Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

OK I have scanned through this discussion and you all seem to be coming from a particular starting point which is the here and now which in my view is PEAK PRIVATE VEHICLE. I had a brief glimmer of hope when a few people mentioned the laws of physics, but then the assumptions dashed them. The

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

I hope google keep their divisions separate: http://deepdreamgenerator.com/ -andyf PS. ddg.gg "google dream" ___ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-10 13:10 Paul Bolger wrote: > Personally I can’t wait for advertising subsidised travel. “Sir, in a moment > we’ll be passing your local supermarket, and for a short time I’m authorised > to offer you, at an incredible %25 off … SIR! If you don’t take those earbuds > out in five

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

At 01:18 PM 10/06/2016, Karl Auer wrote: >(Unpauses Radiohead, returns to book). How about an AI movie? http://mashable.com/2016/06/10/ai-movie-script/ At least one's life isn't at risk. Jan I write books. http://janwhitaker.com/?page_id=8 Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 15:10 +1200, Paul Bolger wrote: > SIR! If you don’t take those earbuds out in five seconds I will be > charging you the full price for this trip, and a $10 contract > dishonorment fee.” "Hullo Car. Nice to hear from you. You may have noted that I am holding a large axe? I

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Personally I can’t wait for advertising subsidised travel. “Sir, in a moment we’ll be passing your local supermarket, and for a short time I’m authorised to offer you, at an incredible %25 off … SIR! If you don’t take those earbuds out in five seconds I will be charging you the full price for this

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 11:38 +1000, David Lochrin wrote: > Way back in the 60's artificial intelligence comparable with human > intelligence was confidently forecast to be a reality in 10 or 15 > years. Ten years later it was another decade or so away. We're now > half a century further on and

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-10 10:13 Karl Auer wrote: > Working computers have only been around for half a century or so. In that > time they have gone from electrical monsters to electronic marvels. They have > taken on a multitude of tasks that we once said with great confidence they > would never be able to

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Fri, 2016-06-10 at 09:04 +1000, Andy Farkas wrote: > Chess and Go have finite logical outcomes that are governed > by strict rules. The laws of physics are pretty strict. I tried to go faster than light once, and got fined. > Driving is a learning experience. Something different happens >

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 09/06/2016 23:11, Karl Auer wrote: Computers were never going to play chess. Until they did. Computers were never going to play Go. Until they did. Computers will never drive cars... until they do. Chess and Go have finite logical outcomes that are governed by strict rules. Driving (and

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

At 09:32 PM 9/06/2016, David Lochrin wrote: >If Volvo are unconditionally accepting "full liability for accidents involving >its driverless cars" such questions would not arise, but it seems a very brave >move indeed. Maybe they've run the risk/return numbers on this and figured in the law

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Thu, 2016-06-09 at 22:52 +1000, Andy Farkas wrote: > Most weekdays I drive 25 kms to work (one way). I > experience things that I'm sure only a human could > comprehend. Comprehend? Perhaps. Deal with? Hmmm. > Auto-cars are not going to cut it in rural Oz. Not now, perhaps. Tomorrow? You

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 09/06/2016 22:29, David Lochrin wrote: On 2016-06-09 21:32 I wrote: Suppose there's been heavy rain for three days and numerous warnings about flooding on local roads. Ignoring the warnings, I drive around a bend and hit water 30cm deep at the speed limit with the result the car

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-09 21:32 I wrote: > Suppose there's been heavy rain for three days and numerous warnings about > flooding on local roads. Ignoring the warnings, I drive around a bend and > hit water 30cm deep at the speed limit with the result the car aquaplanes > causing an accident with multiple

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-09 12:23 Jim Birch wrote: >> Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be >> responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? > > A company has responsibilities if your electric kettle explodes, or your new > fence falls on a passing

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

I get very frustrated with discussions about car driving and robots, for a bunch of reasons: - Odious comparisons are made between cars and other forms of transport, or other technology, most of which is far less complicated or with far less risk involved. - Gross generalisations are made

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Some of the car makers are trying to answer this question: 'Volvo says it will accept full liability for accidents involving its driverless cars, making it "one of the first" car companies to do so.' http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-34475031 rik. On 9 Jun 2016, 11:33 +1000, David

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

David Lochrin wrote: Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be > responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? A company has responsibilities if your electric kettle explodes, or your new fence falls on a passing pedestrian. It's not a new

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

At 11:28 AM 9/06/2016, David Lochrin wrote: >Stephen & Mike raise a really excellent question (below). Only a human can >assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be responsible for a death >caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? I had the same question when I read about the

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Stephen & Mike raise a really excellent question (below). Only a human can assume moral or legal responsibility, so who would be responsible for a death caused by the actions of a vehicle computer? Candidates include the pollies who mandated use of the technology, the executives of the

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-08 17:49 Chris Johnson wrote: > There are too many posts to quote from - but consider, just on whether all > cars should have a self-driving function. Two cases: > > 1. If arterial roads such as the Sydney M5 Eastern Distributor/Hume Highway > mandated hands-off driving only - and

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 8/06/2016 10:54 PM, Michael wrote: ... robot drivers will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. ... They're here! Some trucks in WA mines have no driver on-board. There are drivers, but they're thousands of kilometres away, working in air-conditioned safety. The trucks mostly drive

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 2016-06-08 22:54 Michael wrote: > I am surprised that this technology focussed list is so distraught about the > idea of robot drivers. > > Clearly, based on everything we have seen in the last 40 years, robot drivers > will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. Arguing there is a

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

I am surprised that this technology focussed list is so distraught about the idea of robot drivers. Clearly, based on everything we have seen in the last 40 years, robot drivers will arrive and exceed human abilities soon after. Arguing there is a certain set of conditions (road surfaces, types of

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 Jim writes > If the driverless vehicle drives like a dumb but safe driver it could save > a lot of lives, injury and loss ... Like everything else driverless vehicles > will be resisted by some, and taken up happily by others ... Neither the > government or their

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 7/06/2016 12:00 PM, link-requ...@mailman.anu.edu.au wrote: > Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 > years time There are too many posts to quote from - but consider, just on whether all cars should have a self-driving function. Two cases: 1. If arterial roads such

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Issues around driverless vehicles arise at two levels. There are more-or-less interesting, low-level questions about possible technology, but a much more interesting issue is what we would hope to gain and at what cost - the System Requirements Specification. I can see a role for driverless

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

David Lochrin wrote: It's interesting to see this topic surfacing again so soon, it obviously > excites passions. > Isn't it? If cars are to be completely computer-controlled by law This is a possible endpoint at the moment. It's not a real issue. That would only happen if cars meet all

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

It's interesting to see this topic surfacing again so soon, it obviously excites passions. So let's think about the idea in more detail. If cars are to be completely computer-controlled by law, then they must safely transport the man living in some rural area who wants to take his pregnant

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 7/06/2016 9:51 AM, Jim Birch wrote: > I doubt that the big, bad, government is going to take anyone's car away > from them, unless they are a proven danger to others. It will be a more a > case of what works best for the individual. I agree. IMHO, the issue is not about these technologies

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

Certainly some people, including me, like driving. Though not all the time. For most people pleasurable driving is a small part of their driving time. A lot of the pleasure, the social aspect, seeing stuff and going somewhere different, won't disappear. However, you need to compare the

Re: [LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

On 06/06/16 15:36, David Boxall wrote: ... you could probably ban all private vehicles ... Already in inner Sydney suburbs I notice many share cars. The Australian National University has recently introduced these in Canberra. Initially the cars are being used by staff, but will later be

[LINK] Why you may not own, or drive your vehicle in 10 years time

... while there might still be some human drivers in the system for commercial functions like trash, mail, ambulances, and package deliveries, you could probably ban all private vehicles ... -- David Boxall