Blott

Self drive AI cars

32 posts in this topic

Thank-you for choosing to buy from Acme SelfDrive Inc. and welcome to your new SelfDrive Artificial Intelligence motor car.

Please step inside and make yourself comfortable in the seating area. Please encourage your passengers to enter the car. Please ensure all doors are closed. Please enter your user name followed by your password. 

Incorrect user name, please try again. 

Incorrect user name, please try again.

Incorrect user name, please try again.

Incorrect user name, please try again.

Incorrect password, please try again.

You have entered incorrect details to often, system will shut down for 15 minutes

Thank-you for choosing to buy from Acme SelfDrive Inc. and welcome to your new SelfDrive Artificial Intelligence motor car.

Please step inside and make yourself comfortable in the seating area. Please encourage your passengers to enter the car. Please ensure all doors are closed. Please enter your user name followed by your password. 

User name and password accepted 

Please press # to download latest updates, this may take several minutes or longer and the system may shut down and restart several times

Please press # to download latest updates, this may take several minutes or longer and the system may shut down and restart several times

Please press # to download latest updates, this may take several minutes or longer and the system may shut down and restart several times

Please press # to download latest updates, this may take several minutes or longer and the system may shut down and restart several times

# key accepted please remain seated while updates are downloaded 

System updates complete

Your user licence is due to expire, please enter credit or debit card details now to renew your user licence (we take the security of your details seriously and will only share them with carefully selected partners, our mother, Joyce next door and Dave down the pub)

Congratulations - Your user licence has been renewed

Please enter your user name followed by your password

System error, please shut down, count to 10 and activate re-boot

System in safe mode, motor car will not operate in safe mode

Please enter your user name followed by your password

Diary alert - Your scheduled meeting @ 10am expired 30 minutes ago

Please press the STOP button to activate the engine

Incorrect pressing of STOP button

Please press the STOP button to activate the engine

Incorrect pressing of STOP button

Please press the STOP button to activate the engine

Congratulations STOP button correctly pressed 

Please select destination or say the destination you wish to travel to

Office is not recognised please try again

Office is not recognised please try again

Office is not recognised please try again

Office is not recognised please try again

You selected - Office, is that correct?

Yes has not been recognised  

Please select destination or say the destination you wish to travel to

You have selected OFFICE as your destination. Please watch the following safety video detailing how to sit correctly in the motor car

No action has been detected for 30 minutes while you watched the video, system has gone into shut down

Thank-you for choosing to buy from Acme SelfDrive Inc. and welcome to your new SelfDrive Artificial Intelligence motor car.

Please step inside and make yourself comfortable in the seating area. Please encourage your passengers to enter the car. Please ensure all doors are closed. Please enter your user name followed by your password. 

Please accept the following terms and conditions before journey can begin

You accept all and any claims made against this motor car and by association Acme SelfDrive Inc. to be your responsibility

Acme SelfDrive Inc. in association with UK Roads Plc have agreed to allow you to travel on UK Roads at your expense 

A mileage charge will be levied to your account at midnight per day per vehicle

Failure to pay charges will result in suspension of driving privileges and repossession of motor car

In the event your SelfDrive Artificial Intelligence motor car causes an accident due to system failure you agree to be liable for all costs arising 

In the event your SelfDrive Artificial Intelligence motor car causes a speeding ticket to be raised due to system failure you agree to pay any and all fines and accept points on your licence 

You agree not to take litigation action at anytime for any reason against Acme SelfDrive Inc.

Please press or say ACCEPT to begin your journey 

You said accept - did I hear that correctly 

You said yes - did I hear that correctly

Please adopt the seating position demonstrated in the video you watch earlier 

Please be aware the vehicle may move forward in order to complete the journey

Please press STOP to restart the engine

Your journey will begin in 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 

WARNING WARNING BATTERY LEVEL CRITICAL

PLEASE PRESS THE START BUTTON TO STOP THE ENGINE

PLEASE PLUG THE CHARGING CABLE INTO A NEARBY CHARGING OUTLET

CHARGING WILL BE COMPLETE IN 8 HOURS

 

Thank you for travelling with Acme SelfDrive Inc. we hope you have enjoyed your experience 

Please complete the following customer survey where options are limited to EXCELLENT or VERY GOOD

Have a nice day!!    

