Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Thursday February 01 2018, @04:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the just-let-go dept.

A very small survey of people of different ages suggests that there are age and gender differences in the acceptance of riding in automated cars. In summary, 2,600 people in the US replied and of them 38% of the men and just 16% of women would be happy to ride in an automated vehicle. About a quarter of respondents said they would feel safe in a driverless car while around two thirds said they would not travel unless there was a driver. No mention was made about their opinions of sharing the road with these massive projectiles when driving themselves in traditional cars.

Source : Driverless cars: Men and women have very different opinions on letting go of the wheel


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @05:23PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @05:23PM (#631562)

    The same incident in an automatic car will teach all automatic cars.

    That's an optimistic assumption. More likely, it will teach only those cars created by the same company.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Touché=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Touché' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @05:39PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @05:39PM (#631576)

    The same incident in an automatic car will teach all automatic cars.

    That's an optimistic assumption. More likely, it will teach only those cars created by the same company.

    Of course, because government will make sure that all data about safety, crashes and other stuff is restricted and, as such, will cause more deaths just because they're involved [techcrunch.com]. Because [*rolls up newspaper*] gub'mint bad! Bad gub'mint!

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:30PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:30PM (#631606)

      Why mod it 'troll'?

      What we need are clearly-defined contracts, not a violently-imposed monopoly!

      Commie bastards!

      Anarcho-Capitalism [wikipedia.org] FTW!!!!

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:02PM (2 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:02PM (#631592) Journal

    More likely, it will teach only those cars created by the same company.

    This, like all other problems, can be fixed with more government regulation. Then the whining will begin, despite the fact, that the corporations brought it upon themselves. Maybe they might act in a way that it would never occur to create a regulation.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by tftp on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:55PM

      by tftp (806) on Thursday February 01 2018, @06:55PM (#631618) Homepage
      Perhaps, the first robot car incident will be forgiven. However all the materials about it will be sent to all car companies by NTSB or the like. If a second incident occurs of the same type and the patch (or what is it in neural networks) is not applied, the company will be punished for the accident. Very soon every car company will be fixing bugs found by others or confirming, in writing, that their system handles this condition.
    • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @08:56PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @08:56PM (#631688)

      How about regulations which force these companies to make all of the software Free Software and have open hardware? If the cars do not respect users' freedoms, then they must be scrapped. Also, expect them to spy on people.

  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by frojack on Thursday February 01 2018, @09:05PM

    by frojack (1554) on Thursday February 01 2018, @09:05PM (#631690) Journal

    More likely, it will teach only those cars created by the same company.

    More likely it will teach nothing useful at all, and will be ignored, blamed on human drivers, and tossed out as an anomaly, written off as a cost of doing business.

    Humans are very good at watching for and avoiding crazy actions of other drivers, children, dogs, and objects.

    That guy who just passed you with a phone to his ear, and a hamburger in his other hand is going to do something stupid sooner or later. The smart drivers will put distance between themselves and that pending accident. Everybody involved, even the burger-muncher, is safer as a result. Will the computer ever achieve this ability to predict human errors, or the errors of other computers? Will interpret the frantic looks over the shoulder as a need to merge left or right, even without a turn signal? Will it recognize the middle finger as the sign of a rolling road rage - best avoided?

    To error is human. But humans learn to allow for and expect errors. To really fuck things up you need a computer.

    Someone is sure to insist that the solution is to remove all human drivers. Along with the decisions about where, when, route, and for what reasons you may choose to go someplace. Even the decision to park in the shade will be removed from your purview.

    Cars are not elevators.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.