Ned
Footballguy
I think someone up-thread mentioned it, but when you look at it from this perspective... sheesh that's doubling a lot of trips which means 2x fuel, wear/tear, etc.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Driverless Cars/Trucks (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SkyRattlers
- Start date
Ned
Footballguy
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
So maybe instead they'll have to go find a "charging" lot....and since there may or may not be a person inside the charging can't rely on a cable....so maybe it'll be the same as what they have been developing for our phones....induction charging. The car simply parks in a spot and the surface is just an induction plate.
moleculo
Footballguy
That's being developed right now.
Ned
Footballguy
ne stone.......... solar electric smart cars. 
TripItUp
Footballguy
I'm wondering how far along solar cars are at this point...I'm assuming not advanced enough where they could be solely reliant on solar power. May be a hybrid approach for the forseeable future...electric from the grid and from solar.
Foosball God
Foos
roadkill1292
Footballguy
I think the reasons it makes more sense for the retailer to initiate a delivery than for the individual to run his car down to the store are twofold: (1) the retailer can run a robot down the street that is sized specially for his product and (2) he can use alternative fuels more effectively than the private car owner.
Remember the very first Star Wars? When Leia was brought to Vader's ship we saw all kinds of little bots scurrying down the hallways on errands. Well, a pizza-carrying bot might be shaped differently than a bot meant to haul a couple of burgers and some milk shakes and a 50-lb bag of dog food from PetSmart might take an even differently-shaped carrier. But none of them would have to be very big because they don't need space for human beans.
About the second point, there's a trash hauling company in the Bay Area, iirc, that generates methane fuel from the garbage it picks up and then runs their trucks with the methane. It doesn't matter that nobody else is using methane fuel -- they've got a steady supply and all their trucks do is run out, pick up more raw material, and come back to the depot anyway........where the fuel is. I don't know what the right fuels are for little delivery bots but it might be something else that the general public can't use efficiently but they can.
Remember the very first Star Wars? When Leia was brought to Vader's ship we saw all kinds of little bots scurrying down the hallways on errands. Well, a pizza-carrying bot might be shaped differently than a bot meant to haul a couple of burgers and some milk shakes and a 50-lb bag of dog food from PetSmart might take an even differently-shaped carrier. But none of them would have to be very big because they don't need space for human beans.
About the second point, there's a trash hauling company in the Bay Area, iirc, that generates methane fuel from the garbage it picks up and then runs their trucks with the methane. It doesn't matter that nobody else is using methane fuel -- they've got a steady supply and all their trucks do is run out, pick up more raw material, and come back to the depot anyway........where the fuel is. I don't know what the right fuels are for little delivery bots but it might be something else that the general public can't use efficiently but they can.
TripItUp
Footballguy
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
http://qz.com/437788/googles-self-driving-cars-are-now-on-the-streets-of-california/
Here's a video of a car without a driver actually navigating california roads
Here's a video of a car without a driver actually navigating california roads
Last edited by a moderator:
(HULK)
(Smash)
This already exists for electric cars.
I agree, it makes the most sense for non-human lots.
(HULK)
(Smash)
Solar.
Price keeps dropping on it while performance keeps increasing. By the time we have true takeoff on the automated cars, I expect solar to be the cheapest and most efficient energy available to us.
The world, she's changing, and fast.
ETA: I don't think panels will be on cars, but the grid will have converted to solar as it will be cheaper. We may still use other fuels for nighttime though, unless the storage issues are resolved (which is unclear).
Last edited by a moderator:
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Here's the link for the South Korean induction charging system. If we ever find the power, this is the way to go. I believe a team at Utah State (home of Pons and Fleischmann!) has also made considerable progress on this kind of system.
It's the best plan of them all -- you never have to stop to charge up. But again, we have to find the additional power first.
It's the best plan of them all -- you never have to stop to charge up. But again, we have to find the additional power first.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Just an aside here - the sequential VIN numbers for deliveries are up to around 94XXX, new orders are mid-95XXX. There's a roughly 40 day period from order confirmation and delivery. They don't report monthly sales figures, but their Q2 deliveries will come out Friday - should be around 11,000.
Google has a fleet of driverless cars running around Mountain View right now. Mostly converted Lexus but a few of their self-produced vehicles.
Bolt 55 kW (200 mile range) mule is in testing. Nissan LEAF 2016 upgrade will be modest (about 25 more miles range), but the next gen LEAF will be comparable to the Bolt range.
The Model S has Traffic Aware Cruise Control and Lane Keeping Assist. It's only a matter of time before we see more and more autonomous driving from all the BEVs.
Change is coming fast.