 

Disclaimer -

All names used here are fictional and are not associated in anyway to any names in existence which may be similar 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, stockingsadmirer69 said:

The shape of things to come.

Very frightening.

It certainly is but I think it will be a good number of years before all the "normal" cars disappear from our roads...I would think at least 20-25 years at the earliest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was once asked to demonstrate how my work provided phone was 'playing up' to one of the tech people, it performed beautifully my refusing to obey any command given to it (much to my surprise I may add, usually these things work fine when the tech folk are about). It was immediately agreed the phone needed to be replaced so, a few days without a phone and then back to normal.

Now we all know our pc's and tablets have their little moments which frustrate the b'jesus out of us, televisions just the same. In fact all tech has it's moments where a switch off and turn back on fix is required.

So we can conclude all tech is inherently jittery.

Self drive cars which seem to be the Holy Grail of today will be no different. So, what happens when the car is doing 70mph and decides to stop playing? What happens when it loses it's bearings and hits something else or a pedestrian? Who goes to court, the self drive 'passenger' or the car manufacturer. Will the 'driver' be allowed to go to sleep on long journeys or be over the legal limit to otherwise drive? And if not in a car, what of passengers on a self drive bus, who becomes the designated 'person of responsibility' the last passenger to board or the first?

The whole thing has got disaster stamped all over it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/uber-self-driving-car-killed-pedestrian-death-tempe-arizona-autonomous-vehicle-a8263921.html

Saying I told you so, doesn't really cut it does it.

It was always going to happen and will continue to happen, if we insist on giving tech control over humans all the best sci-fi films will come true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Blott said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/uber-self-driving-car-killed-pedestrian-death-tempe-arizona-autonomous-vehicle-a8263921.html

Saying I told you so, doesn't really cut it does it.

It was always going to happen and will continue to happen, if we insist on giving tech control over humans all the best sci-fi films will come true

You really are an old Luddite Blott.  

There's been an accident between a self drive car and a cyclist and the cyclist has died.  We have no information about how the accident occured or whether the car or the cyclist was at fault.  But on the basis of one death, you claim it proves the inherent danger in self drive cars.

Exactly how many cyclists have been killed by cars driven by humans during the time these tests have been going on Blott?  I've no idea at the number, but would expect it to be much higher.  Do you think this shows the far greater inherent danger in human driven vehicles?  Should we ban them now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

You really are an old Luddite Blott.  

There's been an accident between a self drive car and a cyclist and the cyclist has died.  We have no information about how the accident occured or whether the car or the cyclist was at fault.  But on the basis of one death, you claim it proves the inherent danger in self drive cars.

Exactly how many cyclists have been killed by cars driven by humans during the time these tests have been going on Blott?  I've no idea at the number, but would expect it to be much higher.  Do you think this shows the far greater inherent danger in human driven vehicles?  Should we ban them now?

You'll soon change your tune after one of these  driverless cars knock you off your skateboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose a short term answer would be to have someone walk in front waving a red flag.
All things must start somewhere. Poor William Huskisson was the first victim of rail travel but where would we be now if they had given up on the train? Many of us might have lived our whole lives without ever seeing the sea.

I no longer have to get out and get under to fix up my automobile.

My first computer crashed every few minutes (and that wasn’t long ago) but the 2011 MacBook I am looking at now has worked faultlessly since I bought it.

The real danger is not that technology doesn’t work but that it may work too well. Stephen Hawking warned of the exponential rate of change of Artificial Intelligence. Early experts laughed off the fear that computers would take over the world by saying all we had to do was pull the plug out.

Where is the internet plugged in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

You really are an old Luddite Blott.  

There's been an accident between a self drive car and a cyclist and the cyclist has died.  We have no information about how the accident occured or whether the car or the cyclist was at fault.  But on the basis of one death, you claim it proves the inherent danger in self drive cars.

