News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The latest chapter for the self-driving car: mastering ci... by bertil on Monday April 28, 2014 @12:58PM (#7661208)
Most human drivers tend to over-estimate the consequence of a collision — it’s common that swerving to avoid a wild animal poses a greater danger than hitting, for instance.

However, what a robocar can do that most humans can’t is organise the clean-up, and that’s hundred times more important, because presently, hundreds of cars will pass that debris.

Let’s say you have a radar under the chassis (not unlikely given Telsa’s latest PR issue): the car OS can warn the authorities instantly with an exact location; images from several cars can be compiled to form an exact estimate of what it is. All car with significant connectivity can be informed that this lane is closed a small portion before any physical equivalent (orange cones) has time to be set up, possibly allowing a safer clean-up if the (connected) highway detects that all cars in the next x minutes have been warned, and a brusher drone can be dispatched.

Re:The latest chapter for the self-driving car: mastering ci... by stephengillie on Monday April 28, 2014 @01:10PM (#7661305)
Could we have the cars drive in such a way that the effect on air pressure as they pass would push some debris off the roadway?
Re:The latest chapter for the self-driving car: mastering ci... by bertil on Monday April 28, 2014 @01:22PM (#7661421)
I can’t tell if that’s a fantastic idea, or you've watching too many Fast-and-Furious action movie. Let’s agree it’s both.

Serious answer: probably not. What you describe involves turbulence control — an area that has driven the most spectacular effort in computing for half a century, and as far as I can tell, still a very dark box.

Having self-driving space flight to Jupiter trigger philosophical debate by quasi-human AI, that’s pretty much a given by now; using a fan in a controlled manner… no way. Who would have though in 1968 that 2001 was the realistic one, and Iron Finger 2 non-sensical?