>Google calls on US to shake-up self-driving car laws
>Google's self-driving car chief has urged lawmakers to ensure the US sets consistent laws for the technology.
>He also reiterated his company's view that it would safer if passengers were not able to override a vehicle's autonomous systems.
This is the future you chose. You will now be getting into your Google Plus automated vehicle to go to your government-designated place of work, with no brakes on the commute.
See a truck broken down infront of you and the car doesn't know how to react? Enjoy being slammed into a stationary vehicle at 80 miles per hour with no way of even stopping it.
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35813656
>>67562106
Self driving cars will never be a thing unless the roads are completely separate from any type of pedestrians and they go 20kmph while being surrounded in 5ft of cushioning foam, even then it's a stretch.
You don't have to drive one...
Giving away your God given right to drive 2 tons of American steel however the fuck you want is the ultimate self cuck.
>>67562106
>This is the future you chose. You will now be getting into your Google Plus automated vehicle to go to your government-designated place of work, with no brakes on the commute.
Fucking awesome. Do you know how time consuming and dangerous driving is? I'd love to sleep on my way to work.
>>67562343
You honestly think humans will have better senses and reaction time compared to a computer with state of the art sensors? Pedestrians can also push the fucking cross button at the cross walk.
>>67562343
You're an idiot. They already are a thing. Some Teslas and MB S-class cars already have full-on auto-pilot.
Say goodbye to your freedom to speed.
>driverless cars allowed on road for public
>accidents start to happen
>insurance claims are filed
>it is decided that a car that follows a program could not have made a mistake
>all accidents are decided to be the drivers fault
>manual cars are banned from the road
>forced to buy a new car or not be able to drive
>required to update the cars OS every month(for a nominal fee)
welcome to the future, goyum
>>67563271
Which way does the car swerve? Who's at fault when someone dies?
>>67562106
>This is end folks.
>The family unit will be destroyed.
>What will women do when they don't have dishes to scrub?
>What if it doesn't clean off all of the food?
>Will it explode and kill everyone?
>What will we do with all of that extra time? I know. COMMUNISM.
Enjoy getting fucked in the ass by Stalin you cucks.
>>67562343
Bullshit. They don't have to be perfect. They just have to be better than people, which is not hard to do.
>>67563271
Saw this old guy on the I5 just chillin on his phone those Teslas are tight
>>67563461
The self-driving car stops.
The human panics and kills someone without having time to fully contemplate the philosophical and ethical ramifications of the scenario.
>He also reiterated his company's view that it would safer if passengers were not able to override a vehicle's autonomous systems.
Uh
>>67563967
>The self-driving car stops.
Not enough time in case you can't work out the scale on my 9 hour photoshop job.
>>67563647
This.
this reason alone is why car insurance will plummet for people who invest in a self driving car and will skyrocket for those who insist on driving.
>>67563461
>implying the sensors don't detect humans/objects prior to being within 5 feet of them
>implying Google engineers are as retarded as Australians
Do you have downs m8?
>>67562719
Except what happens when you see somebody on the side of the road, ready to jump infront of your vehicle to kill themselves. You know it, the car doesn't. Enjoy having a person go through the windshield and skewer you with their shattered bones.
What happens when you've had a hard day at work and just want to get take away for dinner on the way home, but your piece of shit Google car doesn't know how to go through a drive thru, and the parking lot is completely full from other Google drivers who couldn't get their car to go through it?
What happens when a sensor fucks up? Does t he car come to a halt and refuse to move until the sensor is fixed? Does it continue driving at high risk of causing an accident? Do the other Google cars know that car has a fucked sensor?
Breaking News: Chinese Hackers Cause Millions of Car Deaths, President Clinton Accused of Aiding and Abetting
>>67562106
I look forward to numales and women being relegated to their self driving cuckmobiles.
>>67564218
There is enough time. A computer can and will react within hundredths of a second. Far faster than a human can.
there is no way the car won't be able to sense the objects unless they pop out the ground suddenly whack-a-mole style. In that case, the human would do no better and would get PTSD from killing people.
>>67564378
At some point the machines will have to decide who is to save and who to kill.
Have you even seen Terminator bro?
>>67564697
>A computer can and will react within hundredths of a second.
What's it gonna do, lock the brakes and slide right into them anyway?
Soon Google will be able to sue the government for threatening there profits.
This is TPP at work boys.
>>67564697
Reaction and anticipation are two different things.
>>67564697
So these automated cars now have somehow broken the laws of physics, and have brakes that are capable of instantaneously slowing the vehicle while not killing the passengers?
Even the best braking systems in the world can't stop a vehicle traveling at full legal speed within 30 meters.
Ok mate.
>>67564431
You should probably ask google, I am sure that they have considered your simplistic scenarios.
>kids in their "I know everything phase"
You are probably extremely annoying to everybody around you right now.
>He also reiterated his company's view that it would safer if passengers were not able to override a vehicle's autonomous systems.
Lost me there.
>>67563679
they are actually shoddily manufactured.
Who the fuck is Google?
Honest question. What's the fucking point of auto cars? For the cost, you might as well pay for a fucking cab, which is what you're doing anyway. Without the experience of driving a car why not just use public transit? So you can watch porn on your commute? I see literally no benefit.
>>67564242
That's fucking bullshit, no car should be allowed to be fully automatic autodriven, every single one should have a manual mode.
We need to Fucking stop google before it's too late
>>67564431
>Except what happens when you see somebody on the side of the road, ready to jump infront of your vehicle to kill themselves.
And a computer would still react faster than a human driver, likely avoiding the suicidal person or stopping to the point to minimize damage better than the human driver.
You are really underestimating computer reaction times. These cars will feel like the world is pic related.
>What happens when you've had a hard day at work and just want to get take away for dinner on the way home, but your piece of shit Google car doesn't know how to go through a drive thru, and the parking lot is completely full from other Google drivers who couldn't get their car to go through it?
This problem would happen once, Google would send a software patch and the problem would be solved forever.
>What happens when a sensor fucks up? Does t he car come to a halt and refuse to move until the sensor is fixed?
actually yes. Probably. There would be sensors that would be checking which sensors need maintenance. Also sensors won't blow like light bulbs. You would have to smash it for whatever Luddite reason you have to prove a point.
>Do the other Google cars know that car has a fucked sensor?
This whole technology would work better if the vehicles were intercommunicating. Imagine significantly reducing accidents if the other cars knew the location of surrounding cars and if they are fully functioning and not out of control for whatever reason.
Vid related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiCFtmdrvHM
Your arguments are destroyed by technology.
>this kills the gasoline huffing aussie
>>67562106
why do you have to shitpost about everything
I was about to call you retarded and then I saw the flag
>>67566825
>not masturbating on public transit
It's like you WANT to stand out.
>>67565999
>Even the best braking systems in the world can't stop a vehicle traveling at full legal speed within 30 meters.
So your scenario is that 5 people have decided to spontaneously form a human chain across the motorway?
>>67562106
>not realizing that everything computers can do, they do better than humans
What if both my wife and I are drowning and I tell my car to save my wife but he saves me instead.
>>67565018
>What's it gonna do, lock the brakes and slide right into them anyway?
You don't know what computer assisted anti-lock breaks are? Are you driving Flintstones style cars in Criminal Island?
>>67562106
When the government takes away my right to drive
Thats when we get /k/ and start the happening
>>67566825
taking the human variable out of one of the biggest causes of death
The shit I see people pull on the roads around here damn near puts me at a point where I'd fully support driverless cars
I'd be happy if they were used as punishment. Fuck up ONCE and you have to be toodled around by a machine because you're too inept to do it yourself
>>67565614
>Reaction and anticipation are two different things.
A computer can do both. It can sense around it and anticipate. That's exactly how these cars function. Otherwise they wouldn't even move.
>>67566907
>Group of children walk out into the street without looking both ways
>google car is speeding down the road with you sleeping in the driver's seat
>either side of the road are buildings
>google car decides the lives of children is more important then yours and swerves into a wall
>>67564697
Computers sure are fast jimmy!
Just how fast are the sensors? WHat are the algorithms that determine the stimuli that the computer reacts to to get out of the way of an obstable?
If we are relying on JUST cameras and active infrared scanning how can the car tell a dude in a gray hoodie and pants from a pavement gray background.
Maybe you haven't considered the sensors could be dogshit and that tech could be behind
>>67567094
Thank you.
>>67565999
You're a fucking mouth breathing idiot.
>>67566871
Hand over your flesh, and a new world awaits you.
>>67566825
>Public transit
Yeah we ruined that shit ages ago
>>67566371
It'll be safer that way. you need to let the machine do its job.
If you want it to stop there could be a command to "pull over" in an moment. Why would you need anything else?
>>67567186
you get a sickass robotic arm and save the world from the first AI that tries to enslave it
of course, I specified the *first* AI, if it happens once, it'll keep happening until they succeed or we destroy all technology
>>67566412
How? they are almost zero maintenance.
>>67567426
Computers are pretty shit at anticipation. The fact google's car didn't understand a bus isn't very likely to slam on the brakes is why they had their first accident.
>>67562719
Senses? Yeah. Definitely. Reaction time, no. But they are more fluid in their decision making and are capable of making tough calls whereas a machine will get caught in a state loop and burn.
Human override is necessary, and none of this will be mandatory. It simply can't be. People will not give up that freedom.
>>67564431
>what happens when you see somebody on the side of the road, ready to jump infront of your vehicle to kill themselves
the cars sensors, which can see hundreds of yards ahead of it, and can see in all 360 degrees, would have detected a pedestrian near the side of the road long before you did, would begin slowing down before ever getting near the pedestrian, and would be much quicker to respond to break if the pedestrian ran out into the street than you would be
>
What happens when you've had a hard day at work and just want to get take away for dinner on the way home, but your piece of shit Google car doesn't know how to go through a drive thru, and the parking lot is completely full from other Google drivers who couldn't get their car to go through it?
almost certainly google's cars would be designed to be able to go through a drive thru. depending on their popularity, drive thrus may even be redesigned to accommodate them.
also, it's a self-driving car. you could get out and go get your food while the car continues to look for a parking spot.
as far as the rest of your hypotheticals, yeah, google cars would most certainly be communicating with one another, knowing if their censor is broken. if anything, a car with a broken sensor could rely on other cars sensors to guide it safely to the side of the road.
all of this was basic speculation by myself. that's all it took to show that you are really dumb bro
like >>67566003 said, google has 100% thought about all of this. please KYS my friend
>>67562343
Yep, this.
It's never going to happen.
>>67563967
Nope. Brake line is cut.
>>67567533
>automated car
>speeding
You really don't understand how a computer works do you? The car will be obeying speed limits, meaning it should have enough time to stop unless someone intentionally jumps in front of it. Computers aren't assholes who disregard the safety of others so they can get home and shit.
>>67566871
>That's fucking bullshit, no car should be allowed to be fully automatic autodriven
almost all cars will be auto driven. It'll start with trains, then semi-trucks and cabs then passenger cars. It'll be irresistible when that safety and efficiency data constantly comes back in real time.
>>67568142
>35 mph
>speeding
>>67565765
>google using windows
>>67562106
and it will be all Moot's fault. I couldn't ask for a better way to go.
SO LISTEN HERE!!!!!
Did you know why everything's tough screen now? It's the same reason a certain group is pushing for self driving cars.
So Jews can do more shit on the Sabbath.
>
3
Yep it's the Jews again.
>>67567533
google car sees the children 1000 yards earlier, before they were even crossing, noticed they were close to the side of the rode, began slowing down in anticipation, comes to a nice, safe stop as they cross the road without looking, you continue sleeping
the best part is you didnt even come up with that hypothetical, you heard from another retard but you thought that retard was smart so you decided to repeat it too without ever thinking ever
>>67562106
>people buy flimsy, self-driving cars
>I buy a big truck
Lets see how a collision would look.
>>67562106
>it would safer if passengers were not able to override a vehicle's autonomous system
>>67568284
you said 'speeding down the road' first, asshole
jesus christ
>>67562106
Google doesn't even have the logistics to produce cars.
But whatever, if I can install a double bed or a sofa in my self driving car and sleep or fap on my way to work, it would be worth it.
Unless OP is a cuck who enjoys long commutes by being a wage cuck.
>>67568286
>people relying on computers to not get in fiery wrecks
>>67567533
No, the google car stops- safely.
It must obey all traffic laws and would sense the children in or near the roads, especially because there is no sidewalk in your scenario and buildings on both sides.
>>67562106
This is why we need Trump.
>everyone drearily moving along in their automated google cars
>one mad cunt in an "obsolete" hotrod screams past them all driving like a "madman"
>gets all the bitches and gets everywhere early and thus promoted over anyone else
No one is going to drive automated cars, because they'll know they are cucking themselves
>>67567560
>Computers sure are fast jimmy!
yes they are you fucking Mennonite.
>>67563448
This is how they are going to spin it no matter what.
Seriously if something doesn't change soon dystopian future is going to be a reality. Fuck it already is on its way.
>>67568371
>Anytime you are driving in a city the google car is going 10 under the speed limit because it is constantly sensing people
>Every time someone approaches the street it stops
weeeee
>>67568460
Speeding does not necessarily mean goign over the speed limit, speeding can simply refer to moving fast. Sorry english isn't your first language Chang
>>67568560
>stops
It doesn't matter how good the sensors are if they brakes aren't good enough
>>67566871
>yfw the God Emperor directs reborn Goebbels to hijack Google's software in every car and force all of them occupied with liberals to be driven directly to Trumpschwitz
>yfw America becomes great again
>>67568389
Instead of buying the cars, people are expected to pay for access to the fleet that comes when you call for a ride. A bunch of ratty little robot taxis that that smell of cigarettes and semen.
>>67562381
Self driving cars would allow people to pay zero insurance and need no drivers license. it would reduce costs dramatically. also deaths caused by driver error or driving drunk would completely disappear. all defects would be paid by the company of the car as any other product.
LOOK ABOVE!
IT'S THE JEWS THIS TIME TOO!
>>67567560
>WHat are the algorithms that determine the stimuli that the computer reacts to to get out of the way of an obstable?
holy fuck
>>67567994
>But they are more fluid in their decision making and are capable of making tough calls whereas a machine will get caught in a state loop and burn.
Wow everybody. We have a computer scientist here. Look out!
>>67562106
>Michael Hastings type deaths happen at 50 tick rate
>never another chance to escape the zog
>>67562106
I'm ready to vomit all over the fucking place, are you?
>>67568668
This is something no one has talked about. Automated cars with their huge priority on safety are going to be eaten alive by aggressive drivers that know they can exploit the cautiousness of the computer to make their commute 10 minutes shorter. I know I'd do it.
>>67568936
also people would never have to spend hours finding a space because the car could do it itself.
>>67567994
>Human override is necessary, and none of this will be mandatory.
And it will be nothing more than a big red button that says "PULL OVER & STOP".
>>67562106
Reminds me of hot tub time machine 2, could be cool
>>67568874
>Speeding does not necessarily mean goign over the speed limit, speeding can simply refer to moving fast. Sorry english isn't your first language Chang
You said speeding. someone ELSE took that literally. You posted some inane shit I called you out on
But now that I see you're one of those people that replies to a handful of responses in one go, I'm not surprised you lack the mental capacity to have a conversation via text
>>67567994
>Human override is necessary, and none of this will be mandatory. It simply can't be. People will not give up that freedom.
Not even that. I want to be able to fully manually drive the car at will.
>Speeding down the highway, going 90mph in the empty fast lane while all the roadsleepers in automode are in the slow lane going 65.
>Get a phone call/text
>Put the car in auto mode, tell it to go to work, it seamlessly transitions, I can lay back and chat and text in the slow lane with the roadsleepers
>Finish call/text conversation 10 minutes later
>pop it back in manual and fly down the highway.
The best oppurtunity driverless technology provides us, besides sleepdriving, and free designated driver, is this:
Driving requires 100% attention
More shits arent paying attention because of phones and what have you
Now there is an option to engage an autopilot so these faggots can finish their texts and not kill us all
Yes, a computer can react faster than a human, but a computer cannot make predictions.
Case: You see a bunch of kids playing with a ball near the edge of the curb. A self-driving car would continue on at normal speed until a ball or child crosses its path, where then it would come to a harsh stop, possibly harming the child or people in the car. A human on the other hand can observe and use judgment to drive slow and cautious past the kids playing because in many cases kids will go in the street without properly looking.
>>67568874
>weeeeee
well at least you are admitting that your initial argument was wrong, now you are changing it to something else entirely
self-driving cars would most certainly drive slower than human drivers on average, but would most likely get to places faster due to the huge decrease in traffic and congestion
Do you guys really not believe a computer could figure out what to do about road obstructions?
It would react faster than you could. Far more lives would be saved than lost.
Then it would tell every other car in the area to move aside well beforehand to avoid the delay.
I will admit to some concerns about personal freedoms. But to imply that it would be a worse driver than you is laughable.
>>67568949
what's the logic behind that elevator
>>67564069
>someone wants you dead
>tells your car to floor it into the nearest brick wall, semi, train or guard rail
>logged as isolated incident because accidents are rare
>>67568084
I dont know how advanced you think sensor tech is, because it isn't.
SOme of these autodriving cars aren't even using LADAR ffs
How much would one of those cost?
>>67565999
jaywalking in the US is already illegal but never enforced. jay walkers would just be killed with zero liability from the car company or passengers the same way if you kill someone without a helmet on a bike in the road you arent held liable.
>>67568537
computers aren't dicks that get distracted by whatsapp or browsing facebook while driving.
>>67568936
>would allow people to pay zero insurance
i don't believe this. thats too much money to give up and states mandate insurance
>>67569236
driverless cars don't change the amount of spaces available
>>67569556
your life.
>>67569302
>you're stupid for replying to multiple people in one post
>You should be less efficient and make a separate post for each response.
what are, 60? Because the things you post are retarded.
>>67567186
With all the time in the hospital recovering, id marathon i, robot back to back
>>67568874
>It doesn't matter how good the sensors are if they brakes aren't good enough
Then according to you, how the fuck is a person better capable of handling the situation over a machine that doesn't "space out" or "panic"?
>>67562106
M80, this means that I literally gain two hours to do whatever the fuck I want in a car a day instead of driving. I could read a book, practice an instrument, take a nap, or just shitpost.
Hell, not even to mention those times were I'm completely shitfaced and I can now just stumble into my go home box and wake up at my doorstep.
>People believe they're better drivers than a machine programmed to drive while they're busy listening to the radio, slapping their kids, trying to tie a tie in the rearview mirror...
>>67568936
>>67569216
>>67569236
>wanting to be dependent upon a government agency
lmao u libcucks sure do love sucking their dicks
>>67569216
>>67568668
they'll be banned shitlords
>>67569323
I hate to meme it up but it's fucking 2016. Technology is far beyond what you think it is, evidenced by your little scenario there.
The car sees the kids by the road. it sees them moving erratically and not simply walking down the sidewalk. It keeps track of them to ensure they DON'T become a threat
how the fuck do you think these things handle intersections if they can't deal with what you described?
Fuck there is nothing more infuriating than being a computer engineer on a planet of ignorant fucking apes
>>67562106
I wonder if self driving cars are always going to have those gay ass LIDAR type things on the top. they look so stupid.
>>67568273
Plane can already do it and we still have pilots. Checkmate retard.
>>67569338
Initial argument isn't wrong, your solution to the argument is simply stupid. Nobody living in a city would want a car that does that. Just deal with the fact that your expectations are too high and stop crying when people bring up certain issues that self driving cars will have.
>>67568936
Despite the fact that its bullshit in regards to insurance, another problem will crop up: There won't be nearly as much income coming from cops pulling people over for driving poorly or running a light or sign.
>>67568273
If you can't turn it back to manual and its enforced by law the government now has restricted your right to travel freely.
They are already pushing the line in regards to air travel, now this 100mph border zone thing (which probably helps things with the illegal problem actually)
>>67569442
The jews aren't allowed to push buttons on the sabbath.
>>67569735
hit the kids, little fuckers should have seen me coming.
>>67569674
they can't charge for insurance when there is no driver. the car companies will be liable for malfunctions like a phone company is liable for exploding phone batteries.
>>67569674
cars could travel further to park. a car could park in another city even. with human drivers no one would think of doing that to walk home that far.
>>67569821
I don't think you understood my post at all.
>>67569825
I'm well aware that's the end goal. Fortunately for me the automotive industry will never allow it to happen in my lifetime.
>>67569954
A plane doesn't have to deal with as much compared to a car in an urban setting.
>>67568537
>people relying on computers to not get in fiery wrecks
how about moms yelling at their loud asshole kids in the backseat, a fat guy eating a fucking cheese burger while driving and a tart applying mascara with her eyes off the road causing fiery wrecks?
A computer would always pay attention and do its singular job.
>>67569954
Look at his posts carefully, he's made a lot in this thread.
You're arguing with a robot.
>>67569821
>private car companies are government agencies
Only GM really is.
Look, the inevitable outcome is that manually operated cars will be outlawed in cities eventually. And at some point on all public roads.
Cry all you want.
>>67562106
I can already see the future:
>it is illegal to own a vehicle that is driven by a person
>you may only select government-approved destinations to travel to
>you will only be restricted to travel to certain places or areas depending on your "class"
>you cannot exit the car while it is in motion, nor stop it where you wish to
>ALL cars are tracked by GPS, including statistics about the car
>cars will be electrically powered, so at least that's good
>>67569705
When you reply to 3 or more posts in one go it ruins the conversational flow for those replying to said post unless they quote the section of the post they're responding to. Efficiency for you personally leads to hard to follow quote chains and even more misunderstandings.
yes, make separate posts. I know that stupid jew moot ruined it for us by adding captcha, but that's what we have to work with. /pol/ has a negligible timer between posts.
>>67568836
It's already here.
>>67563607
Except most automatic dishwashers really are garbage that don't work. I save time by hand-washing my dishes rather than loading and unloading a dishwasher plus rewashing the dishes that didn't get clean.