Exactly how many cyclists have been killed by cars driven by humans during the time these tests have been going on Blott?  I've no idea at the number, but would expect it to be much higher.  Do you think this shows the far greater inherent danger in human driven vehicles?  Should we ban them now?

I knew I could rely on you to jump to the defense of the latest thing, just as you know you can rely on me to be Devil's Advocate.

The 'whole point' of self drive is to take away human error, as soon as the tech starts making the same errors we are no further forward are we. Of course linking our motors into the 'mainframe' is a handy way for big brother to keep an eye on us as well :58674be0c2f40_EmojiSmiley-06:

As for being a Luddite, i'm okay with progress in a fashion. It's usually flawed and frustrating and breaks down far more often than it should, earlier in this topic I asked who would be the person of responsibility on a self drive bus, the first passenger on or the last? Probably there will be a driver sat there nodding off in case the tech goes wacko, so again, we are no further forward if it still needs human input.

Helen above makes a good point about A I which i'm sure you'll appreciate Alteredbhoy, tech driven by computers if essentially a logic machine. The day will surely come when the logic machine decides the only logical way forward is to delete the unlogical. And the unlogical part of the equation is of course the human race.

Enter The Matrix i Robot and every other film which has foretold of our mad rush to give up all control to machines, because they can do everything better, supposedly :58674be025c9f_EmojiSmiley-05: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Blott said:

The 'whole point' of self drive is to take away human error, as soon as the tech starts making the same errors we are no further forward are we. Of course linking our motors into the 'mainframe' is a handy way for big brother to keep an eye on us as well :58674be0c2f40_EmojiSmiley-06:

That is the "whole point" Blott.  We have no idea at this point whether the accident was caused by computer error or human error.

Big brother doesn't need a driverless car to keep tabs of where we are.  If you have a mobile phone and it is turned on, they can locate you to within about 6 feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though the car was controlled by computer, there was a human body within the car that could have taken control of the car.   

 

Now, I don't believe that we have all the facts on the accident.  Such as was the cyclist riding dangerously around the car?  Was the accident possibly caused by the person in the vehicle trying to take control from the computer?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

Big brother doesn't need a driverless car to keep tabs of where we are.  If you have a mobile phone and it is turned on, they can locate you to within about 6 feet.

True, and stepping out onto the street pings us up on the myriad cameras Big Bro operate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blott, my esteemed fellow cynic, that's not the half of it you need to spend half an hour over a pint of real ale with my semi-retired friend from the security service or even my daughter's ex partner in the NCA. If they so wish you wouldn't be able to break wind without it being flagged up. :58674be0c2f40_EmojiSmiley-06:

Regards John B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well having see the footage of the cyclist in black wheeling their bike into the path of an oncoming vehicle in the dark, it was clearly entirely the fault of the victim. Maybe we should ban the use of roads by humans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also suggest if the victim had paid more attention she should have seen the oncoming vehicle and not stepped directly into its path. We just dont know. Its a tragic accident and devastating to the family. Lets be honest, the only reason this is headline news is becuse it  unfamiliar and unchartered technology controlled by that bogeyman of the newspapers known as Uber. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Alteredbhoy said:

Well having see the footage of the cyclist in black wheeling their bike into the path of an oncoming vehicle in the dark, it was clearly entirely the fault of the victim. Maybe we should ban the use of roads by humans. 

You will have seen the video below which is only dash cam footage and doesn't show the view a few seconds before the impact. You are correct the lady was only wheeling the bike and  didn't just appear out of thin air, which might have been the case if Victoria Pendleton had been riding the bike. The lady also didn't just step from the kerbside in front of the car but wheeled the bike from the other side of the road. Any competent driver with normal eye sight would have spotted the lady wheeling the bike and reacted before she was in front of the car. The so called safety driver was as much use as a chocolate teapot. It's ludicrous to even consider self drive cars being allowed on public roads let alone test them using  dozy safety drivers. The World has gone mad.

