4 ms·

All the same, I have a large amount of trust in my own driving. I trust my driving more than my own programming. And I sure as hell trust my code more than some

All the same, I have a large amount of trust in my own driving. I trust my driving more than my own programming. And I sure as hell trust my code more than some sketchy offshore team's. It's only a matter of time before the first car segfaults. Plus it's a huge security risk. Cars are internet-connected these days.

TeMPOraL 12y ago
Well, for one you can be pretty sure that self-driving car software isn't going to be written by hippie webdevs changing frameworks every other week. Companies and programmers that tend to work on this kind of software have pretty good track records - we don't see planes falling out of the sky or medical machines randomly killing patients all the time. Uou're going to have an app store for your car drivers.
- rogerbinns 12y ago
  Cars have it simpler than planes etc too. In particular they can always fail safe by stopping - something that isn't applicable to planes. Other complexities aren't present either due to the 2d nature of roads - for example car software doesn't have to worry about stalls, coffin corner or similar. I believe that self driving cars will primarily be owned by companies with fleets of them, rather than individual ownership we have today. It doesn't make sense to have them sitting idle 23 hours a day. The owner companies will have a very strong incentive for safety since even rumours would be bad for business. They will also be in a better position to do something about it due to having multiple vehicles.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    they can always fail safe by stopping Not if you're in a highway.
    - seanflyon 12y ago
      Not if you are on a highway with no shoulder and significant traffic. Seems like a rare case.
    - rogerbinns 12y ago
      Especially on a highway. I am talking about a situation where normal operation isn't possible such as due to hardware or software failure. Of course it isn't ideal, but wouldn't be much of a problem if the other vehicles on the road are driverless. (To be clear I mean they can just stop in the middle of the road if things are bad.) A plane can't just let go of all control surfaces. Heck it can't even leave them where they are. It must do something and always must provide some degree of control. A flying plane is moving at several hundred miles an hour and cannot stop.
  - TeMPOraL 12y ago
    > It doesn't make sense to have them sitting idle 23 hours a day. Well, I agree. That's why I expect that, along human drivers, the very concept of car ownership will disappear. It's much more efficient to have those cars available on call; they can serve someone else while you're not using them, and they can be parked&recharged at night with much better space-efficiency than cars are parked today.

TeMPOraL 12y ago

Well, for one you can be pretty sure that self-driving car software isn't going to be written by hippie webdevs changing frameworks every other week. Companies and programmers that tend to work on this kind of software have pretty good track records - we don't see planes falling out of the sky or medical machines randomly killing patients all the time. Uou're going to have an app store for your car drivers.

rogerbinns 12y ago
Cars have it simpler than planes etc too. In particular they can always fail safe by stopping - something that isn't applicable to planes. Other complexities aren't present either due to the 2d nature of roads - for example car software doesn't have to worry about stalls, coffin corner or similar. I believe that self driving cars will primarily be owned by companies with fleets of them, rather than individual ownership we have today. It doesn't make sense to have them sitting idle 23 hours a day. The owner companies will have a very strong incentive for safety since even rumours would be bad for business. They will also be in a better position to do something about it due to having multiple vehicles.
- icebraining 12y ago
  they can always fail safe by stopping Not if you're in a highway.
  - seanflyon 12y ago
    Not if you are on a highway with no shoulder and significant traffic. Seems like a rare case.
  - rogerbinns 12y ago
    Especially on a highway. I am talking about a situation where normal operation isn't possible such as due to hardware or software failure. Of course it isn't ideal, but wouldn't be much of a problem if the other vehicles on the road are driverless. (To be clear I mean they can just stop in the middle of the road if things are bad.) A plane can't just let go of all control surfaces. Heck it can't even leave them where they are. It must do something and always must provide some degree of control. A flying plane is moving at several hundred miles an hour and cannot stop.
- TeMPOraL 12y ago
  > It doesn't make sense to have them sitting idle 23 hours a day. Well, I agree. That's why I expect that, along human drivers, the very concept of car ownership will disappear. It's much more efficient to have those cars available on call; they can serve someone else while you're not using them, and they can be parked&recharged at night with much better space-efficiency than cars are parked today.