>>67569442
So, the deal with shabbos is that you're not allowed to start a flame. So, anything that uses electricity is usually considered for intents and purposes as violating shabbos because of that. I.e., you flip a switch which runs on electricity which is generated at a coal burning (like your wife) power plant. You also can't transport people which is another problem.
But you can arguably A. Use things that are already on, like leaving a stove on so you have heat B. Use things that are coincidentally working that are not affected by you. So, a shabbos elevator would get off at every floor so Jews don't have to interact with it, nor does their use of the elevator inflict any additional labor on the system.
Like you can ride on the back of a train on shabbos if the train was going in that direction anyway and it was free or an escalator.
>>67570130
>>67569442
Yep this is why everything is touchscreen now.
Hey Siri, is the Sabbath over already?
>>67568874
>>Anytime you are driving in a city the google car is going 10 under the speed limit because it is constantly sensing people
>>Every time someone approaches the street it stops
uh, you aren't doing that? How many people have you killed driving to Costco for your 5 gallons of mayonnaise?
>>67570149
And they still have pilots and manual control. Nobody trust the thing it's like the concord all over again.
>>67570185
Until it realizes the programmer forgot to put a semicolon somewhere, and the car rear-ends a semi on the highway.
>>67563607
but "family unit" was destroyed either way
>>67570551
Or your Nvidia catch fire on the highways
>>67562343
>computer controlled cars will never be a thing
>flies in a plane that is 90% computer controlled
>>67570482
>Like you can ride on the back of a train on shabbos if the train was going in that direction anyway and it was free or an escalator.
Combine a self-driving Google car with your Google Now or whatever that feature is that learns your schedule and shit, and you'd not have to push a button at all but you'd be taken right to temple. You didn't do it, the car did, so it's permissible.
Oy vey!
> See a truck broken down infront of you and the car doesn't know how to react? Enjoy being slammed into a stationary vehicle at 80 miles per hour with no way of even stopping it
This is equivalent to saying "See a truck broken down in front of you and your brakes fail? enjoy being slammed into a stationary vehicle"
This technology is LITERALLY better than the best human being on the planet at judging distances and speed. There will come a point when half of the population is using self-driving vehicles, the other half manual, and the resulting death statistics will be fucking hilarious. I can guarantee you 99.9% of deaths will be caused by the savages still driving manual cars. There is no argument against this technology.
>>67570526
You do? Shitty drivers like you are the ones causing accidents when you brake for no fucking reason. I drive the speed limit, and brake if someone comes into the road. I don't assume every person walking on the sidewalk is waiting for the chance to jump out in front of my car
>>67570755
Yeah, but AMD doesn't have any driers.
>>67570009
sounds like somebody needs a diaper change
it's okay to be wrong little baby, as long as you tried your hardest
>>67562106
>aussie
>BBC
Not even bothered reading.
>>67570137
we're still long away from totally driverless cars, they will need some kind of pilot
>cars could travel further to park
you would have to plan every move you made for the day and program the times you needed to be picked up exactly or be stuck waiting for your car that decided to park itself in the next city
>>67570509
that's so fucking stupid. a touchscreen is just as much a 'button' as any button is. it's MORE buttons arranged in a matrix with varying types of methods for turning a 0 into a 1.
Religion and modern life do not mix and one is going to have to go before the other can truly progress
>>67570509
That's not true. Or at least not that simple. There are 39 prohibited labors on shabbos (labors used in the construction of the temple), and most of the restrictions are a technicality of something else.
Like if you had a button that was not connected to anything, you could press it. It's fine. If it sparks a flame it's not fine.
>>67570925
>Wahh, I can't make an argue with him so I will just call him names
>>67562106
I like the idea, but it's google, so no thanks.
>>67570848
That's a bit more complicated too, and subjects are divided. For instance, it's considered in poor taste since you would be consuming additional fuel and the car is running exactly for this purpose. It's akin to hiring a cab to take you to shabbos and paying him in advice since you can't exchange money on shabbos.
>>67570917
Why are these new advanced cars so tiny, and gay looking? I mean look at just look at the old school American muscle cars. They may have been very fuel inefficient but you could take one look at the car, and know it smashed pussy. Also built like a tank out of metal instead of plastic. Didn't need an airbag cause yours would probably just tear through the other car. Unless it was also a muscle car then I guess it would be like one of those dragonball z explosive clashes lol.
Fuck all of you. When I have to drive my family member to the hospital, I'm doing it with my own damn skills.
And don't get me started with how this is going to cause accidents with slow computer drivers on a highway/road with people who're all speeding at the speed of traffic.
>C.A.R.A., take me to work, I'm running a little late.
>I'm sorry Anon, your voting records show you voted for Trump in 2016. Proceeding to nearest body of water, please fasten your seatbelt.
>>67571011
>a fucking dot
>>67571051
Don't tell me, tell the Jews.
>>67571064
>Like if you had a button that was not connected to anything, you could press it. It's fine. If it sparks a flame it's not fine.
There's even more to it than that depending on how Jewy you are with the various prohibitions.
>>67568482
>Google doesn't even have the logistics to produce cars.
Doesn't matter if they just develop the tech and sell it off to the highest bidder who would add to it.
>>67569859
A time will come when tech becomes too much, the invasion of privacy becomes too much, the abundance of choice and distraction over free will becomes too much, the ignorant fucking apes will wake up one day to how it all has made their live's empty and vain, and they will fucking hang that computer engineer from his own dongles, they will hang him until he dies.
>>67566871
>That's fucking bullshit, no car should be allowed to be fully automatic autodriven
>no car should be allowed
Sir, are you infringing upon my freedom? If so, I'm going to have to kindly tell you to kill yourself.
>>67571322
>the car is running exactly for this purpose
But what if the car's going that way anyway, and it's electric?
