Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-07-08, 08:53 AM   #1
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
A car that drives itself...

I have mentioned autonomous drive vehicles here before, a couple of times, and apparently to the dismay of some motor vehicle loving cyclists. Such vehicles are just around the corner... according to the article below:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/...riverless_cars




DETROIT - Cars that drive themselves — even parking at their destination — could be ready for sale within a decade, General Motors Corp. executives say.

GM, parts suppliers, university engineers and other automakers all are working on vehicles that could revolutionize short- and long-distance travel. And Tuesday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will devote part of his speech to the driverless vehicles.

"This is not science fiction," Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research and development, said in a recent interview.

The most significant obstacles facing the vehicles could be human rather than technical: government regulation, liability laws, privacy concerns and people's passion for the automobile and the control it gives them.

Much of the technology already exists for vehicles to take the wheel: radar-based cruise control, motion sensors, lane-change warning devices, electronic stability control and satellite-based digital mapping. And automated vehicles could dramatically improve life on the road, reducing crashes and congestion.

If people are interested.

"Now the question is what does society want to do with it?" Burns said. "You're looking at these issues of congestion, safety, energy and emissions. Technically there should be no reason why we can't transfer to a totally different world."

GM plans to use an inexpensive computer chip and an antenna to link vehicles equipped with driverless technologies. The first use likely would be on highways; people would have the option to choose a driverless mode while they still would control the vehicle on local streets, Burns said.

He said the company plans to test driverless car technology by 2015 and have cars on the road around 2018.

Sebastian Thrun, co-leader of the Stanford University team that finished second among six teams completing a 60-mile Pentagon-sponsored race of driverless cars in November, said GM's goal is technically attainable. But he said he wasn't confident cars would appear in showrooms within a decade.

"There's some very fundamental, basic regulations in the way of that vision in many countries," said Thrun, a professor of computer science and electrical engineering.

The Defense Department contest, which initially involved 35 teams, showed the technology isn't ready for prime time. One team was eliminated after its vehicle nearly charged into a building, while another vehicle mysteriously pulled into a house's carport and parked itself.

Thrun said a key benefit of the technology eventually will be safer roads and reducing the roughly 42,000 U.S. traffic deaths that occur annually — 95 percent of which he said are caused by human mistakes.

"We might be able to cut those numbers down by a factor of 50 percent," Thrun said. "Just imagine all the funerals that won't take place."

Other challenges include updating vehicle codes and figuring out who would be liable in a crash and how to cope with blown tires or obstacles in the road. But the systems could be developed to tell motorists about road conditions, warn of crashes or stopped vehicles ahead and prevent collisions in intersections.

Later versions of driverless technology could reduce jams by directing vehicles to space themselves close together, almost as if they were cars in a train, and maximize the use of space on a freeway, he said.

"It will really change society, very much like the transition from a horse to a car," Thrun said.

The U.S. government has pushed technology to help drivers avoid crashes, most notably electronic stability controls that help prevent rollovers. The systems are required on new passenger vehicles starting with the 2012 model year.

Vehicle-to-vehicle communication and technology allowing cars to talk with highway systems could come next.

Still in debate are how to address drivers' privacy, whether current vehicles can be retrofitted and how many vehicles would be need the systems to develop an effective network.

"Where it shakes out remains to be seen but there is no question we see a lot of potential there," said Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

*******************************************************

Now the thing we cyclists have to do is ensure that any such vehicle/system, takes us into account. On the plus side such an autonomous vehicle is not likely to break the law, nor act aggressively toward cyclists... on the flip side we must ensure, through pressure to law makers, that such vehicles do not impede our safety as legitimate road users.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 10:01 AM   #2
John E
feros ferio
 
