Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #691711 > unrolled thread

Self drive cars

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Self drive cars john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 19:26 -0700
    Re: Self drive cars Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-23 20:44 -0700
      Re: Self drive cars benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-24 01:09 -0400
        Re: Self drive cars Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 03:49 -0700
      Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-24 13:24 -0700
    Re: Self drive cars Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2018-06-25 16:01 +1000
      Re: Self drive cars Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 01:59 -0700
        Re: Self drive cars "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 19:12 -0700
          Re: Self drive cars "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-25 19:34 -0700
      Re: Self drive cars Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-06-25 16:42 -0500
        Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-25 14:46 -0700
          Re: Self drive cars Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-06-26 08:31 +1000
            Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-26 15:05 -0700
              Re: Self drive cars Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-06-27 08:30 +1000
              Re: Self drive cars "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 16:03 -0700
                Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-26 16:44 -0700
                  Re: Self drive cars Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-06-26 18:52 -0500
                  Re: Self drive cars john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 18:45 -0700
                    Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-28 13:53 -0700
                      Re: Self drive cars Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 16:04 -0700
                        Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-29 13:22 -0700
                          Re: Self drive cars "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 13:44 -0700
                            Re: Self drive cars Leo Sgouros <adravirgo@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 13:50 -0700
                  Re: Self drive cars "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 19:57 -0700
                    Re: Self drive cars "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-26 22:12 -0700
                    Re: Self drive cars Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-28 13:57 -0700
                Re: Self drive cars "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-26 22:10 -0700
        Re: Self drive cars Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> - 2018-06-26 08:30 +1000
    Re: Self drive cars "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 19:02 -0700
      Re: Self drive cars "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-25 19:33 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#692215

On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 4:05:01 PM UTC-7, Alan Folmsbee wrote:
> On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 10:53:36 
> 
> > Vehicles have already become the weapons of choice of terrorists.  Consider the possibilities when they can master controlling the self driving vehicles!  There will not longer be a need for a suicide driver!
> > 
> > Double-A
> 
> Yes AA, that is bad news. If it can be repaired, it can be hacked to be a
> servant of military extremists. The Welsh can finally throw off the 
> yoke under The Windsor House Dictatorship. They already rule the
> isle of Man ! What will they want with their car weapons?


Are you Welsh by any chance?

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#692219

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 1:22:47 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 4:05:01 PM UTC-7, Alan Folmsbee wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 10:53:36 
> > 
> > > Vehicles have already become the weapons of choice of terrorists.  Consider the possibilities when they can master controlling the self driving vehicles!  There will not longer be a need for a suicide driver!
> > > 
> > > Double-A
> > 
> > Yes AA, that is bad news. If it can be repaired, it can be hacked to be a
> > servant of military extremists. The Welsh can finally throw off the 
> > yoke under The Windsor House Dictatorship. They already rule the
> > isle of Man ! What will they want with their car weapons?
> 
> 
> Are you Welsh by any chance?
> 
> Double-A

Will cars be given a God.Allah 4 wheel desert camel.Bert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#692223

On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 3:44:52 PM UTC-5, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
<snip>
> 
> Will cars be given a God.Allah 4 wheel desert camel.Bert

For you, a PROBE.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#691990

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 4:03:28 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 3:05:50 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 3:31:54 PM UTC-7, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> > > > On 26/06/2018 7:46 AM, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 2:42:16 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> > > > >> On 6/25/2018 1:01 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> > > > >>> On 24/06/2018 12:26 PM, john wrote:
> > > > >>>> Even if a driver is there supervising, things happen so quickly that
> > > > >>>> unless a person is feeling the road- actually driving- there is no
> > > > >>>> time to react.
> > > > >>>> Nevergoing to work on roads- maybe in Space
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Driver supervision is only being used during development. The intent is
> > > > >>> that the end product will be fully autonomous, with no driver, only
> > > > >>> passengers, and the latter will not be criminally liable for accidents
> > > > >>> or breaches of the road laws.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Sylvia.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> fully autonomous vehicles will always have accidents,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> sensors fail, age, lose calibration
> > > > >> probability of detection is never  100%,
> > > > >> probability of false detection is never  0
> > > > >> one cannot identify or characterize all road hazards
> > > > >> plugs corrode, disconnect
> > > > >> the system has an overall failure rate
> > > > >>
> > > > >> the courts, lawyers, owners, victims, hospitals, will all demand
> > > > >> liability be identified.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> that June Bug your car hit at 60 mph took out the front right radar
> > > > >> unit, which missed that pedestrian you hit.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The goal is not that self driving cars should be perfect, that only that they have less accidents than human driven cars.
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > **Correct and, in that sense, we are very close to that goal. Another 5 
> > > > years should see that aim completed.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -- 
> > > > Trevor Wilson
> > > > www.rageaudio.com.au
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Also, as soon as the fast food restaurants redesign their drive throughs to accommodate them, you should be able to send your care to drive itself to the Pizza Hut, or whatever, by itself to pick up your order!  That way, if the car does get in an accident, you won't even be in it!  
> > > 
> > > Double-A
> > Cars like that will be running when all humankind is dead before they  hit the ground.Will these robot cars be color bigots? Will a Caddy
> > 
> > 
> >  try to take over the world.Will electric cars say gas cars fart? Will big heavy cars become bullies.  I think all this started so you do not have to tip a human delivering a pizza
> > Bert
> 
> 
> The possibilities are boundless!  Just consider the hacking of those cars.  Of course the military will get involved.  Can you imagine us fighting Iraq in an age when all their cars were self driving?  Our military could hack into their cars' programs so that they would all suddenly start running over their own pedestrians!  Wouldn't that be great!
> 
> Double-A

