Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by georgemcbay on Saturday September 01, 2012 @05:09PM
(#4465143)
Even simply coming to a safe halt is problematic. What if some troll traps a self-driving car with a few empty cardboard boxes?
Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by Retric on Saturday September 01, 2012 @05:57PM
(#4465275)
It stays still until someone removes them. If it's a cab it's more than likely to simply call for help.
Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by georgemcbay on Saturday September 01, 2012 @06:01PM
(#4465285)
And while it is still, it is now an obstacle for other empty self driving cars. Soon the troll has blocked an entire intersection or freeway using a combination of empty boxes and other trapped self-driving cars.
You underestimate the effort a good troll would be willing to put into this.
Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by rictic on Saturday September 01, 2012 @06:48PM
(#4465409)
There are lots of simple things that one could do to a roadway to impede or endanger traffic. Consider, for example, the danger of leaving something sharp or slick on a tight turn where people often speed.
I've thought about this for a few years, and as near as I can tell it's either much harder than it seems, or there are fewer vandals than I'd have expected.
Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by nazgulnarsil on Saturday September 01, 2012 @06:03PM
(#4465288)
the real test of driverless cars comes shortly after they start to become widely used. A driverless car will be forced into a trolley problem situation. That is, it will have to choose between hitting two things without the option to hit neither. Expect extreme scrutiny in the ensuing legal case.
Re:Driverless cars promise to reduce accidents, revolutionis...
by mike-cardwell on Sunday September 02, 2012 @07:07AM
(#4466745)
At least we'll be able to reliably determine the reason, and fix it if necessary, rather than relying on human testimony.
I believe that any such situation that could not be dealt with by simply coming to a safe halt is currently very badly handled by humans. I believe that they could be better handled with the _current_ state of the art, let alone advances we see over the next few decades.
I'm not arguing that they could be perfectly handled; just that the machines can do better than the average meat-bag.