>Be american
>Get shot
>"Google, drive me to the hospital"
>gas is low
>google car takes me to the gas station first
>get shot again
>>67569216
>Automated cars with their huge priority on safety are going to be eaten alive by aggressive drivers that know they can exploit the cautiousness of the computer to make their commute 10 minutes shorter.
And those would be the cars police would target for tickets.
It's hard to ticket a car that "must follow all traffic laws at all times" versus some asshole like you.
>>67562106
>See a truck broken down infront of you and the car doesn't know how to react? Enjoy being slammed into a stationary vehicle at 80 miles per hour with no way of even stopping it.
That won't be a problem. The problem with Google's self-driving cars is that they're too slow and safe.
>>67570143
>>67569825
>I'm well aware that's the end goal.
>I want to drive muh horse and buggy on the roads!!! huurrr!!
>>67572306
Yeah I'm sure the self driving car will usher in a new era of policing where cops actually patrol the roads and don't just sit in speed traps all day. You might as well tell me self driving cars are the key to solving the energy crisis and global warming while you're at it.
>Android can't consistently turn the screen on when you take the phone away from your face
>Trusting this company to put a million cars on the road that need to detect other vehicles
>>67572204
Sources really aren't out on it yet. But generally transporting people with an an arranged intent is prohibited. Like getting on an airplane if prohibited. I suppose roller coasters would be, too.
>>67571820
>There's even more to it than that depending on how Jewy you are with the various prohibitions.
No, that phone exists as a mechanical extension that involves little to no use of electricity. Like no numbers appearing on it. Electric buttons are a definite no. Mechanical not so much.
Shabbos also doesn't exist as a "WELL, WE'RE FUCKED ANYWAY, MIGHT AS WELL BREAK THEM ALL." like surgeons will use special phones like that on shabbos as their job is necessary to save life, but they want to desecrate it as little as possible.
>>67569954
okeedokee. You sure got me.
>>67573353
I understand, it's just a fascinating insight into you guys.
>>67570077
>If you can't turn it back to manual and its enforced by law the government now has restricted your right to travel freely.
you realize that cops will have almost zero probable cause for pulling over a self-driving car right? You can be PISS drunk and why would that matter or be illegal if the drone car is safely driving?
>>67573189
And then get to drive their buggies on the road so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
>>67567533
>thinking that a self-driven car will EVER sacrifice the safety of its passenger(s) for other people
You are literally retarded if you believe this, it would be financial suicide for the company in charge of this technology.
>>67570373
Maybe all of that in China. Your pussy ass government wouldn't do all of that.
>ALL cars are tracked by GPS, including statistics about the car
lol, cell phones are worse and people bring them into the bathroom with them. You're talking about a hypothetical car when you have something George Orwell couldn't dream of in your pocket today.
>>67570460
>Except most automatic dishwashers really are garbage that don't work
No they aren't.
Go raise a barn and fuck your sister, Abraham.
>>67573345
/thread
We're nowhere near reliable mass usage.
>>67568131
>Brake line is cut
>Car detects that the brake line is cut
>Car doesn't start
>Car calls for a tow truck and the police because someone has tried to murder you
>>67562106
I actually did a usability test for an autonomous car for MIT (I think). They have a "driver" who sits there in case something weird happens.
>>67570677
>but "family unit" was destroyed either way
yeah by those fucking commie "dishwasher" machines I tell ya!
>>67562343
Yeah they will, and they will make all taxi drivers jobless.
>>67573345
Leave the call screen dumbass.
>>67571400
>Why are these new advanced cars so tiny, and gay looking?
Only Elon wants his cars to look sleek and reptilian. google wants to produce a soft looking "butt-plug" model.
>>67562343
You are wrong, they simply have to be better than human drivers which they already are
What's even the point of owning a car then? Just fucking use Über. It's a lot cheaper.
>>67571462
>Fuck all of you. When I have to drive my family member to the hospital, I'm doing it with my own damn skills.
Call an ambulance you insurance-less piece of white trash.
Fuck google, come and take my car.
>>67573619
Tbh with you fampai, this isn't particularly weird things. Things get weird when you get into situations like
>Can goys do shabbos breaking things for me?
>Where can I transport goods? Like upstairs outside, etc?
>Am I allowed to put out a flame if it is burning my fucking house down?
>>67562106
>See a truck broken down infront of you and the car doesn't know how to react?
You're an idiot if you think self-driving cars would reach the commercial stage without being able to account for road obstructions.
>>67573265
How do you do a "speed trap" on a car that is programmed to go the speed limit exactly?
Self driving cars will be more fuel efficient if not electric- if that's the case then it's a matter of where you got the electricity from.
>>67575125
Well the good thing is that there's no Jewish hell so ultimately you'll manage!
LOL.
One of my good buddies growing up is an Israeli Jew and I know all about this kind of thing.
>>67574546
And semi-truck drivers. It's a stupid time to think of being a truck driver or a cab driver.
>>67572306
My small town depends on cops ticketing out-of-towners. Do you want to destroy my way of life?
>>67562106
I'm buying a M35A3 to run over google cars.
>>67575688
Oh wow so politically incorrect you showed them
>>67567116
Except when they crash, freeze, hang up, lose connection, or kernel panic. Which they do all the time.
Everyhing made by humans is made with the human element inherently built into it. Failure in a system is inevitable.
>>67575659
http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2014-09-30/story/waldo-city-council-votes-dissolve-police-department-speed-trap-city
People like me want to wipe your fucking town off the map.
>>67563647
Who is at fault? Google? The passenger?(remember you can't drive it)
This a huge issue no one is discussing. Google is not going to want the liability. When your google car eventually kills or injures someone they are going to want you to be financially responsible for their defective programming.
>>67576053
>Which they do all the time.
yeah because you own a self driving car, right?
FUCK THAT
>tfw just started working on a 1956 Bel Air
>passengers not able to override
Nothing pisses me off more about modern technology other than the complete lack of control the designers take away from the user.
Instead if technology adapting to the needs of man the man is forced to adapt to the technology, even at his own expense.
>>67576244
>Who is at fault? Google? The passenger?(remember you can't drive it)
probably google if there is a problem. They would apologize, settle in court and fix the problem so it wouldn't happen again.
>>67567426
No a computer can only react to predefined variables.
It can anticipate nothing.
>>67576290
turn it into a bed throw a mattress in it and sleep it in.
>>67575408
They'll obviously be looking for cars that aren't autonomous dumbass.
The CBO is calling for Americans to be taxed by the mile. They will eventually raise the tax so high that it will cost too much to drive, and Google will have a monopoly on the self-driving cars, forcing Americans to purchase their robot cars.
>>67576319
Do you faggots try to override the elevator, too?
>>67564697
so if google car is cruising along at 60mph and I'm sitting at an intersection and decide to pull out when its 12 feet away.. it can react?
>>67576512
>No a computer can only react to predefined variables.
For the most part, yes.
>It can anticipate nothing.
wrong.
>>67576426
So what if there isn't a "problem", but the cars still hits another car or a pedestrian? Do you really think Google is going accept liability for every fucking car on the road?
>>67574770
No they aren't. And you are confirmed to be a memer, who knows jack shit about the subject. People without actual degrees and experience on the field always like to rely on some pony show public announcement.
We'll get there eventually, but not in the near future. Also the whole security and reliability question is a huge problem.
People make mistakes, this is the whole point of making automated cars. But they aren't designed by some fairytale super AIs, they're made by humans too. And the threat is very real when we're talking about something that wouldn't be just a controlled showcase, but a subject of mass production and everyday usage.
No one would argue that cars in general are safe. Yet there are numerous cases of fatal development errors and subsequent deaths.
Before anything, the development and production standards should be supervised and the Google monopoly curtailed.
>>67576592
>They'll obviously be looking for cars that aren't autonomous dumbass.
I know. That was my point, YOU dumbass.
>tfw /o/ starts an anti self driving car coalition with /n/.
Do robot cars get out of the way of ambulances and fire trucks or do they continue as if they're not in front of them?
>>67576861
So then what exactly do you not understand about cops continuing to do exactly what they do now? Because obviously there's a disconnect somewhere.
>>67576729
What roads have 60 mph intersections in the US?
And yes, it will react, probably swerve or stop and minimize damage.
>>67577059
How aren't /n/ and /o/ one board yet
>>67576804
>but the cars still hits another car or a pedestrian?
how is that not a problem for the Google engineers? I don't understand. Google would treat every accident as an engineering issue they need to eliminate.
>Do you really think Google is going accept liability for every fucking car on the road?
if it is an auto-driving car of their design and software, yeah. That is Google's plan.
>>67576245
No but I own and program computers. Sorry to have a little more knowledge in the field. But to lay it down for you, how often does your Android phone lag or you Google maps take to recalibrate when it loses connection? Imagine these hang ups in an object moving over 60kmh and also in the presence of over 100 other human variables. What is going to happen?
I can drive drunk, and still have a better reaction time than an OS that loses it shot because of a panic cause by multiple variables it ddnt know how to handle.
>>67576084
Come for my speed traps, leave with a few bullet holes.
>>67576426
Logically if they cause fatal accidents, they'll try to shift the blame very quickly and try to hinder and undermine the investigation.
This is what car manufacturers do.
Disabling human override when we can't even fathom how a proper, human-like AI could even exist is insane. A car driving software can easily be better in most scenarios, 99.99% of the time than a human, but denying the opportunity to override the dumb machine if the human sees fit is ludicrous.
>>67577373
/o/ and /n/ hate each other.
>>67577119
>So then what exactly do you not understand about cops continuing to do exactly what they do now?
I'm sorry you're retarded. You can't write a ticket for a auto-driving car because it has no driver and the software is programmed to follow all traffic laws all of the time. That's a hell of an alibi.
You wouldn't hack a car.
>>67576734
I can anticipate what the developing team would anticipate, no more.
>>67568142
have you ever driven a car?
>>67577464
you realize if you have a car from even 20 years ago it has a computer system integrated into it and the car won't run if it malfunctions, right?
>blah blah blah, What is going to happen?
the car will pull over and stop if there's a malfunction.
Are you this fucking stupid?
>>67577464
>I can drive drunk, and still have a better reaction time than an OS that loses it shot because of a panic cause by multiple variables it ddnt know how to handle.
No. No you can't.
Computers aren't arrogant and stupid. Like you.
I'd be fine with self driving cars, only if the road is full of 100% self driving cars
>>67577726
>Logically if they cause fatal accidents, they'll try to shift the blame very quickly and try to hinder and undermine the investigation.
They won't be able to. Who would be to blame? Likely it'll be the other car anyway.
>Disabling human override when we can't even fathom how a proper, human-like AI could even exist is insane.
no it isn't. Again, you'll get a big red button that says "PULL OVER & STOP".
>>67568371
google car senses a fag on bicycle in front of you.. slows down.. can't pass, opposing traffic. google car goes 10mph for the next 20 miles.
>>67576734
How am I wrong. Tell me one way a computer can anticipate objects or variables in an environment that is overall indefinable.
Take an auto manufacturing line. Everything the computer is designed to do is react to imperfections in welds, dimensions, vibrations, weight, and timing. Nothing in its coding is designed to anticipate anything. All it does is react to what it is designed to know.
