AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Vorpal »

Annoying Twit wrote:I must admit that I'm more concerned about the quality of the computer vision (including sonar and any other electronic senses) than I am about the reasoning of the car. There may be significant risk of 'sorry human, I didn't see you.'

+1. Discalimer, I don't have any degrees in AI, but have worked with automatic guidance systems on farm equipment.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by kwackers »

Vorpal wrote:
Annoying Twit wrote:I must admit that I'm more concerned about the quality of the computer vision (including sonar and any other electronic senses) than I am about the reasoning of the car. There may be significant risk of 'sorry human, I didn't see you.'

+1. Discalimer, I don't have any degrees in AI, but have worked with automatic guidance systems on farm equipment.

And I've sat next to folk whilst they drive.

I've no problems believing we can easily do better. :lol:
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by thirdcrank »

... Driverless trains will never happen whilst the unions have a grip. It's not the hardest thing to make doors behave safely without several people to watch them but we don't have that either...


This illustrates one of the points I'm trying to make: the availability of the technology doesn't guarantee it will be used or if it is used, it will be used in the most logical manner. The technical experts will have a lot less positive influence than they might like to imagine.

This is why I think that driverless long distance HGV's will have the earliest introduction. Plenty of demand from the likes of Amazon, with no resistance from organised labour or any other significant lobby. The equivalent of ASLEF in the private car trade is the new car buyer. It's irrational to look for any sort of rationality here. In short, a lot of people are wedded to their cars, no matter what the very obvious drawbacks and in an economic system dependent on conspicuous consumption, increasing car sales are a driving force :oops: in our prosperity, not least because there's no more conspicuous form of consumption that motor car ownership. As I've posted before on similar threads, I fancy this is why so much of this technology which is already in use is called "driver assist." I doubt that expression came into use by accident.
Annoying Twit
Posts: 962
Joined: 1 Feb 2016, 8:19am
Location: Leicester

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Annoying Twit »

The utility cyclist wrote:don't insult my intelligence :roll:
So you are saying there will be no set parameters, if you don't give a set of parameters/instructions/code then the AI will be given free reign to make unlimited, no boundaries decision making, where does it get the abaility to learn from, how without code(AKA programming) can it learn to start with? so what rules does that end up obeying/following without programming/parameters? Do you know what unrestricted AI will do in a life or death situation, is that one that aligns with civilised thinking of those presenting the greater harm should bear the brunt of the responsibility and also be sacrificed so that the innocent/vulnerable are saved? That's already shown not to be the case with those in charge asking the public what decision making it (AI) should take.

The Guy Martin programme was a perfect example of the supposed intelligence not being able to make a very simple decision because the programmers had not inputted what it needed to be able to make that decision and despite having already spent a lot of time, money and effort were massively short in something a human being would understand easily.
So without the programming/parameters where will will AI go, what direction with respect to decision making in those critical situations occurs, if it decides to sacrifice the innocent then that is clearly IMO an unlawful deliberate act and therefore we cannot trust AI to be an improvement in that aspect (As I said I believe it will be better in others)
So?


I'm not saying that there will be no set parameters. I'm saying that the process will include significant learning, and that any rules (note: I did mention them) will not just be done by programmers by by specialists in crafting rules.

Nobody will know what an AI, even with a considerable proportion of hand crafted rules, will do in all extreme situations until they happen. Some will be handled as the creators intended, others will be handled in unexpected ways, including very bad ways. There will be, and there already have been, unexpected automated car responses not foreseen by those that created the cars. There have been aircraft crashes due to software, intended to make crashes less likely, failing. The software is still, overall, an advantage.

Since the rest of your reply is addressed to an misinterpretation of what I said, I'll let this sub-thread reset here.
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by old_windbag »

kwackers wrote: old_windbags apparent belief that the rules will magically reflect the personality of the person doing the program.


I wasn't being serious about the type of intelligence being reflected in the car, rather being light hearted about how intelligence does not always reflect itself as we would wish it too. But where vehicles are concerned it will be an interesting learning curve, literally. I do think there are many other avenues where autonomous control can be applied to our benefit and in a more controlled area( trains being one, trams another ). The data gained from such in terms of feedbacks such as machine vision etc can then feed into cars/lorries at a more refined level perhaps than at present. There seems to be a sudden rush to get on this autonomous vehicle boat and in many respects it may not be necessary at all. I do think taking drivers out of the equation can be beneficial but not quite sure if the final goal is what the public will buy into.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by kwackers »

old_windbag wrote:I wasn't being serious about the type of intelligence being reflected in the car, rather being light hearted about how intelligence does not always reflect itself as we would wish it too. But where vehicles are concerned it will be an interesting learning curve, literally. I do think there are many other avenues where autonomous control can be applied to our benefit and in a more controlled area( trains being one, trams another ). The data gained from such in terms of feedbacks such as machine vision etc can then feed into cars/lorries at a more refined level perhaps than at present. There seems to be a sudden rush to get on this autonomous vehicle boat and in many respects it may not be necessary at all. I do think taking drivers out of the equation can be beneficial but not quite sure if the final goal is what the public will buy into.

