4 ms·

Do you have anything meaningful to back up your point? Any sources? Anyone else who agrees?

andai 10y ago
I agree!
mrbabbage 10y ago
On the train point, humans have operated fully automatic rail systems for nearly fifty years (the London Underground Victoria Line opened in 1968; BART in San Francisco is similarly automated and open in 1972). The first unattended train to my knowledge, the Vancouver SkyTrain, didn't open til 1985, or 17 years later. My interpretation: it took a while—17 years—for people to warm up to driverless trains on fixed routes with no at-grade intersections.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Also in Japan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m12tb1p_NEM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m12tb1p_NEM
- adolph 10y ago
  Also Dallas: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFW_Skylink https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFW_Skylink
- linkregister 10y ago
  Who is the person who sits at the front of the BART train? That isn't the operator?
  - pvg 10y ago
    It is. What they spend most of their time operating are the doors, though.
    - gyc 10y ago
      Although it wasn't that long ago when BART workers went on strike, replacement workers (former BART operators) stepped in to operate the trains, and then promptly ran over and killed two workers performing track maintenance.
      - pvg 10y ago
        It also didn't really have anything to do with the train operators. http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/BART-Responds-to-NTSB-Report-on-Accident-That-Killed-2-Workers-299797051.html http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/BART-Responds-to-NTSB-R...
shouldbworking 10y ago
There's not really studies on the subject. The need for a human to be in control of machines that carry other humans seems to be an innate human trait from my perspective. Humans have proven themselves to be mentally flexible by, for example, training themselves not to have a fear of snakes which is believed to be an innate fear of primates, speculatively including humans. This means humans could possibly overcome the fear of being in a fast moving vehicle without human control, but I would argue that the self discipline needed to train our entire population not to fear these vehicles would be enough of an obstacle that they will never be realized. There's also the human factor at play. For a long while humans and robots will be sharing the road, and as soon as human drivers learn that the robots will avoid collisions at all costs they will start abusing machine controlled vehicles. A human will reach a point where they say "Well, fuck it just run into me then" but it would be unethical to program a machine with the same logic. Other humans know they can't fuck with people too much or they risk a confrontation. I think its an open question how nice society will be to participant unable to retaliate. A more realistic path for self driving vehicles is special segregated lanes on highways. This is already done for HOV vehicles so much of the infastructure and design is already in place. Self driving transports would use these lanes connect between hubs where the vehicles are brought under human control for the short and more chaotic final leg to their destination. This could be workable with our current highways and without scaring the hell out of anyone, but it means that much of the research towards these vehicles is currently misguided. Sorry for posting a short and hollow response originally. I have been accused of doing so on the site before but my reasoning is to try to avoid giant walls of text like this. You're right in implying.l that such short and zany sounding answers don't add much to the discussion
- yourapostasy 10y ago
  > I think its an open question how nice society will be to participant unable to retaliate. I suspect that the initial implied liability carried by the first batch of commercially sold self-driving vehicles will lead to extensive sensor logs and 360° dash cam recordings. In the event a human driver tries to game a self-driving vehicle and it causes an accident, the extensive data logging will supply far more than traffic courts and insurance companies have ordinarily dealt with before, and likely lead to new legal precedents. If the LIDAR data logging shows a human driver recklessly accelerated towards the self-driving car (presumably thinking it would get out of the way) and the path of least damage correctly chosen was to stay put because of merging cars on either side, then most attorneys and insurance companies will find it hard to challenge sub-second LIDAR data that can be reconstructed to overlay data on the video log. One potential development out of this push for self-driving vehicles that might catch us by surprise is ubiquitous, extensive data logging in vehicles, both human- and computer-driven. In order to sell the tech at a mass scale, all sorts of sensors must sell much cheaper than even today, and they won't necessarily be limited to only computer-driven cars. Like cell phone cameras made solid-state cameras and storing large amounts of photos and videos cheaper than the mass market imagined possible only 30 years ago, and now people are putting those camera sub-assemblies to use outside of cell phones.

andai 10y ago

I agree!

