soon
Does your car have any idea why
my car pulled it over? "
my car pulled it over? "
...
| |
Anonymous comments allowed.
70 comments displayed.
#2
-
gittons (01/07/2016) [-] hey, if every single car was a perfect system of self driving..ness then the only accidents
would be from humans.
would be from humans.
#22 to #2
-
senorfrog (01/07/2016) [-] It's both a blessing and curse. Can do stuff while riding, could even sleep alone, roads may work smoothly, less accidents, but have to know where to go beforehand, can't speed up or pass someone, can't actually feel in control, can't have old cars with it yet, or (like the black person who totaled my truck) blame the accident on the other person and make money by suing.
#60 to #22
-
captchakid ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] Would never need to speed up to pass, the car would do it for you. And if every car was automated, there would be virtually no traffic.
#4 to #2
-
SteyrAUG (01/07/2016) [-] And then we get to open the massive can of worms that is the ethics of self-driving cars:
www.technologyreview.com/view/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/
www.technologyreview.com/view/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/
#11 to #4
-
deathstare (01/07/2016) [-] This experiment is flawed. Autonomous cars have sensors and scanners. Autonomous cars always obey the speed limit. Autonomous cars can break a hell of a lot faster than human drivers since it's perfect in it's science. An autonomous car would have seen the humans on the road and slowed long before their's even a chance for failure. An autonomous car can see itself in a grid, the scanners project the surroundings of the car on the grid. Autonomous cars can perfectly weave through tight spaces.
Humans won't die from getting hit by a car unless that car plows through them or they smack their head on the floor. An autocar would be well on the way to stopping, making it difficult to achieve fatal speed.
There is an easy assumption that car manufacturers will choose to spare the owner rather than the masses. It's the same reason that buildings don't have the number 13. They don't want to lose the sale of superstitious people, and the non-super people couldn't care less.
IF I CHOOSE THE CAR, I EXPECT THE CAR TO CHOOSE ME! It's my money that the company took, not theirs.
Humans won't die from getting hit by a car unless that car plows through them or they smack their head on the floor. An autocar would be well on the way to stopping, making it difficult to achieve fatal speed.
There is an easy assumption that car manufacturers will choose to spare the owner rather than the masses. It's the same reason that buildings don't have the number 13. They don't want to lose the sale of superstitious people, and the non-super people couldn't care less.
IF I CHOOSE THE CAR, I EXPECT THE CAR TO CHOOSE ME! It's my money that the company took, not theirs.
#12 to #11
-
deathstare (01/07/2016) [-] Not to mention, if a car was programmed to steer itself into the wall, it would know the time of impending impact. It would position the seat and activate the airbags so that the occupant survives easily.
#13 to #4
-
pentol ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-]
I'm making the assumption here that >90% of human drivers would not chose to crash themselves into the wall if they end up in this situation. a autonomous car that does the same thing, but better, is a net gain. The question that needs to be asked is not "how do we make one car safer for all of us?", like here, but "how do we make ALL the cars safer for all of us?".
Then the utilitarian answer becomes easily recognizable as the car that has the best ratio of saleability and "selflessness"
Then again, i'd like to have a car that doesn't log where i go and stuff, so i wouldn't get a selfdriving car anyways.
Then the utilitarian answer becomes easily recognizable as the car that has the best ratio of saleability and "selflessness"
Then again, i'd like to have a car that doesn't log where i go and stuff, so i wouldn't get a selfdriving car anyways.
#10 to #4
-
ILIEKPEPSEE ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] another issue is insurance and liability FOR any accidents that occur. Why would you choose to give away your agency in the event of a possible accident, only for you to have to pay for any damages your AUTONOMOUS car caused?
#6 to #4
-
bann ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-]
I'd still prefer that system. So long as its known before hand what cars are programmed to do, you've no one but yourself to blame for accidents peeps in the road I mean
Plus, from a utilitarian stand point, self driving cars would actually obey the speed limit, leading to drastically less deaths on the road.
Plus, from a utilitarian stand point, self driving cars would actually obey the speed limit, leading to drastically less deaths on the road.
#3 to #2
-
vortexrain (01/07/2016) [-] Or if whatever provides the car with navigation ***** up; you cannot rule that out, failure is always an option.
