> Are the people who are working on driverless cars giving these
> matters proper consideration? It seems like the only things I
> ever see have to do with keeping car-addicted suburban Boomers
> behind the wheel or packing more cars onto freeways while
> avoiding pileups when a car in the front slams on the brakes.
=v= Not sure how Boomers got dragged into this, given that the
Google Car was developed and surreptitiously tested in Silicon
Valley by a team reflecting much younger demographics. I have
bike-commuted to work in Silicon Valley, and it is a car-sprawl
Hell that is also the world's ground zero for early adoption of
distracted driving with cellphones, texting, and apps.
=v= The first publicity for this gadget described included a
claim that during initial testing, human override was only
needed once, allegedly because a cyclist ran a STOP sign.
Naturally this played out as danged cyclists, whaddyagonnado,
amIright?
=v= So, after we let the laughter and recriminations subside,
if the company press release is correct and the human operator
wasn't suffering from observer bias (or just lying), what we're
left with is a system that was supposedly able to anticipate
for all the motorist misbehavior in Silicon Valley, but wasn't
programmed to look out for bikes.
=v= The system has been patched, but the point is that it was
an afterthought. How many other afterthoughts aren't Google's
engineers having?
<_Jym_>
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