I've mentioned above (and in other threads) that I think there's too much of a rush to get it to market.

Whilst it's difficult to predict what consumers will buy I'm pretty confident that there'll be a market for self driving vehicles. Given the option of getting 40 winks or Facebooking whilst going to work few will be able to resist the appeal (and that's before you include the cachet of owning a self driving vehicle).

The natural progression is anti collision, through AI supervision to self driving.
Anti collision is already happening. AI supervision is possible on some top end cars but is really work in progress. Once you have the supervision sorted then the self driving is merely icing on the cake. My timeline would put mass produced supervision at around 5 to 10 years and self driving a couple of years after that.

Once self driving cars exist then it's much more difficult to get a handle on where we're likely to end up.
Will folk, particularly youngsters forgo licenses if they no longer need them? (Legislation should in theory allow driverless cars to consider all its occupants as passengers).
Will insurers be keen to allow folk manual control? (I suspect if manual control is supervised then to a large degree this is moot since they shouldn't be any more dangerous).
Will folk even want a car parked on their drive anymore? (If cars can drive themselves to outside of your house from 'pools' would most folk want to own one?)

Overall I think the short term is fairly well mapped out. Longer term I've no idea although I know what I'd like to see.
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by old_windbag »

I must say kwackers I'm keep having flashbacks to HAL :wink: .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARJ8cAGm6JE

Also the siri, cortana blah blah stuff currently marketed heavily on tv triggers absolutely no interest for me in the least.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Cyril Haearn »

The DLR Docklands Light Railway has been driverless for many years
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Vorpal »

Most trains are at least partly automated. New EU standards allow driverless trains, at least in principal, but not all tracks & signals in the UK have yet been updated to the latest standards. While some tracks and signals remain according to old standards, manual driving (and therefore drivers) will be required.

Although Brexit could mean that the UK decides not to adopt new rail stantards, that would mean a possible future loss of compatibility with French systems, and even the Channel Tunnel, which is required to meet European standards (it is written into the Treaty).
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Maybe Notwork Rail could upgrade to Brunels 7'0.25" gauge to keep foreign trains out after GB leaves the EU
Broad gauge was abandoned in 1892 mind, probably for good reasons :wink:
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
RickH
Posts: 5832
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by RickH »

chris_suffolk wrote:- Never really understood the whole push towards self driving vehicles. Seems to be technology solving a problem yet to be invented, rather than a solution to an already existing problem - unless I've missed the whole point, which is entirely likely.

The stated aim for Google's self-driving technology was to greatly reduce the c. 1 million road deaths per year around the world, the vast majority of which are caused by driver error.
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
old_windbag
Posts: 1869
Joined: 19 Feb 2015, 3:55pm

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by old_windbag »

Cyril Haearn wrote:Maybe Notwork Rail could upgrade to Brunels 7'0.25" gauge to keep foreign trains out after GB leaves the EU


I thought brunels wider guage was better in terms of stability and faster on curves? Also wasn't there benefits in the big wheel loco's designed by daniel gooch. Perhaps stevensons gauge versus brunels gauge was the vhs-betamax of it's day.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by Cyril Haearn »

old_windbag wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:Maybe Notwork Rail could upgrade to Brunels 7'0.25" gauge to keep foreign trains out after GB leaves the EU


I thought brunels wider guage was better in terms of stability and faster on curves? Also wasn't there benefits in the big wheel loco's designed by daniel gooch. Perhaps stevensons gauge versus brunels gauge was the vhs-betamax of it's day.


Still is in Australia, Queensland uses 3'6"

Broad gauge has advantages but one standard gauge has more

There was a break of gauge at Gloucester, all passengers had to change. Just like crossing London by train now :wink:
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by kwackers »

old_windbag wrote:Also the siri, cortana blah blah stuff currently marketed heavily on tv triggers absolutely no interest for me in the least.

Each to their own.
I've had home automation for years. The ability to set up a scene on a light switch is great. Being able to tell the house what to do verbally is even better.
Tell my Echo it's bedtime and she makes sure all the lights are off, the doors locked, the alarm is set etc.
Whilst I'm in my garage engineering I can get her to take notes, do calculations, turn the radio on/off, play 'toons' and have a conversation with my other half regardless of where she is and all without taking my hands off the lathe handwheels.

This is the future I was promised when I was growing up in the 60's watching 50's science fiction. Once my robot arrives it'll be complete! 8)
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: AI Programming to be based on public opinion

Post by reohn2 »

Why is it a she? :? :shock:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Post Reply