The Verge…and so it starts
“Even before Nilsson’s crash, the Cruise vehicles had been in 13 crashes that were reported to the California DMV, Reuters reported in October.”
14 collisions to date, some would say it started some time ago. Amazing how all those collisions have been kept out of the mainstream media. Hmm, on second thoughts, maybe not.
14 collisions out of how many vehicle.miles?
Serous or minor collisions?
14 may be an excellent or a rubbish record.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Captain Caveman 76:
ChaosFleabag:
Tesla Autopilot is just like an planes autopilot. It doesn’t automate or run on it’s own. It requires the driver/pilot to use it correctly.
It’s only the idiots that are using autopilot incorrectly. In fact there’s been a few accidents with Tesla drivers saying that their Autopilot did something to cause an accident. What we’ve seen before is driver error or just plain lies. But that doesn’t stop the click bait articles!There have been a few automated car incidents recently and once the data is made public it’s all come out in the wash, as it were!
Surely it’s a cause for concern if the people who are trained to test these things are overconfident in their abilities and not using them properly. What hope does the average deiver have?
The Tesla incidents aren’t by test drivers, they are people who’ve bought them, ordinary, if quite wealthy, drivers.
Franglais:
Captain Caveman 76:
GasGas:
GM faces lawsuit after crash between motorcyclist and self-driving car - The Verge…and so it starts
“Even before Nilsson’s crash, the Cruise vehicles had been in 13 crashes that were reported to the California DMV, Reuters reported in October.”
14 collisions to date, some would say it started some time ago. Amazing how all those collisions have been kept out of the mainstream media. Hmm, on second thoughts, maybe not.
14 collisions out of how many vehicle.miles?
Serous or minor collisions?
14 may be an excellent or a rubbish record.Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Last year (and the two years previous) I drove nearly 90k miles in my truck and about 10k miles in my car without any collisions. For a system that’s supposed to be better, I don’t think it’s doing very well.
muckles:
Captain Caveman 76:
ChaosFleabag:
Tesla Autopilot is just like an planes autopilot. It doesn’t automate or run on it’s own. It requires the driver/pilot to use it correctly.
It’s only the idiots that are using autopilot incorrectly. In fact there’s been a few accidents with Tesla drivers saying that their Autopilot did something to cause an accident. What we’ve seen before is driver error or just plain lies. But that doesn’t stop the click bait articles!There have been a few automated car incidents recently and once the data is made public it’s all come out in the wash, as it were!
Surely it’s a cause for concern if the people who are trained to test these things are overconfident in their abilities and not using them properly. What hope does the average deiver have?
The Tesla incidents aren’t by test drivers, they are people who’ve bought them, ordinary, if quite wealthy, drivers.
I happened to follow a tesla 4x4 along the m6 and a14 couple of weeks ago , the first time it veered off to the nearside I thought ‘dozy git’ then it did it again and again then a 4th time , you knew when it was going to go , it was such regular intervals. so I guess that was autopilot turning off then .
and a ■■■■■■■■ at the wheel
the man from Volvo trucks who is in charge of driver assistance/automation says that their testing shows that if a vehicle is on autopilot and gets into a situation it can’t handle and then hands back ‘control’ to the driver, it takes about five seconds for the driver to interpret the situation and take appropriate action.
Five seconds @ 56 mph…do the maths.
The dangers are absurdly self-evident.
GasGas:
the man from Volvo trucks who is in charge of driver assistance/automation says that their testing shows that if a vehicle is on autopilot and gets into a situation it can’t handle and then hands back ‘control’ to the driver, it takes about five seconds for the driver to interpret the situation and take appropriate action.Five seconds @ 56 mph…do the maths.
The dangers are absurdly self-evident.
+1
Platooning ■■■■■■■■ even worse, in the event of an emergency the bods following closely (with no field of vision no bloody idea what’s going on ahead and daydreaming to boot) are supposed to take over instantly and take the right corrective or evasive action, yeah i can see that working well 
Juddian:
GasGas:
the man from Volvo trucks who is in charge of driver assistance/automation says that their testing shows that if a vehicle is on autopilot and gets into a situation it can’t handle and then hands back ‘control’ to the driver, it takes about five seconds for the driver to interpret the situation and take appropriate action.Five seconds @ 56 mph…do the maths.
The dangers are absurdly self-evident.