#25 to #14
-
blowbags (01/07/2016) [-] You could assign a point system for people based on how much they meet my criteria
E.G white? +3 points, brown? -3 points
Good looking? scale of 1-10 (+5 for 10, -5 for 1)
Intelligent? +3
Make me feel inferior? -20 points! **** you!!!
Turn me down for sex? -10!, obviously a basic bitch!!!
Known to sleep with people I think are jerks?!?!?!? -25!!!! **** YOU DENISE YOU WHORE!!! LEARN THE VALUE OF INTIMACY I HOPE YOU DIE ALONE!!!!!
Make me sausage barms? +3 points
etc
Then the car would have more room/more of a scale to decide who to kill.
E.G white? +3 points, brown? -3 points
Good looking? scale of 1-10 (+5 for 10, -5 for 1)
Intelligent? +3
Make me feel inferior? -20 points! **** you!!!
Turn me down for sex? -10!, obviously a basic bitch!!!
Known to sleep with people I think are jerks?!?!?!? -25!!!! **** YOU DENISE YOU WHORE!!! LEARN THE VALUE OF INTIMACY I HOPE YOU DIE ALONE!!!!!
Make me sausage barms? +3 points
etc
Then the car would have more room/more of a scale to decide who to kill.
#70 to #41
-
yunoavailable (01/08/2016) [-] yeah, I just don't like anons. always makes me think someone was too cowardly to log in or is samefagging. I guess since both comments are at 0 it doesn't matter either way
#71 to #32
-
blowbags (01/08/2016) [-]
in UK we tend to call them "Sausage Barms" - where I'm from in manchester we call them Sausage Muffins but even if you go 15 minutes down the road the people like most of the world/England consider a muffin to be a cake thing - so call it a barm or butty.
I have them on the reg, they get my junk hot, sometimes 3 of them at once (6-8 sausage)
I have them on the reg, they get my junk hot, sometimes 3 of them at once (6-8 sausage)
#19 to #14
-
anon (01/07/2016) [-]
if its perfect, there would be no mistakes made by it.
kill 1, save 3 versus kill 1 save 1?
obviously the former. Also its programming would likely have the rule: go for the least casualties (if it ever, some how despite its damn perfect system, encounters an accident scenario)
kill 1, save 3 versus kill 1 save 1?
obviously the former. Also its programming would likely have the rule: go for the least casualties (if it ever, some how despite its damn perfect system, encounters an accident scenario)
#31 to #20
-
assassindash (01/07/2016) [-] Honestly, it should always go for the option that will cause the least amount of casualties, no matter the situation or reasoning.
Sure, some situations will be ****** up because of this, but at least more people will be alive because of it.
Sure, some situations will be ****** up because of this, but at least more people will be alive because of it.
#21
-
vpiii (01/07/2016) [-] **vpiii used "*roll picture*"**
**vpiii rolled image**
MY CAR DOES NOT CONSENT!
YOU HEAR ME?!
IT DOES NOT CONSENT
**vpiii rolled image**
MY CAR DOES NOT CONSENT!
YOU HEAR ME?!
IT DOES NOT CONSENT
#17
-
scowler (01/07/2016) [-] I'm starting to think these cars are part of a Globalist scheme to establish total control over transportation. #PARANOIA
#50
-
blamie ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] that wont happen tho, self driving cars wont commit any traffic violations, the only reason they'll ever be pulled is because of bureaucratic reasons like out of date registration or something like that.
#38
-
elcreepo (01/07/2016) [-] If the cars are run completely by a computer system, wouldn't human-error caused problems like speeding become a thing of the past?
One day, there will come a time where a policeman's only duty is to ensure we're doing exactly what the machines are making us do with no resistance.
One day, there will come a time where a policeman's only duty is to ensure we're doing exactly what the machines are making us do with no resistance.
#42 to #38
-
legodude (01/07/2016) [-] No, a tesla running on auto pilot was pulled over for speeding
www.autoblog.com/2015/10/20/tesla-autopilot-first-speeding-ticket/
www.autoblog.com/2015/10/20/tesla-autopilot-first-speeding-ticket/
#62 to #47
-
elcreepo (01/07/2016) [-] I haven't found a single instance where that's the case. There's a ******* of science and common sense that goes into determining speed limit.
