Whoever Thinks Driverless Cars Will Be Good in the Next 100 Years

Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
 
I wonder if the last thing he saw on earth was a blue spinning circle from his dedicated processor.
View attachment 150569

What he saw was the DVD he was watching while he ignored 5 warnings from the car. The driver was an idiot. Consider it chlorine in the gene pool.
Oh, that'll never happen! No one will ever take a nap on a driverless car!

And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.
 
Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
Strawman.

Only a fool thinks a computer can make decisions faster and more accurate in a car. You yourself just claimed if there is a problem the car will shutdown. That'll be great on the freeway with everyone traveling at 70mph! My car stopping in the middle of a freeway!
 
The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.

Yes, I figure someone who gets pounded in the butt is going to have anal issues.
 
Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
 
Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
Strawman.

Only a fool thinks a computer can make decisions faster and more accurate in a car. You yourself just claimed if there is a problem the car will shutdown. That'll be great on the freeway with everyone traveling at 70mph! My car stopping in the middle of a freeway!

That is a lie. I said no such thing.

And a computer CAN analyze data and make a decision faster that a human can.
 
The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.

Yes, I figure someone who gets pounded in the butt is going to have anal issues.

Is this your idea of a debate? Call someone gay based on your own imagination and then avoid the topic in favor of attempted insults? Sad.
 
I wonder if the last thing he saw on earth was a blue spinning circle from his dedicated processor.
View attachment 150569

What he saw was the DVD he was watching while he ignored 5 warnings from the car. The driver was an idiot. Consider it chlorine in the gene pool.
Oh, that'll never happen! No one will ever take a nap on a driverless car!

And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
 
Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
Strawman.

Only a fool thinks a computer can make decisions faster and more accurate in a car. You yourself just claimed if there is a problem the car will shutdown. That'll be great on the freeway with everyone traveling at 70mph! My car stopping in the middle of a freeway!

That is a lie. I said no such thing.

And a computer CAN analyze data and make a decision faster that a human can.
A computer can only analyze what it has been programmed to analyze.

Thus the rocket I watched blow up because it gave up trying to divide by zero while a human would have not taken abrupt nozzle actions and attempted to manually direct it.
 
I wonder if the last thing he saw on earth was a blue spinning circle from his dedicated processor.
View attachment 150569

What he saw was the DVD he was watching while he ignored 5 warnings from the car. The driver was an idiot. Consider it chlorine in the gene pool.
Oh, that'll never happen! No one will ever take a nap on a driverless car!

And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
The Tesla car was in autopilot, and the car got him killed.
 
Hey numbnuts, do you think EVERY computer program has a subroutine to time you out? No, they don't. Driverless cars will not. That particular argument is moronic.

I'm the last person who would throw around insults. But, d@mn, you're an idiot! (and probably queer, too) First, yes, every computer program has a subroutine that will time something out. It's a necessary feature in all complex software to handle non-response situation. Further, I believe the other posters point really wasn't about software timing out, but about computer glitches. All software has glitches and bugs and the more complex it is, the more glitches it will have.

Right, that is why he talked about the car timing out at 70 mph.

The "probably gay" comment is hilarious.
Yes, there may be glitches. That us why current cars have it so the driver takes over. But if the driver refuses, it is not the fault of the coding.
Strawman.

Only a fool thinks a computer can make decisions faster and more accurate in a car. You yourself just claimed if there is a problem the car will shutdown. That'll be great on the freeway with everyone traveling at 70mph! My car stopping in the middle of a freeway!

That is a lie. I said no such thing.

And a computer CAN analyze data and make a decision faster that a human can.
A computer can only analyze what it has been programmed to analyze.

Thus the rocket I watched blow up because it gave up trying to divide by zero while a human would have not taken abrupt nozzle actions and attempted to manually direct it.

When was this?
 
There was an incident two days ago where an older lady floored her car and ran into a building. We also had a man at work go into some sort of seizure and floored his car. He luckily went over a hill surprisingly missing everyone.

So yeah there are glitches in whatever system employed. Personally I want to be in control. But I am lucky to have driver's assist. She sits next to me everywhere I go and apparently I have become quite the bad driver.
And hundreds have died because the pilots of their aircraft relied upon automation.
More have died while flying the plane themselves. 50% of all aircraft crashes are a result of human error......50%

Humans had control because no computer can do the job.

Tell that to HAL. Seriously, why do you make up stuff you know noting about?
 