I heard that the latest 747 700 can fly and land if it has too. bert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#692007

There is a Full Moon over Anaheim
that shows why Bert's an idiotic Swine

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#692138

On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 7:57:21 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 4:44:19 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 4:03:28 PM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 3:05:50 PM UTC-7, Double-A wrote:
> > > > On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 3:31:54 PM UTC-7, Trevor Wilson wrote:
> > > > > On 26/06/2018 7:46 AM, Double-A wrote:
> > > > > > On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 2:42:16 PM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> > > > > >> On 6/25/2018 1:01 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> > > > > >>> On 24/06/2018 12:26 PM, john wrote:
> > > > > >>>> Even if a driver is there supervising, things happen so quickly that
> > > > > >>>> unless a person is feeling the road- actually driving- there is no
> > > > > >>>> time to react.
> > > > > >>>> Nevergoing to work on roads- maybe in Space
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Driver supervision is only being used during development. The intent is
> > > > > >>> that the end product will be fully autonomous, with no driver, only
> > > > > >>> passengers, and the latter will not be criminally liable for accidents
> > > > > >>> or breaches of the road laws.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Sylvia.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> fully autonomous vehicles will always have accidents,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> sensors fail, age, lose calibration
> > > > > >> probability of detection is never  100%,
> > > > > >> probability of false detection is never  0
> > > > > >> one cannot identify or characterize all road hazards
> > > > > >> plugs corrode, disconnect
> > > > > >> the system has an overall failure rate
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> the courts, lawyers, owners, victims, hospitals, will all demand
> > > > > >> liability be identified.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> that June Bug your car hit at 60 mph took out the front right radar
> > > > > >> unit, which missed that pedestrian you hit.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The goal is not that self driving cars should be perfect, that only that they have less accidents than human driven cars.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > **Correct and, in that sense, we are very close to that goal. Another 5 
> > > > > years should see that aim completed.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > Trevor Wilson
> > > > > www.rageaudio.com.au
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Also, as soon as the fast food restaurants redesign their drive throughs to accommodate them, you should be able to send your care to drive itself to the Pizza Hut, or whatever, by itself to pick up your order!  That way, if the car does get in an accident, you won't even be in it!  
> > > > 
> > > > Double-A
> > > Cars like that will be running when all humankind is dead before they  hit the ground.Will these robot cars be color bigots? Will a Caddy
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  try to take over the world.Will electric cars say gas cars fart? Will big heavy cars become bullies.  I think all this started so you do not have to tip a human delivering a pizza
> > > Bert
> > 
> > 
> > The possibilities are boundless!  Just consider the hacking of those cars.  Of course the military will get involved.  Can you imagine us fighting Iraq in an age when all their cars were self driving?  Our military could hack into their cars' programs so that they would all suddenly start running over their own pedestrians!  Wouldn't that be great!
> > 
> > Double-A
> 
> I heard that the latest 747 700 can fly and land if it has too. bert


Planes have been able to fly complete flights by remote/computer control for years now.  The pilots are really just a back up now.  The implications of what evil minds could use this for are terrorizing!  

Double-A

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#692005

There is a Full Moon over Anaheim
that shows why Bert's a stupid Swine

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#691860

On 26/06/2018 7:42 AM, Sergio wrote:
> On 6/25/2018 1:01 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 24/06/2018 12:26 PM, john wrote:
>>> Even if a driver is there supervising, things happen so quickly that
>>> unless a person is feeling the road- actually driving- there is no
>>> time to react.
>>> Nevergoing to work on roads- maybe in Space
>>>
>>
>> Driver supervision is only being used during development. The intent is
>> that the end product will be fully autonomous, with no driver, only
>> passengers, and the latter will not be criminally liable for accidents
>> or breaches of the road laws.
>>
>> Sylvia.
> 
> fully autonomous vehicles will always have accidents,
> 
> sensors fail, age, lose calibration

**Easily dealt with, by self-calibration systems. In the case of a 
catastrophic fault, the system would simply shut down. In the same way 
that modern fuel injection system failures cause the engine to either 
stop, or work in 'limp home' mode.

