-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
UK FSD Discussion
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
Oh god, not again.
There is no “driverless car dilemma”. It’s not a philosophical problem in any sense of the word because it never reaches the point where a decision needs to be made. There is no decision.
Road use is a strict risk hierarchy:
1. You. You are the driver (or person directing the vehicle whether autonomous or not) and have made the decision to complete the journey. You have the highest risk, and you take responsibility for minimising it to others.
A driverless car would never go around a corner at speed and be faced with a group of children on the road because it would be driving in such a way that it could stop. There is no decision. Problem solved.
Let’s make it more complicated. The driverless vehicle is faced with an oncoming spectacularly stupid overtake by a dangerous human driver. There is an elderly person on the pavement. The argument is that the driverless vehicle could run over the person on the pavement to protect the owner. But again, see road use risk hierarchy. You are number one. You accepted the risk when you got into the car. You rely on full braking of the car and its integral safety features to protect you. No human driver would consider for a moment driving over the pedestrian to protect themselves. So the problem doesn’t exist.
Honestly, for every single scenario you can come up with there isn’t a solution that doesn’t involve not getting into the situation in the first place.
There is no “driverless car dilemma”. It’s not a philosophical problem in any sense of the word because it never reaches the point where a decision needs to be made. There is no decision.
Road use is a strict risk hierarchy:
1. You. You are the driver (or person directing the vehicle whether autonomous or not) and have made the decision to complete the journey. You have the highest risk, and you take responsibility for minimising it to others.
A driverless car would never go around a corner at speed and be faced with a group of children on the road because it would be driving in such a way that it could stop. There is no decision. Problem solved.
Let’s make it more complicated. The driverless vehicle is faced with an oncoming spectacularly stupid overtake by a dangerous human driver. There is an elderly person on the pavement. The argument is that the driverless vehicle could run over the person on the pavement to protect the owner. But again, see road use risk hierarchy. You are number one. You accepted the risk when you got into the car. You rely on full braking of the car and its integral safety features to protect you. No human driver would consider for a moment driving over the pedestrian to protect themselves. So the problem doesn’t exist.
Honestly, for every single scenario you can come up with there isn’t a solution that doesn’t involve not getting into the situation in the first place.
Pink Duck
Active Member
Fursty ferrret - quite naive, if I may say so. You have little or no experience of such circumstances. I have spent a working lifetime of being involved in such situations where life or death decisions are made on roads and in the air.
Like it or not - some decisions made by the operator of machines do actually include life or death decisions.
Future autonomous car makers will be obliged to cater for moral dilemmas such as this and it will be interesting to watch how this develops.
www.scientificamerican.com
I note that you associate danger or risk with the word 'speed'. Why did you decide that the word 'speed' was incompatible with the situation I described originally? Does driving at 70mph on a dual carriageway - automatically describe the trajectory of the vehicle as dangerous?
Like it or not - some decisions made by the operator of machines do actually include life or death decisions.
Future autonomous car makers will be obliged to cater for moral dilemmas such as this and it will be interesting to watch how this develops.
Driverless Cars Will Face Moral Dilemmas
Autonomous vehicles may put people in life-or-death situations. Will the outcomes be decided by ethics or data?
I note that you associate danger or risk with the word 'speed'. Why did you decide that the word 'speed' was incompatible with the situation I described originally? Does driving at 70mph on a dual carriageway - automatically describe the trajectory of the vehicle as dangerous?
Bouba - you are joking I assume?
If autonomous cars are designed to communicate with each other, what is to stop someone from hacking into the vehicle normally and controlling it from a distance then? Do you honestly believe Tesla for example will allow a BYD to 'chat' with it - exchanging information which leads to a decision by one or the other to function - going fwd??
Now we really are in cloud cuckoo land.
In light of what I said to ferret - there are two (atleast two) fundamental requirements that autonomous car users will DEMAND: 1. Securing the safety of said occupants and 2. The integrity of data bases and control systems onboard, ie: encryption.
Failure to address either of these seriously will reflect directly in sales numbers.
If autonomous cars are designed to communicate with each other, what is to stop someone from hacking into the vehicle normally and controlling it from a distance then? Do you honestly believe Tesla for example will allow a BYD to 'chat' with it - exchanging information which leads to a decision by one or the other to function - going fwd??
Now we really are in cloud cuckoo land.
In light of what I said to ferret - there are two (atleast two) fundamental requirements that autonomous car users will DEMAND: 1. Securing the safety of said occupants and 2. The integrity of data bases and control systems onboard, ie: encryption.
Failure to address either of these seriously will reflect directly in sales numbers.
