“You can get it in your favorite color. Provided your favorite color is Dalmatian or Flower Power.”
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
Can you really predict this will not a feasible in 2065?
I just don’t see a self-driving car being capable of handling a child dashing out in front of it. Any instance would be inexorably tied to the GPS system (which, I’ve read, is barely hanging on right now). Any intermittent failure (or satellite failure) would leave the cars (of the “desired” design) helpless (or worse, out of control in motion). You’ll always have to have a person in the driver’s seat and that person will always have to be ready to take control at any time, so you may as well just be driving yourself.
I certainly like the idea on, say, a train or other vehicle on a set track, but a personal vehicle?
I dunno; those personal flying cars might do well being self-driven, though. I think it’s possible the “self-driving car revolution” over which people are fawning will never be used for cars but rather finally allow the flying cars dreamed in the ‘50s.
I think it will be highway first, and within just a few years. Tesla now has traffic aware cruise control, which enables the car to maintain a user selected distance from the car in front of it. It now has automatic detection of lane departures, and Tesla has announced the intention to support automatic steering of lane changes, by the driver merely using the turn signal. They already have automatic collision avoidance, by using regenerative braking and anti-lock braking, if necessary. I think Teslas will be able to cruise I-5 pretty much on autopilot shortly. Several high-end automakers have these capabilities and more right now.
City driving just has way more variables to take into consideration, although many cars can parallel park without the participation of the driver.
The first driverless cars will be quite heroic, if only for the fact that they will be required to cope with so many humans making decisions. Once humans are out of the loop however... child's play lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
I knew something was going on when Elon made those remarks about Apple 3 days ago. Here is what I said:
Your conclusions, if this is the case, are quite wrong. Elon actually wants competition. Why do you think that he released so many patents to public use. He has stated previously (sorry, no link, no time) that competition can only increase the presence on the roads of electric vehicles and start to shift thinking. There is plenty of room for several Teslas in there. That doesn't imply that he is happy to lose talented people, which is where the friction between companies would occur.
Earlier today I saw another company with the same sort of mapping gear on top their vehicle with the wheel calibration as well. Psomas. The SUV was clearly labeled as a Mapping vehicle.
HERE? Jk
You know, I just thought of something.
Why shouldn't Apple release an innovative new car in 2017 it doesn't have to be driverless. Just a bad ass Apple car.
There's certainly more to the future than "driverless".
While Giggle throws Billions of dollars into R&D for their car, Apple could be MAKING Billions in the meantime actually selling luxury vehicles, building their brand and racking up Billions to fund their future driverless car R&D.
I just don’t see a self-driving car being capable of handling a child dashing out in front of it.
1) You honestly think human reaction times are better than a computer? :???:
2) Your comment isn't any different than when cruise control was still an idea on the cusp of a marketable reality. That seemed to be quite popular on highways and I haven't seen a single report about there being more accidents because the driver behind a semi-self-driving car had gotten too lazy.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
Apparently we're getting messages posted from the past now, because you're too late, self driving cars are already happening, they're on the road now, with over a million accident-free miles just with the Google cars.
It's WAY too late for them to not happen, they'll be for sale to the public in less than 10 years.
There is so much information out there about (and I'll make the distinction) Assisted Driving I'm surprised we are all surprised, but here's a quick little summary of their progress with an noteworthy update/ correction
1) You honestly think human reaction times are better than a computer?
2) Your comment isn't any different than when cruise control was still an idea on the cusp of a marketable reality. That seemed to be quite popular on highways and I haven't seen a single report about there being more accidents because the driver behind a semi-self-driving car had gotten too lazy.
I once drove on cruise control on a remote highway behind another vehicle for perhaps 50 km without touching my brake and the separation between us remained remarkably constant. My guess is that he was on cruise control too and yet, the constancy was remarkable... and that with only cruise control and no other active systems.
There is so much information out there about (and I'll make the distinction) Assisted Driving I'm surprised we are all surprised, but here's a quick little summary of their progress with an noteworthy update/ correction
Given the frenetic pace of development of [1] electric cars and [2] automated systems, involving new players such as Tesla and Google and others but also established manufacturers such as BMW, Mercedes (a company to which one should pay close attention) and Porsche and others, I'd be surprised were Apple not considering the possibilities.
I knew something was going on when Elon made those remarks about Apple 3 days ago. Here is what I said:
If Apple's doing that than Tim Cook really has lost the plot. Apple has no business building automobiles. It's a highly regulated industry and I can't think of anything Apple would bring to the party. What the hell does Apple know about designing cars?!?
