|
boner confessor posted:only 3% of the time, and given that roads are not traveled in equal volume (roads missing from the database are likely to be brand new and have low traffic) probably even less than that It's still a huge problem to have roads completely missing that might be necessary. It's why no real self-driving solution can expect to rely soley on the database, and needs to be able to "see for itself" as it were as well. That's a technology problem caused by a societal problem. Roads change very often. There's roadworks underway all the time, usually with corresponding temporary speed restrictions, often only lasting a few days at a stretch in any one project. If what you're trying to get is cars always following the speed limit, you'd need to be able to pick up all of those somehow, and a national database probably won't manage that. I don't see how that's relevant. We can enforce blatant speeding on all of our closed-system toll roads right now, no questions asked. If you traveled 75 miles in an hour when the speed limit was never higher than 65 MPH, you clearly sped. Simply put police ready to go at exits and entrances of the toll road (they're limited in closed system toll roads in the first place) and an alert for the driver can be put out within seconds via the automatic systems already in place. We however choose not to use the data available to catch and punish unambiguous speeders though. Because the relevant authorities do not actually care about the speed limit being enforced at all times, or as often as possible. (Note that some systems even still have a physical barrier that must lift before you can leave the tolling plaza, which could simply stay locked in place when the system detects you sped, just as they stay down if you haven't paid yet or if your electronic toll payment system can't be successfully read. That'd make it even easier to catch and punish blatant speeders.) boner confessor posted:the sun belt, but at that point i'd imagine there's a lot of construction flags and barriers and poo poo up to warn human drivers about construction which self driving cars are going to have to honor independently of any internal database. some kind of really obvious sign for robots would do the trick here since you're setting up all kinds of warning signs anyway, which would be more practical in the short term than making all the street signs in america robot readable and legible So now you're back to needing a visual recognition system for the speed limit and other things anyway. That's why trying to rely on a speed limit database is a non-starter.
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:I've literally never once seen this anywhere, though I'll admit I don't go out very often lately. It's definitely been a thing for a while. Five Guys in particular has been doing this for several years through their website, but even Taco Bell has an app that lets you order in advance and pick up in-store or at the drive thru. The security issue seems kind of legit, but I'm guessing it can't be too much of a problem since none of these places really do, uh, anything. You generally just walk in, tell them your name, and walk out with your food. I imagine it'd be pretty trivially easy to increase security by just asking for order numbers instead of names.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:25
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:the remotesville dot being underfunded is a distinct and separate issue from the feasibility of an internal database tho Yeah. Because I'm sure Chicago, Minneapolis/St-Paul, Detroit, and the entirety of New England are 'remotesville'. Keep fuckin' that chicken man, maybe it'll cover for you not knowing what the you're talking about. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
fishmech posted:It's still a huge problem to have roads completely missing that might be necessary. It's why no real self-driving solution can expect to rely soley on the database, and needs to be able to "see for itself" as it were as well. That's a technology problem caused by a societal problem. no, as i've said before (and will say again as many times as is necessary apparently) missing roads are often new subdivisions, new fringe roads, and small road additions that don't matter as much fishmech posted:Roads change very often. There's roadworks underway all the time, usually with corresponding temporary speed restrictions, often only lasting a few days at a stretch in any one project. If what you're trying to get is cars always following the speed limit, you'd need to be able to pick up all of those somehow, and a national database probably won't manage that. you don't understand. i'm not trying to get cars to follow the speed limit, i'm trying to ensure cars can't go above a speed limit. we can assume a temporary speed limit reduction would be covered by the car's hazard avoidance (we're not just going to rear end cars in front of us that aren't traveling the speed limit anyway) fishmech posted:I don't see how that's relevant. We can enforce blatant speeding on all of our closed-system toll roads i dont care about your creepy boner for toll roads and it has nothing to do with my argument. i'm not going to engage in whatever you want to talk about that doesn't address anything that i'm saying fishmech posted:So now you're back to needing a visual recognition system for the speed limit and other things anyway. That's why trying to rely on a speed limit database is a non-starter. nah. it's more feasible and practical to include this internal and mostly foolproof system than to rely on consistent signage. you again misunderstand what i'm saying - i'm not saying you can cover speed limits with an internal database, but rather that this would be an invaluable supplement to whatever visual system is in place that is already necessary to make the self driver function. it is in fact more practical to rely on a database than to anticipate consistently legible signage which is consistently read without error by the sensor suite Liquid Communism posted:Yeah. Because I'm sure Chicago, Minneapolis/St-Paul, Detroit, and the entirety of New England are 'remotesville'. Keep fuckin' that chicken man, maybe it'll cover for you not knowing what the you're talking about. i wont apologize for living in an area with an adequate and competent department of transportation that cares about driver safety  you can take pride in that if you want i guess
