Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Redistribution of road space and reduction of most speed limits would be good though.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
tim-b wrote: "I wonder what is cheaper, designing secure cars or doing recalls?"
The Pinto Memo
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Cost–benefit_analysis,_the_Pinto_Memo[/url]
Jonathan
... why doesn't that URL show as a link, please?
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
The future of humans is one thing.
It would be a sweeter, quieter, cleaner, safer, friendlier, healthier world if motor vehicles had no future.
Mere elimination of the "motor" part of it won't solve anything.
It would be a sweeter, quieter, cleaner, safer, friendlier, healthier world if motor vehicles had no future.
Mere elimination of the "motor" part of it won't solve anything.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
JohnW wrote:The future of humans is one thing.
It would be a sweeter, quieter, cleaner, safer, friendlier, healthier world if motor vehicles had no future.
Mere elimination of the "motor" part of it won't solve anything.
I don't think anyone would disagree with that.
My issue with ideals is when they become a binary decision - it's 'my ideal' or nothing.
See this all the time and what it boils down to is a vote for the status quo.
Have ideals but be prepared to accept realistic compromises.
Having said that C19 is changing the world, if it doesn't happen now it never will.
- The utility cyclist
- Posts: 3607
- Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm
- Location: The first garden city
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
kwackers wrote:The utility cyclist wrote:Doesn't matter if you have robot/AI motorvehicles, their mere presence is enough to prevent the vast majority from wanting to cycle on a road, and if you don't take the space away from motorists/motorvehicles then you have no hope whatsoever of turning the tide.
Yes there will be fewer deaths using AI vehicles and fewer injuries, but it still won't increase cycling, particularly in the target groups.
Additionally if you don't adjust the speed limits either it's also pretty ineffective, not sure if mentioned but the programming itself is also massive in determining outcome of incidents and understanding of responsibility not to mention predicting what might occur at certain junctures. Humans can't even grasp basics like a child running out between a car is a thing, or a child skewing off suddenly on a bike or even just falling off because they lost control, something that AI cannot see or predict from the nuanced actions/movements before the losing control happens, so what hope the programmers for billion £££ companies whose sole purpose is to make money and dodge paying taxes.
So you don't want AI cars?
You simply want to leave things as they are, because you'd prefer to share the roads with apes than computers even if they're more dangerous?
I wouldn't and there's no need to. AI controlled vehicles already exist, they're driving along roads near you already.
AI isn't a step change, it's a gradual transition that's already here and has been happening for a while.
If your argument is that you'd like to see less cars then me too.
But lets be honest it isn't going to happen - present situation notwithstanding.
Sometimes you have to accept a compromise and if you can't remove the cars then replacing the drivers with something more competent is a good compromise.
All imo.
Where did I say I don't want AI, I want fewer motorvehicles full stop that was obvious from what I said, with some roads in built up areas that join up and have priority that don't have any motorvehicles on them at all. I clearly pointed out the restrictions of AI in terms of encouraging cycling and safety of people on bikes because the presence of a motor vehicle, AI or not is enough to prevent people taking up cycling, we know this is true.
We also know that the thinking of companies that build cars and the people that will programme them also do not fully grasp safety of vulnerable persons and their lawful responsibility towards vulnerable persons not in a massive construction with huge amounts of kinetic energy, even the police, judges, government don't fully grasp it, nor do many people on bikes, even on this forum,
A couple of years ago Mercedes Benz even stated they would programme their AI such that it would sacrifice innocent people to save their cars occupants. Cycling is already very safe comparatively from a statistical POV, a shift in the tech that doesn't actually improve the uptake of active travel or much in terms of safety due to its limitations seems to me to be a distraction from the real problems at their core. People are getting excited about AI and how it will improve things for cycling, well it might but it will be tiny IMO, and it won't change uptake of cycling in any meaningful way, much like the cycle infra being planned, even that by Chris Boardman which people who live in Manchester have said it's rubbish.
Last edited by The utility cyclist on 30 Apr 2020, 4:51pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
kwackers wrote:..................A) -Have ideals but be prepared to accept realistic compromises.
B) -Having said that C19 is changing the world, if it doesn't happen now it never will.
