Jump to content


Photo

Ethics of the new driverless car


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#41 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 09 March 2017 - 09:58 AM

All old news. We've got selfflying cars next. airbus-vahana-self-flying-car.gif

 

http://europe.newswe...pt-565107?rm=eu

 

Also, there's a lot of resistence against the old school (the selfdrivers): 

 

After reading some of the #Vault7 documents released by @wikileaks 1f525.png1f525.png Everyone should be strongly against self-driving cars...


Lo

#42 TheOptician

TheOptician

    General

  • Tournament Manager
  • 2,372 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 March 2017 - 10:50 AM

There's something off with that video - I'm not convinced it's real.

#43 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 09 March 2017 - 11:33 AM

? Theo?

 

I agree with you it looks like Star Trek.

 

But really. It's 2017. After all it's just a big drone. So it's real. Trust me. It is.


Lo

#44 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 09 March 2017 - 01:15 PM

I like it, but many people prefer good old fashioned gas guzzlers or grounded transportation. Seems air traffic would be easier to manage than ground transportation. I'll go for anything that gets rid of ICE and Spectre can have his cool looking sports car. The electric cars like the Tesla S not only look cool, they are fast.

 

2016 Tesla Model S P90D 0-60 in 2.8 seconds. Is that fast? Range is over 300 miles and you can find a charging station anywhere in the US, China and Europe.

 

Car and Driver 


Edited by queenbee1, 09 March 2017 - 10:52 PM.


#45 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 10 March 2017 - 02:54 PM

OK but what do you hold of this part:

 

a lot of resistence against the old school (the selfdrivers): 

 

After reading some of the #Vault7 documents released by @wikileaks 1f525.png1f525.png Everyone should be strongly against self-driving cars..

Wikileaks is saying not to drive driverless. The FBI (or CIA or the other nonsense according to Trump) will take over and if they are fed up of you, simply drive you off a cliff, Queenbee...


Lo

#46 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,457 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 10 March 2017 - 04:37 PM

It's certainly safer to be driving in a car than flying over of those modern looking helicopter rigs. They look like lunacy. I've got two quick reasons for you.

First, if they think the streets are too crowded, what do they think will happen to the skies when they are filled with their machines? Second, what city anywhere will allow its air space to be populated with a slew of non professional pilots? The risk will be huge. What if there's a major crash up there? What if there's only a fender bender? There's no place to pull over and park and swap insurance cards is there?

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#47 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 10 March 2017 - 06:32 PM

The machinery takes care of all of that, Gary. Computers. Same for the driverless cars. FBI/CIA included. Aren't you wearing your aluhead today?


Lo

#48 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 12 March 2017 - 12:59 AM

Can someone tell me why you don't trust driverless cars and do trust humans? Humans eat and drive, text and drive, talk and drive and some even have sex while driving. Kids screaming in the backseat you name it and add drunk driving and there simply is no advantage to human drivers. Give me an example of human superiority over machines?

 

Another question why do we have ICE cars when EVs are so much more efficient?

 

This excludes men's need for hot car as an extension of their manhood. Women don't feel that and it is not justification as all the cool looking car bodies can be made into EVs.


Edited by queenbee1, 12 March 2017 - 01:02 AM.


#49 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,457 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 12 March 2017 - 02:58 AM

The machinery takes care of all of that, Gary. Computers. Same for the driverless cars. FBI/CIA included. Aren't you wearing your aluhead today?



Ha! Lo, if you're planning on going around in automatic flying machines over traveling in a car that you can control with your own two hands, then have at it. I'll keep my aluhat on proudly every day.

Didn't you ever see I Robot with Will Smith? Yeah, trust those machines. Go right ahead. I'll heed Asimov's warning and not, thank you.

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#50 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,457 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 12 March 2017 - 03:02 AM

queenbee1, the only way flying is deemed safer than driving is placing miles traveled as the denominator in the equation, when the only right thing to place there are the number of trips taken.

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#51 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 12 March 2017 - 05:48 AM

Gary I am not advocating those flying machines and you didn't answer my questions. Why do we need ICE cars when the tech is already there for EVs and what makes you distrust driving machines when we are communicating, running nearly everything with them from banking to power grids. Machines are far superior to humans in almost everything they do.



#52 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 12 March 2017 - 11:22 AM

I'll keep my aluhat 

Ah right. I didn't want to say you have an aluhead, as in your head is made of aluminium ;). So it's an aluhat. Queenbee has a tinfoiled one.

 

But you missed my point, Gary, and so did you, Queenbee. It's the FBI. Or some other group, government controlled or not. Bilderberg. They in the end control everything. They then easily control your driverless vehicle, be it airborn or not. If it's on the ground they can steer you into a cliff. If it's in the air they can simply let you fall from the sky. That's what the Wikileaks story says.


Lo

#53 GaryLShelton

GaryLShelton

    Marshal

  • Moderators
  • 4,457 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Lieutenant

Posted 12 March 2017 - 02:21 PM

Here's a couple of clips from Will Smith in I Robot.

"You can trust them if you want, not me"
https://youtu.be/4kuaikerPKs

Or here's another good one.

"You are experiencing an accident"
https://youtu.be/Wqfs9yJALyc


queenbee1, the only thing machines are better at humans is being machines. So go ahead and trust them if you want, I'll keep driving myself in my gas burning minivan.

The complete GS&F Rules can be found here: http://forum.strateg...rum-rules-2016/

Draw Refusal Rules, specifically, can be read here: http://forum.strateg...604#entry339604

#54 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 13 March 2017 - 02:48 AM

Here's a couple of clips from Will Smith in I Robot.

"You can trust them if you want, not me"
https://youtu.be/4kuaikerPKs

Or here's another good one.

"You are experiencing an accident"
https://youtu.be/Wqfs9yJALyc


queenbee1, the only thing machines are better at humans is being machines. So go ahead and trust them if you want, I'll keep driving myself in my gas burning minivan.

I cannot remember the movie or the book. I think you are referring to fear of Human like Artificial Intelligence. Self driving cars are machines. They are not self aware anymore than iPhones, notebooks or the robots that assemble cars or run the internet. I assume you entrust your money to a bank who tracks it with computers. You trust the ATM and the gas pump with your Credit Card. TVs are now computers with a big screen attached to it. Driverless cars are machines operated by computers. It is who programs them that is at issue. They are coming and maybe we will be dead before they are common, but that won't stop the tech revolution. Humanity is becoming irrelevant. That's where all the jobs are going and not the illegal immigrants.

 

I don't trust humans to make the right decision. They are easily distracted and emotional. Nearly 100 people in the US get out of bed every day and don't make it home due to car accidents. With 300 million Americans that may seem a small amount, but millions of peoples lives are changed due to injuries or incarceration for vehicular manslaughter. 

 

Why don't we just go back 100 years to when cars were not something everyone owned, but feared. You forget that car emissions are poisoning our air and many wars are all about oil. The more dependent we are on oil, the less control we have over our government. Now we have climate change deniers in real positions of power. If it doesn't care those who are alive it should and if you have children and grandchildren you should be very afraid for them.

 

I Robot shows the overreach of government and is exactly what I am concerned with in regards to the ethics of driverless car programming. Do we trust the car manufacturers? The courts? The legislature? That is why this topic started out as The Ethics of a Driverless Car. Science fiction is not science fact and all dissenters in this country can already easily be marginalized or incarcerated in much simpler ways than this science fiction drama. The second clip is simply ridiculous over the top dramatization for entertainment purposes.

 

Do you really think that is what will happen?


Edited by queenbee1, 13 March 2017 - 03:09 AM.


#55 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:30 AM

Let's move away from driverless cars to driver assist and also why do we need coal and oil when the tech is there to get rid of it?



#56 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 31 March 2017 - 04:10 PM

Did anyone see the news that SpaceX launched the first reusable rocket stage? This is a breakthrough. I am very happy for the progress SpaceX has made. They did something that never been done before. This will significantly lower the cost of launching satellites in the future. Now if they can just find a way to travel beyond the speed of light. This too will take revolutionary R&D. Better than adding more nukes, tanks and fighter jets that cannot fight.



#57 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 19 June 2017 - 02:48 AM

All Tesla Cars Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware

We are excited to announce that, as of today, all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory – including Model 3 – will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.

I trust machines a lot more than humans. I would gladly turn over the wheel to an A.I.

 

It's here



#58 Lonello

Lonello

    General

  • Moderators
  • 2,020 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Marshal

Posted 19 June 2017 - 10:24 AM

Have you read this book, Queenbee? http://press.uchicag...bo25086589.html

 

9789462982062.jpg


Lo

#59 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 19 June 2017 - 06:07 PM

I have read quite a bit about Tesla on a rather unconventional blog called waitbutwhy.com

 

He ended up doing a book on his interviews with Elon Musk. I think it was pretty funny last night I saw on John Oliver that the Kentucky coal museum is switching to solar power. The Donald claimed he had created 50k new coal jobs when in fact he had only 1300. The man is such a bald face liar. My favorite comment about liars is that "they would sooner climb a tree and tell a lie, than stand on the ground and tell the truth."

 

John Oliver on HBO did a great expose on the coal industry last night that I am sure you can find on Youtube that coal for all intents and purposes is dead.

 

I'll looked at the link, but I don't buy and read books. I know that solar and wind is the future.



#60 queenbee1

queenbee1

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,121 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Scout

Posted 05 July 2017 - 03:26 AM

Clipped from Forbes'

https://www.forbes.c...h/#1f4c9d37181c

We’re currently testing Levels 2-3 on public roads, but are working on Levels 4 and 5 on private courses:

 

 

 

  • Level 0: Automated system controls nothing, but may issue warnings (e.g., blind spot monitor).
  • Level 1: Automated system includes features such as Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) (slowing the car automatically to match the speed of forward traffic), Parking Assistance with automated steering, and lane departure correction systems. Driver must be ready and able to take control at any time.
  • Level 2: Automated system executes all accelerating, braking, and steering. It can deactivate immediately upon takeover by the driver. The driver is obliged to be alert to objects and events and to respond if the automated system fails to respond properly.
  • Level 3: Like level 2, but within limited environments (such as freeways) the driver can safely turn her attention away from driving tasks, though she must still be prepared to take control when needed.
  • Level 4: Like level 3, but no driver attention is required. Outside the limited environment the vehicle will enter a safe fallback mode - i.e. park the car – if the driver does not retake control.
  • Level 5: Other than setting the destination and starting the system, no human intervention is required. The automatic system can drive to any location where it is legal to drive and make its own decisions.

Alphabet (Google’s parent), Tesla and Uber are testing vehicles that provide levels 3 through 5 of automation. Though the machines are sometimes capable of full Level 5 automation, when driven on public roads legislation in the several states that explicitly allow for their testing requires at least one person to be on board to monitor the vehicle’s proper operation and to take over if and when needed. The testing is progressing apace (notwithstanding a heated legal dispute between Alphabet and Uber about allegedly stolen trade secrets).

 

The potential safety benefits are tremendous. Self-driving cars don’t rubberneck or drive while drunk. They don’t talk on cell phones or turn their heads to comfort screaming children in the back seat. A convoy of them can accelerate from a stop light simultaneously and maintain very short distances between vehicles, greatly increasing the load capacity of roads and substantially shortening commutes. One prominent study predicted an eventual 90% reduction in collisions, saving tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars in losses in the United States alone.

Of course driving may become boring and tedious for “save the manual” troglodytes like me; so I don’t welcome this technological progress with undiluted enthusiasm. But my concern today is with a different problem. What happens when harm is CAUSED by the new technology? For sure, many accidents involving autonomous vehicles will be the fault of “the other guy” (see what happened last week in Tempe, Arizona). But on occasion the autonomous vehicle itself will most assuredly take the rap. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users