It's why you can go as fast as 90 mph on a straight ******* nowhere road in Texas, but you can't go faster than 20-25 mph in a school zone with a really sharp curve just beyond it and lots of residential areas.
If a single GPS is able to relay the speed limit set on a road just with the data put into it a smart car can more than handle it
It's why you can go as fast as 90 mph on a straight ******* nowhere road in Texas, but you can't go faster than 20-25 mph in a school zone with a really sharp curve just beyond it and lots of residential areas.
If a single GPS is able to relay the speed limit set on a road just with the data put into it a smart car can more than handle it
#63 to #38
-
captchakid ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] No, because police aren't purely traffic cops. Think about how stupid you made yourself sound there. Cops respond to burglary, robbery, assault, murder, rape, domestic abuse, and hundreds of thousands of other things that don't deal with vehicles.
#64 to #63
-
elcreepo (01/07/2016) [-] But if machines ran EVERY aspect of our lives, which was what I was implying in the first case in the spoiler...
You wouldn't be able to murder because a machine would keep you on the path to work, make you work, go home, and then ensure that you only do what the machines are programmed to allow you to do.
You wouldn't be able to murder because a machine would keep you on the path to work, make you work, go home, and then ensure that you only do what the machines are programmed to allow you to do.
#66 to #64
-
captchakid ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] That second case is very Dystopic, and not near where we're headed with machines. We're headed towards automation and leisure.
As in, you most likely will be working in STEM fields the faster automation picks up, robots can't be scientists or engineers.
As in, you most likely will be working in STEM fields the faster automation picks up, robots can't be scientists or engineers.
#15
-
anon (01/07/2016) [-]
Not very funny meme bruh., I rate this meme 2/10. Hope youll improve bruh
#51
-
numbmind ONLINE (01/07/2016) [-] **numbmind used "*roll picture*"**
**numbmind rolled image**I hope these cars never become a thing...
**numbmind rolled image**I hope these cars never become a thing...
#59 to #51
-
lipidregent (01/07/2016) [-] I see no issue with cutting human error out of the driving equation
#55
-
anon (01/07/2016) [-]
I've been wondering how America's cops are going to handle the era of the self-driving car. They love giving out tickets and DWIs so much, but in a few years/decades there won't be many traffic laws broken. Maybe they'll actually do something beneficial.
FJ seems to love the coppers, so bring on the reds. I'm anon so it won't matter anyway.
FJ seems to love the coppers, so bring on the reds. I'm anon so it won't matter anyway.
#56 to #55
-
anon (01/07/2016) [-]
the police do not love giving tickets. Imagine you have an entire page to fill out twice every time you perform a task at work, also you have a time limit to fill out this page and may have to go over it a third time later. Now consider that police departments literally have to set an un official quota for tickets or the police wont give any out.
basicly this is another libtard "choose only one"
1. The police love to pull people over and give tickets!
2. Th police are so lazy they need a ticket quota!
the quota for my father in my home town was FIVE TICKETS A MONTH ************ . There were are still are police officers here WHO PULL OVER LESS THAN FIVE PEOPLE A MONTH
basicly this is another libtard "choose only one"
1. The police love to pull people over and give tickets!
2. Th police are so lazy they need a ticket quota!
the quota for my father in my home town was FIVE TICKETS A MONTH ************ . There were are still are police officers here WHO PULL OVER LESS THAN FIVE PEOPLE A MONTH
#45
-
rainbowblowjobs (01/07/2016) [-] And here I thought he was going to fine him for being white....oh god ive been contaminated.....
#35
-
notisac (01/07/2016) [-] i think i remeber somthing about realy old cars not having breaks and it was the cars fault when it crashed? does anybody else remember that or heard about it?
#57 to #39
-
anon (01/07/2016) [-]
cars were also created specifically with the ability to go faster than they will ever need to. We will not stop receiving speeding tickets as it is a multi step industry that moves billions of dollars yearly.
Furthermore self driving cars are 100 years further off than you all think. They cannot drive in non-perfect road conditions.
Furthermore self driving cars are 100 years further off than you all think. They cannot drive in non-perfect road conditions.