John E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Bikes: 1959 Capo; 1980 Peugeot PKN-10; 1981 Bianchi; 1988 Schwinn KOM-10;
Posts: 17,314
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Various levels of automated driver assist technologies are coming online, and the self-piloting automobile (true AUTOmobile, I suppose??) is the obvious ultimate goal, once the equally obvious technical reliability and legal liability issue are overcome. One big motivation is to increase the capacity of freeways by platooning cars within automated lanes, a concept conservative "5 second gap" and "bubble" motorists such as I find terrifying.
__________________
"Early to bed, early to rise. Work like hell, and advertise." -- George Stahlman
Capo [dschaw'-poe]: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger, S/N 42624
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1981 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
John E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 06:14 PM   #3
maddyfish
Senior Member
 
maddyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ky. and FL.
Bikes: KHS steel SS
Posts: 3,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
1. Maximum speed 25 mph
2. Cheap, readily available shut down remotes (think garage down opener so that the car could be shut down if anyone thought it was operating poorly.

Then I'd consider them.
maddyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 06:17 PM   #4
caloso
Packfodding 3
 
caloso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sacramento, California, USA
Bikes: Ridley Excalibur, Gazelle Champion Mondial, On-One Pompino, Specialized Rock Hopper
Posts: 34,119
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 252 Post(s)
But can a robot car lean on the horn and sideswipe a cyclist as well as a human driver? I think not.
caloso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 06:19 PM   #5
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
1. Maximum speed 25 mph
2. Cheap, readily available shut down remotes (think garage down opener so that the car could be shut down if anyone thought it was operating poorly.

Then I'd consider them.
The interesting thing is that the government is working to mandate them... so motorists may eventually not have a choice... unless they plan on driving on closed tracks.

From the article I posted is this little tidbit: "The U.S. government has pushed technology to help drivers avoid crashes, most notably electronic stability controls that help prevent rollovers. The systems are required on new passenger vehicles starting with the 2012 model year."

Remember the government pushed for seatbelts, airbags, collapsing steering wheel columns, and a host of other things for the safety of the auto users. The nanny state will ensure that your future auto is safe for you, whether you want it or not.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 06:44 PM   #6
Az B
Fattest Thin Man
 
Az B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Directly above the center of the earth
Bikes: Miyata 610, Vinco V, Rocky Mountain Element
Posts: 2,649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is an idea that's actually very old. Part of the original ISTEA plan depended on self driving cars on most major roads by 2030 or something like that.

I used to think it was a bad idea, but people are getting more and more stupid every day. And it shows in thier driving. He!!, even Microsoft could probably write a software program that drives better than 50% of the drivers on the road right now.

Az
Az B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 07:56 PM   #7
JLauren
Skybird
 
JLauren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Upstate SC, USA
Bikes: 2006 Trek 1500
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
For a long time, I thought the idea of a computer driving a car was just a Bad Idea, maybe even a frightening idea. The humans were just so much better at the tasks required to drive a car.

From a lot of what I've seen lately, I'm not so sure, and that's more due to changes I've seen in the human drivers than changes I've seen in computer technology.
JLauren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 08:19 PM   #8
ChipSeal
www.chipsea.blogspot.com
 
ChipSeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South of Dallas, Texas
Bikes: Giant OCR C0 road
Posts: 1,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
"DETROIT - Cars that drive themselves even parking at their destination could be ready for sale within a decade, General Motors Corp. executives say."
Ha! These are already on our highways! Surly one in ten cars out there is driving it's self while the motorist is busy texting!
ChipSeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 08:36 PM   #9
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipSeal View Post
Ha! These are already on our highways! Surly one in ten cars out there is driving it's self while the motorist is busy texting!
Right... isn't that what cruise control is for...
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 09:54 PM   #10
maddyfish
Senior Member
 
maddyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ky. and FL.
Bikes: KHS steel SS
Posts: 3,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Flawed as they are, humans can make judgement calls, like hit the truck instead of the pedestrian. Or run off the road instead of hitting the pedestrian.

