1. Sign-up to become a member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It only takes 30 seconds to sign up, so join the discussion today!
    Dismiss Notice

The autonomous (self driving) car buyers and owners thread

Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by Sam Posten, Jan 7, 2014.

  1. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Dave my corporate offices are down that way, we'll have to get a brew next time I run down there :)
     
  2. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    22,725
    Likes Received:
    4,018
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Catfisch Cinema
    Real Name:
    Dave
    Ok. I live in Ashburn, work in Chantilly, and sometimes commute to near national harbor.And I love going to DuPont circle for a burger at Shake Shack :)
     
  3. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Think closer to Tysons than Foggy Bottom =)
     
  4. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    22,725
    Likes Received:
    4,018
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Catfisch Cinema
    Real Name:
    Dave
  5. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Asimov only had 3 rules, but the ethics go much much deeper!
    http://www.wired.com/2014/05/the-robot-car-of-tomorrow-might-just-be-programmed-to-hit-you/
    Great great article!!!!
     
    Aaron Silverman likes this.
  6. Richard Travale

    Richard Travale Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    3,425
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Island, Canada
    Real Name:
    Rich Travale
    I listened to an interview on the radio, talking about the ethical choices an automated vehicle would have to make in an emergency situation. Like, is it better to veer into an elderly person to avoid hitting a child. Or, does the vehicle crash into another car to avoid being hit from behind.
    It sure made me think about the level of AI required. Not black & white at all.
     
    Sam Posten likes this.
  7. KevinGress

    KevinGress Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    610
    Thanks for the link, Sam. It does provoke thought. I think the author missed the mark on several points, though.

    "While human drivers can only react instinctively in a sudden emergency, a robot car is driven by software, constantly scanning its environment with unblinking sensors and able to perform many calculations before we’re even aware of danger. They can make split-second choices to optimize crashes–that is, to minimize harm."

    [color=rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica-Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif;]The first part is simply incorrect. Human drivers do scan their environment and are making many calculations even before they are aware of danger. Now, good and attentive drivers are always doing this - analyzing the scene before them and calculating what could happen. The problem is that too often drivers either feel they can divert more mental resources like other endeavors - like eating, applying makeup, or calling/texting and this is what causes accidents (the article notes this). [/color]

    [color=rgb(51,51,51);font-family:Arial, HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica-Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif;]The thing is, I think this will also become a problem for 'robot' cars. People tend to vastly overestimate the abilities of a computer chip in comparison to the human brain. The issue is that the computer is doing a large number of calculations less in a given moment than a human brain is. So, as car manufacturers, politicians, and 'riders' add more tasks for these cars to perform (monitor environment, monitor speed, monitor internals, gather data for reports, 'call in' said reports, select music, do internet searches, connect to work etc.) the more chances that a car will become 'distracted' (ex: car has to create and submit report to federal [/color]bureaucracy on a normally non-busy street or highway and a deer or child runs out) .

    The other problem the article has, and while it enumerates it several times, is what it offered up was simply thought exercises and not realistic. While fun to think about, you can't base policy or ethical behavior on them because in essence they deny reality. Take the motorcyclists example - 'the car is put in a scenario where it will hit one of two motorcyclists, should it hit the one with, or without the helmet?' The ethical answer is to avoid both.

    Now, with its problems, the article is worth reading because it shows us just how much thinking and deciding that we, as a society, still need to do in regards to technology of this kind. What place does it have in society? How can it enhance, and not hinder, life? etc.
     
  8. TravisR

    TravisR Studio Mogul

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    Messages:
    34,363
    Likes Received:
    11,616
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    The basement of the FBI building
    I'm only in my 30's but that's why I assume that I'll be long dead by the time that this becomes a reality or the norm.
     
  9. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    22,725
    Likes Received:
    4,018
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Catfisch Cinema
    Real Name:
    Dave
    I think the Wired article highlights a challenge we face in the "information" age: being penalized for knowledge. The author asserts that people are happier crashing into cars based on ignorant reflexes rather than crash harm being minimized through informed decisions. I think this is reasonable conclusion, and very frustrating.

    In this context, and stipulating he's accurate for the sake of argument, the author misses an interesting possibility: self-driving cars, in when faced with an unavoidable accident, will target each other. Presuming a car-net, they can communicate the impending disaster, optimize their collision for minimum damage, as pre-deploy passenger-safety features. And when prospective buyers learn that smart cars are built to crash into each other, the smart car industry will die of withering sales.