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:no, as i've said before (and will say again as many times as is necessary apparently) missing roads are often new subdivisions, new fringe roads, and small road additions that don't matter as much You can say that all you like, but I'm pretty sure the guy who just moved into a new subdivision would want his car to be able to drive there just like it drives everywhere else. Similarly you do want to be sure your car can handle major temporary rearrangements of a roadway during construction and other such problem, or at least is capable of somehow detecting an inconsistency and then forcing you back to control. That's why you can't rely on just a street database! You can't ensure they won't go above a speed limit if your recorded speed limit is out of step with the current speed limit, or no speed limit is recorded. If all you want is to prevent them from going above some random speed that won't correlate to actual limits, then, why do you even need a database of the real limits in the first place? There's no boner for toll roads. I'm just pointing out a clear example where the state does not care if you speed in normal conditions. You want to ignore this for some reason that I don't understand. Why would a state that actively refuses to enforce against easily proven speeding be interested in ordering the prevention of speeding by a different class of vehicle? And when it comes to a federal speed limit enforcement, well, there already isn't federally applicable speed limits anymore since the 55 law got repealed and states were explicitly allowed to adopt any speed limits they could justify. It's hardly an invaluable supplement when you're already admitting elsewhere that it'll be frequently out of date as well. It's a rather low value supplement in that case. The car simply must be able to gather the needed data from its environment anyway, similar to a human driver, as we already know databases can't be trusted to be accurate outside the broad strokes at all times, even though they're often very accurate. fishmech fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Apr 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
fishmech posted:You can say that all you like, but I'm pretty sure the guy who just moved into a new subdivision would want his car to be able to drive there just like it drives everywhere else. Similarly you do want to be sure your car can handle major temporary rearrangements of a roadway during construction and other such problem, or at least is capable of somehow detecting an inconsistency and then forcing you back to control. That's why you can't rely on just a street database! do you think i'm saying we use the shapefile to navigate or something because this is so wildly discrepant from what i'm actually arguing that i can't decide if you're doing it on purpose or in error i dont know why you would assume that a missing entry in a database would prevent a self driving car from traveling down a road and i dont think i care fishmech posted:You can't ensure they won't go above a speed limit if your recorded speed limit is out of step with the current speed limit, or no speed limit is recorded. If all you want is to prevent them from going above some random speed that won't correlate to actual limits, then, why do you even need a database of the real limits in the first place? because it would be fairly trivial to include this database. you could even have your vehicle update its own internal database of road metadata if you wanted to. from a technical standpoint this is more easily done than 'reading' the necessary road signs - what if said signs are obscured by adjacent vehicles like large trucks and your self driving car misses its turn? on further thought, how much do self driving cars already rely on an internal database for navigation? fishmech posted:There's no boner for toll roads. I'm just pointing out a clear example where the state does not care if you speed in normal conditions. You want to ignore this for some reason that I don't understand. because state authorities choosing to selectively enforce laws has absolutely nothing to do with federal safety regulations on vehicles and vehicle manfuacturers and i desperately do not want you to attempt to explain the connection to me fishmech posted:It's hardly an invaluable supplement when you're already admitting elsewhere that it'll be frequently out of date as well. It's a rather low value supplement in that case. The car simply must be able to gather the needed data from its environment anyway, similar to a human driver, as we already know databases can't be trusted to be accurate outside the broad strokes at all times, even though they're often very accurate. it could be frequently in date. all i said was we currently update the TIGER national database on a months long cycle, beacuse that's all that is necessary for currentl usage. it could be updated weekly or even daily if necessary for self driving purposes, and you're sticking