4 ms·

Really interesting article... This is why I'm considered annoy by some drivers - I take up too much space on the road for them. However, better to be seen and

Really interesting article... This is why I'm considered annoy by some drivers - I take up too much space on the road for them. However, better to be seen and be considered "annoying" than be killed. The solution is likely a device that cyclists can wear that self driving cars can detect - I'm going to bet the AI for bikes is intractable because they are fast, virtually invisible at some angles and travel in between the traffic in strange ways. An alternative could be all self driving cars near by sending each other information about cyclists via some means. Or self driving bikes ;-)

landryraccoon 10y ago
> I'm going to bet the AI for bikes is intractable because they are fast, virtually invisible at some angles and travel in between the traffic in strange ways. If this is true, do you think humans can handle it any better? What you just described would be a nightmare for any human driver as well. Is it reasonable to allow self driving cars that are only marginally safer than human drivers?
- andy_ppp 10y ago
  These are good questions, I have no idea about answers to them. Turning it around a second, do you think it's acceptable that all self driving cars could be as bad as current humans are?
  - a_t48 10y ago
    Not OP, but as long as it's not worse than current humans and still much better in other areas, I personally find it acceptable. But the goal is for it to be better in all areas.
  - a_t48 10y ago
    Not OP, but as long as it's not worse than current humans and still much better in other areas, I personally find it acceptable. But the goal is for it to be better in all areas.
  - landryraccoon 10y ago
    I think self driving cars should be allowed if they are marginally safer than human drivers. If the car would be just as likely to get into an accident if I was at the wheel, why begrudge me the extra time to read or work?
crooked-v 10y ago
The idea of a "notice me" transponder is an interesting one, but runs into problems with reconciling your own margin of error for location with the receiver's margin of error for location.
- stouset 10y ago
  Not to mention humans being assholes and using them to abuse autonomous vehicles.
  - andy_ppp 10y ago
    You will be able to do that anyway by making yourself impossible to overtake, or walking out into the street for example; by definition the car would know where the transponder was as well. This actually raises a good question that may be even more problematic for autonomous cars; people deliberately fucking with them in a way you wouldn't/couldn't before. Maybe this won't happen but who knows.
    - pvaldes 10y ago
      The question then is who to blame legally for the results of dangerous driving, the human or the car?. Could the police draw a line between both?
- gambiting 10y ago
  It's also already extremely difficult to get people to wear a helmet, not to mention making them use lights, reflective surfaces and having tyres/brakes in good condition. A lot of people just buy the cheapest $15 bike off craigslist and use that. And we would make them wear an expensive transponder than most likely needs charging and maintenance? I don't believe that for a second. Also - what happens if a car hits a cyclist who didn't wear one? Are we sure it's still the cyclist's fault?

landryraccoon 10y ago

> I'm going to bet the AI for bikes is intractable because they are fast, virtually invisible at some angles and travel in between the traffic in strange ways. If this is true, do you think humans can handle it any better? What you just described would be a nightmare for any human driver as well. Is it reasonable to allow self driving cars that are only marginally safer than human drivers?

andy_ppp 10y ago
These are good questions, I have no idea about answers to them. Turning it around a second, do you think it's acceptable that all self driving cars could be as bad as current humans are?
- a_t48 10y ago
  Not OP, but as long as it's not worse than current humans and still much better in other areas, I personally find it acceptable. But the goal is for it to be better in all areas.
- a_t48 10y ago
  Not OP, but as long as it's not worse than current humans and still much better in other areas, I personally find it acceptable. But the goal is for it to be better in all areas.
- landryraccoon 10y ago
  I think self driving cars should be allowed if they are marginally safer than human drivers. If the car would be just as likely to get into an accident if I was at the wheel, why begrudge me the extra time to read or work?

crooked-v 10y ago

The idea of a "notice me" transponder is an interesting one, but runs into problems with reconciling your own margin of error for location with the receiver's margin of error for location.

stouset 10y ago
Not to mention humans being assholes and using them to abuse autonomous vehicles.
- andy_ppp 10y ago
  You will be able to do that anyway by making yourself impossible to overtake, or walking out into the street for example; by definition the car would know where the transponder was as well. This actually raises a good question that may be even more problematic for autonomous cars; people deliberately fucking with them in a way you wouldn't/couldn't before. Maybe this won't happen but who knows.
  - pvaldes 10y ago
    The question then is who to blame legally for the results of dangerous driving, the human or the car?. Could the police draw a line between both?
gambiting 10y ago
It's also already extremely difficult to get people to wear a helmet, not to mention making them use lights, reflective surfaces and having tyres/brakes in good condition. A lot of people just buy the cheapest $15 bike off craigslist and use that. And we would make them wear an expensive transponder than most likely needs charging and maintenance? I don't believe that for a second. Also - what happens if a car hits a cyclist who didn't wear one? Are we sure it's still the cyclist's fault?