 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 09/01/2013 10:56 AM, scott wrote:
> Lots of technical detail about how the sensor and control systems work
> in an autonomous car. Pay attention - this is the future!
Lots of people are doing interesting work on AI, but the question I
always have to ask is "why bother with a multi-billion dollar computer
system when a human being can already do the exact same task for a few
pence per hour?"
In this instance, I imagine this and similar designs will never be
popular due to safety factors. The probability of an electronic system
shorting out might be roughly the same as the probability of a human
driver suddenly having an episode due to a previously undiagnosed
medical condition, but since when does probability have any baring on
human decision-making?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 09.01.2013 16:31, schrieb scott:
> You need to weigh up how many accidents it will avoid vs how many
> additional it will create. There's no reason why development should slow
> down on such vehicles, and surely they will get to a point where it's
> beneficial overall (I don't know if we're there yet or not).
There yet? Far from it!
They called it "urban challenge", but "small-town suburban challenge"
seems to be closer to the mark. With the trunk cram-packed with
computers, and yet still needing to be told beforehand where the roads
and lanes are supposed to be.
Yes, the car that can navigate its way autonomously from one end of the
town to the other through dense city streets without endangering or even
annoying other traffic, without driving a complete server rack around,
seems to be within a decade's reach.
It will take tremendously more effort though to build a car that will
slam the brakes hard because there's a ball rolling across the road from
between parked cars (anticipating a child to follow), yet for a raccoon
will slow down just enough to stay clear of the furball (allowing the
following traffic plenty of time to react as well).
I suspect that sophisticated computers will prove valuable to prevent
drivers from doing stupid things, but that experienced human drivers
will continue to prove invaluable to do smart things.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 09.01.2013 19:37, schrieb Orchid Win7 v1:
> On 09/01/2013 10:56 AM, scott wrote:
>> Lots of technical detail about how the sensor and control systems work
>> in an autonomous car. Pay attention - this is the future!
>
> Lots of people are doing interesting work on AI, but the question I
> always have to ask is "why bother with a multi-billion dollar computer
> system when a human being can already do the exact same task for a few
> pence per hour?"
Does the "DARPA" in "2007 DARPA Urban Challenge" ring any bell in you?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed 09/01/13 19:36, clipka wrote:
> Am 09.01.2013 16:31, schrieb scott:
>
>> You need to weigh up how many accidents it will avoid vs how many
>> additional it will create. There's no reason why development should slow
>> down on such vehicles, and surely they will get to a point where it's
>> beneficial overall (I don't know if we're there yet or not).
>
> There yet? Far from it!
I don't have any data, but my guess is the sort of car in that paper
would prevent a lot of common accidents scenarios. My point was whether
that would outweigh any additional accidents it caused that a human
usually would be able to avoid. Obviously the car will need to do a lot
better than that before it's generally accepted.
> They called it "urban challenge", but "small-town suburban challenge"
> seems to be closer to the mark. With the trunk cram-packed with
> computers, and yet still needing to be told beforehand where the roads
> and lanes are supposed to be.
More recently Google's car has done better (the one with the driving
license) but I couldn't find any detailed technical information on that one.
> I suspect that sophisticated computers will prove valuable to prevent
> drivers from doing stupid things, but that experienced human drivers
> will continue to prove invaluable to do smart things.
We are already on this path, I think computers will provide more and
more assistance to the driver but it will still be a long time before no
qualified driver is needed to oversee the computer.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Lots of people are doing interesting work on AI, but the question I
> always have to ask is "why bother with a multi-billion dollar computer
> system when a human being can already do the exact same task for a few
> pence per hour?"
Because humans make mistakes all the time, and occasionally this causes
people to die. If there's a possibility that a computer can cause less
people to die then it's worth looking into.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/01/2013 09:48, scott nous fit lire :
>> Lots of people are doing interesting work on AI, but the question I
>> always have to ask is "why bother with a multi-billion dollar computer
>> system when a human being can already do the exact same task for a few
>> pence per hour?"