E-Z Glider
Footballguy
What will/do driverless cars do when they come upon a lane closure (due to construction or an accident) and there's a flagman directing traffic and telling you when you can go?
roadkill1292
Footballguy
Speed up, run over the flagman and then embark on an enraged spree of murder and destruction.
Nugget
Footballguy
Link to article discussing ethical considerations i programming driverless cars.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-25/should-a-driverless-car-decide-who-lives-or-dies-in-an-accident-
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-25/should-a-driverless-car-decide-who-lives-or-dies-in-an-accident-
NutterButter
Footballguy
One of the many unknowns. Your car will probably stop there and remain why you're at the exit of the store calling Uber b/c your car never showed up. I guess they could come of with some cone like device that would be used to redirect traffic. There will definitely need to be something to communicate with vehicles in the case where the flagmen are alternating traffic b/c there's only the one lane for both directions.
cstu
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
It's pretty simple to me: a driver-less car should never leave the road.
If someone jumps in front of traffic - like a child - then the car should brake/swerve as best it can but stay on the road. I trust a driver-less car to have quicker reactions and make better decisions than a human.
Galileo
Footballguy
Driverless cars now have their own test city...http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/connectedworld/driverless-cars-now-have-their-own-city-no-humans-allowed/vi-AAdj1dd
Galileo
Footballguy
Oops...Google car hits bus. Nothing significant...no injuries, but does raise the question again of who is to blame.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Self-driving Uber kills 49-year old woman in Arizona
I really have no idea how you can program these cars to deal with pedestrians and animals in the road. It seems like an impossible task.
It might have been the woman's fault. I don't think we know yet.
I really have no idea how you can program these cars to deal with pedestrians and animals in the road. It seems like an impossible task.
The Tick
Footballguy
I gotta admit, i'm not surprised Uber is the first company to unfortunately kill a pedestrian. The other companies working on this auto-drive technology are major tech/engineering companies that have a track history of innovation and development. From the outside Uber seems to be a miss-managed brand marketing company utilizing low overhead contractors to provide their service and happened to create a really nice phone app.
I don't know what they've done to develop this auto-drive tech, but i'd be terrified to be driving near one of them compared to work being done by Google, Tesla, Intel and some of the others.
ETA: And yes, I do know that Tesla already had a driver die, so this is not the first death related to auto-drive. Still rather have them working on this tech than Uber.
I don't know what they've done to develop this auto-drive tech, but i'd be terrified to be driving near one of them compared to work being done by Google, Tesla, Intel and some of the others.
ETA: And yes, I do know that Tesla already had a driver die, so this is not the first death related to auto-drive. Still rather have them working on this tech than Uber.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brony
Footballguy
Fatal Uber crash with pedestrian likely 'unavoidable,' police chief says
"It's very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway," Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle after viewing the footage.
A large median at the site of the crash has signs warning people not to cross mid-block and to use the crosswalk. But the median also has a brick pathway cutting through the desert landscaping that accommodates people who do cross at that site.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/20/tempe-police-chief-fatal-uber-crash-pedestrian-likely-unavoidable/444291002/
"It's very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway," Moir told the San Francisco Chronicle after viewing the footage.
A large median at the site of the crash has signs warning people not to cross mid-block and to use the crosswalk. But the median also has a brick pathway cutting through the desert landscaping that accommodates people who do cross at that site.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/20/tempe-police-chief-fatal-uber-crash-pedestrian-likely-unavoidable/444291002/
Video of the crash here. It's not gory but I suppose some won't want to watch the video. The woman and her bike just appear out of nowhere and the video stops before any contact.
Based solely on the video hard to lay blame on anyone but the woman herself. Perhaps the video isn't as crisp as it would be if you were there but i can't imagine anyone reacting fast enough to avoid hitting her.
Based solely on the video hard to lay blame on anyone but the woman herself. Perhaps the video isn't as crisp as it would be if you were there but i can't imagine anyone reacting fast enough to avoid hitting her.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Watching that, I don't know how anyone could come to the conclusion that this isn't the woman's fault.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
Hard to know that for sure being that the safety driver in the vehicle was looking down and not paying attention seconds before the impact. I tend to agree with you that maybe it was unavoidable--but I can tell you that I personally wouldn't want my community being the testing ground guinea pig for that technology.
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
You realize your fears are without merit right? No different than people with fears of flying. It's far safer to fly than it is to drive, and autonomous cars are safer as well. And they will only continue to improve.
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
It's pretty clear that the pedestrian had no business being in that spot and she made no effort at all to avoid the car despite it being very easy for her to see it approaching.