On the train point, humans have operated fully automatic rail systems for nearly fifty years (the London Underground Victoria Line opened in 1968; BART in San Francisco is similarly automated and open in 1972). The first unattended train to my knowledge, the Vancouver SkyTrain, didn't open til 1985, or 17 years later. My interpretation: it took a while—17 years—for people to warm up to driverless trains on fixed routes with no at-grade intersections.

jacquesm 10y ago
Also in Japan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m12tb1p_NEM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m12tb1p_NEM
adolph 10y ago
Also Dallas: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFW_Skylink https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFW_Skylink
linkregister 10y ago
Who is the person who sits at the front of the BART train? That isn't the operator?
- pvg 10y ago
  It is. What they spend most of their time operating are the doors, though.
  - gyc 10y ago
    Although it wasn't that long ago when BART workers went on strike, replacement workers (former BART operators) stepped in to operate the trains, and then promptly ran over and killed two workers performing track maintenance.
    - pvg 10y ago
      It also didn't really have anything to do with the train operators. http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/BART-Responds-to-NTSB-Report-on-Accident-That-Killed-2-Workers-299797051.html http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/BART-Responds-to-NTSB-R...

shouldbworking 10y ago

There's not really studies on the subject. The need for a human to be in control of machines that carry other humans seems to be an innate human trait from my perspective. Humans have proven themselves to be mentally flexible by, for example, training themselves not to have a fear of snakes which is believed to be an innate fear of primates, speculatively including humans. This means humans could possibly overcome the fear of being in a fast moving vehicle without human control, but I would argue that the self discipline needed to train our entire population not to fear these vehicles would be enough of an obstacle that they will never be realized. There's also the human factor at play. For a long while humans and robots will be sharing the road, and as soon as human drivers learn that the robots will avoid collisions at all costs they will start abusing machine controlled vehicles. A human will reach a point where they say "Well, fuck it just run into me then" but it would be unethical to program a machine with the same logic. Other humans know they can't fuck with people too much or they risk a confrontation. I think its an open question how nice society will be to participant unable to retaliate. A more realistic path for self driving vehicles is special segregated lanes on highways. This is already done for HOV vehicles so much of the infastructure and design is already in place. Self driving transports would use these lanes connect between hubs where the vehicles are brought under human control for the short and more chaotic final leg to their destination. This could be workable with our current highways and without scaring the hell out of anyone, but it means that much of the research towards these vehicles is currently misguided. Sorry for posting a short and hollow response originally. I have been accused of doing so on the site before but my reasoning is to try to avoid giant walls of text like this. You're right in implying.l that such short and zany sounding answers don't add much to the discussion

yourapostasy 10y ago
> I think its an open question how nice society will be to participant unable to retaliate. I suspect that the initial implied liability carried by the first batch of commercially sold self-driving vehicles will lead to extensive sensor logs and 360° dash cam recordings. In the event a human driver tries to game a self-driving vehicle and it causes an accident, the extensive data logging will supply far more than traffic courts and insurance companies have ordinarily dealt with before, and likely lead to new legal precedents. If the LIDAR data logging shows a human driver recklessly accelerated towards the self-driving car (presumably thinking it would get out of the way) and the path of least damage correctly chosen was to stay put because of merging cars on either side, then most attorneys and insurance companies will find it hard to challenge sub-second LIDAR data that can be reconstructed to overlay data on the video log. One potential development out of this push for self-driving vehicles that might catch us by surprise is ubiquitous, extensive data logging in vehicles, both human- and computer-driven. In order to sell the tech at a mass scale, all sorts of sensors must sell much cheaper than even today, and they won't necessarily be limited to only computer-driven cars. Like cell phone cameras made solid-state cameras and storing large amounts of photos and videos cheaper than the mass market imagined possible only 30 years ago, and now people are putting those camera sub-assemblies to use outside of cell phones.