Jesterscup said:I don't disagree with this, it's a huge problem, and we don't have the systems to deal with it properly yet[\i].Tech issues aside we are not going to wake up one day with driverless cars, what is far more likely to happen is that driver assists will increase over time, to the point where actually relinquishing control to the vehicle will be a minor point. There is already talk of vehicles which will automatically brake when a dangerous situation is detected, over time as the public accepts more and more of these assists, then public acceptance of driverless cars will become more palatable. sure the tech to safely have a driverless car on the roads is still a little off ( I'm not foolish enough to give a timescale), but if asked 10 years ago, we'd have thought they were farther off than they seem today.hermes200 said:Examples aside, I think you are underestimating the complexity of the problem. A driverless car has been at the aim of very smart people for generations. That should give you an idea of the kind of effort here. It is the holy grail of AI. A machine that can interact with the real world, in a highly dynamic, highly complex continuous environment, without all the relevant information available, with split seconds decision making (as scary as a failure of a water or power station is, the systems running them have perfect information of all relevant variables at all times and very limited options available that they can outperform a human doing it).Jesterscup said:snipLil devils x said:UGH. I have to wonder if anyone who thinks this is safe in any way actually understands ANYTHING about programming.
You don't need to know all the variables of a system, but you do need to know enough, in our financial systems there is huge uncertainty, and generally that is a risk that is managed, a properly equipped driverless car can have far more information available to it than a human doing the driving. and there are simply loads of really really neat solutions to a lot of the problems. currently the biggie ( and yeah it is a biggie!), is the detection of unexpected objects on non-motorways ( children, animals, bikes etc ad nauseum ) but practical demonstrations of networked autonomous vehicles on motorways were first demonstrated a decade ago. Sure it's speculation, but it's not inconceivable. I could go into detail about specialist systems, object recognition systems & networked threat mapping as excellent examples of solutions to problems that seemed insurmountable only a few years ago.
@Lil Devils : I'm not disagreeing with you at all, there are aspects of our cyber security that are really REALLY scary, we could have nuclear explosions, planes dropping out the sky, cars blowing up, our entire economic system collapsing. With a backdrop of all that ( and with a car that can already be hacked and blown up ), I'm really not fussed if my car is slightly more autonomous, it's already at risk. You know that in a year or so's time, every single new car in Europe will be required to have a sim card and a dedicated network connection as standard, among other things it'll be able to automatically dial emergency services if it detects a crash. Imagine what a malicious agent could do with that.... the only way to not be worried about your car getting hacked is to either not drive, or have an old car.
Or you could have a custom car, as I do.