to this assumption that any database would be out of date not for any technical reason but because it better supports your argument. no thanks e: fishmech i mean this as nicely as possible but very little of what you're arguing against in my posts has to do with what i actually said in my posts and i think i'm just going to not respond to you unless you can demonstrate a higher willingness to engage with my point, thanks boner confessor fucked around with this message at 00:04 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:do you think i'm saying we use the shapefile to navigate or something because this is so wildly discrepant from what i'm actually arguing that i can't decide if you're doing it on purpose or in error I think you're just pointlessly defending the ideas of "databases to solve self driving problems" in general because you brought it up in the first place to handwave away a major problem. It is in abstract fairly easy to update and include a database. It is in practice difficult to do so in a way that ensures you'll actually get an accurate database, updated often enough, to be useful. Your car needs to support all the roads a human can handle, so you already need the ability to gather the necessary data from the existing roadscape anyway. There's no conceivable "federal safety regulation" that would include "not speeding" when the feds already say it's a state matter as to what counts for speeding, and do not have any national-level maximum speed limit anymore. And since we already know the people actually empowered to set and administer speed limits deliberately do not care about their enforcement, where's any federal enforcement going to come in? The TIGER database can almost certainly not be updated and pushed out to everyone's car on a daily basis, and weekly would probably be a stretch too. There's just far too many jurisdictions and entities involved to ensure this would happen properly absent an absolutely massive change in how the roads are actually administered. I'm arguing with the actual substance of your posts, which is "for some reason handwave away major problems with self driving because databases can be relied on, except they can't, but that's not a problem". (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:21
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:how it works most of the time is that ubereats, yelp's eat24, and old fashioned call in orders are processed by some designated employee at the restaurant and then set aside. the customer or pickup will come get it, there's usually a short conversation like "i'm joe, i ordered the meatball sub" and the employee hands over the food. if you wanted to remove the employee from this equation to validate the customer's identity and confirm payment you'd need to generate a qr code or something because it would be trivial to just walk off with more food than you paid for. this actually happens with some regularity, it's just that pick up orders aren't frequent enough for it to be a problem worth solving with technology. i'd think scanning your phone at some kiosk which then says "your meal is in locker 24" which then pops open would be the most straightforward way to do it, but then this assumes sufficient volume of pickup orders to dedicate infrastructure to it You're talking about fully automated food service which is an entirely separate thing from just letting people use their phones instead of the kiosk. You shouldn't need to change anything about how the pickup counter works to accommodate a phone app.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:24
|
|
|
fishmech posted:I think you're just pointlessly defending the ideas of "databases to solve self driving problems" in general because you brought it up in the first place to handwave away a major problem. so you dont actually understand what i'm arguing at all, and are yelling at the least charitable interpretation of my post in your imagination. thanks fishmech anyway this conversation is especially asinine because self driving cars must have a database of roads internally, it's the only practical method for point to point navigation. there's simply no other technology right now which allows you to plug in an address which then spits out a navigational solution. if this database includes address blocks, it must surely include other metadata such as speed limit - if not, that's a conscious omission since already extant databases include speed limit, address ranges, even surface material etc. self drivers must be able to navigate immediate hazards, but that's not going to tell a car how to get to a destination miles away and which turns to take - an internal database of roads must be referenced for this to work, until you can provide some solution remotely somehow from some goofy cloud server which eliminates the problem of keeping the internal database up to date fishmech posted:There's no conceivable "federal safety regulation" that would include "not speeding" when the feds already say it's a state matter as to what counts for speeding, and do not have any national-level maximum speed limit anymore. And since we already know the people actually empowered to set and administer speed limits deliberately do not care about their enforcement, where's any federal enforcement going to come in? im not sure how many different ways i can explain this to you until you understand, but i'll try one more time imagine that we have a federal safety regulation, such as "all vehicles must have seatbelts". that is law the us government can and did pass. now whether or not local jurisdictions give people tickets for not wearing seatbelts is up to them. that is the local enforcement of safety regulations. this does not change the fact