4 ms·

Yes, but auto-pilots are easier problems to solve, due to predictability. It boils down to maintaining speed and bearing, while considering some other factors s

Yes, but auto-pilots are easier problems to solve, due to predictability. It boils down to maintaining speed and bearing, while considering some other factors such as weather, terrain and collision prevention with other planes (transponder based?). In case of a truly unpredictable event, the pilot takes over. Cars on the other hand need to do much more than that. The process of automatically determining where the road actually is, is not trivial by itself. Cars also need to handle other unpredictable factors to a much higher degree; other manually driven cars, bicycles, pedestrians to name a few. Not to mention road obstacles, and animals (in my country moose collisions are common, and deadly).

stormbrew 13y ago
> Not to mention road obstacles, and animals (in my country moose collisions are common, and deadly). It always fascinates me that this argument comes up from the negative side of self-driving cars pretty much every time, but it's actually the poster-child reason self-driving cars are better. A self-driving car is at least as likely to recognize a potential collision with a moose as a human is (given current sensor tech) and probably much more so since it can't be distracted. The advantage of a full omnidirectional sensor array is that it can pay attention to the kid on the bike, the moose crossing the street, the 5 cars around you, the alien spaceship in the sky, and the kid using your bumper to accelerate his skateboard all at once (or at least in timeslices small enough to count as such). You can only pay attention to a couple of those things.
- janvidar 13y ago
  No, don't get me wrong. I am all for better sensors, drivers assist systems, or self-driving cars. I'm just pointing out that self-driving cars are probably more complex than air plane auto-pilots. Although, I have no real knowledge of either.

stormbrew 13y ago

> Not to mention road obstacles, and animals (in my country moose collisions are common, and deadly). It always fascinates me that this argument comes up from the negative side of self-driving cars pretty much every time, but it's actually the poster-child reason self-driving cars are better. A self-driving car is at least as likely to recognize a potential collision with a moose as a human is (given current sensor tech) and probably much more so since it can't be distracted. The advantage of a full omnidirectional sensor array is that it can pay attention to the kid on the bike, the moose crossing the street, the 5 cars around you, the alien spaceship in the sky, and the kid using your bumper to accelerate his skateboard all at once (or at least in timeslices small enough to count as such). You can only pay attention to a couple of those things.

janvidar 13y ago
No, don't get me wrong. I am all for better sensors, drivers assist systems, or self-driving cars. I'm just pointing out that self-driving cars are probably more complex than air plane auto-pilots. Although, I have no real knowledge of either.