California legalises self-driving cars on public roads
47 replies, posted
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/o01h.jpg[/img]
[I]A vision of the future, after the Google Revolution of 2021 brings our Brother Leader to power[/I]
[url]http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5isIR4JBac-up-LQmT1BEbwwEm9VA?docId=CNG.cac244400f044e319f2e9adc74625f14.e1[/url]
[quote=AFP]California Governor Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed a bill clearing the way for self-driving cars to jockey with human-operated vehicles to test the technology on the state's roads.
"Autonomous vehicles are another example of how California's technological leadership is turning today's science fiction into tomorrow's reality," Brown said during a signing ceremony at the Google campus in Mountain View.
"This law will allow California's pioneering engineers to safely test and implement this amazing new technology."
The legislation backed by state senator Alex Padilla lets driverless cars be operated on public roads for testing purposes as long as licensed drivers are behind the wheels to take over if needed.
Development of a self-driving car is one of the projects of a special Google research team headed by company co-founder Sergey Brin.
Brown, Brin and Padilla took a ride in a Google self-driving car before the governor signed the bill into law.
"It obviously seems the stuff of science fiction," Brin said.
"It is a fascinating area to work on but it really has the power to change people's lives, which is why I am really excited about it."[/quote]
this is how terminator began
I'm not buying them until I can flip them on and off like Jensen can.
As someone in Engadget comments said, Sergey Brin is a real life Tony Stark
[QUOTE=smurfy;37800252]As someone in Engadget comments said, Sergey Brin is a real life Tony Stark[/QUOTE]
That distinction belongs to Elon Musk
this is badass and that guy with that thing on his head... that looks badass
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;37800202][img]http://imgkk.com/i/o01h.jpg[/img]
I don't know about you but as badass as that is I'm not buying them until I can flip them on and off like Jensen can.
[editline]25th September 2012[/editline]
none cliché Deus Ex reference, suck it.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://i47.tinypic.com/oo0ht.png[/IMG]
Shut up Megan.
I wonder how long until someone has a horrible crash in one of these things because couldn't handle a road or something.
who's that guy with that thing on his face
[QUOTE=TestECull;37800784]I wonder how long until someone has a horrible crash in one of these things because couldn't handle a road or something.[/QUOTE]
virtually never most likely, the bill requires a licensed driver be there to take over so even if the car did malfunction (though i'm sure there are fail-safes in place anyway), the driver can just take over and drive it like a normal car
[QUOTE=Kopimi;37800916]virtually never most likely, the bill requires a licensed driver be there to take over so even if the car did malfunction (though i'm sure there are fail-safes in place anyway), the driver can just take over and drive it like a normal car[/QUOTE]
And you think that driver is going to even [i]remotely[/i] be paying attention? The whole point of self-driving cars is to allow the occupant to zone out while the car handles things for them. People are going to take this about as far as they have physical space to. We already see people eating cereal and reading the paper while they're driving, what makes you think they'll put those things down and pay attention to the road when the car is driving? They won't. They'll take it ever farther. They will treat it like they would a ride on the subway right up until the airbag deploys. Then they'll shrug and go "The car was driving not me".
I like the progress and there's nothing wrong with a self-driving car if it's 100% reliable. But there's no such thing as 100% reliability, and I don't trust the passenger to be paying attention when the computers do conk out or get confused.
[QUOTE=TestECull;37800985]And you think that driver is going to even [i]remotely[/i] be paying attention? The whole point of self-driving cars is to allow the occupant to zone out while the car handles things for them. People are going to take this about as far as they have physical space to. We already see people eating cereal and reading the paper while they're driving, what makes you think they'll put those things down and pay attention to the road when the car is driving? They won't. They'll take it ever farther. They will treat it like they would a ride on the subway right up until the airbag deploys.[/QUOTE]
Because only a retard would immediately trust a brand new technological advancement with their life
[QUOTE=Kylel999;37801019]Because only a retard would immediately trust a brand new technological advancement with their life[/QUOTE]
Only a retard would drive down the road with a newspaper spread across their steering wheel. But people do it anyway.
Now don't misunderstand what I'm saying here, I've got nothing against self-driving cars. I just don't trust the occupant driving it enough to want to share the road with them right now.
As long as a driver is required to be at the wheel and the mechanical link between the steering wheel and the car's direction is still uninterrupted I'm okay with this
I'm not ok with this,I don't know what or how the computer and it's systems will work.
What if a hacker manages to connect or somehow implement a virus without me knowing and later during the day, the car drives off with me in it, to some thug's house or off the shore?
And what if I couldn't take manual control?