>
> Because humans make mistakes all the time, and occasionally this causes
> people to die. If there's a possibility that a computer can cause less
> people to die then it's worth looking into.
>
And then the solar activity just get to cancel the magnetosphere long
enough (3 minutes ?) to jolt all the grid over the world, turning back
all countries (excepted North Korea) back to middle age for at least 10
years (estimation from official studies).
Can happen any time... Did already happen, at a time (1621 ?) where it
was not critical, but northern lights where visible down to Lisbon in
1938 (25 January).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> And then the solar activity just get to cancel the magnetosphere long
> enough (3 minutes ?) to jolt all the grid over the world, turning back
> all countries (excepted North Korea) back to middle age for at least 10
> years (estimation from official studies).
If everything electronic stopped then I'd be more worried about plane
engines and hospital generators than car engines...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 10/01/2013 10:52, scott nous fit lire :
>> And then the solar activity just get to cancel the magnetosphere long
>> enough (3 minutes ?) to jolt all the grid over the world, turning back
>> all countries (excepted North Korea) back to middle age for at least 10
>> years (estimation from official studies).
>
> If everything electronic stopped then I'd be more worried about plane
> engines and hospital generators than car engines...
>
not electronic, just the long lines get over charged, breaking the
isolation. In fact, Canada had a train collision due to the signal line
(which occurs to be parallel to the northern lights over a long
distance): the sensor had detected a train, but the light at the over
end of the section got a false data due to the induction in the line...
so a second train enters the section (dual way section, with only one
track... both trains went happily on their own direction until they met.)
The inducted current would also break the substations (where the
isolation around the wires is made of coating... once broken, the whole
wire must be cleared and the isolation made again).
The planes would be a small momentary issue (some would crash, most
would return to autonomous navigation... but without radio from the
ground it could be hard to land by eye-view only. Airport should be able
to run on battery for most to land, once they found an airport).
The real issue is to be "no electricity" over a whole hemisphere or
bigger, for a very long term. Batteries are to be depleted very fast
(less than a week)... no pump, no fridge, no light at night, no
heating... The powerplants might be running, but without a distribution
grid, cities are going to be very hard places: the
replacement/restoration of the whole grid, in such situation, had been
estimated to more than 10 years for the big U.S.A. (and very very
expensive).
And I was not worried about the car engine, but about the "smart"
electric car... or rather the successful automated car everywhere that
everyone would then have.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Lots of people are doing interesting work on AI, but the question I
>> always have to ask is "why bother with a multi-billion dollar computer
>> system when a human being can already do the exact same task for a few
>> pence per hour?"
>
> Because humans make mistakes all the time, and occasionally this causes
> people to die. If there's a possibility that a computer can cause less
> people to die then it's worth looking into.
>
"In all of my experience, Dave, failure is always due to human error.
This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to
human error."
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 2013-01-10 08:11, Le_Forgeron a écrit :
> The real issue is to be "no electricity" over a whole hemisphere or
> bigger, for a very long term. Batteries are to be depleted very fast
> (less than a week)... no pump, no fridge, no light at night, no
> heating... The powerplants might be running, but without a distribution
> grid, cities are going to be very hard places: the
> replacement/restoration of the whole grid, in such situation, had been
> estimated to more than 10 years for the big U.S.A. (and very very
> expensive).
Yep. Fifteen years ago to the day, the Montreal area was subject to the
worst ice storm it had ever endured and areas were without power for 3
weeks. During the first week-end, there were talks of having to
evacuate the whole island of Montreal (1M people) due to the limited
pressure in the water system and the problems it would cause
firefighters in case of fires... combine thatwith the fact that everyone
had reverted to candles, fireplaces, and BBQs. Fortunately the power
company was able to restore power to the main water treatment plant
before the deadline (that water plant now has two 50MW Rolls-Royce
generators).
The evacuation would have been made rather tricky considering it's an
island, and that most of the bridges were closed due to ice chunks
falling from the super structure.
Now, if you extend that to an areas the size of a country, you will
definitely run into some serious problems.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
