Drinking is bad

Already lots of stringent laws on the books that have just become a fiduciary benefit to the State. More draconian laws will just make that many more criminals.
 
I know a way to stop alcohol-related driving deaths. And every other driving death.
 
I agree with this. We should ban all alcohol. We should pass a law to prohibit the manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol.



Because that worked out so well the last time we tried it.
 
Stingray Don said:
DUI will be a moot point in the not too distant future with the advent of driverless cars. And if the government really cares about saving lives, they would be more focused on removing regulatory roadblocks that stand in the way of bringing this capability to market.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...ing-wheel-or-pedals-ready-for-streets-in-2019
Click to expand...
Autonomous cars will be bullied. They will be programmed to be passive so as not to cause harm, and human drivers and pedestrians will be free to get in their way at will, knowing the autobot will give way.

THAT will be fun!
 
Ken Ibold said:
Autonomous cars will be bullied. They will be programmed to be passive so as not to cause harm, and human drivers and pedestrians will be free to get in their way at will, knowing the autobot will give way.

THAT will be fun!
Click to expand...
You are right. That WILL be fun. At least until I get an autonomous car that is.

I never thought of that, but I did think about the frustration of being in a car that obeys all the rules, all the time.
 
That will eliminate one of my joys in life; making jaywalkers scramble out of my way. :mad:

Ken Ibold said:
Autonomous cars will be bullied. They will be programmed to be passive so as not to cause harm, and human drivers and pedestrians will be free to get in their way at will, knowing the autobot will give way.

THAT will be fun!
Click to expand...
 
Ken Ibold said:
Autonomous cars will be bullied. They will be programmed to be passive so as not to cause harm, and human drivers and pedestrians will be free to get in their way at will, knowing the autobot will give way.

THAT will be fun!
Click to expand...
Actually, one of the issues being discussed with autonomous cars is the so-called Trolley Problem. If a crash is inevitable, and there are two choices - one that harms pedestrians and one that harms the occupants of the car and perhaps another car - which one shall the autonomous vehicle choose.

Interesting ethical dilemma.
 
wsuffa said:
Actually, one of the issues being discussed with autonomous cars is the so-called Trolley Problem. If a crash is inevitable, and there are two choices - one that harms pedestrians and one that harms the occupants of the car and perhaps another car - which one shall the autonomous vehicle choose.

Interesting ethical dilemma.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed.

Interesting 31-page section devoted to autonomous cars in last month's Car & Driver.
 
JOhnH said:
I agree with this. We should ban all alcohol. We should pass a law to prohibit the manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol.



Because that worked out so well the last time we tried it.
Click to expand...
And marijuana has been illegal for over 50 years now and look how that’s worked out. Yet there are still prohibitionists. It’s terrible
 
Ken Ibold said:
Autonomous cars will be bullied. They will be programmed to be passive so as not to cause harm, and human drivers and pedestrians will be free to get in their way at will, knowing the autobot will give way.
Click to expand...

Probably not. Or at least not in a meaningful way.

1) Initially you won't know if a car is autonomous or not. So how will one know, at a glance, whether or not bullying will win. Even today, my current car has multiple sensors, multiple video cameras, assisted steering, lane following and smart cruise control. It is not a Tesla. The only difference between it and an autonomous car is the smarts of the autopilot. There is no way for someone to know, at a glance, whether I have a fancy trim package or a full autonomous vehicle.

2) Autonomous cars have black boxes (including video) that will demonstrate who the bully is after an incident. This will certainly prevent most people from trying to game the system, because the legal penalty will be high if they cause a wreck being a bully.
 
172andyou said:
Probably not. Or at least not in a meaningful way.

1) Initially you won't know if a car is autonomous or not. So how will one know, at a glance, whether or not bullying will win. Even today, my current car has multiple sensors, multiple video cameras, assisted steering, lane following and smart cruise control. It is not a Tesla. The only difference between it and an autonomous car is the smarts of the autopilot. There is no way for someone to know, at a glance, whether I have a fancy trim package or a full autonomous vehicle.

2) Autonomous cars have black boxes (including video) that will demonstrate who the bully is after an incident. This will certainly prevent most people from trying to game the system, because the legal penalty will be high if they cause a wreck being a bully.
Click to expand...

It's not about causing wrecks. It's about getting priority. I was chatting with one of the google folks at an AI conference last month. Teenagers in Palo Alto have learned that you can make a cardboard stop sign, put it on a broom handle and make a Google car stop in the middle of the block by holding the stop sign up. While the google cars are currently liveried (so they're easy to ID), it's not that hard to wave a stop sign and see what happens... They have also had issues with their cars not being able to merge onto streets during rush hour because the human drivers never leave a gap big enough.

John
 
wsuffa said:
Actually, one of the issues being discussed with autonomous cars is the so-called Trolley Problem. If a crash is inevitable, and there are two choices - one that harms pedestrians and one that harms the occupants of the car and perhaps another car - which one shall the autonomous vehicle choose.

Interesting ethical dilemma.
Click to expand...

Nah, its marketing, no one is going to spend near six figures on some Elon Musk car that if given the choice WILL KILL YOU.


