Advanced Driving Hub

And now all google cars will have learned that big vehicles use their size to bully their way through (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35692845)

Google said it had now refined its self-driving algorithm.

"From now on, our cars will more deeply understand that buses (and other large vehicles) are less likely to yield to us than other types of vehicles, and we hope to handle situations like this more gracefully in the future."

.

A vast improvement in our ability to teach a population of vehicle controllers, over those old-fashioned meat computers, who have to be updated one at a time (and can't react consistently anyway) .

Of course, once the big vehicles such as buses are controlled by programmable control units which will also have the ability to communicate at electronic speeds with Google's control units, such issues will disappear. They won't allow you to do that Dave (assuming the bus driver was called Dave ).

Once the big vehicles are controlled by programmable control units they will know that the smaller vehicles expect them to be less likely to yield and will take advantage of that. A true simulation of a bus driver.

Strangely Brown wrote:Once the big vehicles are controlled by programmable control units they will know that the smaller vehicles expect them to be less likely to yield and will take advantage of that. A true simulation of a bus driver.

So the moral is stick a big radar reflector on the car, then the ADAS system thinks it's bigger than it is and gives way?

so the Google algorithm has a built in assumption that other vehicles will yield when it cuts them up! I like the sound of that... so based on that algorithm, two identical sized google cars heading at each other will both assume that the other will yield - should be fun

on what basis did their algorithm not realise that they didn't have priority and in seeing a vehicle coming, stop and wait - sounds like a fundamental flaw, and quite pathetic excuses

The Google AV [autonomous vehicle] test driver saw the bus approaching in the left side mirror but believed the bus would stop or slow to allow the Google AV to continue

really?! which human thought that was good logic - the law presumably says they should assume that a vehicle with priority won't stop...
common sense would add that a bus even without priority won't stop!

and why the blazes did it pull out at 2mph?!

Alasdair

Horse wrote:

ChristianAB wrote:

Horse wrote:So, CAB, are you saying that programming an auto car might be a bit 'hit and miss'?

No. As hard as it seems now to program those cars, the programming of mostly competent cars will seem ridiculously easy compared to the solving of all the other issues that this will raise. In the same way that programming the matrix looked like a good idea to the machines - spoiler alert - until agent smith came after them all.

Re-read it 'hit' . . . 'miss'. Ah well, suit yourself

Sorry, missed it! My bad...

What about the autonomous self driving lorries to be tested here in the UK?
Is the aim of those driving modern digital technology to render the majority of the population jobless?
Then true AI to be the next dominant species on this planet?

ancient wrote:And now all google cars will have learned that big vehicles use their size to bully their way through (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-35692845)

Google said it had now refined its self-driving algorithm.

"From now on, our cars will more deeply understand that buses (and other large vehicles) are less likely to yield to us than other types of vehicles, and we hope to handle situations like this more gracefully in the future."

.

A vast improvement in our ability to teach a population of vehicle controllers, over those old-fashioned meat computers, who have to be updated one at a time (and can't react consistently anyway) .

Of course, once the big vehicles such as buses are controlled by programmable control units which will also have the ability to communicate at electronic speeds with Google's control units, such issues will disappear. They won't allow you to do that Dave (assuming the bus driver was called Dave ).

Crashing into a bus graceful? To my mind it is daft and not elegant in the least.

WhoseGeneration wrote:What about the autonomous self driving lorries to be tested here in the UK?
Is the aim of those driving modern digital technology to render the majority of the population jobless?

Or create new jobs. How many of todays jobs would you have imagined 30 years ago?

I'm still more interested in why we aren't automating railways/tube etc. If you can have autonomous cars mixing with all other road traffic, how much easier would it be on the railways?

jont- wrote:I'm still more interested in why we aren't automating railways/tube etc.

Unions.

Strangely Brown wrote:

jont- wrote:I'm still more interested in why we aren't automating railways/tube etc.

Unions.

Isn't the DLR autonomous?

And what about the massive changes in signalling on the rail network?