Autonomous vehicles and the transition challenges?

daeman wrote: I can't help but feel they made a very deliberate choice in making beer the item that the autonomous truck delivered.. I mean it's beer, who doesn't love beer, beer isn't threatening... Seriously though, I've said it in other threads on autonomy, why are we as humans so intent on making ourselves redundant and obsolete? What is the end goal?, where is the point at Wich we say, "oh, that's something that only humans should be able to do"? Do we just stop at replacing drivers, how about the technicians? Should we have robot surgeons, chefs and lawyers? Autonomy is a slippery slope and noone seems to look at just how far is to far. Given how fast autonomy and robotics are developing, is there anything that people can honestly say, "they'll never find a way to replace a human at doing (insert task here)

As mentioned by others, I'm rather curious about the accident outcomes. Both who is considered "at fault" and gets sued, as well as how the car makes it's decision. In big busy cities that people have used as examples, you have constant foot traffic. How does the car decide between sending its occupants into oncoming traffic or people on the sidewalk should it need to evade a problem or something breaks?

I've seen Volvo talking about it before, I don't remember specifics though. Think "I, Robot" the Will Smith movie, a robot made a decision that saved his life instead of a kid when the car crashed into the water. It's not the happiest thing to talk about, but it is an important aspect of the technology that needs to be figured out. They basically said "we're working on it" but I'm paraphrasing.

I could see a tax burden to an eventual ban on self driven vehicles in some areas, but also other means of keeping current local income streams. With the AV, they have the advantage of being safer at higher speeds(in theory). This will evolve, if the highways can be maintained or updated(creating jobs). This could lead to minimum speed limits to keep up with traffic, but also where would the line be drawn as far as necessity goes with that? Autonomous buses traveling convoy style 150+mph across the country? At that point why not put the work into long range high speed rail instead?(i know nothing about highpeed rail)

There is also the aspect of modifications if there is personal ownership. Would it even be possible with a fully AV to modify a suspension, swap power systems, adjust aero? There could be an entirely new aftermarket, starting in Silicon Valley instead of Detroit. I think it's safe to assume there will always be stupidly high end, track only vehicles, and from them, people trying to recreate or surpass it at home in the workshop.

Active cruise control is going to be trickling down soon, probably be mandated by 2025 for all new vehicles. I wish it would stop there, but I'm sure the autonomy will go even further.

I don't think I've heard much about the self parking vehicles lately. Was that just a trend, or is it becoming more of a standard than an option?

Gasoline and oil will eventually go away. Moreso than cars and trucks, I'm more interested in what sort of alternative fueling is in mind for mining equipment and related things. This is something I never see talked about, but seems rather important for the whole electric everything lots of people have in mind.

1988RedT2 wrote: So, question: Who gets sued when an "autonomous" car is involved in a collision and kills or maims its occupants or others? The "at fault" party will no longer be an individual, but a machine. The liability of course falls to the manufacturer, who happens to have some pretty deep pockets. If we do in fact see "autonomous" cars released into the wild in large numbers, I predict it won't be long before we see some "glitches," followed by some really big settlements. I think many of you have far too much faith in technology. When was the last time your Windows computer crashed?

It looks like the manufacturers will also act as insurers. Volvo is already doing this. Big settlements are fine when they're extremely rare.

Also, the last time my Windows computer had a proper blue screen crash was back when it was running Windows XP. 7 and 10 haven't blue-screened on me yet (neither on my gaming PC nor on my office PC, only 2 Windows computers I use), however I've had a few freezes due to hardware problems (RAM not stable at the overclock frequency it was rated for, failing video card).

But I'm not a fan of comparing safety-critical systems to consumer stuff anyway.

NOHOME wrote:

daeman wrote: I can't help but feel they made a very deliberate choice in making beer the item that the autonomous truck delivered.. I mean it's beer, who doesn't love beer, beer isn't threatening... Seriously though, I've said it in other threads on autonomy, why are we as humans so intent on making ourselves redundant and obsolete? What is the end goal?, where is the point at Wich we say, "oh, that's something that only humans should be able to do"? Do we just stop at replacing drivers, how about the technicians? Should we have robot surgeons, chefs and lawyers? Autonomy is a slippery slope and noone seems to look at just how far is to far. Given how fast autonomy and robotics are developing, is there anything that people can honestly say, "they'll never find a way to replace a human at doing (insert task here)

There is a good chance that the entire human race is going to fall under the "Peter Principle"

But if we keep finding ways to make ourselves obsolete and redundant where do we get promoted to?

I don't see the global population reducing greatly over the next century or two, so with less and less Jobs, and more and more people, how will that ever end well? Humans require purpose in life. Don't believe me? Speak to someone whos been long term unemployed. Or look at the older people who have worked well into their senior years only to drop off the perch a year or two after retirement or developing cognitive impairment due to lack of stimulation and purpose.

I keep hearing the catch cry that there'll be New Jobs, New opportunities.. but when we seem to be wiping them out quicker than we can reskill and refocus our workforces coupled with the ever increasing pace of automation and rapid advancements in ai, I just don't see it.

I think globally, our policy makers need to move fast and make some realistic determinations on what are acceptable and unacceptable uses for autonomy and ai.

SVreX wrote:

codrus wrote:

SVreX wrote: Cellphones went from extremely rare to hard to live without in less than 10 years. I don't believe autonomous cars will take several decades. The motivation for change will be irresistible.

You don't write software for a living, do you? Genuinely autonomous vehicles (as in the kind you would trust to take your child to school and then come home to park itself in the garage without any adult present) require strong AI, something that's been "10 years away" for the last 50 years.

So, the beer truck making a 120 mile trek and delivering 40,000 cans of beer while the human driver read a newspaper in the back of the sleeper cab is about 50 years away, right?

All I'm saying is that I am very skeptical when it comes to promises from AI researchers. I'll believe it when I see it.

Huckleberry wrote:

JohnRW1621 wrote: I'm pretty sure it is not legal to take a horse and buggy down US1 (Woodward Ave) any more. I assure you can not take a horse and buggy down I-75.

Routes 1, 322, 22 or 30 in PA would not be considered secondary roads anywhere - yet the Amish routinely meander down them at 4mph amid tractor trailers and rush hour Philly/Allentown/Harrisburg traffic.

And then members of the Paved Church of the Holy Cone will declare that is against their religion to use autonomous vehicles.

The question of who is liable for an accident should be easy to determine. Just download the respective files for the vehicles involved, run the data through a standard "ethics" algorithm and then a "judgment" algorithm that corresponds to the damage and print the check.

I agree that insurance companies are going to get cut out of the equation. Either the manufacturers or the Ubber type operators will take that on.

As to human jobs in the future? We been sliding down that razor for a long time now. We are already at a point where a lot of business models require employees that make less than living wages and clients who are 1% ers. We did not mind it so much when it was overseas, but now its pretty much universal.

As to the human condition no longer having a purpose? No worries, spending the whole day figuring out how to get enough calories to wake up alive tomorrow seems to keep a lot of people engaged.