I just don’t see a self-driving car being capable of handling a child dashing out in front of it. Any instance would be inexorably tied to the GPS system (which, I’ve read, is barely hanging on right now). Any intermittent failure (or satellite failure) would leave the cars (of the “desired” design) helpless (or worse, out of control in motion). You’ll always have to have a person in the driver’s seat and that person will always have to be ready to take control at any time, so you may as well just be driving yourself.
I certainly like the idea on, say, a train or other vehicle on a set track, but a personal vehicle?
I'm not too worried about the self driving car's abilities. Certainly a computer can react much quicker than a human. What bothers me are software bugs. If you've got even just 2000 self driving cars on the road and there's an unforeseen glitch in the software, then the results could be catastrophic.
At present we have enough accidents from defective parts in automobiles. Having defective parts actually controlling the vehicle will just add to the problem.
Eventually we'll get there but for now I think it's just a pipe dream.
1) You honestly think human reaction times are better than a computer?
I honestly think I didn’t say anything about humans.
2) Your comment isn't any different than when cruise control was still an idea on the cusp of a marketable reality.
Uh… what? Cruise control just has to keep putting a set amount of fuel into the engine. How is that in any way comparable to actually driving?
I haven't seen a single report about there being more accidents because the driver behind a semi-self-driving car had gotten too lazy.
1. You’ve seen the accidents caused by people who thought cruise control self-drove, right?
2. THE DRIVER IS STILL DRIVING WHEN YOU HAVE CRUISE CONTROL ON. If anything your response time would be better since you could hover over the break rather than having your foot on the gas (and your mind occupied with keeping the speed the same).
I would like to see an Apple car! Bring it on! Apple needs to think big, and they have enough money to fund countless such projects.
Apple already rules phones, tablets and computers, they should branch out into other areas also.
Yes because designing personal computers translates to designing automobiles. ?TV hasn't been updated in several years, Apple still doesn't have a streaming music service to compete with Spotify, their cloud services leave a lot to be desired, software releases are quite buggy, ?Watch hasn't even shipped yet and people want Apple to get into the car business? What next should Apple start designing appliances? Seriously people are off their rockers.
I honestly think I didn’t say anything about humans.
Sure you did. You said self-driving cars wouldn't be capable of stopping if a child ran out into the road. Since a vehicle now can only be stopped by a human if that happens you are comparing that situation to a human controlled vehicle.
Uh… what? Cruise control just has to keep putting a set amount of fuel into the engine. How is that in any way comparable to actually driving?
That isn't what cruise control does. The amount of fuel, RPMs, gear setting, etc. all change to maintain a particular speed.
1. You’ve seen the accidents caused by people who thought cruise control self-drove, right?
1) Now you're just making my point about progress.
2) So there are idiots out there and we still have safer vehicles and cruise control common in even inexpensive cars.
2. THE DRIVER IS STILL DRIVING WHEN YOU HAVE CRUISE CONTROL ON. If anything your response time would be better since you could hover over the break rather than having your foot on the gas (and your mind occupied with keeping the speed the same).
And the driver will still be in control with the next step toward self-driving cars, just as the driver is still in control with cruise control enabled. This is how complex technology usually advances.
Hmmm. Not going to happen? Between what Google is doing and what Tesla already has on the road with its Auto Pilot feature I think we're almost there. http://youtu.be/PcwObeGB_mU
See, [@]Tallest Skil[/@], that is likely the next evolution along this long road go self-driving cars: Cruise Control+ that can also decelerate if there is something blocking its path.
Yes because designing personal computers translates to designing automobiles. ?TV hasn't been updated in several years, Apple still doesn't have a streaming music service to compete with Spotify, their cloud services leave a lot to be desired, software releases are quite buggy, ?Watch hasn't even shipped yet and people want Apple to get into the car business? What next should Apple start designing appliances? Seriously people are off their rockers.
I think y'all need to watch this:
With respect, the video doesn't support your argument. Someone who knew Steve Jobs' thinking and was close to him as the idea of a revolutionary new mobile phone was developing could have said, as Jonny Ive intimated in the interview, "Why are you thinking about this? Focus Steve, focus, we build computers and music players".
People need to communicate and want information, hence the iPhone is cleaning up but people also need to get around, safely. Who will buy an iDevice (in the longer timeframe) if their ride won't talk to it? Apple must take an interest in modern transport (which doesn't mean an Apple iCar is on the horizon).
Hmmm. Not going to happen? Between what Google is doing and what Tesla already has on the road with its Auto Pilot feature I think we're almost there.
LOVED the video, thanks for posting. So much I'd like to comment on but out of time. However, there wasn't much (or anything) shown that a car couldn't handle autonomously besides just the smart cruise control.