If we accept the hypothesis that driverless cars won't drive like humans/complete idiots braking won't cause a pile up as no car will be tailgating/too close to stop
I thought we were past April fools day, surely this discussion is not seriously considering increasingly unlikely scenarios.Fursty ferrret - quite naive, if I may say so. You have little or no experience of such circumstances. I have spent a working lifetime of being involved in such situations where life or death decisions are made on roads and in the air.
Like it or not - some decisions made by the operator of machines do actually include life or death decisions.
Future autonomous car makers will be obliged to cater for moral dilemmas such as this and it will be interesting to watch how this develops.
Driverless Cars Will Face Moral Dilemmas
Autonomous vehicles may put people in life-or-death situations. Will the outcomes be decided by ethics or data?
I note that you associate danger or risk with the word 'speed'. Why did you decide that the word 'speed' was incompatible with the situation I described originally? Does driving at 70mph on a dual carriageway - automatically describe the trajectory of the vehicle as dangerous?
Humans make horrendous mistakes sometimes when faced with panic situations, perhaps we should worry more about the human idiots with driving licences.
There are two large bus queues of school children on both sides of the road, an steroid is about to hit the road in front of you. Do you kill the children or yourself and family.
Anyone better this?
Going by how predictive text has failed already...I suggest that AI isn’t going to handle that situation very well
Pink Duck
Active Member
A human driver would probably capture the scene with a smart phone video recorder and slow down in lane. No need to kill the children presuming a good chance that everyone dies. FSD (Supervised) would likely continue on regardless at uneven speed.
Zilla91
Active Member
One thing I've not seen mentioned is how on most of the FSD 12 videos it appears the car is happy to completely disregard the speed limit. Think I saw one with Chuck Cook doing something like 39 on a 30, not exactly the type of behavior that will lead to better road safety.
Utumno
2 x Model Y LR (2022 Q2 & 2023 Q3)
Don’t feed the troll people…Fursty ferrret - quite naive, if I may say so. You have little or no experience of such circumstances. I have spent a working lifetime of being involved in such situations where life or death decisions are made on roads and in the air.
Like it or not - some decisions made by the operator of machines do actually include life or death decisions.
Future autonomous car makers will be obliged to cater for moral dilemmas such as this and it will be interesting to watch how this develops.
Driverless Cars Will Face Moral Dilemmas
Autonomous vehicles may put people in life-or-death situations. Will the outcomes be decided by ethics or data?
I note that you associate danger or risk with the word 'speed'. Why did you decide that the word 'speed' was incompatible with the situation I described originally? Does driving at 70mph on a dual carriageway - automatically describe the trajectory of the vehicle as dangerous?
Sorry, are you calling me a troll? Bit childish.
Zoros: Weirdly, I also work in a safety critical industry. There is nothing in aviation that would fit the scenario you describe to have worked on.
There’s no autonomy in autopilots…
You’re absolutely right that I associate the relative danger level with speed, because it’s obviously linked. Driving down a residential street at 30mph is legal, but inappropriate. The correct speed is the one that allows you to stop before hitting a child that runs out without looking, which might be 20mph, or 10, or even lower. This is the sort of stuff that removes the “decision making” about hitting someone, which was the point of my post.
I’m really happy to have a discussion on an interesting subject, it not when someone claims to work in the industry but provides no argument to back to their viewpoint, or with the person who screams “TROLL” because they disagree. This isn’t Reddit.
So I heard today via a relatively reliable source that a months FSD is coming to us all in the UK in the not too distant future. The approach I would speculate is two pronged. 1) Tesla get an opportunity to gather huge chunk of driving data for the neural net models developed and apparently working pretty well as of v12.3.3
2) existing customers who’ve not considered spending the price of another decent used car on a driving assistant get to try it and some might just feel the improvements are now worth it and pony up £6800. Additionally we all drag everyone and his dog for a drive in our Tesla’s to share the experience and so out of all those folks then there are a some folks who’ll be making use of referral codes for newly converted Tesla drivers. Definitely a watch this space moment I think…
2) existing customers who’ve not considered spending the price of another decent used car on a driving assistant get to try it and some might just feel the improvements are now worth it and pony up £6800. Additionally we all drag everyone and his dog for a drive in our Tesla’s to share the experience and so out of all those folks then there are a some folks who’ll be making use of referral codes for newly converted Tesla drivers. Definitely a watch this space moment I think…
Pink Duck
Active Member
I don’t believe it will be for “all”, usual ‘legacy’ S/X owner exemption. Nor regulated for cars without cabin camera. Nor before 2025.
Last edited:
Zilla91
Active Member
Utumno
2 x Model Y LR (2022 Q2 & 2023 Q3)
Not you, Zoros. Because I replied to his post and not yours. I am agreeing with your perspective. I also work in safety critical industries, and am professionally involved in the AI sector.
