Cars in driver-assist mode hit a third of cyclists, all oncoming cars in tests

[Raoul Ross]

A trade rag I read daily

https://www.theregister.com/2022/05/16/automous_car_ada_system_tests/

"Autonomous cars may be further away than believed. Testing of three leading systems found they hit a third of cyclists, and failed to avoid any oncoming cars."

[Ace-Garageguy]

Yes, some of us who live in engineering reality have been aware of the shortcomings and the inability of current systems to provide the "more than human" level of reliability and function that's constantly touted.

[Raoul Ross]

I guess what I was trying to point out is that, while most peeps with a modicum of mechanical aptitude already were wary of Driver Assist gadgets, here is real world testing with specific outcomes presented by a well known and respected authority.

Unfortunately many peeps who buy into these driver assist techniques believe that they can rely on them solely to keep them (and others around them, maybe) safe while they are distracted by, oh I dunno, TEXTING WHILE DRIVING comes to mind. They believe this partially by the hype given to them by salesmen, but mainly by marketing/media types pimping "AI".

In fact, there no such thing as Artificial Intelligence, never has been. At it's root it's all just clever programming and engineering more clever 'gadgets' .

Here's an excellent Opinion (from the same site) that explains what current "AI" actually is, expensive hardware and marketing: https://www.theregister.com/2018/11/06/andrew_fentem_on_ai/

In other words, I'm not worried about becoming an obsolete "Meatbag" very soon and I don't believe 'Driverless Cars' are very near either.

Edited May 18, 2022 by Raoul Ross

[stavanzer]

Amen, Raoul!

I have heard some horror stories just about Cruise Control while working as a Tech at car dealers.

[Ace-Garageguy]

28 minutes ago, Raoul Ross said:

In fact, there no such thing as Artificial Intelligence, never has been...At it's root it's all just clever programming and engineering more clever 'gadgets' .

I agree with everything you say except the above.

As a spare-time student of primary-source AI writings and research for decades (from Turing to Kurzweil, etc.), the work done by the best and brightest has provided fantastic insight into how human intelligence interprets and interacts with reality, and that understanding has been the basis of an increasingly sophisticated AI-development feedback loop that gets us ever closer to building a real thinking, feeling machine. Systems that can learn and infer from available data and stimuli, and self-modify on their own (way beyond what they're programmed to do) are currently running.

Unfortunately, a lot of the folks in the field are NOT at the top in ability, and are primarily motivated to produce marketable toys that miss the mark of real intelligence by miles. To put it in model car terms, think of the difference between the trash that companies like Palmer turned out, compared to the masterworks of Gerald Wingrove.

As with so many things bleatingly promoted as great saviors of humankind, AI is just not ready for deployment, and a lot more first-rate work needs to be done before it is. But it's coming. Count on it.

[stinkybritches]

12 hours ago, Raoul Ross said:

 

"Autonomous cars may be further away than believed. Testing of three leading systems found they hit a third of cyclists, and failed to avoid any oncoming cars."

Based on what I see on my daily commute, I would say that autonomous vehicles are already on par with the average driver.

[Raoul Ross]

"I agree with everything you say except the above."

Hmm, I did use the term "current AI". No doubt bright minds will try to replicate what we take for granted, Intelligent Thought, but I also doubt it will ever be replicated. No human can recreate the incredible programming it took to create Life, the Universe and Everything(tm). ?

Edited May 18, 2022 by Raoul Ross
quote

[Raoul Ross]

2 minutes ago, stinkybritches said:

Based on what I see on my daily commute, I would say that autonomous vehicles are already on par with the average driver.

LOL

[Ace-Garageguy]

18 minutes ago, Raoul Ross said:

...No doubt bright minds will try to replicate what we take for granted, Intelligent Thought...

Interesting paradox there.

Though many may "take for granted" their ability to engage in "intelligent thought", few actually possess it.    

[Raoul Ross]

And I just thought of an example... How would a car(computer) make the choice between "Take out the bicyclist or the telephone pole" without being self-aware and making that decision?

[Ace-Garageguy]

18 minutes ago, Raoul Ross said:

And I just thought of an example... How would a car(computer) make the choice between "Take out the bicyclist or the telephone pole" without being self-aware and making that decision?

You seem to be assuming that self-awareness and machine intelligence are necessarily mutually exclusive.

They're not.

https://www.me.columbia.edu/news/lipson-self-aware-machines

Edited May 18, 2022 by Ace-Garageguy
TYPO

[Raoul Ross]

Very cool and if true, humanity is truly doomed! We'll need to eliminate telephone poles!

Ha!

[vamach1]

A married couple was killed a few days ago on a route I had ridden before but I avoid it because the vehicle traffic is 50 mph plus and there is no barrier between the bike lanes and traffic,  I try to ride on the paths but.I do have to bike a ways on the street to get to them.

Edited May 18, 2022 by vamach1

[TonyK]

I have no interest in "self-driving" cars. I get strange looks when I tell people I have never used cruise control on long trips. After buying a new car I check to see if it works but that's it. I'm just too much of a hands on driver. I want to be in control at all times.

Luckily I'm old enough that I won't be needing one of these fancy cars anyway.

[Ace-Garageguy]

1 hour ago, TonyK said:

...I have never used cruise control on long trips...I'm just too much of a hands on driver. I want to be in control at all times.

I agree in principle, but occasionally, if I'm kinda in the middle of nowhere with very little traffic, I'll engage cruise if I'm getting uncomfortable from sitting and need to stretch. I find it's useful for that...but more often I'll just pull over and walk around a little.

Otherwise, I can't conceive of it being just so difficult to maintain a steady speed that somebody would need mechanical assistance.

Interesting aside...traffic fatalities are up something like 11%, the highest since 2007, in spite of all the latest greatest "safety" measures. And stupid operator behavior and impairment are the primary causes.

A logical solution would be much better vehicle-control training (do they even teach parallel parking anymore?) and more stringent licensing requirements, but anything requiring people to accept personal responsibility for their actions is generally political suicide.

 

[NOBLNG]

32 minutes ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

A logical solution would be much better vehicle-control training (do they even teach parallel parking anymore?) and more stringent licensing requirements, but anything requiring people to accept personal responsibility for their actions is generally political suicide.

My thoughts exactly! There is no shortage of people willing to drive vehicles. The authorities just need to tighten up the requirements for getting a license. It is NOT a basic right.

[Joe Handley]

22 hours ago, stinkybritches said:

Based on what I see on my daily commute, I would say that autonomous vehicles are already on par with the average driver.

I’m no longer driving for work, but when I’m out off the clock, it gets interesting. Dad and I drove up to the model car club meeting Saturday, a roughly 2 hour round trip and ran across plenty of times an self driven car would have been better than the drivers in front of us going both ways!