Normally I'm pretty good at working my way through different scenarios in conjunction with a single enigma but this time I might need someone else's ideas. First, the development of "smarter" automobiles includes their upcoming ability to drive themselves. That's a gimme. But here's the problem: In order to do that they have got to be able to "think" like a human being because in certain instances there are choices to make that only a human can make. Example: Let's say you and your family are in a self propelled auto of sorts and going 60 MPH and there is a cliff on your right side, another vehicle coming in the left lane and a dog in the middle of your lane. What would your car decide to do? Go over the cliff saving the dog, or hit the dog saving yourself and your family? There are soooo many scenarios that I can come up with that demand a human being making the decisions that I really doubt if anyone will ever catch me riding in a car that is supposed to drive itself. Your thoughts???
That's scary but maybe you can program in a lot of scenarios and then also have the option of taking over the control if you're not sleeping, lol. You could also have an alarm sound to wake you if something unexpected comes up but it's probably too late. I love animals but love humans more so would program in...hit the dog. Of course so many unexpected things can happen that's why I would want an option of taking it off drive on its own.
I have been following the development of Google Car. If you still haven't heard, it is a car intended to drive by itself using GPS and the programming that may be called AI (artificial intelligence). The design is for it to be a driverless car and all the passengers need to do is to just indicate the destination.However, in the recent press release of Google Car, they have encountered a "thousand" problems that may take many years to resolve. The driverless car is okay when there are no other vehicles but when there is traffic on the road, the car loses its good disposition on the steering wheel. Now Google Car designers are thinking of a paradigm shift - it will not be a driverless car anymore but a driver-assisted car that would be appropriate for those physically challenged people wanting to drive.
Chrissy, Chrissy, Chrissy! One such as yourself would have the chauffeur looking more through the rear view mirror and not watching the road. That dear, is definitely not safer but nice try!
You gave me a big laugh with that chauffeur, hahahaaah. This is not a joke but whenever people would see an "aging madam" with a nice car and a handsome driver, you can guess what's on their mind, huh. There is one lady senator now who is being intrigued with such talks because she has a bodyguard who is handsome and naturally young with a good body to boot. Well?
I don't trust the self-driving cars. There have already been reports of issues such as accidents, and in your scenario, I'm not sure what I would do, but I would assume the car thinking for itself would probably value human life over animals (not saying I do, at least in most cases), and hit the dog. Look at all of the hackings that go on, and imagine that your vehicle is hacked and hijacked as you're driving along. Then imagine you're driving a bullet train and the same thing happens. Automation has its place, but that place is not in the driver's seat, in my opinion.
I am going to stick with a car that needs a driver. The one I have is a stick shift Manuel transmission. No self-driving cars for me.
I would surely like a car that could drive itself when of course they get the kinks worked out. You could have a drink on the way to dinner and no DUI, fantastic. You could read the paper and have coffee on the way to work. You could site see on long trips without having to watch the road. People who can't drive for some reason ( handicapped etc. ) would not have to count on others to get around. What a wonderment that would be. I hope I live long enough to see the completed item.
@Bobby Cole "Your thoughts???" Agreed! Volubly. About the only thing gained by self-driven is elimination of the human "reaction-time" factor, IMO. If all the possible "anti" variables could be summed together and eliminated, it might work, like perhaps within a sealed, evacuated tube, but Oh Yeah! They're already working on that one to link Oakland and L.A.? That's nuts! Frank
@Corie Henson Is it known publicly by what means the lady senator pays her handsome driver, is it with taxpayer money, or, er,..........? Frank
I can envision just such a scenario as @Bobby Cole laid out for us, and it is hard to say what a computer would actually do in a situation where they had to make a choice. Hopefully, the computer would choose to hit the dog, as opposed to the oncomiing vehicle or going off of the cliff; but you never know what input might go into the computerized decisions. However, the Hyperloop is a totally different matter, and I like that idea a lot. I am a great fan of Elon Musk, and would own one of his cars if I were a rich person. I think that he has excellent ideas, and that hybrid cars, or even electric ones, are the vehicle of the future. Using solar power for the battery charging makes them almost free to run, and much better for the earth, as well. The Hyperloop, as I understand it , would parallel I-5 for the most part, and would transport people from one city to the other one much faster than they could drive, and also MUCH cheaper ! ! The Hyperloop uses solar power, and a suction system which speedily pulls the hyperloop transporter from one end of the route to the other. Since there is nothing in there for it to hit, there should not be any accidents like we see on freeways, with huge pileups of cars and trucks. https://www.wired.com/2015/08/elon-musk-hyperloop-project-is-getting-kinda-serious/#slide-1
this is new technology?? probably first generation. I always wait for 3rd or 4th generation. by then all the bugs have been ironed out. there have been accidents. can't say i like being the guinea pig here.
Passenger and fighter jets have had on board computers for many years now which can practically fly the plane with no human interaction. The operative word here is practically because even the FAA and the Dept. of Defense knows that there are many situations whereby humans must make the decision based on real time, real life circumstances. The failing of computers fall in the catagory of "reasoning" and "instinct" which all humans have but cannot be translated into a logarithmic equation. All computers can do is process information that is based on data that has been programmed into it. Our brains are constantly working and learning and as long as there is something to connect even the most seemingly meaningless information to it we can react.