Google's Self-Driving Cars: Fun Facts

ercoerco Posts: 18,185
edited June 2015 in Robotics Vote Up0Vote Down
"When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

- Pablo Picasso

Comments

  • 22 Comments sorted by Date Added Votes
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 19,354
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    It has a face. But why the glum look? Reminds me of Marvin:

    "Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and you ask me to take you to the mall. Call that job satisfaction, 'cause I don't."
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 3,984
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    The only thing worse than an AI with a bad attitude is one with too positive an attitude. Witness Talkie Toaster from Red Dwarf:
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,058
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    It looks like it is worried it might rain.

    If you looked at the car and thought the Google engineers purposefully made it look like it had a face, you were right. Their intention was both to make it cute to spiritually disarm other drivers.

    I'm guessing you have to see it running you over in a parking lot to fully understand how the flat mouth and droopy eyes are disarming.
  • GordonMcCombGordonMcComb Posts: 3,034
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Here's how driverless cars of the real future will actually work. After all, each of us will sometime in our lives be chased by a crazed lunatic with an automatic pistol.

    (caution: Arnie bad language humor ahead)
  • TtailspinTtailspin Posts: 1,321
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    So you would be just a passenger? Can you actually stop the car? or does it just keep driving to the destination its given?
    What happens if i accidentally drop my cell phone out the window and have to jump out of the car to pick it up, will the car just drive away when the light turns green?
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 19,354
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Good question, what happens if you open the door when the thing is moving? Will it let you open the door? Is there a big red emergency stop switch somewhere?
  • ercoerco Posts: 18,185
    edited June 2015 Vote Up0Vote Down
    Doors? Windows? You guys are funny. Didn't you see Wall-E? In the future we lay on pods and the robots load us into nacelles. There are no doors. There are no windows. Only happiness, peace, efficiency and compliance.

    Are we there yet?
    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • ercoerco Posts: 18,185
    A well-written article on the reality (difficulty) of driverless cars. It's from LinkedIn, but I think everyone can view the article. Please advise if otherwise.

    https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-driverless-cars-might-hit-road-so-fast-scott-nyquist
    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • My car (not driverless) has what amounts to an RFID tag in the key fob, so it knows when I'm in the car, and it's a 2008 model. Given al the problems autonomous cars will have to solve, "is there a passenger?" seems like a pretty easy one.

    On the flip-side, a computer doesn't get distracted, can look more than one direction at once, can "see" in infra-red and radar, and can have millisecond reaction times. I'd be more inclined to trust one than the average driver.
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    My car (not driverless) has what amounts to an RFID tag in the key fob, so it knows when I'm in the car, and it's a 2008 model. Given al the problems autonomous cars will have to solve, "is there a passenger?" seems like a pretty easy one.

    On the flip-side, a computer doesn't get distracted, can look more than one direction at once, can "see" in infra-red and radar, and can have millisecond reaction times. I'd be more inclined to trust one than the average driver.
    Yeah but do you trust the programmer who wrote the software for the self-driving car?

  • No doubt the cars will be linked to a central computer sending back data to head office to 'improve the driver experience in future products'. What a wonderful target for foreign hackers to plant a virus to have all cars go wild on a certain day at a certain time.

    Dave
  • >>but do you trust the programmer...?

    They're probably paying more attention than the average driver, and NHTSA is all over this stuff. Driverless cars won't hit the road until they meet a fairly high safety bar in closed testing, then real-world testing, so yes, actually I do.
  • MikeDYurMikeDYur Posts: 2,052
    edited August 3 Vote Up0Vote Down
    erco wrote: »
    Doors? Windows? You guys are funny. Didn't you see Wall-E? In the future we lay on pods and the robots load us into nacelles. There are no doors. There are no windows. Only happiness, peace, efficiency and compliance.

    Are we there yet?


    I'm not crazy about an elevator taking control.
    Something here just looks like it cheapens the human, to have a robotic vehicle cart a large group of people around.

    But a capsule and a tube to travel in, was a dream of mine as a kid though.

    Elon Musk is doing that in Dubai:

  • I don't trust the weather, QA issues, and most of all, hackers.
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    >>but do you trust the programmer...?

    They're probably paying more attention than the average driver, and NHTSA is all over this stuff. Driverless cars won't hit the road until they meet a fairly high safety bar in closed testing, then real-world testing, so yes, actually I do.
    It's good to hear there be such high standards applied.

  • ercoerco Posts: 18,185
    tritonium wrote: »
    What a wonderful target for foreign hackers to plant a virus to have all cars go wild on a certain day at a certain time.

    You guys worry too much!



    "When you make a thing, a thing that is new, it is so complicated making it that it is bound to be ugly. But those that make it after you, they don’t have to worry about making it. And they can make it pretty, and so everybody can like it when others make it after you."

    - Pablo Picasso
  • From NHTSA's website: 35,092 people died on U.S. roadways in 2015. 94 percent of crashes can be tied to a human choice or error.

    The current generation of self-driving cars tends to be safer than human driven cars:
    https://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/29/crash-data-for-self-driving-cars-may-not-tell-whole-story.html

    They were involved in more accidents than people were, but not a single one was deemed their fault. Another study suggests that because they're more conservative than a typical driver, aggressive humans expect them to, for example, run a yellow light, and rear-end them, at twice the rate of human drivers. If you want to make driving safer, unless the human is Mario Andretti, they shouldn't be in control. :-)

    Don't get me wrong - I really *like* driving, but watching other people in traffic (and myself) has made me decide that we can't really be trusted any more. We're too inattentive.
  • JasonDorie wrote: »
    My car (not driverless) has what amounts to an RFID tag in the key fob, so it knows when I'm in the car, and it's a 2008 model. Given al the problems autonomous cars will have to solve, "is there a passenger?" seems like a pretty easy one.

    On the flip-side, a computer doesn't get distracted, can look more than one direction at once, can "see" in infra-red and radar, and can have millisecond reaction times. I'd be more inclined to trust one than the average driver.

    +1
    In science there is no authority. There is only experiment.
    Life is unpredictable. Eat dessert first.
  • +1
    My Prop boards: P8XBlade2, RamBlade, CpuBlade, TriBlade
    Prop OS (also see Sphinx, PropDos, PropCmd, Spinix)
    Website: www.clusos.com
    Prop Tools (Index) , Emulators (Index) , ZiCog (Z80)
  • Does the Google car still have LIDAR on top? That's a non-starter (cost wise) for anything affordable by consumers.
  • It's too bad we can't resolve the distracted driving issue without autonomous cars. There goes another chunk of humanity.
  • xanadu wrote: »
    It's too bad we can't resolve the distracted driving issue without autonomous cars. There goes another chunk of humanity.

    If it wasn't for distracted drivers being responsible for taking out the non-distracted drivers, I'd just say survival of the fittest :D

    But alas, I have to side with the autonomous cars here too. But I agree that the security of these things needs to be watched as closely if not MORE closely than the driving algorithms. You'd like to think that big companies have the money and resources to ensure their cars are secure, but it seems they jumped into the tech world way too soon in some cases.
    David
    PropWare: C++ HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) for PropGCC; Robust build system using CMake; Integrated Simple Library, libpropeller, and libPropelleruino (Arduino port); Instructions for Eclipse and JetBrain's CLion; Example projects; Doxygen documentation
Sign In or Register to comment.