A) - you're right in my opinion Kwackers- and I for one have got used to that.
B) - do you think it will?
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Bmblbzzz wrote:Redistribution of road space and reduction of most speed limits would be good though.
Oh yes - absolutely - but it won't happen.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
JohnW wrote:do you think it will?
We can only hope.
Personally I suspect it'll be the usual in that things won't be as good as you'd hoped, but neither will they be as bad as you feared.
C19 is likely here for years. The new norm will mean social distancing.
On the one hand that means those of us who can will likely work from home, on the other it may be the final nail in the coffin for public transport (without gov support) and no public transport could mean a huge uptake in private vehicles...
TBH I don't think I've ever been so unsure of the future as I am now, but if nothing else these are interesting times.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
kwackers wrote:JohnW wrote:do you think it will?
..............it may be the final nail in the coffin for public transport (without gov support) and no public transport could mean a huge uptake in private vehicles...
.................and finish what bloody thatcher started
kwackers wrote:JohnW wrote:do you think it will?
TBH I don't think I've ever been so unsure of the future as I am now, but if nothing else these are interesting times.
Me too kwackers - I'm an old(ish) man, and not as concerned if I was in my forties, but I fear for my children and one expected grandchild. I wouldn't recommend anyone to have children now.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Jdsk wrote:... why doesn't that URL show as a link, please?
Because the forum software doesn't seem to like the dash in the middle of the url.
If you put the address without the url tags you get a partial (non working) link that breaks at the dash (which incidentally is not the "-" character, probably a long "em" dash rather than an "en" dash)
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Thank you very much.
Jonathan
Jonathan
-
- Posts: 2199
- Joined: 20 May 2011, 11:23am
- Location: South Birmingham
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
niggle wrote:Should humans be allowed to continue controlling motor vehicles on public roads once AI in driverless vehicles surpasses human controlled driving in safety and efficiency?
I wpould ask about the future of humans in control of a ny mechanical contrivance, powred or not, transport-based or not.
think of it - no need for people to work operating machines, or delivering goods, and no effort involved in getting yourself about at all.
Everybody safe from harm from any form of mechanical contrivance - pedestrians safer on roads and cycle paths, no factory accidents (no people working in them), no hernias or other problems caused by lifting things (its all done for you).
What's not to like about the prospect ...
Brompton, Condor Heritage, creaky joints and thinning white (formerly grey) hair
""You know you're getting old when it's easier to ride a bike than to get on and off it" - quote from observant jogger !
""You know you're getting old when it's easier to ride a bike than to get on and off it" - quote from observant jogger !
-
- Posts: 7898
- Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
There is a science fiction story written in 1909 by E.M. Forster (not usually thought of as a SciFi writer!) called The Machine Stops. I hope that it is only prescient in parts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Machine_Stops
The story is set in a world where humanity lives underground and relies on a giant machine to provide its needs, predicted technologies similar to instant messaging and the Internet.
Travel is permitted, but is unpopular and rarely necessary. Communication is made via a kind of instant messaging/video conferencing machine with which people conduct their only activity: the sharing of ideas and what passes for knowledge.
Finally, the Machine collapses, bringing 'civilization' down with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Machine_Stops
It's the same the whole world over
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
It's the poor what gets the blame
It's the rich what gets the pleasure
Isn't it a blooming shame?
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Of course the concern about people being in control of vehicles is surely equally valid about cycles. Or legs for that matter. I still haven't found the piece of research that I came across some years ago showing that most pedestrian/vehicle accidents were the pedestrians fault. Eg idiots not looking when crossing road. By a huge proportion. Far fairer to ban walking I reckon. Still wonder how this idea of driverless cars copes with non standard road/conditions.
I would like to see the introduction, compulsory of technology that prevents vehicles exceeding speed limits. A sensor on the sign posts could do a lot. It could also completely blow up mobile phones used in cars and those nasty speed trap detectors.
I would like to see the introduction, compulsory of technology that prevents vehicles exceeding speed limits. A sensor on the sign posts could do a lot. It could also completely blow up mobile phones used in cars and those nasty speed trap detectors.
Re: Future of humans driving motor vehicles.
Of course Hazel O'Connor had something to say about all this.