 

Edited by Augustus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Augustus said:

You will have seen the video below which is only dash cam footage and doesn't show the view a few seconds before the impact. You are correct the lady was only wheeling the bike and  didn't just appear out of thin air, which might have been the case if Victoria Pendleton had been riding the bike. The lady also didn't just step from the kerbside in front of the car but wheeled the bike from the other side of the road. Any competent driver with normal eye sight would have spotted the lady wheeling the bike and reacted before she was in front of the car. The so called safety driver was as much use as a chocolate teapot. It's ludicrous to even consider self drive cars being allowed on public roads let alone test them using  dozy safety drivers. The World has gone mad.

 

pffft, I'm certain that you've only said this to be provocative and I refuse to rise to your bait.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alteredbhoy said:

pffft, I'm certain that you've only said this to be provocative and I refuse to rise to your bait.

 

I only write what I believe. Forgive me if I didn't make my original point very well and I will try again. Don't you think the dash cam video from the self-drive car is very dark? Have a look at this youtube video taken on the same stretch of road at night where the accident happened. Do you agree that the road and surroundings look much more illuminated in this video than the dash cam video from the self-drive car?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although it would appear the first case of a 'driverless' car killing some was not the fault of the tech, surely it also follows a considerable number of road fatalities are not the fault of the driver.

If we accept the above statement to be true does it then follow human driving and tech driving are both liable to causing fatalities although not being at fault. So, when tech breaks down and does cause a fatality are we any further forward?

The obvious answer is no!!! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've changed my opinion from my original one, having seen the footage and additional footage of the road. Uber appear to have a lot of questions to answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the video, it looks like the headlights on the car are not working very well. This type of incident happens regularly in the UK on country roads. In the winter on the way home from work, I used to drive along a country lane and this sort of thing happened quite regularly, but normally my headlights picked up the shape and forced me to take evasive action. On a technical point, this vehicle should have forward facing radar and should detect the hazard. On most high specification modern cars there is an adaptive cruise control which detects hazards and slows the car down ( I used to work on vehicle electronics ), so why in this case did it not work. What if this was a broken down car or truck? On the vehicles I worked on, we had issues with the car picking up dead animals at the side of the road, so I am pretty sure it would have detected this. Just remember a computer is only as good as the person who programmed it (I used to do this for a living). I regularly have a discussion with my colleagues who all work in the car industry and we all seem to agree, the totally autonomous car is a long way off. Possibly on a motorway or in a traffic queue it might work, but in town and on our country roads it is a real challenge, even the most stupid human being is more adaptable than a computer built to a price.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this thread and AI vehicles in general. I think they're a good idea, and will definitely increase in popularity. As for this specific accident, I feel that it was the fault of the woman that obviously walked in front of the car. It seems to me that oncoming traffic must be disregarded by the computer driven car. Possibly that is why the accident occurred. Maybe the car can't differentiate between oncoming traffic and an object traveling perpendicular to the car's direction. But the response time and the vehicle's braking distance will certainly always be a factor. 

You know, on another thread we were talking about banning guns. And whether or not it was the guns or the person doing the mischief. If one could look far enough ahead, and you could consider these cars being in a similar situation that guns are currently experiencing.

At some point in time, however, our society, i.e., the citizens would be 'dumbed down' to a level that would make them incognizant of the level of danger in these vehicles.

Would we hear cries to ban this vehicle, instead of understanding and dealing with the root cause? Or possibly banning both the bicycle and the vehicle. Let's include the pedestrian in this as well. Hmm, if we banned the bicycle and pedestrian, maybe the cars would be ok. No, that's not right! There are other cars out there.

Maybe we should just stay at home and nobody go nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, rowlf said:

I've been thinking about this thread and AI vehicles in general. I think they're a good idea, and will definitely increase in popularity. As for this specific accident, I feel that it was the fault of the woman that obviously walked in front of the car. It seems to me that oncoming traffic must be disregarded by the computer driven car. Possibly that is why the accident occurred. Maybe the car can't differentiate between oncoming traffic and an object traveling perpendicular to the car's direction. But the response time and the vehicle's braking distance will certainly always be a factor. 

You know, on another thread we were talking about banning guns. And whether or not it was the guns or the person doing the mischief. If one could look far enough ahead, and you could consider these cars being in a similar situation that guns are currently experiencing.