Even the most bleeding hearts in CA, when push comes to shove will plow over every pedestrian on the west coast before they give their life, or the life of their snot nosed kid.

So it's not a question of ethics, it's a question of if they want to sell their product or not.
 
Disappointed in you guys for not posting this sooner:

tumblr_n2rwldnjWn1qfr6udo1_400.gif
 
mscard88 said:
Click to expand...
Horses can't really hear music the way we do, indeed no animal can except perhaps birds, which make their own melodies. Horses can be trained to look like they're dancing.

Our little Moogie dog got into the cast off eggnog once at a party and got pretty snokered. Just wasn't too steady on her feet for awhile.
 
jsstevens said:
It's not about causing wrecks. It's about getting priority.
Click to expand...

Understood. And forcing priority will cause wrecks. Which will be documented on the black box. Which will discourage abusing the system.
 
wsuffa said:
"Why engineers need to study ethics...."
Click to expand...

Management’s call. I’m not building it until you decide what you want it to do and put it in writing.

And I’m squirreling away a copy of said document somewhere under my control in case this goes poorly (for the company) in the Press later.

Come sue me when I leak it. The PR person will have a heart attack.
 
steingar said:
Horses can't really hear music the way we do, indeed no animal can except perhaps birds, which make their own melodies. Horses can be trained to look like they're dancing.

Our little Moogie dog got into the cast off eggnog once at a party and got pretty snokered. Just wasn't too steady on her feet for awhile.
Click to expand...

Steingar,

I have to tell a story about one of our Norwegian Elkhounds.

Wife and I were on the living room floor watching TV and sharing a glass of Brandy. We went to the fridge for a snack and returned to find the glass almost empty and the dog standing on spread legs with a stupefied look on her face. She lapped up about four ounces while we were gone. We called the vet who advised us to just wait. It took her a day to recover. She never did that again.
 
172andyou said:
Understood. And forcing priority will cause wrecks. Which will be documented on the black box. Which will discourage abusing the system.
Click to expand...

Not given the current approach to AI cars. Forcing priority will keep them sidelined. It's already going on and has been for a while and yet, no wrecks. If no wrecks is the top priority of the AI, it's working. But getting where you're going is taking a back seat.

How do you envision forcing priority will cause wrecks?

John
 
SAE actually as a standard set of "Levels of Automation".

Ethics is a big part of it - see the Trolley Problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

Ultimately - even considering ethics - the decision of choosing between two bad options ("who gets killed") will be determined by politics or a bureaucratic process and written in stone (blood), much as aviation regulations have been written.
 
steingar said:
Already lots of stringent laws on the books that have just become a fiduciary benefit to the State. More draconian laws will just make that many more criminals.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of countries with zero-tolerance for DWI. I was in one a few weeks ago. I've lived in one. Sure is nice not getting killed by a drunk driver.
 
JOhnH said:
I agree with this. We should ban all alcohol. We should pass a law to prohibit the manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol.



Because that worked out so well the last time we tried it.
Click to expand...
Strawman.
 
Norman said:
Steingar,

I have to tell a story about one of our Norwegian Elkhounds.

Wife and I were on the living room floor watching TV and sharing a glass of Brandy. We went to the fridge for a snack and returned to find the glass almost empty and the dog standing on spread legs with a stupefied look on her face. She lapped up about four ounces while we were gone. We called the vet who advised us to just wait. It took her a day to recover. She never did that again.
Click to expand...
Every time the local team beats their arch rivals my boy dog gets beer. Every time they've won the national championships my boy dog gets bourbon. My girl dog doesn't much like either. My Moogie dog continued to drink beer, eggnog, and anything else could get her little tongue into until the day she died. She was a good little dog and is much missed in the Steinholme.
 
denverpilot said:
Management’s call. I’m not building it until you decide what you want it to do and put it in writing.

And I’m squirreling away a copy of said document somewhere under my control in case this goes poorly (for the company) in the Press later.

Come sue me when I leak it. The PR person will have a heart attack.
Click to expand...

Scott Adams is following us here, too:

04307c90dd1001350f18005056a9545d
 
jsstevens said:
Not given the current approach to AI cars. Forcing priority will keep them sidelined. It's already going on and has been for a while and yet, no wrecks. If no wrecks is the top priority of the AI, it's working. But getting where you're going is taking a back seat.

How do you envision forcing priority will cause wrecks?
Click to expand...

AI cars have been in plenty of wrecks. They've nearly all been caused by humans. This will continue. The black boxes testify to the humans errors.
 
172andyou said:
AI cars have been in plenty of wrecks. They've nearly all been caused by humans. This will continue. The black boxes testify to the humans errors.
Click to expand...

True that they’ve almost all been caused by humans, but that didn’t answer my question: how would forcing priority (for example the not leaving a gap large enough for a self driving car to consider it safe to merge) cause a wreck?

John
 
Stingray Don said:
DUI will be a moot point in the not too distant future with the advent of driverless cars. And if the government really cares about saving lives, they would be more focused on removing regulatory roadblocks that stand in the way of bringing this capability to market.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...ing-wheel-or-pedals-ready-for-streets-in-2019
Click to expand...
I have a hard time imagining how they're going to teach driverless cars how to safely negotiate some of the logging roads I've been on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top