[QUOTE=Kopimi;37800916]virtually never most likely, the bill requires a licensed driver be there to take over so even if the car did malfunction (though i'm sure there are fail-safes in place anyway), the driver can just take over and drive it like a normal car[/QUOTE]
Wait why not just drive it regularly then
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0I5DHOETFE[/media]
It's intended to be like an advanced cruise control. Something you can turn on in your car when you're tired of driving.
The Driverless Car doesn't know which direction to swerve when some fuck head on their phone pulls out in front of you
So have fun with that
[QUOTE=TheTalon;37801311]The Driverless Car doesn't know which direction to swerve when some fuck head on their phone pulls out in front of you
So have fun with that[/QUOTE]
What makes you say that?
[QUOTE=TestECull;37801026]I just don't trust the occupant driving it enough to want to share the road with them right now.[/QUOTE]
They should be more scared of your driving than you of theirs.
Its been proven to be a lot safer than human drivers.
Also the occupant isn't driving it, silly bean. He just sits there and the machine controls it. It can react 1395951935915% faster than a human, monitor all sides and pretty much do everything instantly at the same time, unlike a human.
Stop being a caveman and embrace technology.
[QUOTE=Robbi;37801617]They should be more scared of your driving than you of theirs.[/quote] If they're scared of my driving they're too nervous to be outside their home in the first place.
[quote]Its been proven to be a lot safer than human drivers.[/quote] It's also been proven to fail. There is no infallible computer, nothing with 100% reliability. Having a backup on hand ensures all hell doesn't break loose.
[quote]Also the occupant isn't driving it, silly bean. He just sits there and the machine controls it. It can react 1395951935915% faster than a human, monitor all sides and pretty much do everything instantly at the same time, unlike a human.[/quote] And it can fail. A bug could block a key sensor, dirt could corrode connections, poor maintenace could see it glitch, a software bug could appear, something could let go in the electrical system and power the computers off entirely, hell the road itself may cause the computers to go bonkers. There's no telling which of the millions of things at play could cause the computers to fuck up and do something wrong.
And when it fails what then? If the occupant is just a passenger we have a computer guided cruise missile that has no idea it's out of control at all on our hands. There needs to be a human at the controls in the likely chance the computers glitch out or something lets go in the electrical system. You wouldn't fly on an airline running with just it's autopilot despite said autopilot being capable of making the whole flight, you'd insist on a human pilot/copilot team in the cockpit anyway, what's so different here?
[quote]Stop being a caveman and embrace technology.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=TestECull;37801026]
Now don't misunderstand what I'm saying here, [b]I've got nothing against self-driving cars.[/b] I just don't trust the occupant driving it enough to want to share the road with them right now.[/QUOTE]
Stop being an ass and realize that these things are anything but infallbile and still rely on the squishy bit behind the wheel should something go wrong.
This won't end well,last time i tested a self driving car a big chunk of the city got damaged. Self driving cars FTL
[QUOTE=TestECull;37802257]If they're scared of my driving they're too nervous to be outside their home in the first place.
It's also been proven to fail. There is no infallible computer, nothing with 100% reliability. Having a backup on hand ensures all hell doesn't break loose.
And it can fail. A bug could block a key sensor, dirt could corrode connections, poor maintenace could see it glitch, a software bug could appear, something could let go in the electrical system and power the computers off entirely, hell the road itself may cause the computers to go bonkers. There's no telling which of the millions of things at play could cause the computers to fuck up and do something wrong.
And when it fails what then? If the occupant is just a passenger we have a computer guided cruise missile that has no idea it's out of control at all on our hands. There needs to be a human at the controls in the likely chance the computers glitch out or something lets go in the electrical system. You wouldn't fly on an airline running with just it's autopilot despite said autopilot being capable of making the whole flight, you'd insist on a human pilot/copilot team in the cockpit anyway, what's so different here?
Stop being an ass and realize that these things are anything but infallbile and still rely on the squishy bit behind the wheel should something go wrong.[/QUOTE]
Of course it's not 100% safe, nothing ever is, it takes time to show flaws, and to work out how to fix said flaws - as said though it's proven to be safer than human drivers, but everything can fail.
You shouldn't be saying you don't trust it when it is more likely you'd have a crash with a human, than one of these.
I personally trust this more than I do a lot of drivers currently on the road..
It seems to be very safe and I do hope this lives up to google's expectation of halting deaths/accidents via automobiles in half
It starts with self-driving cars and ends with the Machines controlling the surface of the planet and farming humans for their body heat.
All those cars probably run apple maps - banned from day one
Google has said they are trying out self-driving cars now, because they did some research, and found it's been feasable and safer than human driven cars for quite a few years now.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
