Comments on: Intelligent cars: automated systems on display in Versailles

By: dorigo

dorigo — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:31:03 +0000

Hi Terry,

it’s too unfortunate that we have to care what ferrari owners want. Nobody should be allowed to drive at 200km/h, let alone 300. There are racetracks for that…
It is like banning smoke: doing it everywhere is a limitation of people’s freedom, while leaving it allowed in a small spot (such as those usually found in airports) is both right and educational.

By: Terry Bolton

Terry Bolton — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 10:05:33 +0000

about the comment that suggested that robots will generate a personality and we have to make a silicon butt .

really i dont see that comming soon specially in cars systems because its mostly designed to learn from its sensors and actuators not from you when you curse the driver of the next car.

i can see that these systems will offer agreat dealof car stability and accidents prevention which will be great for a family man like me .

but certain features like taking control and overriding user orders will take alot of the fun.

by other words cars which are designed to run at extremly high speeds will not be happy with a speed limit system (some people pay alot of money for a ferrari just to reach the 300Km/h)

but i think that this system is a great step in the direction of safe roads and somone should force using it in all cars

cheers
T.B.

By: Intelligent cars: automated systems on display in Versailles — Camcorder and CD player review

Sat, 13 Oct 2007 05:32:54 +0000

[...] driver with the aim of preventing street incidents or mitigating their effects…. source: Intelligent cars: automated systems on display in Versailles, A Quantum Diaries [...]

By: dorigo

dorigo — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 16:51:08 +0000

Lol, imagine Mandy talking too much, you kick her butt, the sensors catch it and she moans and says “Ouch – sorry, I apologize… I guess I’ll just shut up for a while”. That is close to my ideal car.

Oh, and – anybody against computer-mobbing here ? Or am I a sexist because I imagine a female robot getting kicked ? It’s Fred’s fault, he chose a female driver.

Cheers,
T.

By: Fred

Fred — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 14:06:00 +0000

I’m with you concerning the personality feature. The current GPS devices for vehicles have a variety of voices available if audio assistance is desired. This past week, on a drive to Frisco and back, a friend brought along such an aide with projecting a voice called Mandy who had a slight British accent. Her pleasant voice kept popping up at various times to very accurately keep us on track. Throwing her a few lines each time was great fun but she disregarded our comments and performed like a trooper focusing on the points of interest programmed. This was fine for freeway driving but when we were in downtown S.F. she might as well have been a wife or girlfriend giving directions but a much cheaper dinner date. p.s. It’s very difficult to find a bad cup of coffee in North Beach. On the last day of the trip, la signora running Caffe Puccini reminded me of a fine summer morning in Italia for a few brief moments. We had left Mandy in the car and she wouldn’t speak to us again for 20 minutes until we crossed the Bay Bridge driving out of town. Her silence spoke volumes.

By: dorigo

dorigo — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:27:50 +0000

Yes, I also look forward to a future when the car will be my slave and do the driving for me… However, I think we should expect intelligent systems to develop a personality of their own, so it becomes important to be able to argue with them… How about supplementing them with a soft silicon butt ready to be kicked when opportune ?

Cheers,
T.

By: Mauro Da Lio

Mauro Da Lio — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:10:54 +0000

Systems like these are moving robots. They must have some sensorial system, intelligence to understand the environment (make a “metal” model of it), intelligence to make plans (what to do, how to drive safely), and human interfaces (if the human must be in the loop) or automatic intervention.
Interestingly these systems have the same drawbacks as the humans (they have allucinations (false alarms), or they miss recognizing objects) and they may also fail. The roadmap for robots smarter that “attentive” drivers is still long. Now we all hope they may help preventing distractions and unattentive driving which is ultimately the cause of 95% of all accidents.
One day we will have a car which we will tell: “please martha (maybe my car will be named that way) bring me to the shopping centre downton”… but that is still future.

By: riqie arneberg

riqie arneberg — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:49:46 +0000

Long overdue! For starters, we ought to let turnpikes have (overrideable) control over speed. We have had the technology to do this for decades. Impatient lane changers slow everyone down, including themselves, and create a hazard as well. The system could control speed, but allow driver to override with gas pedal/brakes, at which point traffic police would be notified. This provides for possible system errors, but alerts police of possible violaters as well.

Ultimately the driver should be eliminated entirely, allowing him to sit back and sip a scotch while the car takes him to his destination.