https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/30/tesla-autopilot-death-self-driving-car-elon-musk
I'm trying not to be too smug about the guy dying, but when will you idiots ever learn? I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots, trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
Musk is a fucking fraud, and is going to be exposed as the next Enron. Anyone naive enough to give Tela their money deserves to be robbed. I just can't wait for the lawsuits to begin.
>>79451064
Did he even read the Terms of Service? It CLEARLY says that the auto pilot doesn't work and you will die if you use it!! What a retard, amirite??? :D:D:D
>a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion
LOL please explain this one
>>79451064
What's the difference between a Tesla and a gun? A Tesla is an inanimate object that can decide to kill you.
>I'm trying not to be too smug about the guy dying, but when will you idiots ever learn? I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots, trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
First of all this isn't "AI"
Second, autopilot can't replicate human drivers because a car crashed? Are you a retard? If they wanted to replicate human drivers they would be crashing more often than this so far.
40,000 car deaths a year in America.
Like 75% is due to wrong turns.
>>79451325
AI driver won't know that you're supposed to speed up to get along side of anyone that cuts you off so you can give them the finger
>>79451064
It's basically cruise control.
Tesla's bringing trouble calling it auto pilot.
>Musk is a fucking fraud
No he isn't
He said this isn't a truly autonomous car and driver input is required, he warned everyone about exactly this
>>79451362
True
Humans still beat automation on fatalities per distance travelled
>>79451064
It's still safer even now than human drivers. You have no point.
And before someone comes yelling "this is not about muh politics...." No, trying to take away all your last human freedoms to where your car drives itself, all you financial info is put onto a ship that will be injected under your skin (and, of course, which can also keep track of your every move).
But hey, isn't all of this great? So long s you aren't a criminal, like why fo you care if the OWG, NWO knows evert step you take?
>>79451512
What is the use of this feature besides cruise control, which already exists?
>>79451064
>AI for cars can never drive as well as a human
Yes OP, AI has reached the ceiling of its potential. Visual learning is only 2 years old and applications can now be shown an image and describe it with a sentence but AI is now at its peak it'll never surpass humans.
Just my speculating of how much of an unimaginative dullard you'd have to be to believe that and what they might say.
>>79451325
Emotion is the wrong word, but no one is as stupid as a highly educated and nominally intelligent person who sets rules based on currently available data -- and then walks away. The functional premise of autonomous cars is magically predicting the future.
>>79451589
Basically advanced cruise control
You can get on the highway and it will change lanes, slow and speed up, etc, but you still have to pay attention.
>>79451064
Not disagreeing with you but what parts of a human being do you think could never be artificially replicated by technology assuming technology will inevitably advance way further than we can imagine today
>>79451064
>One automated car crashes and kills someone
"Oh my gawd! Automated cars are evil! They will never work, ban them forever!
>Several cars have crashed and killed people all around the world in the past hour.
"cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion"
On a mass scale, I do think automated cars will be safer for the public than personal driven cars.
hurr durr let's ban AI development
>>79451064
good
>>79451584
I can't drive
(Legally blind)
I for one welcome our self driving car overlords
>>79451696
AI will kill us all
Just saying
>>79451711
hope your AI overlord kills you so you don't pass on those weak genes famalam :^)
>>79451347
same way as humans want to behead you stupid
People crash all the fucking time.
>we could never replicate the safety and skill of a human driver!
1 computer assisted car crash.
>CAR MURDER! AR15's ARE SAFER! JEW FRAUDS!
/pol/ is always full of retard logic, but this thread is particularly ripe.
>>79451696
worked for star trek.
>>79451692
>it will do all of these things that allow you to pay less attention
>but you still have to pay the same amount of attention that you would if it did not
Holy shit its like I'm in Israel. That is the most jewish rationale for a useless feature I have ever read.
>>79451799
technology will fix genes or dna anomalies
>>79451325
>LOL please explain this one
OK, as you wish:
>if one sees a high school girl clearly uncomfortable at the wheel, you keep away from her.
>An old man who is going slow and clearly has vision problems (based on observing his glasses), at a 4 way stop you let him go even if not there first
>a woman with a lot of children in the car (rare these days for White families), you give more pace and give the right of way even if they don't have it just to prevent drama
I can think of 100 examples mate...
>>79451958
yeah an d the cheapest and most efficient way to do that is eliminating faulty gen lines.
>>79451694
Probably all of them but the complexity of the brain makes replicating it with electronics a difficult task (for future people).
>>79451945
>Useless feature
That's laughable considering the things Germans pass off as "features"
>>79451799
If its genetics how come nobody else in my entire family has this eye disease?
>>79451589
It's a more advanced cruise control, if you try to use it like they do in a Simpsons episode you deserve whatever happens to you.
>>79452122
What kind of non sequiter is this? I am not a german. Freedom aint free.
>>79452127
How do you quantify the appropriate amount of attention to remove from driving with this feature? Can you not worry about paying attention when its time to make a turn, because this does it for you?
If you have to pay the EXACT same amount of attention to survive, what is the fucking point?
Stop using diversionary rhetoric and explain exactly how this meaningfully impacts the way you should be behave in a car.
>>79451325
You can prove it to yourself. Next time you want to cut into a line of traffic look the other driver directly in the eye. They will let you.
Fail to look them in the eye and they will block most likely block you.
130 million miles driven my Tesla autopilot. 1 fatality.
Human drivers normally manage 90 million miles between fatalities.
Musk's merry band of mad engineers are combing over the data. Looks like the autopilot mistook the trailer for a overhead sign.
Cool thing about AI, it will only ever make a mistake once. The AI will be fixed. Hopefully it will be a lot longer than 130 million miles before the next one.