    More practically: the deterministic choices the author presents are too simplistic, and I would hope no one would go in such a strict route. Because that information is too little. While the Volvo is better in a crash than the Fiesta, it's unknown if the Volvo is carrying a toddler with a young mom driving while the Fiesta has 90 year old Grandma who has lived a rich and full life. (I hope I don't go too far with this example. I don't mean to imply or actually start the "lifeboat" ethical debate here :) )

    Actuarial science is needed for such cars; I'll guess that spam filtering and also life-insurance experts can find new careers in smart-car programming. But, as the author considered, I think some randomness is needed in the decision making.
     
  10. BrianW

    BrianW Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 1999
    Messages:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Brian
    I think if an autonomous car spots a clown by the side of the road, it should be programmed to take him out. It'd be better for all of us.
     
    KevinGress likes this.
  11. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Big brains already thinking hard about this:
    http://www.popsci.com/blog-network/zero-moment/mathematics-murder-should-robot-sacrifice-your-life-save-two?src=SOC&dom=fb&utm_source=digg&utm_medium=email
     
  12. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Oatmeal makes the case for Tesla:
    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla_model_s

    I'd definitely like to see an autonomous Tesla. If any HTF members own a Tesla and are willing to do a ridealong sometime on the east coast or vegas areas please keep me in mind ;)
     
  13. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Sounds like their confidence is ramping up and that more demos to journos are going almost too well...
    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/05/13/a-trip-in-a-self-driving-car-now-seems-routine/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

    More impressions:
    http://recode.net/2014/05/13/googles-self-driving-car-a-smooth-test-ride-but-a-long-road-ahead/

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/14/upshot/when-driverless-cars-break-the-law.html
     
  14. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
  15. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    Pre-vis is key. Google has 2k of -millions of miles of roads mapped so far.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/05/all-the-world-a-track-the-trick-that-makes-googles-self-driving-cars-work/370871/
     
  16. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    My pal Dave Troy is a huge fan of City life, he posted on Autonomous cars with some of that flavor:
    https://medium.com/future-of-cars-collaborative/a2d7e3ead598
     
  17. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    18,071
    Likes Received:
    22,128
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    I'm just noticing this thread, but I found this article to be absolutely fascinating. (As well as the subsequent discussions here.)

    It actually reminds me a little of an argument I had with my driver's ed teacher back in the day. I don't remember the exact situation described, but basically the teacher was explaining how the rules of the road limit the circumstances when you can and can't change lanes, etc., and about properly obeying those rules under all circumstances. The scenario was something like this: let's say you're on a highway that goes in both directions, and a car starts coming at you the wrong way -- driving in the wrong direction in your lane towards you. If you turn to your right, you'll miss being hit, but you'll probably crash into the wall on the side of the highway which will almost certainly result in catastrophic damage to your vehicle. If you turn to your left, you'll be swerving into oncoming traffic as that's the lane going in the other direction. But in the example as the teacher presented it, for whatever reason, there was no one on the road going in the other direction. The teacher was adament that there was only one proper thing to do - to crash into the right side, because you're never allowed to drive the wrong direction on a highway. I get where she's coming from in theory. But in practice, who would do that? In real life, in a scenario where you only have a second to decide, I think most people would go with the illegal move (driving in the wrong lane for five seconds) over the legal move (crashing into a wall, possibly destroying your car, possibly getting severely injured or killed in the process).

    What would the automatic car do in that situation? Would it be programmed to follow the rules of the road at all costs, or would it allow for an illegal move that was unquestionably the safest solution to a momentary danger?
     
    Sam Posten likes this.
  18. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten
    I'd hope for the latter. Your teacher sounds wrong to me on many levels. Absolute devotion to any rule is a bad philosophy IMO.
     
    Josh Steinberg likes this.
  19. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    22,725
    Likes Received:
    4,018
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Catfisch Cinema
    Real Name:
    Dave
    I agree absolutely.

    :mellow:

    :huh:

    :eek:

    :P
     
    Josh Steinberg likes this.
  20. Sam Posten

    Sam Posten Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 1997
    Messages:
    27,955
    Likes Received:
    5,025
    Trophy Points:
    9,110
    Location:
    Aberdeen, MD & Navesink, NJ
    Real Name:
    Sam Posten

Share This Page