+1
Platooning ■■■■■■■■ even worse, in the event of an emergency the bods following closely (with no field of vision no bloody idea what’s going on ahead and daydreaming to boot) are supposed to take over instantly and take the right corrective or evasive action, yeah i can see that working well
Absolutely…even people in the industry who were talking about ‘driverless’ trucks last year are now saying that autonomous trucks won’t be driverless. I don’t know anyone in the industry who is taking this seriously now.
I have trucks come to my house…the septic tank emptier, the multidrop pallet network truck, the oil tanker and the building supplies crane lorry. An autonomous vehicle couldn’t even navigate the tarmac public road with a green strip up the middle on the way here, let alone the dirt track at the end. Then, when all those trucks arrive, the driver has to do other stuff which is nothing to do with driving.
ChaosFleabag:
Bluey Circles:
if you’re rolling along towards a 90 degree bend and you spot a waggon heading towards the same bend you know when to hang back or get a move on and get there first. what will an autonomous do? have a hairy canary when confronted with the other on the wrong side of the road?At the moment sensors are field of view and field of scanning. Probably within the usual visual range. If you’re talking about blind corners then newer quantum sensors will be able to “see around” corners, which will help with planning. They’re being developed and tested at the moment, although quantum sensing isn’t anywhere near my range of interest. I just know the broad strokes of what they’re doing!
oh aye … the Quantum Sensors and Spin Qubits - they’re the boys.
arxiv.org/abs/1611.02427
couple of them in the visor and DieselDog would be still flat to the mat through Keele and into Hilton Park with 10 minutes to spare
Does anybody get the sense that technology will, in the end, eat itself? Philosophically speaking, what is progress? Is it something true and linear in which problems are only solved, and never created, where utopia will eventually be attained? Or is it just an abstract idea we put empty faith into so we can feel we’re overcoming and controlling something more powerful than us?
I remember reading about a bird native to some south pacific island that evolved a spectacular tail to attract mates. But, the tail became so ■■■■■■■■■■ it could no longer fly, and so became vulnerable as prey, and began dying out.
Makes you think, dunnit?
ezydriver:
Does anybody get the sense that technology will, in the end, eat itself? Philosophically speaking, what is progress? Is it something true and linear in which problems are only solved, and never created, where utopia will eventually be attained? Or is it just an abstract idea we put empty faith into so we can feel we’re overcoming and controlling something more powerful than us?I remember reading about a bird native to some south pacific island that evolved a spectacular tail to attract mates. But, the tail became so ■■■■■■■■■■ it could no longer fly, and so became vulnerable as prey, and began dying out.
Makes you think, dunnit?
I don’t think an animal would ever be that stupid, but, we have invented Bitcoins
bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42265728
that is the equivalent energy of 6,500 Scania V8 730s running flat out 24hours a day 365 days a year. To create something that dosen’t actually exist. Now don’t let her tick over too long in case you pollute the planet.
Bluey Circles:
ezydriver:
Does anybody get the sense that technology will, in the end, eat itself? Philosophically speaking, what is progress? Is it something true and linear in which problems are only solved, and never created, where utopia will eventually be attained? Or is it just an abstract idea we put empty faith into so we can feel we’re overcoming and controlling something more powerful than us?I remember reading about a bird native to some south pacific island that evolved a spectacular tail to attract mates. But, the tail became so ■■■■■■■■■■ it could no longer fly, and so became vulnerable as prey, and began dying out.
Makes you think, dunnit?
I don’t think an animal would ever be that stupid, but, we have invented Bitcoins
bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42265728
that is the equivalent energy of 6,500 Scania V8 730s running flat out 24hours a day 365 days a year. To create something that dosen’t actually exist. Now don’t let her tick over too long in case you pollute the planet.
You’re making a perfectly valid point. But it’s been that way since forever of course. Exchanging our labour for an electronic bleep today, when ten/twenty year ago we’d expect a pile of printed paper. A car trader accepts electronic bleeps or big piles of printed paper for useful lumps of metal, s jeweller accepts the same for a small rock.
Logic exists, but you’ve gotta “mine it”.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
If my car drives itself, can it do my work aswel?
Il just send it to work and stay it home.
As for driverless stuff, they promote being able to read books etc at the wheel but expect “drivers” to be ready to jump in just incase the computer spits its dummy out. I dont see this ending well.