>>79451945
>That is the most jewish rationale for a useless feature I have ever read.
Oi vey goyim, it's like the "Hyperloop!" you're not meant to ask reasonable questions--like what if someone has to take a piss-- just keep up the hype and drive share prices up so Musk can sell when his shares hit their peak and leave all his goy workers with no retirement shekels.
>>79452355
Fuck if I know I wouldn't bother with the thing.
>>79452459
pic related not tesla car
>>79452355
I'm not calling you german you weirdly defensive person.
It just seems odd to attack one of the few genuinely impressive and useful features but not anything else
>>79451584
Having cars with a self driving OPTION isn't bad... It's if they tried to make it self-drive only that there's a problem.
Aren't those the cars that burst into flames?
>>79452459
>130 million miles
with a human the wheel
the first time a guy tried falling asleep and letting the AI drive he ended up dead
>>79452726
Its odd to make posts relevant to the thread topic when germany exists? lmao
>>79451064
>trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers
Yes it can, it will eventually. Tesla's assist feature was never meant to be a 100% autonomous drive with your eyes closed feature. It was never that advanced. But a superior version that makes little to no mistakes will eventually be built.
As sensors improve and the computers that are tasked to make out what the sensors are relaying to it and act accordingly improve, it will be a superior driver to humans.
>ood deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
Tell me how does emotion make you a better driver?
It's freaky to admit but computers will surpass everything we are capable of doing within our lifetime. Within our lifetime we will create that artificial intelligence. We will literally render ourselves obsolete.
Anyways if you're into this kind of shit I recommend reading this
http://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revolution-1.html
If you are a bit of a pessimist I advise you to think twice before reading it. I consider myself an optimist and even I got a little anxiety and depression for a few days after reading that. Anyways that article can be summed up with pic related, we are close to experiencing it lads.
>>79452937
What does that post even mean?
>>79452459
>Cool thing about AI, it will only ever make a mistake once.
Wild guess--- you are an Indian/"Asian" and a STEM, correct?
I've seen this difference between Whites and other races as I travel for my job. You can give a White those odds, and yet he'd still (rightfully so) rather drive himself simply because he HAS CONTROL. I think it's something in you nature that you cannot seem to get it, same way Amerian are about guns and others just can't understand-- would rather take the greater odds of a car crash so long as we get to be in controlt he entire time and if it turns out our abilities aren't good enough at the moment of truth, so be it, but at least we were in control until the end.
Is that based more on emotion than logic? Yes, and it will still win out every time.
t. yank in UK enjoying the hell out of my dollar being worth so much
I dont even trust my chevy malibu electronic shit why? Because corporate software is made by 3rd world indian shitskins programmers.
>>79452929
Teslas have driven billions of miles.
They have gone over 130 million on pure autopilot.
This driver was an enthusiast who posted multiple YouTube videos showing his Tesla's autopilot avoiding multiple accidents by other drivers.
>>79453085
yep this guy get it
>use auto control
>get killed automatically
>>79453211
>human programmers
what could possibly go wrong
>>79452459
This.
Flaws with the AI are a engineering issue then once solved all cars will be updated.
Flaws in human driving are legal issues and are only there as a deterrent and punished after-the-fact when an accident happens.
Frankly this technology isn't ready. When Tesla and others make "fully autonomous" not this "autopilot" shit then we'll be talking.
Until then, people will not compete. We used to put our lives in the hands of horses on the road. Those were replaced with human drivers and finally humans will be replaced by machines.
I support this with dishwashers, washer/dryers and all of the other machines that reduce my labor and increase safety.
The Luddites on this board can fuck off. They know nothing of technology and they vastly overestimate their abilities as drivers.
>>79452842
>self driving OPTION isn't bad
But mate, it could never work this way...imagine...a ride at 6 flags or a water park where some people controlled their own speed and did their own steering, whereas others were computerized.
The only way it could ever work is if, overnight, ALL cars on the road switched over to such a system where they would be able to communicate with one another and adjust speed and steering accordingly.
>>79451064
>a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
>>79453508
ape humans cant stop technology no worries bro :)
>>79453182
>You can give a White those odds, and yet he'd still (rightfully so) rather drive himself simply because he HAS CONTROL.
then a drunk driver hits you, kills you and your "control" means dogshit.
>>79453531
>internet of things
>security
pick one and only one
http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/02/nissans-connected-car-app-offline-after-shocking-vulnerability-revealed/
>>79453085
>that graph
Please provide units for the Y axis :^)
>>79453686
oh shit that ID
auto-pilot cars dont get drunk
>>79453182
Nah I'm just a Turkish dude, if you consider that "Asian". Not in STEM tho.
I would personally pick the option that is more safe, and that is ultimately autonomous vehicles. I honestly feel no need 'in being control of my car' because my car is merely a utility.
Like I feel no need no be in control of my elevator other than set the floor is goes to, no need to be in control of the flights I fly in.
But I do like taking my car for a spin around the track, that's just a hobby thought and I'll maintain that hobby even if autonomous cars come. But I couldn't give a fuck about being in control of my car when in bumper to bumper traffic going to work, rather would have the car handle that.
reminder AI cars don't have to be perfect drivers, they just have to get in less accidents than a normal human
>>79453686
gud id
>>79453684
I completely agree with you here friend. I think the entire "internet of things" will, in 90% of cases, be both insecure and ineffective.
I just hope the Jews don't start a Third World War before I get to see Musk go bankrupt.
