I quite understood that. I was following up your implications.pete75 wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:56pmI've no idea and that's why I started my sentence with If. Ask those who confidently claim they will be safer than human drivers.Mike Sales wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:01pmSo, instead of risking a close pass in marginal circumstances, a Tesla will wait behind until the road is wide and clear? Even when in "assertive" mode?
Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
-
- Posts: 7898
- Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
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?
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
- Location: Norfolk
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:39pmIs this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:06pmAbsolutely. It's also worth noting that those involved with selling or otherwise promoting the technology seem to have a 'religious' narrative that it can do no wrong, and must be better 'because it's technology'. Take an example of a narrow and muddy country lane with high hedges ........ An astute driver may drive slowly in anticipation, whereas a pilot of a 'self-driver' may plough (no pun intended) on regardless, and the ABS brakes be applied far too late to have any effect. We mustn't fall into the trap "because it's new/sophisticated it MUST be better"Mike Sales wrote: ↑13 Jan 2022, 6:37pm
The car driver is most likely to be hurt?!
I am a pedestrian and cyclist, and I cannot agree. Car occupants are protected by much technology which I do not have.
Many drivers assume only motorised road users count. Don't fall into that error.
Apologies, to anyone of religion amongst us, as no offence is intended by using the word 'religious', it's just intended to explain the level of belief some have for tech.
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
-
- Posts: 11041
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
My bold refers. The two aren't synonymous, I think law-breaking is a different debate.Mike Sales wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:00pmYou might think so, but read again (?) the first paragraph of the article.Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:52pm Of course people will want to get to their destinations speedily, but it would be an act of remarkable commercial stupidity to program[sic] the cars such that they didn't do that safely. Musk is an eccentric, but not a stupid one, I think.
Above you will find a discussion which seems to conclude that the programming is not an offence. The law breaking only occurs when the driver is actually caught transgressing, and as we know, enforcement is lax.housands of Teslas are now being equipped with a feature that prompts the car to break common traffic laws — and the revelation is prompting some advocates to question the safety benefits of automated vehicle technology when unsafe human drivers are allowed to program it to do things that endanger other road users.
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Just as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm Re autonomous vehicles on minor roads etc., where the current national limit is 60mph, then there's already plenty of room for improvement and little obvious official appetite for change. I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Mike Sales wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:00pm
Above you will find a discussion which seems to conclude that the programming is not an offence. The law breaking only occurs when the driver is actually caught transgressing, and as we know, enforcement is lax.
Reprogramming currently isn't an offence. No one can be caught transgressing because it isn't illegal. It may invalidate the insurance if a vehicle owner doesn't declare the programming to his insurance company if asked about any modifications. The Road Traffic Act part of the policy will not be affected until or unless the company actually cancels the policy though.
There are government proposals to make "tampering" with vehicle systems illegal - scroll down to the Tackling Tampering section here https://www.gov.uk/government/consultat ... -standards
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
-
- Posts: 11041
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
I'm asking the question to open debate.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:08pmWhy ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:39pmIs this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:06pm
Absolutely. It's also worth noting that those involved with selling or otherwise promoting the technology seem to have a 'religious' narrative that it can do no wrong, and must be better 'because it's technology'. Take an example of a narrow and muddy country lane with high hedges ........ An astute driver may drive slowly in anticipation, whereas a pilot of a 'self-driver' may plough (no pun intended) on regardless, and the ABS brakes be applied far too late to have any effect. We mustn't fall into the trap "because it's new/sophisticated it MUST be better"
Apologies, to anyone of religion amongst us, as no offence is intended by using the word 'religious', it's just intended to explain the level of belief some have for tech.
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
-
- Posts: 3436
- Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
- Location: Norfolk
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Genuine question.... So if it "knows what it can see ahead" is a blind bend, will it slow to maybe 15MPH, stop. or what?Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:54pmI'm asking the question to open debate.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:08pmWhy ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 1:39pm
Is this knowledge on your part, or speculation? Seems to me that the AI parameters could very easily be set to mitigate the "I know this road' syndrome for instance - amongst many scenarios which can lead to excessive speed in a particular situation.
