Poll of the Day > Self driving car

(+) Yeah! (+)

At this stage, I wouldn't ride in a self driving car.

Maybe in like 50 years when they finally got all the bugs fixed and I am too old to drive

If I could afford one I would have one already.

Not yet.

Yeah, I'll take a nap and go exactly the speed limit, extremely carefully, and get there basically on time.

I'm not getting into a self-driving car until it's mandated that ALL cars are.
No algorithm will ever account for the stupid shit a human driver may do, and I'm not gonna be stuck in a death trap when some yahoo swerves into my lane or something. I want full control for emergency maneuvers just in case.

streamofthesky posted...

I'm not getting into a self-driving car until it's mandated that ALL cars are.
No algorithm will ever account for the stupid shit a human driver may do, and I'm not gonna be stuck in a death trap when some yahoo swerves into my lane or something. I want full control for emergency maneuvers just in case.

You already can do that.

No but I see it in like the next 20 years.

Not until the technology is perfected. The only automatic system in a vehicle I trust is cruise control and even then, I pay close attention to it to make sure it doesnt do something stupid.

what if the only options for the system are run over a cat/dog, or swerve and hit a car?

https://youtu.be/d9kpyGqKwJk

Yes, but only for demonstration purposes. In their current iteration I wouldn't consider one for real-world use.

Definitely. The Waymo taxis seem to be quite competent.

I don't even like riding in cars driven by other people!

Krazy_Kirby posted...

what if the only options for the system are run over a cat/dog, or swerve and hit a car?

Guess no one knows the answer to that other than the engineers. My guess is that it doesn't have any "value of life" metric for hitting and old man or a young man with a longer life to live, and does the action that's less likely to hit anything, but obviously prioritize hitting an inanimate object over a pedestrian.

Safer than human drivers.

Cant be worse at driving than i am so absolutely.

I'm impaired so I'd love a self-driving car

Naw

I fall into the category of never wanting one, and not being entirely happy that other people have them (for a multitude of reasons).

But I'm also aware that's a battle I'm literally never going to win. Which will only add more fuel to my scathing old man yelling at clouds energy in a few decades when I'm forced to own one against my will because non-self-driving cars have all been outlawed and are no longer being made. Assuming I'm not dead by then. Which honestly, I probably will be.

And also assuming we haven reached peak Mad Max by 2050 or so, with roving leather gangs fighting over scraps and water. Because that would probably impede the adoption of AI-powered cars.

Yellow posted...

Guess no one knows the answer to that other than the engineers. My guess is that it doesn't have any "value of life" metric for hitting and old man or a young man with a longer life to live, and does the action that's less likely to hit anything, but obviously prioritize hitting an inanimate object over a pedestrian.

The problem most people worry about is how it's probably inevitable that it will be programmed to prioritize between your single-occupant car and the two kids and their dog. Or the bus full of old people. Or whatever else it decides is more important than you are when it drives you off a cliff to avoid hurting someone else.

And that's just when it's working as intended. And not getting confused and assuming the side of a tractor trailer is open sky and plowing you right into it resulting in your decapitation (ie, what most self-driving accidents up to this point have been).

Or somehow getting hacked, screwed with by some sort of virus, or just falling victim to some stupid Y2K-esque glitch due to poor quality control.

Whether any of those fears are legitimate or not, they're the kinds of things people think of when they think about self-driving cars. Which is why most polls tend to suggest people at the moment are more into the idea of a self-driving car than they are willing to ever actually ride in one.

I'd be open to it in the future, but not yet. The technology is too new, and there are undoubtedly many bugs that have to be worked out.

No, if I am to die it is by my own incompetent hand, not a robot's.

CynicalZealot posted...

Whether any of those fears are legitimate or not, they're the kinds of things people think of when they think about self-driving cars. Which is why most polls tend to suggest people at the moment are more into the idea of a self-driving car than they are willing to ever actually ride in one.

Regardless I think public transportation is the only way solve this fundamental problem, so I would not consider self driving cars to be very impressive in general
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/2/6/3/AAbsMXAADioH.jpg

Not the way they are now.

Not until I can sleep in the driver's seat.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

what if the only options for the system are run over a cat/dog, or swerve and hit a car?

Neither since robot's have better reaction speeds.

Revelation34 posted...

Not until I can sleep in the driver's seat.

Neither since robot's have better reaction speeds.

You know the human brain is faster than the fastest super computer, right?

Muscles posted...

You know the human brain is faster than the fastest super computer, right?

Good luck beating an AI at reaction speed.

Revelation34 posted...

Good luck beating an AI at reaction speed.

racecar drivers do that on a regular basis... it's not out of the realm of possibility to say that others can too, even if they don't always

Muscles posted...

racecar drivers do that on a regular basis... it's not out of the realm of possibility to say that others can too, even if they don't always

I am not a racecar driver.
You are not a racecar driver.
My grandparents are not.

Why would 99% of people be held to the standard of a racecar driver?

how about more trains and buses

but yeah I'd rather not have to drive. my friend actually just rode in a self driving car in San Francisco, he said it was neat

shadowsword87 posted...

I am not a racecar driver.
You are not a racecar driver.
My grandparents are not.

Why would 99% of people be held to the standard of a racecar driver?

Even regular humans still think faster than the AI though

Muscles posted...

Even regular humans still think faster than the AI though

that doesn't mean we make the best decisions.. can maybe process things quickly and then fuck it up lol

Muscles posted...

Even regular humans still think faster than the AI though

what are you basing that statement on?

no, I do not trust a robot not to malfunction and crash the car.

grimhilde00 posted...

that doesn't mean we make the best decisions.. can maybe process things quickly and then fuck it up lol

doesn't mean the ai will make better choices

Revelation34 posted...

Neither since robot's have better reaction speeds.

this assumes the ai sees the animal in time. they can run out from between other cars

Krazy_Kirby posted...

doesn't mean the ai will make better choices

which is why more studies on things need to be done

anyway it's far from ready for wide use

trains + buses + trams >>> cars anyway

Muscles posted...

Even regular humans still think faster than the AI though

The average hand-eye coordination response of a human is 23ms.
A bad CPU works in the GHz range, which has a clock cycle of 1ns, which you're looking at a factor of 1000x faster. It's not a fair reference at *all* because of how computers work with multiple clock cycles, but, you can absolutely program a computer to be faster than a human. It's very easy once the setup is done.

Sure. I would ride in one as long as I was not responsible like the owner or driver if something goes wrong. That way if something does go wrong I am not the one in trouble.