that your vehicle has a seat belt now it is not practical for the federal government to enforce national speed limits, if only because they have jurisdiction of a small set of roads (interstate highways) and no actual federal police to enforce those regulations. the federal government also has limited ability to regulate the conduct of drivers. but it is practical for the federal government to enforce the addition of a safety feature to self driving cars, since you can add "must obey posted speed limit" to the behavior of a self driving vehicle just the same as you can add the requirement of safe shatter glass and airbags. is this any clearer at all to you now? fishmech posted:The TIGER database can almost certainly not be updated and pushed out to everyone's car on a daily basis, and weekly would probably be a stretch too. There's just far too many jurisdictions and entities involved to ensure this would happen properly absent an absolutely massive change in how the roads are actually administered. i was only using TIGER as an example of a centralized government database but private databases exist as well. and whatever complaints you have against my argument here you also have against the practical application of those databases in self driving cars because, as stated, it is the feasible method for navigation. waymo's self driving car certainly relies on alphabet's proprietary road database to navigate, and i'm sure they've figured out some way to keep this internal database up to date. regardless, this is a distraction because you're pointing towards "it's only 99% perfect!" as an example of why it's not feasible, demonstrating you don't understand the point of the database and therefore probably don't understand my argument either boner confessor fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:47
|
|
|
Dr. Stab posted:You're talking about fully automated food service which is an entirely separate thing from just letting people use their phones instead of the kiosk. You shouldn't need to change anything about how the pickup counter works to accommodate a phone app. I don't really see how you could fully remove the employee anyway, even if you had something to automatically validate the customer's identity. It feels like you've already done the bulk of the work in streamlining the POS process by reducing the experience to "Hi, I'm Bob. I'm here to pick up my order." You still need to get the food to the customer somehow after verifying their identity. I guess something like a modern version of an automat might be a neat gimmick, but it doesn't seem like having someone load a vending machine saves any labor versus just handing the customer their order.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:so you dont actually understand what i'm arguing at all, and are yelling at the least charitable interpretation of my post in your imagination. thanks fishmech All as a way to explain the statement "It would not be hard to solve this" in response to: "what if the automatic truck goes to fast and falls over?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:I don't really see how you could fully remove the employee anyway, even if you had something to automatically validate the customer's identity. It feels like you've already done the bulk of the work in streamlining the POS process by reducing the experience to "Hi, I'm Bob. I'm here to pick up my order." You still need to get the food to the customer somehow after verifying their identity. I guess something like a modern version of an automat might be a neat gimmick, but it doesn't seem like having someone load a vending machine saves any labor versus just handing the customer their order. Which again, if you are talking about automation, the problem isn't "removing the employee", it is saving 100 employees 2 minutes, and eventually you only need 90 employees, as we have seen literally throughout human history, it is just that this process has sped up to the point that many people are being obsoleted faster than they can learn a new trade. (at least as far as I have been lead to understand.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
ReverendCode posted:All as a way to explain the statement "It would not be hard to solve this" in response to: "what if the automatic truck goes to fast and falls over?" basically yeah. i said as much in the gbs osha thread. we can ensure self driving vehicles won't go too fast by referencing an internal database of speed limits (or referencing transmitted metadata about a route) as well as reading signage if it is present and legible. it is practical and in fact likely that the us government will use its established regulatory powers to enforce speed limits on self driving vehicles
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
ReverendCode posted:Which again, if you are talking about automation, the problem isn't "removing the employee", it is saving 100 employees 2 minutes, and eventually you only need 90 employees, as we have seen literally throughout human history, it is just that this process has sped up to the point that many people are being obsoleted faster than they can learn a new trade. (at least as far as I have been lead to understand.) I agree. I've got about a million posts in this thread and the automation thread to this same effect. All I'm saying is that we've basically automated food ordering about as far as we can from a technological standpoint and now it's a question of whether people actually use it. These systems won't have a meaningful impact on labor unless people start preferring them over doing things the old way. My gut reaction is that people will because convenience usually wins out in the end in low-end markets like fast food, but I'm not basing on that anything other than feeling.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:so you dont actually understand what i'm arguing at all, and are yelling at the least charitable interpretation of my post in your imagination. thanks fishmech No, I understand what you were trying to argue quite well: it was "we can pretend like it won't be a problem to do a bunch of hard stuff because maybe a database will work". This isn't true though. All of those databases are already known to be full of errors, and require constant updating which we can't rely on happening. So you can't just rely on the database for any of that information, you must always be able to self-verify the data at least as well as a human can. You can't have a federal safety regulation preventing cars from speeding without the feds actually knowing and setting a maximum allowed speed limit. You can require some sort of limiter to be available, but the limiter's not going to be able to function without some sort of reliable way of ensuring the car always knows the allowable speeds. And as the toll road example proves, the people actually in charge of enforcing speed limits already don't want to enforce them all the time even ins ituations that make it extremely easy to enforce - why expect them to go to the effort required to ensure data et al is constantly updated for a speed limiter? The authorities don't care if you obey the posted speed limit in many situations, why expect them to care if a car obeys the posted speed limit instead? Oh boy, relying on random corporate databases, which the DOT that already can't be bothered to update the government records timely will surely update on time. These databases simply aren't going to work dude. Google's internal database already only works for a constrained subset of the Mountain View and surrounding areas, plus a few other test bed areas, and they barely manage to keep that up to date, you can't expect them to make that national let alone international. boner confessor posted:basically yeah. i said as much in the gbs osha thread. we can ensure self driving vehicles won't go too fast by referencing an internal database of speed limits (or referencing transmitted metadata about a route) as well as reading signage if it is present and legible. it is practical and in fact likely that the us government will use its established regulatory powers to enforce speed limits on self driving vehicles Note: not actually possible because the databases aren't accurate, the metadata isn't getting transmitted (and transmitter might easily fail even once installed), and the signage is often as not illegible. And so your self driving truck misreads ramp #12 of the interchange as a higher speed limit then it's supposed to, goes too fast, and crashes.That's the point. That's why it's not practical and the government can not enforce the speed limits.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
fishmech posted:No, I understand what you were trying to argue quite well: it was "we can pretend like it won't be a problem to do a bunch of hard stuff because maybe a database will work". This isn't true though. i know you really, really want to save face and not lose an argument - and your internet reputation is so important to you that you'll never give up - but you're basically saying a database wont work when that is exactly how gps navigation works. sorry fishmech, but you're 100% wrong here and it's just a question of when you accept that. in the meantime you're going to increasingly drill down on unnecessary details of my argument desperately searching for the validationof success but i think i've demonstrated again that you're full of crap and not really worth engaging with consumer grade gps systems which have existed for more than a decade do exactly what you claim can't be done so thanks for playing but i'm done here let me put it in your native tongue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_navigation_device boner confessor fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i know you really, really want to save face and not lose and argument - and your internet reputation is so important to you that you'll never give up - but you're basically saying a database wont work when that is exactly how gps navigation works. sorry fishmech, but you're 100% wrong here and it's just a question of when you accept that GPS navigation doesn't work that way though. GPS navigation relies on the human driver to look for differences between what the GPS voice/map says to do and the actual road conditions and compensate for that. Blindly following GPS instructions all the time leads to crashes and breaking laws. Do you even pay attention to yourself? Here's just one example of what happens when you blindly trust the GPS:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
fishmech posted:GPS navigation doesn't work that way though. GPS navigation relies on the human driver to look for differences between what the GPS voice/map says to do and the actual road conditions and compensate for that. Blindly following GPS instructions all the time leads to crashes and breaking laws. Do you even pay attention to yourself? i never said blindly trust the gps? i said gps provides route and navigational data. you're so desperate to win this argument you've forgotten to actually read my posts. go yell at a pillow or something if you need to vent it's super easy actually to transmit route data and metadata, again, this is a real thing that already exists so it's really absurd for you to sputter about how it can't be done https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Maps_Navigation
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
do you even have an argument at this point about how self driving cars are feasible or infeasible one way or another or are you in pure debate mode because you seem to switch back and forth depending on tactical necessity. a few posts ago you were talking about self driving cars reading their environment and now you're saying they'll drive into lakes
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i never said blindly trust the gps? i said gps provides route and navigational data. Which isn't enough to fix the problem. That's why I say you're just handwaving poo poo. boner confessor posted:
Once you actually have accurate information in a computer-accessible format in the first place. That's frequently missing. Not really sure what you don't get here. boner confessor posted:do you even have an argument at this point about how self driving cars are feasible or infeasible one way or another or are you in pure debate mode because you seem to switch back and forth depending on tactical necessity. a few posts ago you were talking about self driving cars reading their environment and now you're saying they'll drive into lakes I suggest you try reading posts. It's very simple. You may need your daughter to help you with it. fishmech fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Which isn't enough to fix the problem. That's why I say you're just handwaving poo poo. your argument as it currently stands (not willing to anticipate where it will go on the next page) is that self driving cars can't navigate between an origin and destination because google maps in a machine readable format is just too hard, apparently. i should be glad you're only accusing me of handwaving with such a silly and ill considered grudge of an argument. please calm down and consider what it is you actually want to say instead of trying to defeat me in 1v1 forums combat
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:your argument as it currently stands (not willing to anticipate where it will go on the next page) is that self driving cars can't navigate between an origin and destination because google maps in a machine readable format is just too hard, apparently. i should be glad you're only accusing me of handwaving with such a silly and ill considered grudge of an argument No that's not my argument. My argument is that you're frankly a moron for claiming you can rely on the databases to ensure a self-driving vehicle is driven safely, for instance in ensuring a self-driving truck won't go too fast around a turn and tip the gently caress over. That's what you're handwaving "uhhh sure we'll magically ensure all the info on the safe speeds is actually entered properly, despite the fact that it doesn't get done so today".
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
fishmech posted:That's what you're handwaving "uhhh sure we'll magically ensure all the info on the safe speeds is actually entered properly, despite the fact that it doesn't get done so today". i just want to point out again that technology currently on the market does exactly what you're claiming it can't do and you're pretending that it doesn't exist just so you can yell at people on the internet. here check it out the thing which you claim is impossible can be bought on ebay http://www.ebay.com/sch/Car-GPS-Units-with-Speed-Limit-Indicator/156955/bn_2702718/i.html e: i bet you're going to say "it's only 99% accurate so it's worthless" again lol
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i just want to point out again that technology currently on the market does exactly what you're claiming it can't do and you're pretending that it doesn't exist just so you can yell at people on the internet. here check it out the thing which you claim is impossible can be bought on ebay Thanks for showing something that doesn't actually have a reliably fully up to date database of the necessary information. What aren't you getting here? Once again, speed limit databases are frequently incomplete or erroneous. You can't rely on them. boner confessor posted:e: i bet you're going to say "it's only 99% accurate so it's worthless" again lol If it doesn't actually work in a situation, it can't prevent accidents in that situation. Not sure what's hard to understand here or why you disagree with that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 02:04
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:e: i bet you're going to say "it's only 99% accurate so it's worthless" again lol fishmech posted:Thanks for showing something that doesn't actually have a reliably fully up to date database of the necessary information. What aren't you getting here? Once again, speed limit databases are frequently incomplete or erroneous. You can't rely on them. called it. yeah this is pointless, i think i've demonstrated you dont know what you're talking about as much as you love to hear yourself talk. thanks for nothing fishmech posted:If it doesn't actually work in a situation, it can't prevent accidents in that situation. Not sure what's hard to understand here or why you disagree with that. you seem to think i'm saying the car should be driven 100% by gps. i've never said anything like this and i can only assume you've had a bad day at work and are looking for a punching bag
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:called it. yeah this is pointless, i think i've demonstrated you dont know what you're talking about as much as you love to hear yourself talk. thanks for nothing What's impressive is that you think dealing with the facts at hand is bad, and outright are handwaving away the problems with execution while pretending you aren't. boner confessor posted:you seem to think i'm saying the car should be driven 100% by gps. i've never said anything like this and i can only assume you've had a bad day at work and are looking for a punching bag You said a situation like a truck tipping over on a curve due to taking it too fast would be prevented by a self-driving vehicle's speed limit enforcement. You then ignored that the speed limit enforcement needs proper speed data to enforce against, thus meaning it wouldn't actually prevent the very situation it's meant to prevent in practice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