I can see it now, plug in modules that allow you to reprogram your auto drive for faster speeds, faster cornering, or whatever.
maddyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-08, 09:57 PM   #11
maddyfish
Senior Member
 
maddyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ky. and FL.
Bikes: KHS steel SS
Posts: 3,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
People are already hacking GPS route finding systems, just wait utnil the hack auto drive cars.
******* will select their victims and have the victims' own car deliver them. Ex-husbands will program the ex-wifes' car to drive into a lake.
maddyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-08, 04:29 AM   #12
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
1. Maximum speed 25 mph
2. Cheap, readily available shut down remotes (think garage down opener so that the car could be shut down if anyone thought it was operating poorly.

Then I'd consider them.
This attitude always interested me, being as computers make considerably fewer mistakes than humans, and can scan using pure numerical data on the world around them with millisecond response time, and don't get distracted. (To be exact, they don't make any mistakes, they either break or are programmed wrong)

Me, I just LIKE driving, it's the only thing I fear... I don't get to drive anymore, the car does it for me. As for safety, I realize the practicality of using computers that error much less frequently than humans is a smart idea.

Also, considering that throttle, steering, brakes and traction control is already mainly computer controlled in cars now a day, I don't see what the huge difference with them filling in the rest of the gap. Mind you, these systems have no easy override, and malfunctions can end in death, however we practically never see them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
People are already hacking GPS route finding systems, just wait utnil the hack auto drive cars.
******* will select their victims and have the victims' own car deliver them. Ex-husbands will program the ex-wifes' car to drive into a lake.
I'm pretty sure driving systems will be most likely ROM without the ability to wirelessly hijack it for the obvious reason you already mentioned. It would be stupid to let an outside device influence a machine that should be self-sufficient on it's own programming.

Sure, if someone rips out your car's computer they could technically hijack that, but already they can hijack your electronic throttle system to kill you in the same way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
Flawed as they are, humans can make judgement calls, like hit the truck instead of the pedestrian. Or run off the road instead of hitting the pedestrian.

I can see it now, plug in modules that allow you to reprogram your auto drive for faster speeds, faster cornering, or whatever.
Computers can be programmed to make judgment calls like those, they're nothing but logic, the system should be able to pick up the size of an object, and distance from any objects within 360 degrees of the car depending on sensors. Way better than a human ever could, quicker, with greater precision, and 100% optimal usage of every aspect of the car's handling abilities.

However, due to the system itself, accidents like this would be so extremely rare it's laughable. A computer can track all traffic on the road in visible range without networking (and even invisible traffic [due to obstacles] if they were networked), therefore there are no surprises, every car knows what every other car in the vicinity is doing through various sensors.

Last edited by StrangeWill; 01-08-08 at 04:45 AM.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-08, 08:10 AM   #13
San Rensho 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChipSeal View Post
Ha! These are already on our highways! Surly one in ten cars out there is driving it's self while the motorist is busy texting!
Sad but true. The United States automobile industry decided a long time ago that computer driven cars were the wave of the future. In order to break us in to the concept, cars today are full of all kinds of gizmos, GPS, widescreen video, etc. to get is used to the idea of not having to pay attention to driving, with the unintended consequence of everyone talking on their cell phones or taxing, instead of pay attention to driving.

The American car of the future, which is already partially here, is just a rolling entertainment center, measured by the number of cup holders and TV screens the car has, with as little input from the driver is possible.

What a difference in Europe, where high-performance cars like Porsche don't even have cup holders. Europeans understand the concept that cards are meant to be driven, not entertain you.
__________________
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace

1980 3Rensho-- 1975 Raleigh Sprite 3spd
1990s Raleigh M20 MTB--2007 Windsor Hour (track)
1988 Ducati 750 F1
San Rensho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-08, 01:21 PM   #14
maddyfish
Senior Member
 
maddyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ky. and FL.
Bikes: KHS steel SS
Posts: 3,944
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
[QUOTE=StrangeWill;5944365]


I'm pretty sure driving systems will be most likely ROM without the ability to wirelessly hijack it for the obvious reason you already mentioned. It would be stupid to let an outside device influence a machine that should be self-sufficient on it's own programming.
QUOTE]

SO you're telling me that a remote shut down won't be integrated into these so that if they go crazy, as computers often do, you can't shut them down? Or they won't have remote shut down for police use?