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
Crikey I've just had to do 3 spelling corrections in that last sentence because the AI thinks it knows better
-
- Posts: 11041
- Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
- Location: Near Bicester Oxon
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Whatever you tell it to do. In that scenario - such as when driving in Cornwall I'm regularly at that sort of speed. I do meet people behaving differently, often on tractors and in vans and so on.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 3:29pmGenuine question.... So if it "knows what it can see ahead" is a blind bend, will it slow to maybe 15MPH, stop. or what?Bonefishblues wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:54pmI'm asking the question to open debate.fastpedaller wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:08pm
Why ask the question when I have said it is an example, and I've used the word 'may' in the narrative?
Would the AI parameters only learn of the "I know this road" level of care needed, only after collisions have occurred in the same way that local councils and highways will only recognise an accident black spot or need for road alteration after several people have been injured?
(Serious question).
Why would AI need to wait for collisions before it learns? As a for instance, the car knows what it can see ahead, it knows what road conditions are, it knows what the ambient temperature is, it knows what the performance parameters of its brakes and tyres are. That data combined (and I'm sure there are other pieces - many of them) can be used now, not after the event. The bigger problem may be the human intervening because it is smarter than the vehicle, it thinks.
Crikey I've just had to do 3 spelling corrections in that last sentence because the AI thinks it knows better
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Because we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs?Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:44pmJust as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
-
- Posts: 36780
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
One other point may be that if somebody driving one of these does break the law, then if the charge is for an indictable offence, the jury may find them NOT GUILTY.
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
The idea is to replace engine noise for the benefit of blind and/or visually impaired persons, so no it doesn't.mjr wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 4:09pmBecause we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs?Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 2:44pmJust as electric cars already do on European (this includes UK) models up to 30km/h.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 12:27pm I could imagine some system whereby these "silent" - apart from tyre and wind noise - vehicles make a noise, trumpeted as a safety improvement.
Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
It seems a tragedy that some other method to benefit them is not being implemented, so everyone, visually-impaired or not, must not get the benefit of quieter cars and better sleep.Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 4:36pmThe idea is to replace engine noise for the benefit of blind and/or visually impaired persons, so no it doesn't.mjr wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 4:09pmBecause we want the most noise to be inflicted in places with dense housing and residents must not get a noise pollution reduction from the switch to EVs?
Does it at least deactivate 11.30pm-7am (the hours when sounding a car horn is mostly illegal) so people in such areas can sleep more easily?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
We're talking about self driving cars so all inside will be passengers. BTW some people are found not guilty in magistrates courts. A guilty verdict in all cases may well be a certainty with a traditional bench but many mags court cases are now decided by a professional district judge who will consider the evidence before coming to a decision.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 4:17pm One other point may be that if somebody driving one of these does break the law, then if the charge is for an indictable offence, the jury may find them NOT GUILTY.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
-
- Posts: 36780
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
I thought the point of this thread, which isn't the first on the broad topic of self-driving cars, was the suggestion that users could use a setting to allow some of them to break the law. (As in the thread title.) I intentionally used the term "indictable offence" in my remark about a jury.
Re: Teslas can be programmed to break the law.
Indictable offence because as an ex copper you know a defendant has damn all chance of being found not guilty by a traditional bench of magistrates. I was pointing out that because professional district judges are now sitting in a lot of courts people have a chance of a not guilty verdict on non indictable offences.thirdcrank wrote: ↑14 Jan 2022, 5:36pm I thought the point of this thread, which isn't the first on the broad topic of self-driving cars, was the suggestion that users could use a setting to allow some of them to break the law. (As in the thread title.) I intentionally used the term "indictable offence" in my remark about a jury.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker