|
LOL you're either a secretary or a janitor and everyone is laughing at your illiterate rear end. "I know more about embedded systems than a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering" - A Janitor theperminator fucked around with this message at 10:44 on Jul 24, 2017 |
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:41 |
|
|
# ? Apr 18, 2024 06:55 |
|
they never mentioned how that discredits NASA's investigation which included actual tests on real vehicles, because it doesn't, but keep obsessing over that little "gotcha" must be nice when life is so simple lol
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:45 |
|
I work in the field of controls engineering and am somewhat familiar with their self driving car system The basic gist of it is that Tesla made the mistake of hiring computer scientists to do a controls engineers job This seems to be a recurring problem (Google fired all of the control engineers and replaced them with CS fucktards too) in SV these days
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:45 |
|
even with everything humans have been able to accomplish, there's just no way they could get vehicles to navigate themselves in less than ideal conditions. it's just not possible. a loving pipe dream i tell you.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:48 |
|
I work for a trucker company and they already got the self driving car tech good to go. They're still "testing" it though and will continue to do so for years unless something crazy happens. It needs to be perfect because if you get a truck smashing into some people or just crashing on its own it would be a PR nightmare Some of the ideas they're floating around is self driving trucks, but with like a control tower that can supervise and potentially "take over" the cars in case the conditions get too difficult for the car to operate on its own
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:51 |
|
Zo posted:they never mentioned how that discredits NASA's investigation which included actual tests on real vehicles, because it doesn't, but keep obsessing over that little "gotcha" First of all NASA said that even though they didn't reproduce it, they were unable to rule out the ECU as the cause and points out that they were unaware that the RAM is non-ECC and incapable of detecting memory errors let alone correct them. they also didn't investigate all of the software. Any engineer looking at the list of poo poo there will tell you it's a timebomb and I guess it helps to understand the implications of global variables and stack overflows. Relying on standard SRAM for life critical systems is inexcusable, stack overflows are inexcusable, your ECU having to kill tasks to free up CPU time is inexcusable. It's nice to be someone who actually knows what they're talking about.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:53 |
|
Let’s step back for a moment and read what Tesla says about their autopilot on their websitequote:To make sense of all of this data, a new onboard computer with over 40 times the computing power of the previous generation runs the new Tesla-developed neural net for vision, sonar and radar processing software. Together, this system provides a view of the world that a driver alone cannot access, seeing in every direction simultaneously, and on wavelengths that go far beyond the human senses. Oh so they’re using NN NN sort of have a reputation in the controls community because papers published with these kinds of results have a tendency to violate their own assumptions That doesn’t stop CS degree guys from using them and markov chains all of the time Also keep in mind your typical self driving car has more sensors and raw data going into its autopilot than what you would ever see on a pitch attitude hold for 20 million dollar fighter jet
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:54 |
|
MY question to all these loving trucker companies is why they don't just come up with flying autonomous transports instead. Like drones hauling cargo containers around? They could just go straight from point A to point B without having to deal with roads and other drivers Like this thing, except 100x larger
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 10:56 |
|
i think theyre called helicopters
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:06 |
|
theperminator posted:First of all NASA said that even though they didn't reproduce it, they were unable to rule out the ECU as the cause and points out that they were unaware that the RAM is non-ECC and incapable of detecting memory errors let alone correct them. they also didn't investigate all of the software. well, i'm glad you're falling back to the "electronic gremlin" theory, because that's at least possible, in the exceedingly unlikely sense let's not forget that while NASA played with the ecu, the nhtsa was doing the legwork examining the actual cars that allegedly accelerated unironically. the results are as lol as you expect quote:The results of NHTSA’s field inspections of vehicles involved in alleged UA incidents during
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:08 |
|
Did someone mention the Wrong RAM?
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:10 |
|
Streak posted:i think theyre called helicopters self driving helicopters though?? Someone do this and become a trillionaire
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:15 |
|
Zo posted:well, i'm glad you're falling back to the "electronic gremlin" theory, because that's at least possible, in the exceedingly unlikely sense The same throttle position sensor supplying the main processor is what supplies the black box if I am understanding correctly. And while there are apparently two different sensors they run through the same input block on the same chip.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:16 |
|
theperminator posted:The same throttle position sensor supplying the main processor is what supplies the black box if I am understanding correctly. And while there are apparently two different sensors they run through the same input block on the same chip. even assuming that's true (the figure does not show the Event Data Recorder), you should still see brakes in the data, rather than only throttle instead of brakes plus there's the whole thing where brakes should overpower acceleration, especially in most of the reported circumstances which are low speed. so if they actually stomped on brakes as they allege, they should be fine (or have faulty brakes which are easily checked). see, with respect to low speed incidents: quote:Incidents initiating at low speeds (i.e., from a stationary position or at a speed less than 15 MPH) quote:NHTSA believes that these incidents are very likely the result of pedal misapplication. This
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 11:33 |
|
Zzulu posted:MY question to all these loving trucker companies is why they don't just come up with flying autonomous transports instead. Like drones hauling cargo containers around? They could just go straight from point A to point B without having to deal with roads and other drivers Because it'd make every item you buy at least twice as expensive compared to ground transport Also only huge heavy-lift helicopters are able to lift a loaded shipping container Oh, and helicopters have a habit of falling out of the sky on the regular.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 12:42 |
|
There's an ever increasing amount so we might as well give them something to do.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 12:53 |
|
Zzulu posted:self driving helicopters though?? tacobell had drones delivering food a while ago iirc
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 13:03 |
|
The only people who experienced unintended acceleration in Toyotas were over the age of 65. Most of them in their 70s or older. There was never a problem.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 16:32 |
|
Who will ban normal cars first, insanely gay europe or gently caress retarded usa ??
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 16:39 |
|
Serak posted:Because it'd make every item you buy at least twice as expensive compared to ground transport Yeah well, just make better tech how hard could it be
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 16:41 |
|
Yeah it's definitely the wrong ram that's what did it, certainly wasn't humans loving up like always. NASA is in on it, those pencil pushing ivory tower weenies. Old people are def. not more likely to plow into a crowd or bike race or store front or rear end of someone at a stop light than an xbone on wheels.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 16:43 |
unpacked robinhood posted:Who will ban normal cars first, insanely gay europe or gently caress retarded usa ??
|
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 16:55 |
|
Former DILF posted:I want a self-driving motorhome. Oh gosh, I guess I'll just go to sleep and WAKE UP IN A COOL NEW PLACE get a boat and chart a course on the ocean
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:08 |
|
Man who babysits adult children all day instead of working in the real world thinks bad RAM causes senile old peope to hit the wrong pedal
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:09 |
|
I, too, cannot wait for the massive upheaval that will come when the fat cats behind Big Back Brace finally get their comeuppance.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:10 |
|
Smythe posted:Did someone mention the Wrong RAM? The Tesla is the Xbone of automobiles.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:11 |
|
I hope people start flashing bespoke ukrainian roms for performance on their top modern cars
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:16 |
|
Inescapable Duck posted:Then what happens when it snows? My hot take is that I don't know nearly enough about the subject to call it.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:18 |
|
Significant Ant posted:I work in the field of controls engineering and am somewhat familiar with their self driving car system I'm a software engineer and this loving blows on my end too. I love (hate) job postings that basically are prettied-up word-salad trying to disguise the fact that a company that doesn't really know what they need decided that they wanted to hire a "computer guy".
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:18 |
|
this thread is a good example of why techno-futurists are retarded
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:24 |
|
a self driving car is like the Terminator, can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with, doesn't feel pity or remorse etc. except it's not a cold blooded killer but a terminal fucktard. think every time a computer or app has given you trouble, now make it a dozen thousand times heavier (extremely flammable lithium battery included), put yourself and your family inside it, and launch it to 80 mph on an extremely poorly maintained road. these things will hard reboot at highway speeds at best, at worst they'll get hacked the whole loving time because their "intelligence" is fake and they're tethered 24/7 to remote systems computers are a stupefyingly bad technology and as a programmer I'm baffled at their deification. they're fancy calculators. they don't actually "think". a self driving car is not "aware" in any way form or shape of what's happening around it and it can't make "choices"
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:40 |
|
you are basically reinventing the train
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:42 |
|
Streak posted:even with everything humans have been able to accomplish, there's just no way they could get vehicles to navigate themselves in less than ideal conditions. it's just not possible. a loving pipe dream i tell you. It can't be done today so it will never be possible. Computers can fly to Mars and drive around there but it's impossible on Earth. Those egghead computer jockeys probably never even heard of weather. The whole thing is absurd.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:46 |
|
hackbunny posted:a self driving car is like the Terminator, can't be bargained with, can't be reasoned with, doesn't feel pity or remorse etc. except it's not a cold blooded killer but a terminal fucktard. think every time a computer or app has given you trouble, now make it a dozen thousand times heavier (extremely flammable lithium battery included), put yourself and your family inside it, and launch it to 80 mph on an extremely poorly maintained road. these things will hard reboot at highway speeds at best, at worst they'll get hacked the whole loving time because their "intelligence" is fake and they're tethered 24/7 to remote systems p much this, the semantics that AI developers use have been perverted and taken literally by laymen via lovely tech blogs and ted talks self-driving cars will be safer than humans but the real barrier is getting someone to accept that every time they drive there's a .0001% chance the randomness gods select their car or a car in the vicinity to poo poo the bed and kill them, as opposed to human drivers being 10x more likely to murder someone or themselves but at least you feel like you're in control
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:48 |
|
If we can get the control program to recognize that you shouldn't try to win a race against a train at a crossing it's already better than a lot of human drivers.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:51 |
|
...and the pitch! posted:It can't be done today so it will never be possible. SV will be a lake long before we get cars capable of driving themselves in all weathers on lovely american roads with imperfect mapping and GPS like, people usually use 'frank the meth addict trucker" in their examples of human trucking vs. Ai trucking, but even Frank can see a traffic jam, Frank can see a hosed up parking lot space, Frank can recognize and stop for pedestrians, Frank doesn't lose all reliable sight in the rain. It's not Crackhead vs. iCar, it's Crackhead vs. Slightly more advanced Roomba.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:56 |
|
The point where self-driving cars are viable is the point where AI is going to be practically sentient. And then I bet we'll invent viruses that make them drunk.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 17:59 |
|
...and the pitch! posted:It can't be done today so it will never be possible. counterpoints... computers can't fly to mars or can only do so pretty bad. I don't remember the exact figures but I'm willing to bet that a majority of mars missions failed, and that's with round the clock monitoring from a huge team of trained pros. also no traffic on mars, around mars or on the way to mars egghead computer jockeys are fully aware of the limits of the system but it's not them calling the shots ...and the pitch! posted:If we can get the control program to recognize that you shouldn't try to win a race against a train at a crossing it's already better than a lot of human drivers. that's the hell of it: a self driving car has no idea what a race, train, crossing or winning are. they're incredibly dumb, dumber than the dumbest animal you've ever known. they'll be preprogrammed (often in ways not fully understood to the programmers themselves, like neural networks) with a very vague outline of what a train crossing looks like to its sensors (have you ever seen what a self driving car sees? for all the fancy sensors they're drat near blind). knowledge of trains won't probably even be programmed in the system, they'll just pray and hope the topic never comes up (and blame the user when it inevitably does) I'm not doing a hot take by saying the self driving car is an expensive reinvention of the train. it will kill private vehicle ownership, and turn roads into all but railways. it's the only way it can be made to work
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 18:03 |
|
Nearly every benefit of self-driving cars could be accomplished today by functional public transport.
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 18:09 |
|
|
# ? Apr 18, 2024 06:55 |
|
Remember that time a Tesla model S couldn't even complete a full Nurburgring lap without knocking power down so it didn't burst into flames?
|
# ? Jul 24, 2017 18:14 |