Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Will Become an AI Company

mattmaroon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 168 posts

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#81

Post by RodgerTheGreat »

zasz wrote: post #54
100k wrote: post #45

Traffic is caused by human error? I suppose flooding is caused by "water error", then? Traffic is caused by too many vehicles attempting to use a limited resource at the same time. Driverless cars may make this more tolerable (certainly riding the bus does) but the idea that this will make traffic obsolete is laughable.

We will probably never be able to get rid of traffic completely, but we could greatly increase the capacity of a road. If every car was driven by a robot, then the distance between cars could be much smaller than it is right now.

Precisely. Traffic is not caused by human error, Traffic is made worse by the margins of safety required by human error. Take human reflexes and perception out of the equation and you don't eliminate the problem entirely, but you allow for increased efficiency.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#83

Post by nihilocrat »

2. Children could own cars. Don’t feel like schlepping your kid to soccer practice? Just buy them a car

6. ... Make my car driverless (freeing me up to watch TV, read a book, catch up on emails, etc.) and able to travel at twice the speed, and spend the entire trip at top speed (rather than slowing down and speeding up on the highway) and I could feasibly live as far as 100 mph away.

7. Urbanization will reverse. Why pay $3,000/month for a flat in Manhattan when you can get from 100 miles upstate to work in 30 minutes?

This is bascially an apocalyptic scenario in my mind. I hate what the automobile has done to US cities, making everything the same vanilla spread and causing the car to become necessary to participate in modern life. I'm sad this blogger doesn't even think twice about the advantages of public transit (see: 6.) or more clever urban planning to reduce travel distances.

I like his basic thesis but I'm horrified by this example he puts forth. We should be moving away from the car, not towards it.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#84

Post by lwat »

maeon3 wrote: post #14

Self driving cars are 15 years away. The self driving cars will have to deal with the chaotic human drivers, and this will require Strong AI. Once we have this, driving around will be one of the small issues of the day.

Self driving cars are here today.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/12/sartre-project-ready-to-roa...

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#85

Post by chc »

krschultz wrote: post #67
aneesh wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1-800-BING-411 is still operational. http://www.discoverbing.com/mobile/411/

I wonder if Microsoft is running that service for the same reason or simply because Google had a 411 a product Microsoft thought they needed one too.

I'm pretty sure it's the latter. Microsoft's MO lately has been to rip off anything that makes their primary competitors unique, so they can go on being a one-stop shop in any industry they believe themselves to be a part of. And since Google is both a big competitor and lacking any central concept to its business, Microsoft will pretty much rip off anything they do.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#86

Post by chc »

nihilocrat wrote: post #83

2. Children could own cars. Don’t feel like schlepping your kid to soccer practice? Just buy them a car 6. ... Make my car driverless (freeing me up to watch TV, read a book, catch up on emails, etc.) and able to travel at twice the speed, and spend the entire trip at top speed (rather than slowing down and speeding up on the highway) and I could feasibly live as far as 100 mph away. 7. Urbanization will reverse. Why…

Why should we be moving away from the car? You seem to take this as an a priori fact. I see no advantages to public transit aside from less energy waste, unless you just occasionally long for the scent of hobos.

And urban planning is not a solution. It's shutting the barn doors after horses got out. Most urban areas have already been not only planned but fully executed and there isn't public will to tear the whole thing down and start over.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#87

Post by dagw »

nowarninglabel wrote: post #73

Did no one stop to think about this? It is extremely far-fetched at best. >safety regulations could be greatly relaxed. No, at least not if the author's vision of 200mph average speeds is to be taken. When a mistake or malfunction happens at that speed, safety mechanisms will be imperative. Furthermore, having a mechanical car does not prevent: someone else running into you, a deer running in front of the car, etc. >…

do you see parents sticking their 6 year olds on the subway just because they can?

Maybe not 6, but certainly 8 year olds are quite capable of using public transport and happily do so in many parts of the world. I know I was taking the bus to the library when I was 8 or 9 and the train into town when I was 10, and that wasn't strange in the slightest.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#88

Post by kermit_de_fro »

jonprins wrote: post #15
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #2

This is a great article. Every now and then Matt can really knock one out of the park. Of all the tech that we talk about on here, there are only a few items that really catch my attention. Christmas tree machines are one of them. Auto-drive cars is the other. These two inventions, when complete, will massively change things. Good luck guessing when they'll be complete, though. Could be a decade. Could be a couple of…

I take major issue with his prediction that driverless cars would subsume subway usage - at least, in cities where mass rail transit is the norm instead of the exception. Five million ride on NYC's subway every day. No matter how good the algorithms, an additional 2.5m (riders typically ride twice a day - to and from work/school) cars on the streets of Manhattan and the boroughs would be catastrophic.

Not so sure I agree. When I try to think of the core difference between subways and robotic vehicles, the only one I can think of is the relative lack of stops and the absence of cross-traffic.

With a serious and reliable driverless car system, stops could be integrated in a way which made them minimally impede traffic flow and the cross traffic optimized to maximize the flow over the whole road network.

Keep in mind we are talking about (in the limit at least) a network of driverless cars which can communicate. If traffic signals are in on the deal, I see no reason we shouldn't be able to do far, far better than a subway system.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#89

Post by nkassis »

This post and thread make me feel like I'm watching a 50s futurist vision of the world. I like it ;p The driver less cars need to fly too.

I hope google expands and manages to make money from more than just ads. Driverless cars would be awesome if they can pull it off soon. I just drove from Florida to Canada and back and I was thinking all trip I needed a driverless car. Most of the road could have been driven by todays AI no problem. Driving is so mindless.

Re: Google Will Become an AI Company

#90

Post by nkassis »

nowarninglabel wrote: post #73

Did no one stop to think about this? It is extremely far-fetched at best. >safety regulations could be greatly relaxed. No, at least not if the author's vision of 200mph average speeds is to be taken. When a mistake or malfunction happens at that speed, safety mechanisms will be imperative. Furthermore, having a mechanical car does not prevent: someone else running into you, a deer running in front of the car, etc. >…

The problem of dealing with drivers in outdated cars with drivers could be fixed with dedicated lanes. Most large cities have dedicated lanes for 2+ passengers or buses, it should be doable to have them allow driver less cars too.
Post reply on HN