With respect, the video doesn't support your argument. Someone who knew Steve Jobs' thinking and was close to him as the idea of a revolutionary new mobile phone was developing could have said, as Jonny Ive intimated in the interview, "Why are you thinking about this? Focus Steve, focus, we build computers and music players".
People need to communicate and want information, hence the iPhone is cleaning up but people also need to get around, safely. Who will buy an iDevice (in the longer timeframe) if their ride won't talk to it? Apple must take an interest in modern transport (which doesn't mean an Apple iCar is on the horizon).
I don't think Apple should get into the business of building cars. The iPhone is basically a personal computer that also makes phone calls. Or a music player that also makes phone calls. It's not a stretch to see Apple going from the Mac or iPod to the iPhone.
Comments
Comes in red or yellow.
“You can get it in your favorite color. Provided your favorite color is Dalmatian or Flower Power.”
I just don’t see a self-driving car being capable of handling a child dashing out in front of it. Any instance would be inexorably tied to the GPS system (which, I’ve read, is barely hanging on right now). Any intermittent failure (or satellite failure) would leave the cars (of the “desired” design) helpless (or worse, out of control in motion). You’ll always have to have a person in the driver’s seat and that person will always have to be ready to take control at any time, so you may as well just be driving yourself.
I certainly like the idea on, say, a train or other vehicle on a set track, but a personal vehicle?
I dunno; those personal flying cars might do well being self-driven, though. I think it’s possible the “self-driving car revolution” over which people are fawning will never be used for cars but rather finally allow the flying cars dreamed in the ‘50s.
I think it will be highway first, and within just a few years. Tesla now has traffic aware cruise control, which enables the car to maintain a user selected distance from the car in front of it. It now has automatic detection of lane departures, and Tesla has announced the intention to support automatic steering of lane changes, by the driver merely using the turn signal. They already have automatic collision avoidance, by using regenerative braking and anti-lock braking, if necessary. I think Teslas will be able to cruise I-5 pretty much on autopilot shortly. Several high-end automakers have these capabilities and more right now.
City driving just has way more variables to take into consideration, although many cars can parallel park without the participation of the driver.
The first driverless cars will be quite heroic, if only for the fact that they will be required to cope with so many humans making decisions. Once humans are out of the loop however... child's play lol.
I knew something was going on when Elon made those remarks about Apple 3 days ago. Here is what I said:
Your conclusions, if this is the case, are quite wrong. Elon actually wants competition. Why do you think that he released so many patents to public use. He has stated previously (sorry, no link, no time) that competition can only increase the presence on the roads of electric vehicles and start to shift thinking. There is plenty of room for several Teslas in there. That doesn't imply that he is happy to lose talented people, which is where the friction between companies would occur.
HERE? Jk
You know, I just thought of something.
Why shouldn't Apple release an innovative new car in 2017 it doesn't have to be driverless. Just a bad ass Apple car.
There's certainly more to the future than "driverless".
While Giggle throws Billions of dollars into R&D for their car, Apple could be MAKING Billions in the meantime actually selling luxury vehicles, building their brand and racking up Billions to fund their future driverless car R&D.
1) You honestly think human reaction times are better than a computer? :???:
2) Your comment isn't any different than when cruise control was still an idea on the cusp of a marketable reality. That seemed to be quite popular on highways and I haven't seen a single report about there being more accidents because the driver behind a semi-self-driving car had gotten too lazy.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
Apparently we're getting messages posted from the past now, because you're too late, self driving cars are already happening, they're on the road now, with over a million accident-free miles just with the Google cars.
It's WAY too late for them to not happen, they'll be for sale to the public in less than 10 years.
There is so much information out there about (and I'll make the distinction) Assisted Driving I'm surprised we are all surprised, but here's a quick little summary of their progress with an noteworthy update/ correction
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/22/6828161/california-permits-self-driving-cars-google-audi-mercedes-benz
1) You honestly think human reaction times are better than a computer?
2) Your comment isn't any different than when cruise control was still an idea on the cusp of a marketable reality. That seemed to be quite popular on highways and I haven't seen a single report about there being more accidents because the driver behind a semi-self-driving car had gotten too lazy.
I once drove on cruise control on a remote highway behind another vehicle for perhaps 50 km without touching my brake and the separation between us remained remarkably constant. My guess is that he was on cruise control too and yet, the constancy was remarkable... and that with only cruise control and no other active systems.