>>79451064
Yep. But we don't respect emotions
>>79451844
in'shallah
>>79453865
this, pic related
>>79453865
AI cant get drunk, so thats 50% less accidents already
>>79454038
>>79452696
Tfw trump loses
>>79451064
> TSLA 216.50
>>79454057
Yeah it just has a potato brain that shuts off constantly. The cameras didn't know the sun from a white trailer. Kid lost his ball in the street? You brake. Hail? You brake. Similar shapes though eh. Cat? Dog? Brake. Frogs? Run em over
>>79453865
can the man in your pic die in an accident? I'm so disgusted.
>>79451520
has there ever been a mile travelled without intervention? I mean, in this case the car was able to travel by itself, but usually people don't let it since it's against the disclaimer!
>>79454269
thats why all cars must have auto pilot connected with each other to avoid crashes
>>79454035
of topic
who is fault in pic related
>>79454406
That's why you haven't learned anything and you wanna just drive goyim off a mountain
>>79451362
"AI" does not exist
>>79454317
Google's cars drive without intervention. They drive very slowly.
The vast majority of all autonomous concept cars have no steering wheels or no one in the driver's seat and drive by themselves.
>>79453670
R A R E
A
R
E
>>79454448
Who's at fault? Who knows. But one thing was for sure is that three people were "in control".
>>79451512
yeah, to cover his ass
So many people here have no idea what self driving is and what auto pilot is.
Watch this please:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsVsUvx8ieo
These cars won't need to be connected to each other. They can act independently, and have to be better than the top 1% of human drivers.
Neural nets can read road signs better than any person alive. Hell you are filling a captcha that was labelled by a neural net.
>>79454317
hundreds, if not thousands of miles by now.
>>79454269
>>79454449
some anon mentioned this before, but the point is the program will be fixed and that program will not make the same mistake again. The programming that supports self driving cars is only going to evolve and become better from here.
>>79454551
no its not
>>79451064
>>79451170
>>79451347
>>79451589
>This is the first known fatality in just over 130 million miles where Autopilot was activated.
>Among all vehicles in the US, there is a fatality every 94 million miles.
>Worldwide, there is a fatality approximately every 60 million miles.
Read more here faggots: https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/tragic-loss
>>79454581
its clear ,the red car was stoping the transit, even the poor guy in the jeep had to cross on the top of the red car so he could continue is journey .
>>79454587
Someone actually cares when this technology fails. The man's life insurance will pay, Tesla will make a settlement and engineers will scramble to fix the issue permanently.
When a person usually dies in an accident, nothing fucking happens. Every says "aww, how sad" or "wow, they were stupid" and the person gets buried and nothing changes. This is different. All of these accidents will be taken very personally by many people involved and engineered until they won't happen again.
>>79454498
>Google's cars drive without intervention. They drive very slowly.
I believe the Google car can make a trip by itself. When the collision with the bus occured, the driver said he didn't intervene because he thought the bus driver would stop.
>"When the light turned green, traffic in the lane continued past the Google AV," Google officials wrote in the report. "After a few cars had passed, the Google AV began to proceed back into the center of the lane to pass the sand bags. A public transit bus was approaching from behind. The Google AV test driver saw the bus approaching in the left side mirror but believed the bus would stop or slow to allow the Google AV to continue.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/google-self-driving-car-fault-bus-crash-181054217.html
>>79454874
http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-tesla-drivers-death-using-cars-autopilot-probed-by-nhtsa-2016-7
>>79454728
>hundreds, if not thousands of miles by now.
You have to consider the times when a test driver has intervened. It's pretty much like letting a learning driver behind the wheel - there will be less accidents when it's supervised.
>>79454953
In that case, the car was fully autonomous. What you read was merely the opinion of the passenger/researcher.
>>79455078
>there will be less accidents when it's supervised.
lol, no.
>>79451064
Tesla is the Apple of cars
>>79454551
N E W
E
W
And he was watching HARRY POTTER too! Wew boy what a cuck.
>>79451064
>Musk is a fucking fraud
according to what exactly
>>79455167
Thank you. It's your bedtime now.
>>79455111
The car was fully autonomous. It crashed because the driver did not stop the car.
>If the driver would have stopped the car, there would not have been an accident.
>>79455078
I think you're underestimating the amount of mileage that has been done without human intervention, but I have no numbers on hand to back that up
my point is we're still in the development/learning phase
>>79455166
haha, what? Even Tesla says the new feature must be supervised... because it's safer then.
>>79451064
lol hurr durr muh tesla
it's for the fag that thought the prius was getting too common. like how do i let the other hipster faggots know im better than them? buy a tesla!
I'm no fan of whom Musk's government tit sucking tactics, but driverless cars are here to stay. They have driven probably millions of miles at this point and this is the first death? Seems like a pretty good trash record.
Everyday cars won't be the first to adopt the technology, I think the trucking and bussing industry will adopt them in the near future, which will benefit consumers greatly
>>79451568
>It's still safer even now than human drivers.
No, it's not.
>>79451064
>trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
It will happen just not now.
The AI had never seen a white truck on a white background before and failed to detect it crossing the road.
I'm surprised some of the other sensors didnt detect it either.
>>79455480
>Musk's government tit sucking tactics
You mean how he got a loan from the government, and then paid it back early with interest?
>>79455320
>It crashed because the driver did not stop the car.
lol, you have selective reading. The "driver" was the car. The researcher couldn't stop the car.
They found what the problem was and have already fixed the issue so it wouldn't happen again. You barely read the fucking article and you aren't even vaguely familiar with this technology.
>>79455408
>haha, what? Even Tesla says the new feature must be supervised... because it's safer then.
You're still an idiot. There ARE NO AUTONOMOUS CARS ON THE ROADS. The Tesla cars have "autopilot" which isn't autonomous driving. It's a precursor for convenience for consumers and research for autonomous cars later.