A computer can not anticipate an abnormality, it can not react to the people in between the cars walking into traffic. It doesn't react to the car directly in the right hand lane that suddenly and with blind swiftness merges into the left lane causing an accident.
A self driving car is the equivalent of auto correct. Convient when it works and an absolute cheap chute when it fails.
>>67577776
The whole fucking point was that cops will not be ticketing people road bullying google's fag cars as you asserted because cops will continue to sit in their speed traps as cops are born to do. You claimed they wouldn't and then totally forgot what the entire argument was about and went off on a tangent about how "man you can't like ticket a machine" which was entirely unrelated.
No fucking wonder you want self driving cars, you can't keep a coherent train of thought going for 10 minutes.
>>67577464
Android phone lag and google maps disconnecting are both false equivalencies.
A car driving computer would
1. Have the hardware required to never lag
2. Not depend on an internet connection for controlling the car. A connection might only be needed during the input of the destination.
3. Be thoroughly tested for all possible problems that could prevent it from executing its job properly.
>>67578019
What's going to happen? Armed faeries with a yeti with a rocket launcher? I'm sure the developing team can handle it.
Apparently, local and federal law enforcement will have access to the live feed of any camera they want on every car on the grid.
>>67574897
>call an ambulance
>ambulance arrives 15 minutes later
>takes 5 minutes to get person loaded in the ambulance
>has to drive another 15 minutes to the hospital
Meanwhile, driving to the hospital yourself takes 20 minutes less and doesn't cost $500.
>>67574766
this
Good luck getting me out of my archaic dino sipping v8
>>67568560
unless the party van is blocking the view and the kids walk out right as it gets near.
>>67578660
>brains are literally computers
>mine anticipated your faggotry
>btfo
>>67563967
It's lovely seeing somebody with no experience driving cars talk about self-driving cars just "stopping"
>>67562106
/o/ here. I've actually done some research on how these things work. That scenario would never happen, that being said, having no manual controls is idiotic as well.
>>67578142
>will pull over and stop
Are you completely insane? Are you out of your mind? Do you realize that such an event can happen in any traffic situation?
You can't just write a fucking simple exception handler procedure that will fucking pull you over like in the middle of a highway when you're in the middle lane.
Stop the fucking meming. A self-driving car can't lag, ever, the same way a nuclear plant control software can't just shut down unexpectedly.
It has to be reliable or people will die. And it's not like we don't have reliable automated machines and systems, but they have always been used in controlled environments.
>>67577776
>You can't write a ticket for a auto-driving
But you can if it violates traffic laws.
> the software is programmed to follow all traffic laws all of the time. That's a hell of an alibi.
If it is an open source and there are proofs that it was not modified.
>>67577452
>Google would treat every accident as an engineering issue they need to eliminate.
Absolutely not. Doing so would undermine confidence in the product and open them up to massive liability. You never admit fault or deficiencies in the product until there are no options left.
>>67578142
Except the car is already moving when it malfunctions.
>>67578304
Nice counter argument. You really went far with that.
>>67578725
All things that are currently impossible in a computer system that require live updates and corrections.
For the 3rd part see my orginal post about the human element inerent in all things made by man.
>>67579215
>But you can if it violates traffic laws.
Better send that ticket to Google then because passengers do not control the car.
>>67562106
One of these abominations had an accident here a few weeks ago.
Drove onto the wrong side of the road and then slammed itself into a barrier.
The excuse "Oh it wasn't going that fast" and that something unexpected was on the road that made the car malfunction.
>>67578924
Don't go have some bernie shilling to do?
>>67570137
>the car companies will be liable
and that's why you'll never ride in a driverless car
>>67579693
[citation needed]
>>67578424
>big riot happening in your city
>decide to get the fuck out
>guys walk up in front of your car
>your car stops automatically
>they pull out baseball bats
>"oh fuck oh shit!"
>can't do anything but sit there as they bash your windows in
>>67568836
Feb 2nd 2016
the day the kikes cemented their control over the dystopian future
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/02/daily-chart-1
y din u stob it
Let's look at this from a different angle.
If these cars are electric, how long do they take to charge?
How can you drive a thousand miles in two days if the car goes 400 and needs to stop and recharge for four hours?
And tell your wife to hold her baby until the car is done charging.
Electric cars are a bad idea and electric self driving cars are even worse. We don't need technology like this. Our system works fine.
>>67579693
>The excuse
There will always be one. They cannot afford to kill this project in it infancy by creating doubt within the public.
>>67579660
And this is the problem. Auto driven car could violate laws freely and no one takes responsibility.
>>67570885
>There is no argument against this technology.
do you think you'll buy one for less than 2.9 million?
>>67578527
Pull over and stop. If only it were that simple. Clearly you have no clue as to the very simple variables that would be required for the system to be able to perform such a function.
If the speed on a road changes, but the internet road database hasn't updated yet, will traffic cops ticket every robot car that wanders in, or can the cars actually read signs?
>>67580086
Exactly. Google won't want it and will get politicians to grant them immunity. That will leave customers saddle with liability for something they have zero control over.
Goodbye to being able to spontaneously go somewhere if the car is charging. Or even worse, oops! the storm knocked out electricity. I guess we're stuck since the car needed to be charged.
Even with state of the art computers, sensors, and radar systems: they are still prone to glitches and failures. If we are going to use self driving cars: we need an option for a human to override the systems. Keep it simple stupid and have a regular brake set up. Master cylinder, booster, ABS, VSC, high performance brake rotors, and dual piston calipers. We need to improve current braking systems...
>>67580229
>or can the cars actually read signs?
They can. Not 100% reliable but they can.