> probability of detection is never  100%,

**True, but the detection systems are already vastly superior to average 
drivers and certainly better than very young, or very old drivers. In my 
case, I have a relatively modern car, fitted with a large array of 
automated systems. In the 3rd week of ownership, I was set to reverse my 
car from a parking space. My driver's side view was completely 
obliterated by a large structure in the guise of a Toyota Land Cruiser. 
I put the car in reverse, checked the rear view mirror and the rear view 
monitor. I began to reverse, when an urgent noise was emitted from the 
dash. I stopped reversing. I then noted two small children running from 
my blind spot, across the path I was about to take. I remarked to my 
partner that the safety systems had potentially saved a bunch of people 
form having a really bad day. In fact, I am betting that the particular 
system (Subaru call it: Rear Cross Traffic Alert) will be a mandatory 
fitting on all cars within 5 years.

> probability of false detection is never  0

**True enough, but, again, the systems are already better than the 
majority of drivers.


> one cannot identify or characterize all road hazards

**Correct. Humans are still better than most automated systems. My 
Subaru employs a total of 6 cameras in various locations. Cameras and 
computers are cheap. Software and integration of various systems is 
improving significantly. Since Subaru rely totally on cameras, there are 
potential problems with heavy rain and the detection systems. That said, 
my partner suffers with poor vision (though she can still legally drive 
in any nation on the planet, with corrective lenses), the Subaru 
detection systems are superior to hers. The Subaru systems are not 
superior to my own vision. Yet. I understand the next generation of 
Subarus are due to be fitted with an upgraded Eyesight™ system, 
supplemented by radar and highly accurate GPS. The systems are improving 
very rapidly.

> plugs corrode, disconnect

**Not usually for many decades. Long after the vehicle has exceeded it 
useful life.

> the system has an overall failure rate

**So do humans. Consider a human suffering a common cold or 'flu. Or a 
human has not enjoyed adequate sleep. One could argue that a sick, sleep 
deprived, alcohol or drug affected human is vastly more dangerous that a 
computer system. In any case, feedback systems will usually detect 
faults on any system. That includes corrosion and CPU or other faults.

> 
> the courts, lawyers, owners, victims, hospitals, will all demand
> liability be identified.

**And THAT is the big sticking point right now. When autonomously driven 
cars can be shown to be better and safer than the average human driver, 
then the bean counters at insurance companies will agitate for change. 
My tip is that, within 20 years, autonomously driven cars will be 
mandatory on certain roads. It may even be within 10 years. Technology 
improvements are occurring very rapidly.

> 
> that June Bug your car hit at 60 mph took out the front right radar
> unit, which missed that pedestrian you hit.

**Fortunately, there will be multiple back-up systems. My car doesn't 
use radar. It uses stereo cameras (though I understand the next 
generation will employ both cameras and radar). In fact, a mate has a 
similar vehicle. He doesn't bother to use his brakes when driving 
anymore. Personally, I don't trust the systems that much, though I have 
found the autonomous braking works quite well.


-- 
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#691877

On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 7:26:39 PM UTC-7, john wrote:
> Even if a driver is there supervising, things happen so quickly that unless a person is feeling the road- actually driving- there is no time to react.
> Nevergoing to work on roads- maybe in Space

Does the car need so many windows?Seats should all be beds.It makes for back seat drivers.Does it come with pills to put you out of having a break down.Does this car come with a flat fixer?  Can I buy this computer to drive my van?I could do a stick on "self driving cars."I think they do best on free way during rush hour.O ya  Bert

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#691884

So, Glazier you twisted Swine, did you auction off
the bucket that you shit into in your stinky and
defective van to finally make some honest money,
for the 1st tine, in your useless life, given that your
email address of  herbertglazier0@gmail.com
anagrams to  reber_A.Hitler_z0g@gmail.com_ ,
>
since Hitler's two knives, three spoons & 3  forks
that bear the Nazi eagle, swastika & Hitler's initials
were sold for £12,500 in Dorset,
>
or are you only interested in being nothing but a
Face-Shitter and a criminal Graveyard Vandal who
is seeking Pity, Sympathy  and Apppproval with
your promulgation of the following:
>
(1)
On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, when Face-Shitter Glazier wrote:
Harlow Campbell HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com,
& Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net
& Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>:
"I'll be sitting on your faces to take a shit & say: "Open wide".
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>
>
(2)
On 06Dec2014, when the Christian-Hater, JewPigBert Glazier
said to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>:
"Reality is you always post under me for you are an ass kisser.
For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser."
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>
"Benj, you can thank me in advance". - TreBert. ... addinng
>
(3)
On 03Aug2017:
"benj, you eat shit and your shitty brain is coming out your ears."
>
(4)
On 25Mar2008, Graveyard Vandal Glazier wrote in:
<https://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/3ffe7b2257cf8a9a>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.physics/uYtpFTRnW4k/morPVyJ7_j8J>
"Hanson, I will piss on your grave. And have a good laugh
when it seeps down on your face". --  Bert
>
(5)
On 24Jun2018 SwineBert Glazier said to
Mark Earnest <gmearnest@att.net> "your nose is
in a shit bucket all the time. Eat shit and you fit" -- Bert

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web