Robotaxi torched as San Francisco locals rage against driverless cars

[Sprintey]

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-new...riverless-cars

Incredible scenes on the video. The Waymo took a wrong turn into Chinatown.

[Syndrome]

[FTE217]

Power to the people !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MFL]

related to the topic, the morality question regarding self-driving vehicles is certainly an interesting one.

“As we are about to endow millions of vehicles with autonomy, taking algorithmic morality seriously has never been more urgent.”

https://www.technologyreview.com/201...ammed-to-kill/

[Itsme]

Who said USA does not have Bogans!

[Adamz Ghia]

I was listening to a Star Talk podcast and driverless cars was the episodes topic, and one question put forward was what does the car do if a child steps out into the road and swerving one way means you will miss the child but hit another pedestrian and swerving the other way will harm the driver? We have to program that into the car, how do we make that choice?

One of the guests on that episode worked for an auto company (I think it was Volvo), and he said they were struggling with kangaroos. They couldn’t get the systems to predict and recognise their movements.

My personal view is driverless cars will be great for freeways, and for those in Melbourne it should eliminate the Point Cook Bend choke point, but in city roads and suburban areas we have so far to go technology wise it should not be allowed.

[aussiblue]

Look at the various weekly dash cam compilations on YouTube I think we already have lots of (perhaps virtual) driverless cars in Australia; or at least ones with brainless drivers.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

I was listening to a Star Talk podcast and driverless cars was the episodes topic, and one question put forward was what does the car do if a child steps out into the road and swerving one way means you will miss the child but hit another pedestrian and swerving the other way will harm the driver? We have to program that into the car, how do we make that choice?

One of the guests on that episode worked for an auto company (I think it was Volvo), and he said they were struggling with kangaroos. They couldn’t get the systems to predict and recognise their movements.

My personal view is driverless cars will be great for freeways, and for those in Melbourne it should eliminate the Point Cook Bend choke point, but in city roads and suburban areas we have so far to go technology wise it should not be allowed.

My thoughts are that the company has a responsibility to its customers to prioritise their lives over others.

If presented with a situation where it has to kill a pedestrian/others or its occupants, you'd think it would always choose the others.

Interesting ethics conundrum - they're all cheating emissions, so why wouldn't they prioritise the lives of their customers, its a great selling point

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by MFL

related to the topic, the morality question regarding self-driving vehicles is certainly an interesting one.

“As we are about to endow millions of vehicles with autonomy, taking algorithmic morality seriously has never been more urgent.”

https://www.technologyreview.com/201...ammed-to-kill/

A very good point. The prospect of AI enabled drones deciding to act toward battlefield goals, independent of human oversight, is being considered in military circles:

https://www.twz.com/news-features/dr...ep-is-imminent

[Sprintey]

follow up article:

https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-new...ith-autonomous

I especially like the 12 car automated traffic jams (like the sprites in some computer games create), and placing of a road cone on the bonnet of a robotaxi to confuse it's sensors and immobilise it while making it look like a unicorn. But then I have an anarchic sense of humour.

Just like with the O-Bikes, the real problem is the beta testing of a new technology by very naive and idealistic people on very world-weary and cynical people - it's never going to end with property being respected.