Gale Hawkins
Super Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 8,268
- Location
- Murray, KY
- Tractor
- 1948 Allis Chambers Model B 1976 265 MF / 1983 JD 310B Backhoe / 1966 Ford 3000 Diesel / 1980 3600 Diesel
Driverless Cars
- Thread starter 3930dave
- Start date
- Views: 72859
These debates often cycle down to polar echo-chamber tribal shouting matches..... not saying that's what we are doing here (or, I wouldn't waste my energy typing
), but publicly it seems to slide down that hill fast....We're Either All going to Drive Big-Block V8's, OR, We are All going to be locked into tiny golf-carts.......
Reality is going to remain more complicated and diverse.....
I'm big on accountability, for most everything. Externalizing costs, included.........
Both your govt and mine, chose decades ago to "externalize" most all manufacturing jobs here to a country that very successfully treated pollution as a competitive advantage. We gripe about our govts, but even back then, there were enough bright-minds in place that knew exactly what they were doing to us, and the global environment. I won't comment on yours, but my govt loves to cloak itself in the Green flag, and in this case, I'm not talking about BC Bud....
So, yes, I find it more than a bit hypocritical when my govt wants to lecture me about the environment..... they externalize at least as much as corporations do.....
Pay attention to the science..... hope for a future with clean air/water...... but don't confuse the posturing and virtue signalling done by govts with their priorities on managing revenue streams......
I think govt's would have wider credibility in this area if they segregated these "sin" pollution taxes and used them directly for actual enviro remediation activities, instead of just dumping them into General Revenue.
But, it's a lot easier to beat up us peasants at the gas pumps, than bite-the-hand-that-feeds-you by holding mining companies accountable for tailings. Instead the EPA gives them a free pass.....
So yeah..... govts lecturing me about environmental responsibility
....... they need to get their own act together, and meaningfully increase their accountability too....Rgds, D.
I am still EXCITED about the opportunities that autonomous vehicles offer, especially those following the Tesla model of experience based "training".
There are far too many tired, fatigued, drunk, drugged, aged and quite frankly "unsuited to driving" people behind the wheels.
Even the rest of us are subject to lapses in attention, distractions, etc.
Somewhere a few posts ago I suggested the opportunity of letting people with DUIs travel (alone) in fully autonomous vehicles.
That could "save" them from the downward spiral of; no license, no job, no home, no hope.
As to whether or not it would enable/encourage them to go out MORE and get drunk... would it MATTER as long as the vehicle wouldn't let them take control ?
Personally I would LIKE to have the freedom to travel when my eyesight and reflexes have deteriorated to a point where "driving" (as we now understand it) would be too risky.
WRT gas tax, carbon tax, electric vehicles, state, federal and local government budgets, etc;
If it is to support ROAD maintenance - replace it with a road use tax, weight and distance based.
If it is to combat climate change - carbon taxes on mineral fuels.
Maybe both.
Back to autonomous vehicles; At some point there will be SAVINGS on damage to what is sometimes refereed to as "roadside furniture" e.g. street signs.
OTOH, we may not even NEED street signs for things like speed limits - speed limits are arbitrary anyway, a whole 'nother subject.
Sure, the greenhouse effect has been known and well publicized for over 50 years - it would be unreasonable to assume that Presidents were in some way "shielded" from that knowledge, however much it has been inconvenient to acknowledge it. {as an Inconvenient truth}
It clashes with economic policy, so quash it - - done and done.
The "It won't become an URGENT problem within "My" administration" mindset.
There are far too many tired, fatigued, drunk, drugged, aged and quite frankly "unsuited to driving" people behind the wheels.
Even the rest of us are subject to lapses in attention, distractions, etc.
Somewhere a few posts ago I suggested the opportunity of letting people with DUIs travel (alone) in fully autonomous vehicles.
That could "save" them from the downward spiral of; no license, no job, no home, no hope.
As to whether or not it would enable/encourage them to go out MORE and get drunk... would it MATTER as long as the vehicle wouldn't let them take control ?
Personally I would LIKE to have the freedom to travel when my eyesight and reflexes have deteriorated to a point where "driving" (as we now understand it) would be too risky.
WRT gas tax, carbon tax, electric vehicles, state, federal and local government budgets, etc;
If it is to support ROAD maintenance - replace it with a road use tax, weight and distance based.
If it is to combat climate change - carbon taxes on mineral fuels.
Maybe both.
Back to autonomous vehicles; At some point there will be SAVINGS on damage to what is sometimes refereed to as "roadside furniture" e.g. street signs.
OTOH, we may not even NEED street signs for things like speed limits - speed limits are arbitrary anyway, a whole 'nother subject.
Sure, the greenhouse effect has been known and well publicized for over 50 years - it would be unreasonable to assume that Presidents were in some way "shielded" from that knowledge, however much it has been inconvenient to acknowledge it. {as an Inconvenient truth}
It clashes with economic policy, so quash it - - done and done.
The "It won't become an URGENT problem within "My" administration" mindset.
Last edited:
Hope springs eternal ??????
Technology can offer great promise....... there are plenty of positive potential scenarios, as you and others have described Reg.....
Reality tends to diminish or erode those lofty goals somewhat though...... just as well Marshall McLuhan passed before the Springer Show hit it's stride......
Rgds, D.
Technology can offer great promise....... there are plenty of positive potential scenarios, as you and others have described Reg.....
Reality tends to diminish or erode those lofty goals somewhat though...... just as well Marshall McLuhan passed before the Springer Show hit it's stride......
Rgds, D.