fishmech posted:So now you're back to needing a visual recognition system for the speed limit and other things anyway. That's why trying to rely on a speed limit database is a non-starter. For what it's worth, Tesla's Autopilot system already has the ability to read speed limit signs. And back on the subject of replacing human labor with machines, they're set to show off their electric semi truck in September. There's been no official word on whether it will include Autopilot hardware, but given that Elon Musk's ultimate goal is for that to be a standard safety feature, it's reasonable to assume that the truck will have it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:called it. yeah this is pointless, i think i've demonstrated you dont know what you're talking about as much as you love to hear yourself talk. thanks for nothing But he's right. 99% doesn't cut it. Databases can't be relied upon for self driving cars for all the reasons that have been said.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:But he's right. 99% doesn't cut it. Databases can't be relied upon for self driving cars for all the reasons that have been said. they sure can! we already accept that a car can switch back to manual mode for the time being if necessary, and i don't think that a lack of internally referenced speed data would necessitate that. plus you could also provide current speed limit data when a route is transmitted, fishmech asserts this can't happen for reasons that he hasn't bothered to define yet. i dont see why it's an obstacle to keep this stored and updated - google maps already provides an up to date road network via wireless transmission for free, so to say that it's not possible to provide road metadata on top of that is baffling. regardless though there's a pretty amazing lack of imagination here regarding how cars would handle the 1% edge cases and it's a little funny that for the purposes of debate people are just going to throw up their hands and declare it impossible instead of assuming the self-driving car might be capable of autonomous navigation without that information - such as slowing down to a preset "safe" speed. i think you're all assuming the car would throw a null reference or something and just pull over or i dont know what e: you're really going to have to explain to me why they can't be relied on when they're already relied on by millions of people all over the world, and you're going to have to provide an explanation that doesn't rely on the necessity of 100% perfect information for a system which is by definition autonomous quasi-ai boner confessor fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:e: you're really going to have to explain to me why they can't be relied on when they're already relied on by millions of people all over the world, and you're going to have to provide an explanation that doesn't rely on the necessity of 100% perfect information for a system which is by definition autonomous quasi-ai Because your automation system lacks a sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence to replace the human driver whose discretion covers the other 1% of situations, because no such AI exists. Humans can, since you apparently are incapable of grasping this point, function perfectly fine on insufficient data by making a spot decision. We consider that is an acceptable level of risk because the driver is responsible for their actions and for the operation of their vehicle. An automated vehicle, not being a person, cannot at any point be responsible for its actions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Because your automation system lacks a sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence to replace the human driver whose discretion covers the other 1% of situations, because no such AI exists. Humans can, since you apparently are incapable of grasping this point, function perfectly fine on insufficient data by making a spot decision. i dont see how lacking a reference to the speed limit on the immediate stretch of road the vehicle is on is going to cause a malfunction but i've got multiple people insisting it despite being unable to articulate how or why so it must be true liquid communism maybe you can tell me why an autonomous vehicle experiencing a rare gap in data and not knowing the current speed limit would necessarily cause an unsafe driving situation? nobody else seems to be able to e: haha tesla implemented uploading of real time road conditions to the navigation system in 2014... it's so technically impossible to do it was done years ago boner confessor fucked around with this message at 06:06 on Apr 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 05:41
|
|
|
kinda feels like the debate is not really a good discussion because the question is not if a bot can take over completely but when a bot can do something you used to have to hire someone for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:An automated vehicle, not being a person, cannot at any point be responsible for its actions. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...a53o3ky7w7FwHZg I'll bet they got insurance on this terminal. But my god, those automated cranes someone tell the insurers they can't be responsible for thier actions!