There is so much information out there about (and I'll make the distinction) Assisted Driving I'm surprised we are all surprised, but here's a quick little summary of their progress with an noteworthy update/ correction
http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/22/6828161/california-permits-self-driving-cars-google-audi-mercedes-benz
Given the frenetic pace of development of [1] electric cars and [2] automated systems, involving new players such as Tesla and Google and others but also established manufacturers such as BMW, Mercedes (a company to which one should pay close attention) and Porsche and others, I'd be surprised were Apple not considering the possibilities.
If Apple's doing that than Tim Cook really has lost the plot. Apple has no business building automobiles. It's a highly regulated industry and I can't think of anything Apple would bring to the party. What the hell does Apple know about designing cars?!?
I just don’t see a self-driving car being capable of handling a child dashing out in front of it. Any instance would be inexorably tied to the GPS system (which, I’ve read, is barely hanging on right now). Any intermittent failure (or satellite failure) would leave the cars (of the “desired” design) helpless (or worse, out of control in motion). You’ll always have to have a person in the driver’s seat and that person will always have to be ready to take control at any time, so you may as well just be driving yourself.
I certainly like the idea on, say, a train or other vehicle on a set track, but a personal vehicle?
I'm not too worried about the self driving car's abilities. Certainly a computer can react much quicker than a human. What bothers me are software bugs. If you've got even just 2000 self driving cars on the road and there's an unforeseen glitch in the software, then the results could be catastrophic.
At present we have enough accidents from defective parts in automobiles. Having defective parts actually controlling the vehicle will just add to the problem.
Eventually we'll get there but for now I think it's just a pipe dream.
I honestly think I didn’t say anything about humans.
Uh… what? Cruise control just has to keep putting a set amount of fuel into the engine. How is that in any way comparable to actually driving?
1. You’ve seen the accidents caused by people who thought cruise control self-drove, right?
2. THE DRIVER IS STILL DRIVING WHEN YOU HAVE CRUISE CONTROL ON. If anything your response time would be better since you could hover over the break rather than having your foot on the gas (and your mind occupied with keeping the speed the same).
They are happening.
Yes because designing personal computers translates to designing automobiles. ?TV hasn't been updated in several years, Apple still doesn't have a streaming music service to compete with Spotify, their cloud services leave a lot to be desired, software releases are quite buggy, ?Watch hasn't even shipped yet and people want Apple to get into the car business? What next should Apple start designing appliances? Seriously people are off their rockers.
I think y'all need to watch this:
Sure you did. You said self-driving cars wouldn't be capable of stopping if a child ran out into the road. Since a vehicle now can only be stopped by a human if that happens you are comparing that situation to a human controlled vehicle.
That isn't what cruise control does. The amount of fuel, RPMs, gear setting, etc. all change to maintain a particular speed.
1) Now you're just making my point about progress.
2) So there are idiots out there and we still have safer vehicles and cruise control common in even inexpensive cars.
And the driver will still be in control with the next step toward self-driving cars, just as the driver is still in control with cruise control enabled. This is how complex technology usually advances.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
Hmmm. Not going to happen? Between what Google is doing and what Tesla already has on the road with its Auto Pilot feature I think we're almost there.
See, [@]Tallest Skil[/@], that is likely the next evolution along this long road go self-driving cars: Cruise Control+ that can also decelerate if there is something blocking its path.
Yes because designing personal computers translates to designing automobiles. ?TV hasn't been updated in several years, Apple still doesn't have a streaming music service to compete with Spotify, their cloud services leave a lot to be desired, software releases are quite buggy, ?Watch hasn't even shipped yet and people want Apple to get into the car business? What next should Apple start designing appliances? Seriously people are off their rockers.
I think y'all need to watch this:
With respect, the video doesn't support your argument. Someone who knew Steve Jobs' thinking and was close to him as the idea of a revolutionary new mobile phone was developing could have said, as Jonny Ive intimated in the interview, "Why are you thinking about this? Focus Steve, focus, we build computers and music players".
People need to communicate and want information, hence the iPhone is cleaning up but people also need to get around, safely. Who will buy an iDevice (in the longer timeframe) if their ride won't talk to it? Apple must take an interest in modern transport (which doesn't mean an Apple iCar is on the horizon).
Hmmm. Not going to happen? Between what Google is doing and what Tesla already has on the road with its Auto Pilot feature I think we're almost there.
LOVED the video, thanks for posting. So much I'd like to comment on but out of time. However, there wasn't much (or anything) shown that a car couldn't handle autonomously besides just the smart cruise control.
I don't think Apple should get into the business of building cars. The iPhone is basically a personal computer that also makes phone calls. Or a music player that also makes phone calls. It's not a stretch to see Apple going from the Mac or iPod to the iPhone.