4 ms·
Remote operators work for flying drones, since those don't have to evade children running onto the road with sub-second reaction times. For cars there is no wa
by Mithaldu 12y ago
Remote operators work for flying drones, since those don't have to evade children running onto the road with sub-second reaction times.
For cars there is no way electron-based signal transmission technology can control them with an even marginally acceptable latency.
- lukasm 12y agoLatency doesn't matter. What matter is the final outcome. Better skill, software, data etc can compensate that.
- astazangasta 12y agoDrone pilots can have several seconds of latency. This means remote operators are useless as a backup to the machine if a split second reaction is required.
- jsprogrammer 12y agoWhat do you mean by electron-based signal transmission technology? If you're talking remote control, those signals will be photon based. If you're talking internal control, electrons on wires move pretty fast and many cars already utilize them. Is there much latency difference between mechanically closing the throttle with your foot and signaling a servo to close the throttle? Presumably some situations can be analyzed by a processor and trigger the servo before the human controller has even been able to consciously perceive a scene.
- Mithaldu 12y agoOne question: How do you plan to remote control a moving car with photons? Edit: Huh, ok. I didn't know radio signals are also photons. Still, the speed of light is significant with sub-second decisions. So even for photon transmission remote control of a moving car in live traffic is not feasible.