This is an elaborate "lane assist" cruise control and isn't an autonomous car. Get your shit right.
>>79455549
Reno, Nevada got memed hard by Elon Musk and Tesla
>>79451633
oh shit a white truck i thought it was open space but don't worry this is rare. it's not like we've just been settling out of court to hide all the deaths.
>>79455540
hey faggot, look here
>>79454874
>>79451064
>IT DRIVES ITSELF! BREAKTHROUGH! REVOLUTIONARY! WORLD CHANGING!
>We dindn't literally mean it drives itself, you idiot. Of course you still have to drive it. Do you think this shit is magical or something?
>>79451064
why replicate when u can replace. everyone wins unless ur a baby throwing their toys from the crib. you lose
>>79455540
according to what
![StrawMan2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/aj4933Q.jpg "StrawMan2[1].jpg")
>>79455771
Imagine the lawsuits when this shit gets mass produced.
>>79455874
The lawyers already smell blood right now tbqh
>>79455627
>There ARE NO AUTONOMOUS CARS ON THE ROADS.
exactly.
>The "driver" was the car. The researcher couldn't stop the car.
The researcher could have stopped the car, but he decided not to. It would be counterproductive to strip the human from taking any control.
Google AV = the autonomous driving
Google AV test driver = the researcher that is put there to prevent out of control vehicle
>>79455549
Solar City is a perfect example of this.Also I'm pretty sure every electric car Tesla sells is heavily subsidized to the tune of thousands of dollars per car. Let alone all the up front money they received.
>>79455833
That's a good illustration. Having a strawman drive me around would do about as much for me as the Tesla system since I still have to drive in both cases.
>>79451665
>>79451064
Low IQ individuals detected
>>79451695
I know this is an extremely small sample but
>this was Tesla’s first known autopilot death in some 130 million miles driven by its customers. “Among all vehicles in the US, there is a fatality every 94 million miles,” the company then notes.
It does seem to be safer.
>>79451064
This is only a small road bump, fem.
Within a few decades all vehicles will be self driving and networked to one another and it will literally be illegal to manually drive on public roads.
>>79451064
yeah, it's not like people ever die in cars that they're driving
>>79453674
fuck your autism is bad.
one person dies in a semi-autonomous vehicle
>OMG WE GOTTA STOP THIS SHIT NOW
30k+ people a year die in manually controlled automobile accidents
>well that's just the way it is
>>79456013
Every automaker gets subsidies for selling electric cars. All of them, not just tesla.
When you talk about automakers sucking the government's tit maybe you are talking about every OTHER single automaker since they were the ones that got a real bailout after the crash in 08.
https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list
Idiot
>>79454204
lol what a fag
I don't like the idea of AI cars- not one damn bit. I personally hate electronics even though my paycheck and livelihood depends on them.
But, statistically, AI is better than human drivers. Logically, it is better.
I was on my motorcycle for 90 minutes today and nearly got whacked at least 20 times thanks to stupid SC drivers who think texting while driving is ok. These are retarded inbreds who can barely get down the concept of breathing while walking, let alone driving a vehicle.
I'd be more concerned about AI missing some texting dumbass than I am it causing an accident...
I'll say this right now- if I ever lose my mind and go nuts, I'll be known as the "Cellular Killer." I'll specifically target pieces of shit that text and drive. Shotgun to the face and drive off.
>>79456161
This sounds awful
>>79451064
You doomsayers are ridiculous.
Self driving cars are the future.
It's like Chess... We used to think it was so complicated that no computer would ever be able to defeat a grand master. But now we have computers that know every single possible permutation of moves.
This is the early days of self driving cars.
As more and more of them hit the roads, all possible events will be encountered and all possible resolutions to those events will be found.
Eventually vehicular death will be almost a thing of the past, as rare as dying in a plane crash is today.
Tesla has already come out and said that the amount of miles driven by Mr Dead shows he was still above the curve on the miles driven / fatality equation.
This guys live was even saved by his car once before by reacting faster than he could.
So absolute worst case scenario for this guy he lived quite a bit longer than if he was driving an ordinary car.
>>79451064
enough with the musk is a fraud bullshit. you all have been saying that for 10 years and he still blows everyone the fuck out eventually, with occasional setbacks. but fuck you, one car crashes and it's end of tesla motors; get the fuck out of here.
>>79455166
wut?
this nigga died because he didn't supervise. there would at least be one less accident you fucking retard.
>>79451788
Skynet will be on our side. It only took 24 hours.
>>79455956
>The researcher could have stopped the car, but he decided not to.
NO. You are wrong. You aren't following any articles or Google's research. The researcher is there to "observe" you dickwad.
>>79453865
>meme haircut
>meme beard
>meme sauce
>meme noodles
>meme utensils
wew
>>79451064
I have an interesting problem with things like this.
Now, right now, humans are obviously better drivers than these machines, but only slightly. In due time, these machines will outpace humanity altogether in safety and efficiency. That is simply how it is going to be.
Naturally, safety minded individuals will believe it is better to ban humans from driving altogether, as the machines will simply be far better at driving, and far safer on the roads. In turn, humans will be banned from driving on public roadways. Eventually, this will take place in all aircraft also, because machines will be more able pilots.
Here is my fear, slowly, out of concern for safety, and the fact that machines will be objectively better at doing things, we will begin to hand over our ability to exercise our agency in our own lives. Piece by piece, we will be stripped of our rights to do things ourselves in the same of safety and security. The worst part of it all will be the accurate observations that machines WILL be better at these things and that people ARE objectively safer with machines at the helm of those things which humans must now do manually (even beyond just piloting vehicles).
My worry is that we will slowly become much more than a nanny state (in which the government controls everything). I worry that it will be legislated that machines have to do everything for us, as if the world will effectively become a daycare center for adults.
>Can't cook your own food, because you might get hurt. Machines can cook it better, faster, and without safety issues.
>Can't drive, because machines can do it better, faster, and without safety issues.
I could go on and on, but you get the point. Now, I do not believe I am advocating a slippery slope fallacy, but am rather just taking a cautious view of what could be imposed on us in the name of "safety."
>>79451064
Auto-pilot shouldn't mean you're allowed to speed while watching Harry Potter. You should be required to keep your hands on the wheel and a feet on the brake pedal.
"Abra Cadaver!"
Straya 2016.
>>79451064
>I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots, trying to explain how an AI for cars can never replicate human drivers simply because a good deal of the human driving process is based on emotion?
Never is a rather long time. You are a moron.
>>79451064
> I've lost hours of my life arguing with idiots.
/pol/ in a nutshell. Yet we still call everyone else idiots.
>>79456446
>This sounds awful
can't drive your horse and buggy on the highway either. get over it.
>>79451064
Did you read the article? This wasn't an AI failure but a failure of the visual sensors because a white trailer blended into the sky.
>>79456720
Which is why we need to put a stop to this idea that certain risks should be avoided.
I don't want to live in a world where the only food is replicated, or created by machines. I *like* working in the kitchen, and look forward to technology making it *easier* for me to cook safely, not removing me from the process.
>>79456371
>Every automaker gets subsidies for selling electric cars. All of them, not just tesla.
Which one of them specifically specializes in electric cars though?
I agree the autobailout was fucking retarded. Just like it was in the 70s when they were bailed out. Our government is full of retards, this is not news.
But Musks Tesla/Solar City/Space X empire was built on government money. unlike those car companies.
Hell I honestly hope all his companies do great and we have a fully electric fleet of cars, while getting our energy from the sun, and privately fund all space exploration. But it ain't happening anytime soon.
>>79455756
human + autopilot is safer than the average human population
>>79455818
You can look up youtube videos about the autopilot function. It often fails when there are curves or untypical street paths. It fails to do many exits if they are too sharp.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf4YGuriUp4
>>79452696
Poor Chevrolet-Opel-Vauxhall Omega
>>79454874
Those stats compare all drivers like drunks. A sober driver is significantly safer than Tesla.
>>79456665
>The researcher is there to "observe" you dickwad.
You're telling me Google doesn't let the human INTERVENE in case the car becomes a threat to other drivers?
>>79452103
"Oi mate I see you've got a bag of crisps on your dash, you must be hungry, I'll give you space so you can 'ave a bite without causing a roadway accident!"
literally hundreds of ridiculous examples
People will have to die for technological progress. They always have and always will.
You think people didn't die trying to domesticate and ride horses?
>>79451064
but without ai cars hackers wont be able to siphon trillions from governments around the planet with threats of shutting down trade across land by locking up roads on trade routes
>>79451064
What happens when 2 cars on autopilot are about to crash?
Which driver are they gonna save by maneuvering in their favor?
The mother that has her 3 children with her in the back of the car?
Or the drunk asshole who wasn't at fault and has the law on his side?
>>79452386
Five minutes ago I did this. I read the mouth of the driver speaking to her friend. "I'm not going to let him pass." As she closed the gap that I was trying to get over into.
Fuck you spic whore.
Interesting. Sounds like the truck is at fault since you're not supposed to pull into traffic unless you can do so without impeding other traffic.
Trucks do this all the time because of a FUCK CARS mentality. We all see it when they go through an intersection way beyond when they should have because they feel like we all can just sit and wait.
Interesting that nobody asked if the truck should have been making that turn at that time.
>>79456588
>this nigga died because he didn't supervise.
Yes because it was not an "autonomous car" it was a car with an experimental feature called "auto pilot" made by Tesla and it's practically a "lane assist" cruise control feature.
In a fully autonomous car my answer of "lol, no" was reserved for human intervention. Human intervention will cause accidents, not prevent them.
>>79457193
Whoever has a lighter skin color
>>79451508
Could be wrong, shooting from the hip here. But just where the fuck does Tesla Motors call it "Auto pilot"?
>>79457072
YES! THAT'S WHAT THIS RESEARCH IS ALL ABOUT!
Fuckola. You're really missing the point here. The Google cars drive on predetermined tracks at the moment and they are fully autonomous. They drive slow and carefully and frankly, the researchers are probably looking for fuckups and minor accidents at 30 mph so they can fix issues.
>>79457193
>What happens when 2 cars on autopilot are about to crash?
>Which driver are they gonna save by maneuvering in their favor?
oh, you're one of those faggots who think the car will make "moral decisions" on "who it should kill".
Fuck off.
>>79451064
>Against a bright spring sky, the car’s sensors system failed to distinguish a large white 18-wheel truck and trailer crossing the highway, Tesla said. The car attempted to drive full speed under the trailer, “with the bottom of the trailer impacting the windshield of the Model S”, Tesla said in a blogpost.
Holy fukcing Christ. Can you imagine the scene?
>>79456956
>Which one of them specifically specializes in electric cars though?
The electric car subsidies have been on the books long before Tesla existed. Just no one was ever up to the challenge of building an electric car that people wanted.
>But Musks Tesla/Solar City/Space X empire was built on government money
Couple of things, Tesla was built on investors money. Musk was able to get people to believe in him and invest in Tesla. Tesla almost died at one point and would have but Musk put ALL of his remaining PayPal money into it to keep it alive. Musk does not own or control Solar City. Space X survives on Government money, but that is money they get from NASA for shipping goods to space at a much lower cost then NASA could, so in that way Space X saves the government money.
>+1,99%
How?
>>79457193
>The mother that has her 3 children with her in the back of the car?
Cars will be programmed for pragmatism. That is, each car will communicate with one another about the amount of occupancy.
>Car 1: Mother and 3 kids.
>Car 2: Mother, Father, and 3 kids.
Imagine if there were a situation in which a collision was unavoidable for any reason. The cars would take note of this, communicate with one another as to who has the more valuable cargo (Car 2, as it has more people), and then will take whatever action they are capable of taking to slay everyone in Car 1 if necessary to save the occupants of Car 2.
I don't want machines making those decisions. What a fucking nightmare.
>>79457061
Source?
>>79457543
yeah sounds bad.
>>79457360
>We learned yesterday evening that NHTSA is opening a preliminary evaluation into the performance of Autopilot during a recent fatal crash that occurred in a Model S.
It's the name they gave it.
>>79451064
Wow, first generation self-driving cars have a few kinks? Who woulda thunk it!
>>79453844
that bitch was most likely sober when she rolled that. Texting, putting on makeup, etc..
>>79457578
>Cars will be programmed for pragmatism. That is, each car will communicate with one another about the amount of occupancy.
lol, no. The cars won't do that shit.
If the cars ever do intercommunicate (they will in the future), they will simply say "I'm going this direction, in this location, and at this speed" and the cars will never, ever collide.
You're a complete fuckup as a human being if you don't understand how basic technology works.
>>79451584
>a ship that will be injected under your skin
Britannia rules the waves... when?
Beginning stages of autopilot cars and people are cunts because it doesn't yet work properly yet.. C'mon you faggots.
>CELLPHONES HA! ONE TOWER?!
Kill yourself. It advances. It improves. It's an industry. If you think it just comes out of their asses you have to be kidding yourselves and you shouldn't be on this site you useless sacks of shit.
Anybody who dies regarding this is a nobody. Nothing has been lost. Shut the fuck up already. Laugh at the stupidity if anything. We all know this isn't the point to sit around watching Harry Potter while letting auto-pilot take control of everything you silly cucks.
>>79457742
>Wow, first generation self-driving cars have a few kinks? Who woulda thunk it!
Any generation of vehicle, no matter how advanced, will face this problem: >>79457578
This is not something I think should happen.
If people want their automated cars, I am all for it. However, no one better try to take my hands of the wheel of my car.
>>79457779
And I want that woman to be able to text, put on makeup and be drunk as hell when she's in her car. I just don't want her to be in control of it when she's an occupant of that vehicle.
>>79453085
>Within our lifetime we will create that artificial intelligence. We will literally render ourselves obsolete.
Not this shit again.
Look, anyone with two fucking brain cells doesn't buy into the hype. Soft AI - AI that passing a turing test in a narrow scope, or AI with limited functionality - is the best we can hope for. Every fucking AI on the market right now - EVERY FUCKING ONE - has enormous cognitive defects I can trigger with just plain sentences, nevermind the fact that none of them can even understand nuances.
This bullshit about "oh AI will save us / destroy us / take our jobs / make our lives better" is only 25% right. They do make life better, but they aren't replacing critical thought anytime soon.
The fact that people even buy into this bullshit indicates they apparently can't think beyond the reptile-brain-level eat/sleep/fuck/shit cycle.
>>79451448
Underated post
>>79451064
Idiots do exist.
Nonetheless, I don't really care. If these car companies want to move fast in reducing the 30,000 or so vehicular deaths a year, then a few sacrificial deaths aren't so bad. It's like a clinical trial for cancer treatment. If I told you that cancer drug treatment research killed a few thousand people, but in the end they found a drug that saved thousands every month, would you panic at the deaths during the research phase?
It looks like so far, automated driving research and testing has killed 1 person. That's amazing compared to the real world of human drivers
autopilot has a better skill than you, goyim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqpsbMCXSyc
>>79457858
>However, no one better try to take my hands of the wheel of my car.
I'm sure you can get a wheel installed and go "VROOM!" when you drive in the future.
It was going to happen eventually, this will change nothing.
Not long before you need to buy and agree to a new TOS before you can use your car
>>79457544
>that people wanted.
They don't want them at the moment though. Tesla's sell at a horrendous rate.
For Musks sake I seriously hope he's not connected with it at this point. That project is an abject failure.
>>79452124
BlindAnon, don't argue against the faggot who told you to Kill Your Self to save the gene pool.
Just Zatoichi your way to prosperity and become the Maui Mallard of our timed.
>>79452103
What a crock of shit. If I'm not yielding or stopping everyone is getting the fuck outta my way. I'd run over 100 little white girls if it meant I get to where I'm going 5 minutes earlier.
>>79451064
If you don't want to pay attention just take the fucking bus or train.
>>79456110
Tesla requires people to look over the autopilot feature, otherwise the pilot even crashes untypical highway exits.
>>79457800
>If the cars ever do intercommunicate (they will in the future), they will simply say "I'm going this direction, in this location, and at this speed" and the cars will never, ever collide.
That doesn't work to well when you are hydroplaning or are on a sheet of ice. Control is an illusion here.
Now, a modicum of control can be excersized even when you are on ice, but again, if the collision is UNAVOIDABLE, which the cars will know, how will they calculate what actions to take... if there are actions to take?
Human drivers would decide based on self-interest, which would lead to a randomized outcome.
Computer drivers would decide based on pragmatism based on the data provided to them.
There are only two choices that can be made, self-interest or pragmatism. There is no third alternative. You either try to save your own occupants as your first priority, or you try to place them into second-class status to prevent an even greater loss of life in another vehicle.
I love how afraid everybody is in this type of thread. It's like you're not on /pol/ and we're back in the 80's talking about the Macintosh. Fantastic!
>>79458113
1984. Robots. PEW PEW PEW! TERMINATOR!
Niggers. You're all such niggers at times. I still love you at least if you're a burger or strayan.
>>79458085
or Uber/YELLOW CAR
>>79457061
a) source
b) if there are so many drunk/otherwise retarded drivers on the road that it can affect the statistics that drastically, explain to me again the rationale of leaving the wheel in human hands?
>>79451347
>Americans don't need 470 horsepower
I don't know. That cars so fucking heavy it probably does need 470 just to move.
Modern Challengers fucking disgust me.
>>79453212
here is the video for everyone to judge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5rraWJq6E
>>79458039
>Tesla's sell at a horrendous rate.
Tesla has a backlog of over 400k orders....
>>79458039
Fug that last sentence was regarding SolarCity. I guess I forgot to include that. SolarCity is a garbage dump at this point
>>79457966
Jesus, he trusted the car more than I would. Also, why are people using their smartphones while doing these fucking tests? That kind of shit is illegal and doesn't stop being illegal just because you're in your fancy "self-crashing" car.
>>79453212
You mean those videos where he admitted to paying 0 attention?
Literally not even looking when/where he's merging?
>>79453182
>would rather take the greater odds of a car crash so long as we get to be in controlt he entire time and if it turns out our abilities aren't good enough at the moment of truth, so be it, but at least we were in control until the end.
That's why I think I developed fear of flying.
I assume that if I were the pilot myself, I wouldn't be scared at all.
But there in the cabin with all the other pigs ready to be slaughtered... nah. Fear kicks in.
I wish there was at least more emotional engagement with the commander of the vessel. But they are always hidden, etc. Never in plain sight. And anyway airplanes fly themselves so that pilots are just overseers and not actors.
>First gen
>Completely disregard road
>Dies
EVERYTHING IS BAD WITH THIS!
>>79458404
Human stupidity.. I'm odding..
>>79451584
This is more politics than half the shill threads on here.
The question is not whether it's safer.
It's whether people want to put their lives in the hands of autopilots.
Some of us would rather die by our own hands.
>>79458287
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/04/13/this-solar-scandal-more-than-twice-as-big-as-solyndra/
>In November, Republicans specifically called out SolarCity, a company chaired by billionaire Elon Musk, for being investigated by Treasury and Justice Department officials over allegedly abusing solar subsidies. SolarCity is being investigated for “possible misrepresentations concerned the fair market value of the solar energy systems,” according to an October Securities and Exchange Commission filing.
>What the heck does Elon Musk need a grant from the taxpayers for? That's a question we could probably ask of any of the investors who pocketed more than a billion dollars.
>>79451064
What's your guys opinion on Elon? One US anon told me Elon's company stock is shit and he is the biggest welfare queen he's ever seen, can anyone clarify?
>>79451064
I'm more worried about what an self driving car won't do.
Will a self driving car swerve in the right direction to avoid hitting a kid from a tire blowout, even if the chance of motor accident is higher?
Will a self driving recognize erratic driving behaviour from a possible drug or alcohol user, and slow down or speed up for added distance between you and them?
Will a self driving car know the appropriate time when to follow, and when to break the rules?
I've come to the conclusion this technology is simply meant to cull the population of no-responsibility libtards.
>>79457061
Dumbfuck
All I hear in this thread is "Wahh, I can't have what I want in the time-frame I want it! I expect more!"..
Kill yourselves.. Seriously. You'll all be obsolete one day you truck driving faggots.
>>79458631
and redistribute their money to investors
>>79458539
The fact of the matter is, AI cars will decide to kill their passengers in certain scenarios.
Do you really want to be inside a vehicle like that?
>>79451064
>Emotions
Emotions have nothing to do with driving except sending in the car on other lane more quickly.
What you want is spatial awareness and exceptions calculation.
>>79458582
I generally support all his endeavors, but he is a huge welfare queen.
>>79453472
to create the machine, we have to let the machine do its part, and create itself.
Not saying 100% full automation is a perfect idea or anything, but 1 accident being a threat to shut everything down is ridiculous. How many casualties occurred for other transport innovations? If there was a huge body of information proving that this is a bad idea than for sure get the pitch forks, but a couple of crashes after millions of miles worth of test trials ... seems pretty dumb if you ask me.
That said, I wouldn't trust one of these things yet. Google GPS is shit. I've fucked up many of road trips listening to that robotic bitch on my cell phone navigation.
>>79457298
God willing
Moreover, while electric cars typically emit less CO2, the savings are smaller than most imagine. Over a 150,000 km lifetime, the top-line Tesla S will emit about 13 tonnes of CO2. But the production of its batteries alone will emit 14 tonnes, along with seven more from the rest of its production and eventual decommissioning.
Compare this with the diesel-powered, but similarly performing, Audi A7 Sportback, which uses about seven litres per 100km, so about 10,500 litres over its lifetime. This makes 26 tonnes of CO2. The Audi will also emit slightly more than 7 tons in production and end-of-life. In total, the Tesla will emit 34 tonnes and the Audi 35. So over a decade, the Tesla will save the world 1.2 tonnes of CO2.
Reducing 1.2 tonnes of CO2 on the EU emissions trading system costs £5; but instead, the UK Government subsidises each car with £4,500. All of the world’s electric cars sold so far have soaked up £9 billion in subsidies, yet will only save 3.3 million tonnes of CO2. This will reduce world temperatures by 0.00001°C in 2100 – the equivalent of postponing global warming by about 30 minutes at the end of the century. Electric cars will be a good idea, once they can compete – which will probably be by 2032. But it is daft to waste billions of pounds of public money on rich people’s playthings that kill more people through air pollution while barely affecting carbon emissions. The Tesla 3 is indeed a “zero emissions” marvel – but that is only because it does not yet exist.
>>79453420
ISN'T THIS WHAT YOU WANTED?
>>79458226
Because if I'm driving sober it decreases my chances of dying as compared to auto-pilot?
>>79451064
Its all the drivers fault, the "autopilot" should only be there as a second line of defense, he was probably not paying attention and thus he deserved what he got
Auto pilot is a feature, it says you must remain alert and ready at all times.
This retard was watching a movie, cars are very far from being fully automatic still.
>>79454466
until someone can prove that artificial neural networks isn't all there is to replicate biological intelligence no one can really know
>>79454716
>and have to be better than the top 1% of human drivers.
good requirement.
Now make it happen. In your video the recognitiion repeadetly misses trucks it had already identified.
>>79459203
Yes. They're too stupid to recognize this because they're niggers. Don't fret their kind don't vote yet.
>underage
I recently bought a Prius. Not because I'm some fucking hippie bit because it had the trunk space/ back seat space to carry thing I needed.
The fact that it was as cheap as the other cars I was looking at and also had way better gas mileage was just a bonus.
>>79459130
Correct, he was watching Harry Potter at the time of his death.
>>79459312
how much was your prius vs how much was a civic EX?
There are so many things you could NEVER teach a self-driving car (unless we somehow make an quantum leaps in AI).
It may one day become STATISTICALLY safer to drive in but there are still certain situations it will never be able to manager better than a human.
I hope I'm never forced to get one of these things over a manual car. I love driving too so why the fuck would I even want one? The risk of dying in a car crash is insanely small in the first place, at least where I live.
>>79459312
>I recently bought a Prius.
Used/new?
Cost?
>>79457643
Source!
If they themselves called it autopilot then they deserve a reality check. I will admit this, as "autopilot" describes something you can trust to "pilot" your vessel.
>>79451064
>50 people die
>DONT TAKE MA GUNS
>1 person dies
>I TOLD YOU NIGGAS DEEZ GHOST CARS BE DANGRUS
>shit /pol/ says
>>79456446
technocucks love handing control over to big government
How many people die driving every damn day? Piss off you fear mongering bitch
>>79459608
>Source!
Tesla's blog, m8. Last post.
https://www.teslamotors.com/blog
>>79458719
Exactly.
>>79459380
Fug I can't remember.
All I know is that most somewhat recent cars were in the 10-15k range.
>>79459510
It was used. About 30k miles.The previous owner leased it. it was a 2013 model. I bought it for 14k. How did I do?
>>79456529
he is collecting money from the government and from private investors through all of his run. The fraud lives on.
>>79459432
They are allready stasistically safer.
>>79459937
>All I know is that most somewhat recent cars were in the 10-15k range.
a prius isn't 15k
>>79459777
Where can I get one of those auto shooting guns you speak of?
Can someone tell me what the point of a self-driving car is?
Why not just buy a bus or train ticket?
Why are they dumping so much money into useless technology?
>>79459937
Did fine.
Toyota has better quality control than these Tesla memes
>>79456909
it was both. The sensors (radio) couldn't detect it and the AI was too stupid to recognize the truck. otherwise it would mean the tesla is legally blind which would be even worse.
>>79459999
I mean recent as in the within the last 5 years or so.
>>79451695
Jesus fucking christ, who let this retard post??? you DO know that Autopilot's take control of almost anything right? it's just a matter of time before the car industry catches the bug then insurance premiums will go down because cars are much safer when you have a reaction time of 0.00000001 seconds as opposed to 0.237 secs.
>B-but driving is based on emotion
What the fuck is this arguement? driving is based on the road conditions, how fast the car infront of you is going and whether the traffic lights are red or green, THATS FUCKING IT.
>>79459312
If i cared about economy id buy a volt, great car
>>79457578
I feel like this makes sense if people are able to be more pragmatic, but if people are not able to be more pragmatic then each car will always have to prioritize the safety of its own occupants
>>79451064
Agreed, OP.
I'll try self driving cars when they have data showing thousands of hours of driving with a significant reduction in car crashes compared to regular driving.
Oh wait.
>>79456965
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf4YGuriUp4
Holy shit I didn't expect it to be that bad, how the fuck do you trust something that at random just goes out of the lane or doesn't notice obstacles soon enough, or just doesn't know what to do and tells you to take over at the last second?
>>79457193
in skynet, nobody dies unless it is planned.
>>79460017
its called the ar-15
>>79460087
Obviously so you can have car sex while still moving from point a to point b
>>79460087
For the same reason that people use cars instead of buses and trains in the first place.
It takes fucking hours to get anything done.
>>79460325
Aw shit. I'll get me one of those and let it protect my house by itself.
>>79460183
How much do volts cost? They are totally electric right? because that's a no-no for me.
>>79456720
Best post in the thread and only one reply so far? Damn, /pol/, you disappoint me.
This anon gets it. We're rapidly going to be replaced in practically all functions of daily life by machine assistance until we're phased out of a meaningful existence. While I certainly welcome the idea of robots fighting our wars for us, or driving cars for us to keep us safer, I loathe the idea that a computer could dictate the rightful course of humanity. As soon as laws begin to formulate that stipulate humans be banned from "dangerous" activities I'm going to be very afraid.
>>79456699
>meme utensils
explain