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
BrandorKP posted:Yo, calculating the horizontal velocity that will cause a truck to overturn like that is a known and solved problem btw. Even when it's in a complicated situation, wind blowing on the sail area, curved road, etc. One thing most often causes what happened there. Driving too goddamn fast. But how could a computer calculate complex angular momentum formulae more quickly and accurately than a 45 year old guy with a GED, an STD, and an amphetamine habit?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
I find it hard to imagine a data gap provided cars are able to "talk" to other nearby cars in the event of a failure of the main sensor I guess that naively assumes there won't be the barest minimum of safety checks available
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:I find it hard to imagine a data gap provided cars are able to "talk" to other nearby cars in the event of a failure of the main sensor tesla also uses adaptive feedback for immediate wayfinding as well as current road conditions and navigation, but i'm sure it's still not possible to keep static or temporary road conditions uploaded and streamed to the vehicle, for reasons
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 18:12
|
|
ReverendCode posted:Which again, if you are talking about automation, the problem isn't "removing the employee", it is saving 100 employees 2 minutes, and eventually you only need 90 employees, as we have seen literally throughout human history, it is just that this process has sped up to the point that many people are being obsoleted faster than they can learn a new trade. (at least as far as I have been lead to understand.) First off, you can learn to weld well enough for a certification in under 6 months and there will never be enough welders to address the demand, so that's bogus as gently caress from the start. Second, do you have an inkling about what's been going on in the restaurant industry over the past decade? Do you even know what the term "Fast Casual" even means, or which restaurants it applies to, or what makes their business model different (I'll give you a hint, it involves automating away as much of the wait staff as is already feasibly possible)? Fuckin dunning kruger, man. Did you ever stop to think that maybe the industry you're talking about has already been reacting to automation this entire time? I mean, obviously not, but maybe give it a single second of thought before parroting this poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Mr. Belding posted:But how could a computer calculate complex angular momentum formulae more quickly and accurately than a 45 year old guy with a GED, an STD, and an amphetamine habit? As fun as it is to keep harping on this example out of context, it was in response to an actual automation trend. There's never this one moment where someone's introduced to their 1:1 robot replacement and laid off, instead jobs are de-skilled and semi-professional folks are replaced by minimum wage temps with a $5000 widget that does most of the work. That picture was posted in response to "Ok, if robot drivers are only at 99%, why not have a fly-by-wire temp in a cubicle that takes over for the 1%?" and that setup takes away the physical feedback that the meth-addled 45yo relies on to do the job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
 +  = https://petapixel.com/2017/04/17/entire-sony-gear-truck-stolen-way-nab-show-report/
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 06:17 |
|
|
LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:First off, you can learn to weld well enough for a certification in under 6 months and there will never be enough welders to address the demand, so that's bogus as gently caress from the start. Second, do you have an inkling about what's been going on in the restaurant industry over the past decade? Do you even know what the term "Fast Casual" even means, or which restaurants it applies to, or what makes their business model different (I'll give you a hint, it involves automating away as much of the wait staff as is already feasibly possible)? You are agreeing with me very aggressively here, and I am not sure why. I am saying that automation does not have to replace workers on a 1 to 1 basis in order for automation to cause people to lose jobs. In regards your comment about welders: The train up time is not the issue with <INSERT JOB HERE>, it is the fact that after you pay for the machine, your ongoing costs are vastly smaller than paying a salary + benefits + retirement + disability(possibly) for the 3-4 people who would be needed to match the output.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2017 20:33
|
|