|
When I'm making a left if someone has their front end hanging way past the stop line I'll intentionally put my mirror as close to their bumper as I can. Usually nothing happens but 1 out of every 1000 times I see their reverse lights activate as I drive off and I feel super smug.
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2020 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:I say again, mandatory retesting for old people every couple of years. I could get behind maybe every 2 years when you hit 60 but 5 before that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
It's rare that someone loving up is over 60 here. Maybe if you live in Florida or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2020 20:19
|
|
|
I can usually tell when someone is an old driver, but I don’t really think it’s any more unsafe than all the young people who still go 60 in a 35.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2020 00:30
|
|
|
jamal posted:I notice a lot of people have trouble with left turns across big intersections. Like just cannot turn in one continuous smooth arc, it's always turn early, then go straight, then have to make a sharp tight corner at the end. One in particular there's a double turn lane and a dotted while line to follow. Still no. If you look closely you'll see it's because they're turning one handed while holding their cell phone up on speaker in front of their face with the other.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2020 01:39
|
|
|
7of7 posted:If you look closely you'll see it's because they're turning one handed while holding their cell phone up on speaker in front of their face with the other. Bring back suicide knobs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2020 01:41
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/joekaczmarek/status/1317445265985576960
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2020 16:18
|
|
|
I didn’t watch with sound so maybe that would answer my question, but why the gently caress is the idiot driving the car getting so close to a rig that is leaking fire?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 11:37
|
|
|
How has nobody commented on how great it is that the driver of the car is actually listening to, “Smooth Operator “ as all of this goes down? That’s my favorite part.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 14:32
|
|
|
Discernibly Turgid posted:How has nobody commented on how great it is that the driver of the car is actually listening to, “Smooth Operator “ as all of this goes down? That’s my favorite part. Not quite at the level of “HOLY poo poo. Pisssss”, but close https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUz9xCTOPRw
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 15:08
|
|
|
Sigma posted:Not quite at the level of “HOLY poo poo. Pisssss”, but close I have seen two cars on fire on the side of the road in my life and both of them inspired similar levels of excitement. He's right, "poo poo is crazy."
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
I've driven by a couple too. Biggest memory is the heat those bastards give off. The asphalt underneath is forever hosed too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
jamal posted:I notice a lot of people have trouble with left turns across big intersections. Like just cannot turn in one continuous smooth arc, it's always turn early, then go straight, then have to make a sharp tight corner at the end. One in particular there's a double turn lane and a dotted while line to follow. Still no. I do this sometimes when I'm in the inner lane because I see too many fuckers cut the corner in the outside lane despite the presence of painted lines. In the outer lane, I maintain the lane smoothly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TubeTimeUS/status/1319739566685782016
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:03
|
|
|
The thing about "Nanny Nag" commentary jumped out at me - there's a few posters who do that here. One guy in the EV thread was talking about putting a arm weight or a waterbottle on his steering wheel to bypass the safety measures. Autopilot is a mistake. e: Oh, yeah, it's that guy \/\/\/ Krakkles fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Oct 23, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:One guy in the EV thread was talking about putting a arm weight or a waterbottle on his steering wheel to bypass the safety measures. Only an rear end in a top hat would do that
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
Autopilot is fine, giving it to people who's certification for operating a vehicle is granted by filling out a scantron form and taking a bored stranger for a drive around the block is not fine. Airplanes aren't constantly slamming in to mountains on autopilot because the people using those tools are trained and heavily regulated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
It's not just that, something that works 99% of the time inspires complacency and pretty much ensures the driver won't be paying attention, at least if you let them. Which is why Tesla really needs driver attention monitoring.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 22:57
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Autopilot is fine, giving it to people who's certification for operating a vehicle is granted by filling out a scantron form and taking a bored stranger for a drive around the block is not fine. Usually with an airplane when the autopilot says throws up its hands and says "I'm out, this one's on you," there's more time for the crew to react, perceive, and correct because they're 40,000' in the air and miles away from the nearest object. And even then you get an AF447 because the pilots spent so much time on autopilot that they actually don't know how to fly a plane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2020 23:17
|
|
|
I imagine a plane's autopilot system is also safer due to there being very few objects to hit in the sky at 30,000ft... Ground level has a lot of objects everywhere 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 00:04
|
|
|
One of the interesting bits of the boot Digital Apollo was that the guys building the lunar module guidance system developed it to the point where it could auto-land under most circumstances, and the pilots would just be bystanders until/unless something went wrong. The astronaut with the most knowledge of the system - I think it was Dave Scott - told them no astronaut would ever use it. It wasn't that they didn't trust it, it was that if the ostensible pilot wasn't already flying when something went wrong, the time it took him to orient and react might be longer than they had. He understood that back in 1970 and yet the auto industry can't accept it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 00:17
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Autopilot is fine, giving it to people who's certification for operating a vehicle is granted by filling out a scantron form and taking a bored stranger for a drive around the block is not fine. Autopilot in an airplane is way more analogous to normal adaptive cruise control in a car: basically, automating the trivial, annoying bits out and making them more precise than you could get with manual human input alone (important in some circumstances like very low-visibility approaches). As pilot-flying, you're still responsible for monitoring the system, avoiding hazards, making decisions, and ensuring the autopilot is behaving the way you think it ought to, and being ready to take manual control if necessary. The 1% gap between "can do 99% of things" and "can do 100% of things" is a really important 1%.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 01:53
|
|
|
It wasn't brought up to draw a direct comparison between airplane autopilot and car autopilot. The point was supposed to be that tools aren't stupid, just the tools using them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:04
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Autopilot is fine, giving it to people who's certification for operating a vehicle is granted by filling out a scantron form and taking a bored stranger for a drive around the block is not fine. If piloting an aircraft involved constantly steering along a relatively narrow path, while avoiding a constant stream of oncoming obstacles, and simply veering off-course for 6 seconds meant you'd wreck, you wouldn't have an autopilot up there, either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It wasn't brought up to draw a direct comparison between airplane autopilot and car autopilot. The point was supposed to be that tools aren't stupid, just the tools using them. I get that, I just wanted to make the point that what we would consider a "car autopilot" is significantly more complex than anything which currently exists in terms of an aircraft autopilot. It's not that the drivers are necessarily terrible, it's that what currently exists is not a safe system and it cannot be made to become a safe system without huge advancements. If you had perfect driver training, it would still not be safe, because we know the weaknesses inherent in human operators. You can't pay attention to the degree you need to pay attention in order to react quickly enough when something goes wrong, while at the same time having been essentially removed from the process of driving the car for any length of time. Or, to put it more simply: NoWake posted:If piloting an aircraft involved constantly steering along a relatively narrow path, while avoiding a constant stream of oncoming obstacles, and simply veering off-course for 6 seconds meant you'd wreck, you wouldn't have an autopilot up there, either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 02:39
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Autopilot is fine, giving it to people who's certification for operating a vehicle is granted by filling out a scantron form and taking a bored stranger for a drive around the block is not fine. It can't stay in its lane on a freeway, and it can't spot stationary objects. It's not fine, and the problem is not lack of expertise. Zorak of Michigan posted:One of the interesting bits of the boot Digital Apollo was that the guys building the lunar module guidance system developed it to the point where it could auto-land under most circumstances, and the pilots would just be bystanders until/unless something went wrong. The astronaut with the most knowledge of the system - I think it was Dave Scott - told them no astronaut would ever use it. It wasn't that they didn't trust it, it was that if the ostensible pilot wasn't already flying when something went wrong, the time it took him to orient and react might be longer than they had. The stuff that keeps me away from self-driving right now is much more boneheaded, but much more fixable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 10:58
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It wasn't brought up to draw a direct comparison between airplane autopilot and car autopilot. The point was supposed to be that tools aren't stupid, just the tools using them. You also forgot the tools marketing them. If you only skim the stuff Tesla and their fanatics are pumping out it seems like magic that allows you to sit in the back and watch Netflix and it is only the nanny state that is stopping you. It is only in the small print that says it is only advance cruise-control that can't deal with out of ordinary issues that humans just deal with. The insurance companies in Britain sent out a press release just this week after autonomous driving is going to be allowed on motorways. Their experts have said the tech is at least a decade away from being safer than regular drivers. Make that a little less time to be better than regular American drivers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 13:17
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:It can't stay in its lane on a freeway, and it can't spot stationary objects. It's not fine, and the problem is not lack of expertise. It's addressed in that twitter thread, which you should read fully, but the short version of this: monitoring with adequate vigilance for an extremely uncommon event where you need to take control is essentially impossible. If you were paying attention there's no changeover risk, but it's impossible to pay that amount of attention on a sustained basis without being actively involved in the driving of the car.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 18:04
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's addressed in that twitter thread, which you should read fully, but the short version of this: monitoring with adequate vigilance for an extremely uncommon event where you need to take control is essentially impossible. If you were paying attention there's no changeover risk, but it's impossible to pay that amount of attention on a sustained basis without being actively involved in the driving of the car. I'm aware of all that. What I'm saying is that I accept that danger as long as it's sufficiently rare. Step one of making it sufficiently rare is to make autopilot stay in a lane and stop slamming into stationary objects. And that might even be enough, on freeways. The only kind of autopilot problem I ever hear about on freeways is hitting a stationary object.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
Look at this loving dangerous plank. He's lucky he didn't hurt anyone. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbguuzMgV-M
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:Look at this loving dangerous plank. He's lucky he didn't hurt anyone. Jesus Christ, narrowly missed two people on what is obviously a mixed traffic bridge. Hope they threw the book at him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 19:56
|
|
|
Oh man. Shouldn't have left home without his digital tire pressure gauge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Dylan16807 posted:And that might even be enough, on freeways. The only kind of autopilot problem I ever hear about on freeways is hitting a stationary object. One autopilot death was because it couldn't identify a white box truck turning in front of it, although I guess that was a highway not freeway if the distinction is important
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 20:19
|
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:Look at this loving dangerous plank. He's lucky he didn't hurt anyone. Even if he got away with it earlier by lying how it happened the Met are going to want to have a word with him now. That is Lambeth bridge in London with the tower on the right Big Ben and the Houses of Parliament and the building obscured by the rear-view mirror the HQ of MI5.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
MomJeans420 posted:One autopilot death was because it couldn't identify a white box truck turning in front of it, although I guess that was a highway not freeway if the distinction is important  This one? To be more specific, I'm talking about limited-access roads with no intersections. So yes that distinction matters and it'll be far longer before I'd even think about using tesla's self-driving on other roads. Edit, ha: quote:The circumstances of this crash were similar to the fatal underride crash of a Tesla Model S in 2016 near Williston, Florida; in its 2017 report detailing the investigation of that earlier crash, NTSB recommended that Autopilot be used only on limited-access roads (i.e., freeway),[201]:33 which Tesla did not implement.[231] Dylan16807 fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Oct 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2020 21:42
|
|
|
I fully expect to be dead and buried before self-driving cars can consistently safely handle anything other than the most predictable roads and traffic. Admitedly it's equally unlikely that humans will consistently safely handle the same stuff, but at least you can usually predict what stupid poo poo they're going to do and get out of the way before they hit you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
My favorite self driving car people are the ones who insist that all roads be smoothed and leveled to make it easier for existing technology, as if the US could do that or the money wouldn’t be better spent on public transportation
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2020 03:08
|
|
|
Sigma posted:My favorite self driving car people are the ones who insist that all roads be smoothed and leveled to make it easier for existing technology, as if the US could do that or the money wouldn’t be better spent on public transportation I think that's what it's going to take, though, for full self-driving to work. There's going to have to be stuff embedded in the road for the car to sense where it is rather than relying solely on cameras and lidar - particularly for complicated city layouts. It may only take a chunk of metal embedded every 10 feet to mark out lanes, which would be cheap and durable, anyway. I don't think it's going to be feasible for cars to be able to handle it all on their own anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
Sigma posted:My favorite self driving car people are the ones who insist that all roads be smoothed and leveled to make it easier for existing technology, as if the US could do that or the money wouldn’t be better spent on public transportation I liked the proposal that would have made all pedestrian don QR codes like runners’ bibs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2020 06:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:10 |
|
|
Deteriorata posted:I think that's what it's going to take, though, for full self-driving to work. There's going to have to be stuff embedded in the road for the car to sense where it is rather than relying solely on cameras and lidar - particularly for complicated city layouts. Bingo. I 100% agree. Trying to deduce things from an analog, inconsistent, ever changing world, especially by using cameras only, is not going to cut it. A standard where the road and other vehicles have unambiguous markers on them will. And even then, I’d say only only on limited access freeways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2020 07:44
|
|