At some point in time, however, our society, i.e., the citizens would be 'dumbed down' to a level that would make them incognizant of the level of danger in these vehicles.

Would we hear cries to ban this vehicle, instead of understanding and dealing with the root cause? Or possibly banning both the bicycle and the vehicle. Let's include the pedestrian in this as well. Hmm, if we banned the bicycle and pedestrian, maybe the cars would be ok. No, that's not right! There are other cars out there.

Maybe we should just stay at home and nobody go nowhere.

You obviously did not read my post, for AI to work properly the vehicle should have noticed the threat, that could have been a stationary car that has stopped with its lights out. There is something wrong with the lights on the vehicle that crashed. It does not mention what speed the vehicle was travelling, I assume if it was the US then is is probably a maximum of 55 MPH so the vehicle should have stopped, at 70 MPH (normal UK motorway speed) then possibly not. If a competent driver can see the threat, then the computer must be better. or else why use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ruby said:

You obviously did not read my post, for AI to work properly the vehicle should have noticed the threat, that could have been a stationary car that has stopped with its lights out. There is something wrong with the lights on the vehicle that crashed. It does not mention what speed the vehicle was travelling, I assume if it was the US then is is probably a maximum of 55 MPH so the vehicle should have stopped, at 70 MPH (normal UK motorway speed) then possibly not. If a competent driver can see the threat, then the computer must be better. or else why use it.

The car lights will have been working okay. It's been alleged the dash cam was't correctly calibrated for night time driving, which would explain why everything looks dark in the video.

14 hours ago, Corona said:

I've changed my opinion from my original one, having seen the footage and additional footage of the road. Uber appear to have a lot of questions to answer.

Uber will pass the buck to the so called safety driver who will end up back in jail.

Edited by Augustus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rowlf said:

I've been thinking about this thread and AI vehicles in general. I think they're a good idea, and will definitely increase in popularity. As for this specific accident, I feel that it was the fault of the woman that obviously walked in front of the car. It seems to me that oncoming traffic must be disregarded by the computer driven car. Possibly that is why the accident occurred. Maybe the car can't differentiate between oncoming traffic and an object traveling perpendicular to the car's direction. But the response time and the vehicle's braking distance will certainly always be a factor. 

You know, on another thread we were talking about banning guns. And whether or not it was the guns or the person doing the mischief. If one could look far enough ahead, and you could consider these cars being in a similar situation that guns are currently experiencing.

At some point in time, however, our society, i.e., the citizens would be 'dumbed down' to a level that would make them incognizant of the level of danger in these vehicles.

Would we hear cries to ban this vehicle, instead of understanding and dealing with the root cause? Or possibly banning both the bicycle and the vehicle. Let's include the pedestrian in this as well. Hmm, if we banned the bicycle and pedestrian, maybe the cars would be ok. No, that's not right! There are other cars out there.

Maybe we should just stay at home and nobody go nowhere.

That is great point you have made by comparing this thread to the banning of guns thread. My view is that these self driving cars are going to create too many problems for the future. I am a little surprised by Alteredbhoy's view because he is against honest law abiding citizens owning guns, but doesn't seem  to have a problem with rogue self-drive cars killing jaywalking women.  The technology should only be used for such vehicles as tractors ploughing fields rather than  automobiles on public roads in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ruby said:

You obviously did not read my post, for AI to work properly the vehicle should have noticed the threat, that could have been a stationary car that has stopped with its lights out. There is something wrong with the lights on the vehicle that crashed. It does not mention what speed the vehicle was travelling, I assume if it was the US then is is probably a maximum of 55 MPH so the vehicle should have stopped, at 70 MPH (normal UK motorway speed) then possibly not. If a competent driver can see the threat, then the computer must be better. or else why use it.

I was just noticing the close proximity of the on-coming traffic, and how much response time was needed to actually compensate for a vehicle that was coming 'left of center'. Which really what the woman was doing. What would you expect the AI car to do, but to hit the brakes? To veer right to evade a collision may jeopardize the occupants or bystanders.

