Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 71,674
- 212,891
Even if your robot car can travel from Orlando to SF Cali in a night of sleep, It's still going to need refuelling. The robot will have its slave (YOU), do that. No naps for you.
- 1
Autonomous Systems
- Thread starter Blakkheim
- Start date
khorum
Murder Apologist
- 24,338
- 81,363
Lol why would refueling autonomously be a harder problem than driving from Anaheim to SF? They’ve had this prototype for a couple years and it’s in a couple of their superchargers.
My big huge billionaire elevator pitch is a fleet of autonomous fuel tankers that trucks can ping electronically, drive up to and lock into for on-the-road refueling.
Refueling is an annoyance for drivers but purely a cost-center for autonomous transport.
pharmakos
soʞɐɯɹɐɥd
- 16,306
- -2,239
nah, with the rise of autonomous vehicles we will see the return of gas station attendants. high end autos will have autopay.
- 1
Borzak
Bronze Baron of the Realm
- 24,586
- 31,889
Chukzombi
Millie's Staff Member
- 71,674
- 212,891
hah, i always get those two names mixed up. disneyland has all the hobos sleeping on the road
Kiroy
Marine Biologist
- 34,617
- 99,901
I assume you talking about autonomous driving stuff? Ford doing some pretty amazing things when it comes to engine efficiency.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,415
- 73,483
TJT
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 40,930
- 102,731
Fear mongering on my part. But I think of these kind of incidents in revolutionary technologies to like our absurd views on Nuclear Power. Any problem sets the development back years.
BrutulTM
Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun.
- 14,430
- 2,216
I'm pretty much in awe of my ecoboost F-150, and it's several years old. Not for fuel economy so much, although 18 mpg highway isn't bad for a full sized pickup, but the thing accelerates like you wouldn't believe, pulls a trailer like it's nothing, and is so quiet that the electric fan makes more noise than the engine. I never would have thought that was possible from a 3.5l v-6, at least outside of a tuned sports car.
Hateyou
Not Great, Not Terrible
- 16,288
- 42,316
Doesn’t really look like she jumped out in front of it. If this is actually the video...
Edit: I mean I probably would have smoked her too, it’s dark and wearing dark clothes, just saying the articles I read I envisioned her like leaping suicidally in front of it.
Edit: I mean I probably would have smoked her too, it’s dark and wearing dark clothes, just saying the articles I read I envisioned her like leaping suicidally in front of it.
- 2
Quineloe
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,978
- 4,463
The whole point of self driving cars however is to avoid accidents like that. Yes, we all would have most likely hit her. Maybe. Don't bikes have side reflectors? You can see those from long before you actually see anything else. Keep in mind the video we see is a bit darker than it actually was, due to the bright light on a camera recording making everything dark appear even darker.
But aren't self driving cars using more systems than just a camera, i.e. the human eye? What happened to LIDAR, to IFR and all the other stuff?
I feel like any Mercedes sold today with all the warning systems, but without self driving features, would have detected the danger here long before it became visible. So would that particular Volvo have. But Uber turned all the systems off just to drive with a camera? That is in my opinion criminal negligence.
We all might have hit her, but the car didn't even react. If it had slammed the brakes with the promised instant reaction that self driving cars run with, she'd still be alive. It's well over a second between the crash and when the white sneakers first come into view. Not even grandpa driving with a hat has such a poor reaction time to not have slammed the brakes.
This is not your random freak accident that is unavoidable because someone was utterly retarded and stepped right in front of a moving truck. This is the typical accident that self driving cars are supposed to shine at.
But aren't self driving cars using more systems than just a camera, i.e. the human eye? What happened to LIDAR, to IFR and all the other stuff?
I feel like any Mercedes sold today with all the warning systems, but without self driving features, would have detected the danger here long before it became visible. So would that particular Volvo have. But Uber turned all the systems off just to drive with a camera? That is in my opinion criminal negligence.
We all might have hit her, but the car didn't even react. If it had slammed the brakes with the promised instant reaction that self driving cars run with, she'd still be alive. It's well over a second between the crash and when the white sneakers first come into view. Not even grandpa driving with a hat has such a poor reaction time to not have slammed the brakes.
This is not your random freak accident that is unavoidable because someone was utterly retarded and stepped right in front of a moving truck. This is the typical accident that self driving cars are supposed to shine at.
Last edited:
- 4
- 1
- 1
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,415
- 73,483
If the driver had the same view as the camera there's nothing a human driver could've done to avoid that collision. Except maybe swerve EXTREMELY quickly, with reaction times better than what you'd expect, and performing a maneuver that no driving school would say is safe.
That said, an AUTONOMOUS driver should've absolutely avoided that collision.
Uber's radar should've picked up the metallic bike, and their lidar should've gotten really good readings on the person. Them being out of cone of light from the headlights is zero excuse because radar / lidar gives zero shits about headlights.
- 1
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,415
- 73,483
Looking at it more closely, I'm calling shenanigans on the video. The woman was crossing the street right under two light posts. The kind of cameras they use on that vehicle almost certainly have lots of systems to work well in competing lighting situations, so even the on board cameras feeding autonomy data should give really good results.
The video looks like it was put through some kind of black crush filter to make it look like the driver is basically blind beyond 20 feet in front of them.
The video looks like it was put through some kind of black crush filter to make it look like the driver is basically blind beyond 20 feet in front of them.
- 1
Quineloe
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,978
- 4,463
That's just how cameras work. They focus the image on the light level of the brightest source they have, here the headlights, and everything else appears a lot darker than it really is. The light levels of the video should be completely ignored, as they're nowhere near the actual light levels
Just think of the black men smiling in the dark pictures.
Just think of the black men smiling in the dark pictures.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,415
- 73,483
That's how a 50 cent disposable camera works. I don't know what hardware the uber cars have, but the perception rigs on autonomous vehicles should've absolutely caught that women.