Of course they will.
maddyfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-08, 01:28 PM   #15
sbhikes
Dominatrikes
 
sbhikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Posts: 4,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
If these self-driving cars work as "well" as GPSs we have nothing to fear. Honestly, that's an invention specifically for a man to drive a woman crazy. Gotta bite your tongue the whole time. I know we have to go that way but the darn GPS is sending us on a wild goose chase and I gotta just be quiet or gadget-guy will really get mad because you can't question the almighty gadget.

Self-driving cars will drive you in circles as you look out the window muttering helplessly, "but I want to go over there."
sbhikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-08, 10:43 PM   #16
DCCommuter
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS
Posts: 1,929
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Here's what I wonder about: very few drivers obey all traffic laws. Most speed; about 9 in 10 fail to stop completely for stop signs or right on red; almost nobody yields to pedestrians in crosswalks; I could go on. So will these devices be programmed to drive the way that people really drive, or in strict accordance with the law? I could see the first option being unpopular and the second exposing the manufacturer to liability.

Then there's the cyclist's perspective. How will these things be programmed to drive around cyclists? In many states it's illegal to pass a cyclist on a double yellow. Will they just wait if there's a cyclist in the road? Will they honk? That's illegal too.

Or will we see a wholesale revision of the traffic laws? One, most likely, that would further marginalize non-motorized vehicles, and even non-automated ones.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-08, 11:14 PM   #17
sestivers
Ono!
 
sestivers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Seattle
Bikes: 2006 Cannondale R800
Posts: 643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Newspaper articles make it seem like cars are already driving themselves:

"Pedestrian killed by SUV"

"Cyclist hit by SUV"

Or, my favorite,
"SUV carrying drunk driver hits cyclist"
sestivers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-08, 11:37 PM   #18
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCCommuter View Post
Here's what I wonder about: very few drivers obey all traffic laws. Most speed; about 9 in 10 fail to stop completely for stop signs or right on red; almost nobody yields to pedestrians in crosswalks; I could go on. So will these devices be programmed to drive the way that people really drive, or in strict accordance with the law? I could see the first option being unpopular and the second exposing the manufacturer to liability.

Then there's the cyclist's perspective. How will these things be programmed to drive around cyclists? In many states it's illegal to pass a cyclist on a double yellow. Will they just wait if there's a cyclist in the road? Will they honk? That's illegal too.

Or will we see a wholesale revision of the traffic laws? One, most likely, that would further marginalize non-motorized vehicles, and even non-automated ones.
Good questions... but can you imagine all cars suddenly obeying all the rules of the road... boggles the mind doesn't it?
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 02:02 AM   #19
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
SO you're telling me that a remote shut down won't be integrated into these so that if they go crazy, as computers often do, you can't shut them down? Or they won't have remote shut down for police use?

Of course they will.
"As computers often do"
What?! Paranoid beyond reality much?

Yes, there should be a shutdown for mainly other reasons (if your car goes sideways there is no way in hell that you're going to recover it any better than a computer that can independently control all 4 tires and sense every minor movement in the vehicle), but you do realize that most commercial and military aircraft in the air are LARGELY computer controlled. Along with most of the driving systems in cars now a day anyway. ABS, TCS, DBW and Transmission control, all which keep you on the road much better than without.

If anything human intervention will pollute the system and make it thousands of times more inefficient.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCCommuter View Post
Here's what I wonder about: very few drivers obey all traffic laws. Most speed; about 9 in 10 fail to stop completely for stop signs or right on red; almost nobody yields to pedestrians in crosswalks; I could go on. So will these devices be programmed to drive the way that people really drive, or in strict accordance with the law? I could see the first option being unpopular and the second exposing the manufacturer to liability.