I've always thought the care were designed to decrease the drudgery of extended driving. And the safety would be at least comparable to driving a normal car. 

I would think the vehicle speed would have been in the 35-45 MPH range. The top speed in the US is at least 70 MPH. Maybe 80 MPH in the large western states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Augustus said:

That is great point you have made by comparing this thread to the banning of guns thread. My view is that these self driving cars are going to create too many problems for the future. I am a little surprised by Alteredbhoy's view because he is against honest law abiding citizens owning guns, but doesn't seem  to have a problem with rogue self-drive cars killing jaywalking women.  The technology should only be used for such vehicles as tractors ploughing fields rather than  automobiles on public roads in my opinion.

You probably know this but farm tractors have been using GPS to control the planting and picking of crops for many, many years. If one sat back and thought about it, many other problems could be found to delay the increase of AI cars.

Alteredbhoy's opinions come from his weekly reading of the Daily (non)Worker. That and at the pub slamming brewskies and blowing chow with his buds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/03/2018 at 12:07 AM, Augustus said:

That is great point you have made by comparing this thread to the banning of guns thread. My view is that these self driving cars are going to create too many problems for the future. I am a little surprised by Alteredbhoy's view because he is against honest law abiding citizens owning guns, but doesn't seem  to have a problem with rogue self-drive cars killing jaywalking women.  The technology should only be used for such vehicles as tractors ploughing fields rather than  automobiles on public roads in my opinion.

Rex Scedric Tudor Augustus Caesar, you are such a card.  I am not against "honest law abiding citizens owning guns", per se.  But what I am against is criminals owning guns, and the best way to enforce that (as you can see in most civilised countries) is to prevent everyone owing a gun.  It's a clear case of removing a right from the majority for the greater good.

It is though a bit rich of you to snip at me about this.  After all, you are the person who advocated banning passengers in cars from using mobile phones, in order to prevent the drivers of mobile phones from using them illegally.  You also suggested the banning of Social Media in order to prevent gun crime.

I get the distinct impression that you are just a gobby wind-up merchant, who deliberately takes a provocative view in order to annoy people.

Maybe in one area you have hit the nail on the head.  If the law abiding football supporters at Hillsborough in 1989 had been allowed to carry firearms, they would have been able to prevent the Police from the criminal actions that lead to 96 deaths.  Or maybe you can't bring yourself to agree with certain people, irrespective of how much sense their view may contain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic ......

The Uber killing of the lady hasn't put off Google from announcing their plan to buy 20 thousand Jaguar Landrover electic cars for their self-driving taxi venture. Google think their technology is better than Uber's technology and would have detected the bright pink bike wheeling lady and prevented the fatal accident. Heaven knows what by Grandma would have said, if a self-driving taxi turned up to take her to bingo given the fact she wouldn't step on to a bus driven by a female bus driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26/03/2018 at 4:26 AM, rowlf said:

You probably know this but farm tractors have been using GPS to control the planting and picking of crops for many, many years. If one sat back and thought about it, many other problems could be found to delay the increase of AI cars.

Alteredbhoy's opinions come from his weekly reading of the Daily (non)Worker. That and at the pub slamming brewskies and blowing chow with his buds.

I understand conversion kits are being developed to turn regular tractors in to automated tractors. I also understand the addition production cost for an automated car is less than $3000. I predict it wont be long before automated conversion kits are available for cars and it wont be long before DIY automated kits are available from China for about $100 including free shipping. All very scary in my opinion.

I suspect many of Alteredbhoys rants are made after visits to his local pub. Perhaps he has ambitions of sitting in a self-drive car  to take him home from the pub and transport him to his so called place of work.
 

Edited by Augustus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 9:48 AM, Augustus said:

Perhaps he has ambitions of sitting in a self-drive car  to take him home from the pub and transport him to his so called place of work.

Hmm....wouldn't one need a driver's license to operate an AI vehicle? I don't think AB possesses one........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Uber crash update....


The sensors worked ok on the self-drive car, but the software told the car to ignore the lady wheeling the bike. The so called human safety driver hasn't been sent to jail yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now