What he saw was the DVD he was watching while he ignored 5 warnings from the car. The driver was an idiot. Consider it chlorine in the gene pool.
Oh, that'll never happen! No one will ever take a nap on a driverless car!

And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
The Tesla car was in autopilot, and the car got him killed.

That is like saying a car with the cruise control on got the driver killed when he rearended someone. The Tesla warned the driver 5 times.
 
Oh, that'll never happen! No one will ever take a nap on a driverless car!

And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
The Tesla car was in autopilot, and the car got him killed.

That is like saying a car with the cruise control on got the driver killed when he rearended someone. The Tesla warned the driver 5 times.
And yet the Tesla sped into the intersection killing him anyway.

It is only obvious people will sleep, text, read etc in driverless cars.
 
And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
The Tesla car was in autopilot, and the car got him killed.

That is like saying a car with the cruise control on got the driver killed when he rearended someone. The Tesla warned the driver 5 times.
And yet the Tesla sped into the intersection killing him anyway.

It is only obvious people will sleep, text, read etc in driverless cars.


A driverless car is still illegal. Tesla walks a fine line with the auto pilot. The warnings would have involved a flashing alert on the screen and a sound. If he ignored those, it is his fault. He was still responsible for the operation of the car.
 
It is time to look at the reality of the driverless cars. Weatherman, you want them to be 100% safe. Nice dream, but likely impossible for another decade or so.

You have talked about coding glitches. And that is entirely possible. But those would be isolated incidents. At worst, there might be 500 or so a year.

In 2010 there were almost 5.5 million vehicles crashes, including over 30,000 crashes with a fatality (killing over 32k and injuring over 2.2 million people). As a people, we suck at controlling our vehicles.

Driverless cars will never be distracted, never be drunk or on drugs, and they will never suffer from fatigue.

Here is some data on accidents involving human drivers:
from: Learn the Facts About Distracted Driving
"According to the NHTSA, over 3,331 people were killed and over 387,000 injured in motor vehicle accidents connected to distracted driving. That represents 10 percent of all fatal crashes and 17 percent of all accidents that caused injuries. The National Safety Council disputes these findings, and says that at least 28 percent of vehicle crashes are caused by texting and cell phone use alone—never mind other distractions."

In 2015, according to the CDC, 10,265 people died in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (29%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States. That does not even count those impaired by prescription or recreational drugs.



And as for your claim about the exploding rocket because it was trying to divide by zero, or the idea that the car cannot make decisions as fast as a human, consider this. The Tesla has 8 cameras and 12 ultrasonic sensors monitoring 360 degrees and out to 250 meters. It has forward looking radar that can see through fog, rain, smoke and more. It is processing this data all the time. So if something happens suddenly, the car knows where every vehicle around you is and how fast they are moving. It knows where the road is, the hazards are, and can process the best evasion route in a millisecond. And there is no "divide by zero" in your talk about what happens at 70 mph on the highway. You basically have 3 choices. You swerve left, swerve right, or brake hard and stay in the line you are in. The hazards in the other lanes make this easy, IF you know where the hazards are. Human drivers tend to forget to check their mirrors every 3 to 5 seconds. And even then there are blind spots. 8 cameras and 12 ultrasonic sensors remove the blindspots.

Driverless cars are coming. They will make the roads safer than they are now.
 
15th post
And the programming for the Tesla relies on the driver paying attention to the car. Driverless cars will shut down & pull over.
Tell that to the dead guy in the driverless car.

The dead guy was not in a driverless car. And he ignored 5 warnings from the car.
The Tesla car was in autopilot, and the car got him killed.

That is like saying a car with the cruise control on got the driver killed when he rearended someone. The Tesla warned the driver 5 times.
And yet the Tesla sped into the intersection killing him anyway.

It is only obvious people will sleep, text, read etc in driverless cars.

People are doing that now. The difference is that they are also driving.
 
The best part of this moronic thread is that every single paranoid, anti-tech goofball whining about these cars is in another thread, at this moment, whining that "Drowning kills more people than guns...should we pass water control laws? Huh? HUH?!?!?!"

But one pedestrian death...and get out the vaginal sand remover, time to panic!
 
The best part of this moronic thread is that every single paranoid, anti-tech goofball whining about these cars is in another thread, at this moment, whining that "Drowning kills more people than guns...should we pass water control laws? Huh? HUH?!?!?!"

But one pedestrian death...and get out the vaginal sand remover, time to panic!
Maybe a hundred driverless cars out there, and 2% have killed people.

What's 2% of 260,000,000?
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom