I'd say otherwise, it's still very primitive in its current state (Tesla's Autopilot is a easy example to point that) but I really don't think codependency on A.I. is ever gonna be a practical future. Not to mention, it still wouldn't fix traffic and the sorts, and overall cannot be a sufficient replacement for human drivers in my opinion.
weber 28/32 tldm go away-ing maybe should've put an electric fuel pump on it sooner DCOEs don't fit lol
Agreed. AVs and smart homes are cages that traps your mind. --- Post updated --- Please don't spread lies. Computer may be better than some drivers, not most.
Electric cars are quiet and boring. AI too perfect and boring. Not saying we need crashes and fart can exhausts, but the world will get a lot less human from here on.
He didn't say computers are better, he said they have faster reaction speed and higher precision. you try getting in a manual car and changing gears in about 100ms. the real problem with computers is logically discerning what it sees, a person can see a bird fly in front of the car, or a plastic bag blow into the road, and know it's nothing to worry about, but it would take massive amounts of development and refinement for a computer to b able to accurately perceive the danger of every foreign object it encounters.
We don't need to see 360 degrees. Unfortunately, desires, which fueled by greed, never stop growing. Hitler also believed in this. Interestingly, some vehicles, including some ELECTRIC vehicles have throttle lag at or above 100ms. --- Post updated --- (NOT my opinion)Some people believed that we are in a simulation because the future is too boring so people there living in simulated past.
I cant shift fast in my corolla or ill just grind the shit out of the gears. Good ol' 90's syncromesh, same thing for down shifting, i have to rev match the shift down to 4th and second gear. And sometimes it plain ol' gets stuck in the gear. At least it blows a light blue smoke each time i floor it off the lights
An autonomous car solves some human flaws but certainly introduces some new safety risks. The question in the end comes down to statistics... or cold hard numbers. What kills more people at the end of the day... human operator error or software errors? At least for trains, that question is answered. Computer support has vastly increased overall security. Fully autonomous cars will take a while longer (and will amost certainly have some sort of emergency brake for the passengers to pull in case something goes wrong) but in the meantime what we are increasingly getting is semi autonomous cars that can brake and even steer - to an extent - without human command. And also avoid or at least reduce the severity of loss of control crashes. You may call it "the sissy switch" but the reality is that ESC saves thousands of lives every year, using the vastly superior speed and precision of a computer to "steer" the vehicle back into the meant direction. We have the technological means and it imho would be foolish to not use them. How it is a bad thing? Outside of niche applications ICE cars are increasingly becoming inferior to EVs. ICE have very little going for them beyond "vroom vroom" If individual mid range mobility is meant to survive, it has to get much better overall. That is not possible with ICEs in most cases. Now, this is something I agree 100 % with you. You bring up an interesting point: For remote locations with potential significant power outtages and extreme weather conditions the superior energy density of fuel can indeed be a niche where ICE may live on for several more decades. Yes, this is one of the biggest challenges. Yet it would be superior for driving. A human driver can look into just one direction at the same time, making him mostly blind for all other directions. When you look into the mirror or out of a window, you are literally driving blind ahead. Now, in most cases, that is not an issue as you - hopefully - have checked before that there - should - not be anything in the way. But if something enters the path while you are looking elsewhere, you are in deep trouble. Sensors and computers can check all directions at the same time and as such can brake/steer/accelerate sooner. Seriously? Which is an very interesting topic but doesnt change anything about the fact that a computer can trigger an action much much faster. Yes, it will need the same time to fully engage the brakes as an human driver but it can start doing so a lot sooner due to superior reaction and processing speed. Of course it remains an issue how the computer inteprets something. If yes, I want admin rights and the source code because I have several major bugs to fix....
Peripheral vision: Am I a joke to you? If you use a smart home, you expose yourself to Big Tech, which allows Big Tech to manipulate and dominate you. Knowledge is power. If fully functional AV is available in large scale, should driving be outlawed? It's only a matter of time for AI to be better than human in nearly every aspect. Robots don't need to sleep, electric power is better than painstakingly slow digestive process in human, etc. should humans be wetware CPU livestock in a computerized civilization(livestock provides meat for human consumption, human being provides creative thinking computational power which the AI lack of) by then? If AI can also think creatively, should all human be neutered or euthanized by then? The answer is yes, AI is more efficient, commits less mistakes. So why live as a human? Thus, we will end up not being killed by AI takeover, but killed ourselves by voluntarily give up our rights to live.