Then there's the cyclist's perspective. How will these things be programmed to drive around cyclists? In many states it's illegal to pass a cyclist on a double yellow. Will they just wait if there's a cyclist in the road? Will they honk? That's illegal too.

Or will we see a wholesale revision of the traffic laws? One, most likely, that would further marginalize non-motorized vehicles, and even non-automated ones.
100% computer controlled means stuff like speed limits and stops signs will be a thing of the past. You don't need to be told to stop if you know of all vehicles around you and their speeds/intentions. Speed limits will be determined by the road, it's width, it's use, your vehicle, the density of traffic, as opposed to a flat speed limit determined by some city engineer that basically pulled it out of his arse. In other words: probably increased all over.

I figure if we went 100% computer controlled cars, all the laws would be re-worked for efficiency with logical circuit boards, as opposed to unruly and unreliable humans.

Last edited by StrangeWill; 01-10-08 at 05:49 AM.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 05:01 AM   #20
joe99
Member
 
joe99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Driverless cars....

what's next? riderless bicycles?????
joe99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 09:08 AM   #21
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrangeWill View Post
100% computer controlled means stuff like speed limits and stops signs will be a thing of the past. You don't need to be told to stop if you know of all vehicles around you and their speeds/intentions. Speed limits will be determined by the road, it's width, it's use, your vehicle, the density of traffic, as opposed to a flat speed limit determined by some city engineer that basically pulled it out of his arse. In other words: probably increased all over.

I figure if we went 100% computer controlled cars, all the laws would be re-worked for efficiency with logical circuit boards, as opposed to unruly and unreliable humans.
Rather interesting point... but how might such computer controlled vehicle know of a cyclist approaching from a side street.

While the algorithms for driving may include "speed up" commands on controlled access roads, most likely other streets will be treated as they always have been... unless we all begin wearing transponders.

It would however be quite interesting to have all the visual pollution of keep right, stop, trucks entering, etc and all the other signs removed from the roadway. For that matter, perhaps roadway stripes need not exist in the future either.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 07:27 PM   #22
JLauren
Skybird
 
JLauren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Upstate SC, USA
Bikes: 2006 Trek 1500
Posts: 229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Rather interesting point... but how might such computer controlled vehicle know of a cyclist approaching from a side street.
There would still have to be some sort of sensor system to detect vehicles and objects (animate and inanimate) that might impinge on the computer-controlled car's space.

I can see, however, where speed selection could be much more dynamic, based on things like the road surface, the visibility of the sensor system, and the vehicle's ability to react to something being detected within the visibility horizon. A system like this would be able to make a much better decision on a "safe" speed than human drivers who, even with guidelines like speed limit signs and supposed intelligence, select a speed that's "too fast for conditions".
JLauren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-08, 08:28 PM   #23
StrangeWill
Senior Member
 
StrangeWill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Bikes:
Posts: 1,112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLauren View Post
There would still have to be some sort of sensor system to detect vehicles and objects (animate and inanimate) that might impinge on the computer-controlled car's space.

I can see, however, where speed selection could be much more dynamic, based on things like the road surface, the visibility of the sensor system, and the vehicle's ability to react to something being detected within the visibility horizon. A system like this would be able to make a much better decision on a "safe" speed than human drivers who, even with guidelines like speed limit signs and supposed intelligence, select a speed that's "too fast for conditions".
Yeah that too, and it can determine easily the most minor slippage in the normal operation of the vehicle and further slow down.

It can be truly a lifesaver, however I still love driving my car. Oh well.
StrangeWill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 05:56 PM   #24
sbhikes
Dominatrikes
 
sbhikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Posts: 4,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Let's just hope the OS for these cars isn't Microsoft.
sbhikes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-08, 07:04 PM   #25
genec
genec
Thread Starter
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,975
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbhikes View Post
Let's just hope the OS for these cars isn't Microsoft.

Actually MS announced a while back that they were indeed getting into doing the OS for this... sure hate to see the "blue screen of death" when the car was in charge.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:32 AM.