JasperFrank
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2018
- Messages
- 1,932
- Tractor
- Ford 1220
Being somewhat snow bound for the past 12 days, I can see some problems with Driverless Cars. First I had to Chainsaw my way up and down the hill I live on. With all the trees that fell over the road. If one person had "Ordered" their Driverless car up the hill at the wrong time, and it got stuck, then every one would have been blocked. So that's a problem that I don't see as solvable. And i guess that leads to a general problem with DL cars. How will you control what people will do with them remotely. For instance, I want some pizza delivered to me by my DL car. And you might think no one will do something stupid like that. But i've been around long enough to know just how selfish and stupid people can be. "If they can, they will." There is no algorithm that will fix that.
LD48750
Veteran Member
Being somewhat snow bound for the past 12 days, I can see some problems with Driverless Cars. First I had to Chainsaw my way up and down the hill I live on. With all the trees that fell over the road. If one person had "Ordered" their Driverless car up the hill at the wrong time, and it got stuck, then every one would have been blocked. So that's a problem that I don't see as solvable. And i guess that leads to a general problem with DL cars. How will you control what people will do with them remotely. For instance, I want some pizza delivered to me by my DL car. And you might think no one will do something stupid like that. But i've been around long enough to know just how selfish and stupid people can be. "If they can, they will." There is no algorithm that will fix that.
Ahhhh..... as I recall, we already have driverless pizza delivery being tested.
Order away.
What if the "brain" in the driverless truck thinks your road is to dangerous to go down?
Does the work crew that was sent to clear the trees just go back until the snow melts?
prof fate
Platinum Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2018
- Messages
- 684
- Location
- beaver pa
- Tractor
- kioti ck3510 Cub Cadet 149, 2146, Toro Zero Turn
we have these issues now - snow, closed or delayed schools, trees down, etc.
The short term - yeah, the car won't go. Long term? Who knows what the future may hold.
I remember 40 some years ago "why would anyone want a computer?"...then 25 years ago "why would anyone want a cell phone? You can't use them anywhere but in cities"...and the internet? Forums (well, they weren't called that then of course).
I remember cars with crank windows and no a/c - you could get it, but most poeple didn't. Now it's standard on all but the most base models. Automatics getbetter gas mileage than stick shifts now. If you cna even get a stick shift.
The short term - yeah, the car won't go. Long term? Who knows what the future may hold.
I remember 40 some years ago "why would anyone want a computer?"...then 25 years ago "why would anyone want a cell phone? You can't use them anywhere but in cities"...and the internet? Forums (well, they weren't called that then of course).
I remember cars with crank windows and no a/c - you could get it, but most poeple didn't. Now it's standard on all but the most base models. Automatics getbetter gas mileage than stick shifts now. If you cna even get a stick shift.
Fail safe design, nothing new about that.
OTOH humans often "face down the facts" with fairly predictable consequences.
Impassable snow drift ? OK, so it is IMPASSABLE !
A stupid human will engage 4WD and try anyway - then the inconvenience turns into a call for a wrecker.
Driver less cars, horseless carriages,,,
Some of the HOPES of the previous transition were that there would be fewer road deaths due to runaway horses (How has THAT worked out ?)
and less "pollution" (manure on the streets).
We can't turn the clock back and I don't think we can stop the march of (this) progress either.
We CAN seize the opportunities offered though and holding up potential pathological cases as typical doesn't help progress.
OTOH humans often "face down the facts" with fairly predictable consequences.
Impassable snow drift ? OK, so it is IMPASSABLE !
A stupid human will engage 4WD and try anyway - then the inconvenience turns into a call for a wrecker.
Driver less cars, horseless carriages,,,
Some of the HOPES of the previous transition were that there would be fewer road deaths due to runaway horses (How has THAT worked out ?)
and less "pollution" (manure on the streets).
We can't turn the clock back and I don't think we can stop the march of (this) progress either.
We CAN seize the opportunities offered though and holding up potential pathological cases as typical doesn't help progress.
The answer is.... more technology ! :dance1:
Just mount flame-throwers on the trucks....... snow melts, trees are now ash..... problem gone !
:thumbsup:
Rgds, D.
Some of the best help Progress can get comes from thoughtfully probing the failure modes; ideally, ahead of time. That used to be one of the cornerstones of Engineering.
I understand the mass-market, and what's about to happen. I also understand that many/most people don't care about these issues. Including, a lot of people that should.
The head of GM (allegedly an iron-ring wearer hersefl) testified not that long ago in front of the US govt. She said that they had no-idea how those fatal ignition key problems were allowed into production.
If THAT ^ example of corporate indifference/incompetence..... while implementing a relatively simple technology, doesn't give you serious pause to consider what's coming........ then you hold a different view of risk than I do. And, that's totally fair...... people will view risk very differently, depending on their past knowledge and experiences.
I like to know the weakness and failure points in any tech that I'm using...... regardless of whether it's a high-end engineering tool, or a hammer. I am self-aware enough to know that in terms of the mass-market, I don't exist
.This thread has been fun (seriously)...... I started it to kick around the pro/cons of what's coming, and that's been well-served here.
Bling sells well, but in the rush to market (first-mover advantage et al.....), some things get neglected....... here is a current example, with high-end aftermarket car alarms.....
Security holes found in big brand car alarms - BBC News
Security expert Professor Alan Woodward from the University of Surrey's Centre for Cyber-Security said it was "disappointing" to see relatively simple flaws introduced by companies in the business of security.
"You would have thought any company claiming security as their core business would have done a thorough penetration test on the system as a whole," he said. "It's hard not to conclude that it was not done here."
He added: "The problems were within the direct control of the company. I fear that security researchers are yet again the only ones holding these manufacturers to account."
Prof Woodward said it had become a trend for companies to spend a great deal of time on the "front end" of the apps that users see, but pay less attention to the "back end" which leaves the programmes open to security flaws.
"It should be the companies paying for this, not researchers doing it as a sideline," he said.
Rgds, D.