811–820 of 923 posts
Volkswagon can speak for its own company. It can't speak for the industry. If it were to speak for the industry the word admit can't be used. It would be a different word, like "believe".
Volkswagon can certainly admit that "they" won't have full self driving capability, but it can't "admit" that for other people.
I agree in part in that I am skeptical that full self-driving cars will happen in the next few years, but he is completely wrong when it comes to the long term. Not only will the tech get as good as humans, but most forget to account for the fact that the environment will meet the cars part way. We will eventually update markings and beacons on the roads to make it easier for the cars, implement networks in which the…
> We will eventually update markings and beacons on the roads to make it easier for the cars. Or even easier, platooning. I don't understand why autonomous cars is a bigger thing than platooning. I mean, platooning solves 95% of use cases of self driving cars [1] and is orders of magnitude easier problem to solve. [1] At least for me. I do not mind driving in the cities myself, but if I just could nap or watch a movi…
The cost to upgrade roads appears to be a significant hurdle. A google search says:
"There are approximately 4,071,000 miles (6,552,000 km) of roads in the United States, 2,678,000 miles (4,310,000 km) paved and 1,394,000 miles (2,243,000 km) unpaved."
And there's this:
>> einrealist 18 hours ago [-]
>> I am more fearful of trolls, tricking the technology.
That's even more difficult to address.
We have to evaluate the cost/benefit of implementing this once we get the tech to the point of near total awareness of real world conditions. It might make sense to implement it on major highways, but probably not on rural roads and neighborhood streets because it's not something we can skimp on.
To make it cost effective the roadway tech has to be for the most part "dumb". We cannot rely on "smart" tech that requires complex communication systems or dumb tech that's easy to hack, like lines painted on the road or stop signs and traffic lights that AR can "see".
I think we'd be better off working on implementing assistive safety technologies for automobiles and mass transportation infrastructure like high speed railways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can't even bloody keep the yellow markings on the road visible, and "paint" is a technology we've had for thousands of years. Where in dog's name is the money for installing and maintaining all that smart infrastructure going to come from?
Yeah. For the cost of all this retrofitting of roads, you’d be able to build the most insanely comprehensive transit system anyone has ever heard of. FWIW though, it probably is possible to use this sort of technology for buses and shuttles. You can’t fix markings on ALL the roads, but you can make sure the markings are good enough on main arterials to have a dedicated bus lane.
I agree in part in that I am skeptical that full self-driving cars will happen in the next few years, but he is completely wrong when it comes to the long term. Not only will the tech get as good as humans, but most forget to account for the fact that the environment will meet the cars part way. We will eventually update markings and beacons on the roads to make it easier for the cars, implement networks in which the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeff Bezos never worked at Barnes & Noble or Borders. What does he know about selling books?
If Bezos started a book company, then failed and admitted he's not sure if it's possible to sell books... then I would question whether or not he has the background to sell books... especially if I look around, and other experts in the field don't agree.
It's called a sceptic. Almost every great true visionary had them. I'm no Musk fanboy but he's kinda like the modern day epitome of everyone saying no this isn't possible and it happened anyway. And to add insult to injury he started a rocket company kinda simultaneously. There absolutely is truth to scepticism literally blocking the mind. If you will it enough it can happen is a thing. If we all just put our heads down on how complicated that would be, I don't think we'd be very far.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Self-driving vehicles should be implemented with the same care Apple has given Touch ID and Face ID in regards to protecting sensitive data. Having a central database capable of being scraped and process to determine where any person is at any given time is a non-starter. Care needs to be taken to scrub all extraneous data from the fleet's network.
If I had to choose between privacy of my location or the convenience of a self driving car, I’d choose the car. Every single time. Convenience wins out over privacy for me. It’s the same for the billions that elect to use Facebook. I don’t care if Tesla’s knows I visited the supermarket.
That sounds like it's taken right out of an Orwell story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans are fixable in that they are held accountable. One person can be taken off the road if they are unfit to drive. (Revoke license, imprison, etc). Then the incident has become Someone's Fault, and society can move on.
I’d personally rather have less death and mayhem than be able to blame someone for it...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
how do you see insurance working? why would drivers be responsible to have insurance when the car is completely controlled by bigcorp programmers?
Sometimes it seems that critics of something like self-driving cars want so badly for the project to fail that they themselves fail to see obvious solutions. The insurance will work much better than it does today, because insurance in it's core is about spreading the risks and calculating exact costs of those risks, it's about calculating statistics of negative events and predicting total costs of such events for the…