However, Uber's Lidar system has some work to do. It was a clear line of sight and while the darkness may make it hard for humans to see the pedestrian, the car's systems should have seen her easily. Their failure is a clear sign that it's not ready to take that next step up in the safety department.
However, Uber's Lidar system has some work to do. It was a clear line of sight and while the darkness may make it hard for humans to see the pedestrian, the car's systems should have seen her easily. Their failure is a clear sign that it's not ready to take that next step up in the safety department.
I agree that the lady was being stupid. How do you not see a car coming with its lights on? That said I did see a good point on this that you would think an auto driving car should have been able to stop. We are looking at the video and thinking that we as humans couldn’t have done any better. I agree with that although a human may have had our brights on, but shouldn’t cars with laser sensors be able to detect something at night that we can’t? If you are telling me that driverless cars won’t be any safer than us then what’s the point? We can read Twitter while we drive. A driverless car needs to be able to “see” at night. That lady wasn’t running across so IMHO, if that’s the best that driverless car can do, it’s crap and Uber certainly shouldn’t be allowed to keep testing like that until their crap is safer.
Foosball God
Foos
This is where I'm at. It was the pedestrian's fault, I think a normal driver would have had hit her, but it sure seems like the Lidar should have warned the car. It didn't slow down at all.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
Where did I say that I'm fearful of autonomous vehicles in general? Once the sample size is large enough to establish that they are definitively safe enough to drive in major cities that have billions of different driving scenarios that need to be tested and accounted for--I have no problem with them. Flying has a large enough sample size to definitively establish that it is a safe mode of transportation. I love flying but i still wouldn't want new aircraft being tested anywhere near where I live. What I'm fearful of is the testing of relatively unproven technologies within communities where the results can be catastrophic. In this case--maybe it's clear that the pedestrian is at fault overall. However--the absolute lack of any response by that vehicle did nothing that would make me want that technology to be tested anywhere around me or my family. Any new technology will inevitably have glitches--and these glitches will become exposed with a growing sample size. Wait until there are more incidents where fault isn't as clear--and then ask yourself if you'd want these things tested on your streets.
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
I'm more than happy to have them tested on my streets. But that's because I have accepted that they are already equally as safe as regular cars. Which is what my point was in my original comment to you. You seem to be ok with your family being around regular cars but you are scared of autonomous cars. Which is why I'm saying your fears are without merit.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
Every day we see the careless, stupid things human drivers do. The bar for driverless cars to be safer is fairly low.
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
What you have accepted is an opinion based on a very small sample size in very selected testing zones. I assure you that if they put loads of these things to be tested in every major city with every different driving scenario, in every different type of weather--the notion that they are already safer would not be as clear to you as you make it out to be. Even in these relatively very controlled testing parameters--they are having issues. Saying that they are already definitively safer in every driving scenario is beyond premature and without merit. I appreciate your point of view--and I'll just choose to agree to disagree.
LoadLetterPaper
Footballguy
Pedestrians's fault 100%
Walking across an unlighted road.
Every drunk in america, driving that car, would have run them over.
Walking across an unlighted road.
Every drunk in america, driving that car, would have run them over.
SkyRattlers
Anti-aliai
I think you are mistaken in believing that more autonomous cars is a bad thing. It's actually a good thing. Because the more of them there are the more data is available to them. All their lidar scans, camera video, etc can be shared and creates a live database of road conditions.
Literally when the roads are swamped with these cars they won't ever need to worry about what might be coming ahead in the road because the cameras of the autonomous cars ahead of it have already tracked all relevant info and passed it along.
A solo autonomous car is more worrisome because it's completely dependent on it's own sensors and programming.
I like to think I’m a great driver and part of that is assuming everyone else is stupid and won’t do smart things. That said I’d think that things no human can do like see that lady any earlier than the video shows should be on the table. Night time driving should be something that can be much safer. I don’t know what the lady was doing, just stupid of her and it cost her life, but the Uber car didn’t detect her at all and that is 100% a failure of their system.
And yet you miss the point that that is the situation where a driverless car should have worked better than any human.
LoadLetterPaper
Footballguy
jvdesigns2002
Footballguy
Yes--it was the lady's fault that she j-walked--that doesn't mean that she deserve to get run over by a robot driven vehicle that was doing nothing but randomly driving for the sake of picking up test miles. Even stupidity doesn't deserve a fate that bad. Not only that--the supposed "safer" type of driver that this thing was testing--did absolutely nothing to slow down or stop. Yeah--her crossing the street was dumb--but it shouldn't have resulted in a completely meaningless death.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
An interesting question is how safe will they have to be before they are universally accepted? Once they are safer than humans, delaying their adoption is costing lives. I'd rather save these lives sooner (on a net basis) than wait for a perfect driverless car.