Call me a fool then because the first thing I do, every time I start my car, is turn the stability control off. What I was getting at is this part specifically: Here I'm running on the assumption - I know, at this point I should know better than to make it, but still - that we're all car enthusiasts here. So if you are a car enthusiast, why would you side with this? If true (and it probably is), it's a problem to be solved, not something to derive comfort from! The death of what you might call "normcore" car culture is one of the greatest threats, if not the single greatest threat, facing hardcore car culture right now. Beyond that, why would you want the boring thing to become superior? To me that sounds like something to delay at all costs, not something to look forward to. But I guess the entire concept of fun is obsolete now, or something. Video games are good enough that no one should ever need to have fun in real life ever again. Who actually thinks like that? Convenience, flexibility, ability to store and carry extra fuel, independence from power grid... No, if individual mobility is to survive, it needs people to stop going out of their way to kill it. I'm a little bit disheartened by the possibility that this is the first time (or at least first time in a while) that you've remembered the existence of places outside the Urban Bubble. Adding on to what default said here, too much automation can create a dependence where a person becomes unwilling or outright unable to do things for themselves. This isn't to say that all comfort or convenience technology is automatically bad, but when you are willing to give up all of your privacy and security just for a tiny morsel of convenience (or, even worse, cachet), then you have become enslaved to it. You should never be subservient to technology or the purveyors thereof; technology should always be subservient to you. That's quite an understatement. We simply do not have the technology to create a machine that can "think" the way a human thinks - and once we do, what assurance do we then have that it won't be prone to the exact same failures? KITT was a Hollywood fantasy. There are a small number of cases where this would be useful, and a far larger number where it wouldn't do much. I'm also very excited to witness the related bugs and glitches that get discovered in the field by untrained, non-technical end users. Yes, it does remain an issue, and I'm skeptical that it will ever be solved. But that's fine by me. People act like computers are some sort of paragon of perfection and the ideal that all of humanity should be striving towards. In the end, this usually comes down to one of a few things: -Computers don't have emotions. -Computers can crunch a lot of numbers very quickly. -Computers can react quickly to things. Frankly, it scares me that anyone would see "no emotions" as any kind of ideal that we should be working toward, and annoys me that raw processing power gets mistaken for intelligence. Quick reactions are good, but only if the reaction is correct in a given circumstance. There is a certain type of person that believes the entire universe can and should be reduced to a series of mathematical equations. While nearly all of the physical realm can be explained mathematically, there has to be more than that for a complete worldview. Much of life, even "boring" everyday life, takes place in a dimension which is beyond the reach of equations to comprehend, and I reject utterly any assertion that this is a bad thing. A very revealing comment on multiple levels IMO.
Honestly i dont think AI is a way forward call me stupid but everytime i hear of AI i must think of terminator and how well that went.
It just isn't a good idea. Every friggin time I see a Tesla - I've seen LOTS - the driver is either asleep or half asleep or on their phone. The thing with these people is that they don't care or have lost all caring for not only their safety on the road, but for the safety of OTHERs as well. Do you not know that it is required to be ALERT to drive? That's why I would equate and label driving using autopilot the same as driving while impaired in most cases. Otherwise, up don't need autopilot unless just as a gimmick an convo starter. And in my opinion, if you buy a car just to show off some neat spec or because of a certain trend, then you either have too much money or are spending it in the wrong places and on the wrong things. See, the problem with AI, Autonomous vehicles and advanced controls as such is that a human, buying an AV, is selling his own brain.
Assuming you drive on a public road with other people arround, that is both foolish and reckless. You are endangering yourself and others.
None of my cars have ESC at all. I've had times when taking evasive action in my grandparents cars where ESC has intervened and nearly caused a crash. Its better for ESC to be off if you know how to drive properly because the cars motion is entirely predictable until the computer steps in. Once the ESC starts doing stuff to correct you are then fighting the car instead of controlling the car.
You must have a heart attack when you realize that a lot of us still drive vehicles without any electrical interference garbage hell I don't even have an ECU
Im currently looking for new wheels on my car i currently have 2 options. Please tell my wich ones look better
Yep. Due to the conditions I was under while searching for a car, I wasn't really in a position to insist on something without ESC as even finding something with a stick shift in decent running order was difficult enough. So turning it off is the next best thing. I've never had it cut in during cornering (one time it might have had it been on, not sure if it would have helped anything though), however on acceleration it intervenes late and with all the subtlety of a cinderblock to the face. Fun fact: I passed up an Elantra on my way to the Veloster because it had pretty much the same awful traction/stability control but with no way to turn it all the way off. Even with the system "off", if you launched the car aggressively, it would spin the front tires, find traction on its own, and then the traction control would cut in and absolutely kill your forward momentum. Electronic assists, even the ABS that everyone takes for granted as "a good thing", can create the same sort of mental dependence as more advanced technologies, and you won't necessarily notice. In my Escort, for example, there were times when I locked up trying to stop quickly on wet roads - because I was used to "just stand on the middle pedal and let the computer sort it out". (This is despite driving my Sunbird around with broken ABS for months before the engine went; I guess I just never ended up in that kind of situation with it.) So, I went out to a deserted road where I wouldn't be hit from behind, and taught myself threshold braking and PMABS - which later kept me from blowing a stop sign on an icy offramp. I'm a better driver today because of the time I did without ABS. If you survive a scary situation because of stability control, you're still a bad driver, you just had a computer nanny to bail you out. At this point you will probably respond that it's about saving lives, not getting better at driving - that's what a racetrack is for. It's the same idea that drives people towards robocars - "sometimes people are bad at things, so we have to assume that everyone is always bad at everything and stop expecting anything of anyone." And that is why I fear the self-driving car and seek to delay its adoption by any means possible - because the same people who now say that if you have access to a given computer assist then you have to defer to it or you're selfish and reckless, will quite eagerly make the same argument about self-driving technology. The end result will be a world where no one actually knows how to do anything because everything has always been done for them, and where no one knows how to be responsbile for something because responsibility has always been taken from them. Theses assists also promote and protect bad habits. It is possible to abuse a car to a point where no electrogadgetronic nanny can save you, because doing so would require violating the laws of physics. If you never learned from or noticed your previous mistakes, because you always had computernanny to smooth them out, then you won't know what to do in a situation like that, let alone how to see it coming and avoid it in the first place. BeamNG can teach you that one, though I admit I did this before the ETK 800 was updated to use the new drivemode system. Take one of those cars, preferably a RWD model, to Hirochi Raceway and hotlap with the stability control engaged until you become comfortable with both the course and the car. Then, turn the stability control off and see how many of the same ham-fisted maneuvers you suddenly can't get away with - maybe even didn't realize you were getting away with. The esses before the last corner are particularly educative in this respect. And then you have to unlearn all those incorrect actions, after your brain has already marked that particular car with an "I know how to drive this" flag. --- Post updated --- #1 looks tacky, #2 is alright but I'm not especially a fan of it either. #2 I guess.
