Welcome to the Lounge

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 3:47

23-Mar-18 3:47

No, that's not what I said.

What I said was that HDR is not, and cannot be, used as a reference for what should be seen by what needs to be a video camera. That said, from what I've seen after making my previous comment I've seen cell phone video of the street at night showing almost as much detail as that still that paints a much worse picture of the quality/calibration of Uber's camera and has me wondering about the statements from the local cops about it being too dark to see the victim in advance.

Elsewhere on this very thread I said that LIDAR (which everyone but Tesla's self driving cars are using) should have detected the woman.

More broadly speaking, I find myself in increasing agreement with Timothy B Lee that even if not legally at fault in any of their recent crashes, Uber's cars are demonstrating a pattern of not being particularly good drivers.

Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius

Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt

HobbyProggy25-Mar-18 19:32

HobbyProggy

25-Mar-18 19:32

Dan Neely wrote:
Uber's cars are demonstrating a pattern of not being particularly good drivers.

Agreed, they should be banned from the road.

Rules for the FOSW ![^]

if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

F-ES Sitecore22-Mar-18 23:23

F-ES Sitecore

22-Mar-18 23:23

What learned from this is that having a "human backup" is useless if that person is on their phone. He should be prosecuted.

Munchies_Matt22-Mar-18 23:24

22-Mar-18 23:24

Infrared imaging?

Good idea.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 3:06

23-Mar-18 3:06

IR cams would be a good idea (and some luxury cars have had them for the last few years); but just LIDAR should've been enough to detect her.

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 4:49

23-Mar-18 4:49

Some Mercs had them, they will probably become standard on all cars soon.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 4:55

23-Mar-18 4:55

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Some Mercs had them, they will probably become standard on all cars soon.

On the loaded packages from more mainstream makes perhaps, but barring govt mandates I wouldn't expect to see them working their way down to base models for a while. Things like blind spot sensors and adaptive cruise/lane following that're currently only on mid/upper levels for most cars'd be a lot more generally useful IMO.

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 4:58

23-Mar-18 4:58

Mercs were the first with antilock brakes I think. And airbags?

They have pretty much lead the way. I wouldnt be surprised if we had IR screens in the dash in 10 or 20 years.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 5:09

23-Mar-18 5:09

15+ out I'd have no problem with a prediction of it as a standard feature (unless self driving cars conquer the world first); but even 10y is beyond what I'd consider "soon".

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 5:18

23-Mar-18 5:18

Yeah, I can see alot of automation coming in.

Take cars on motorways, doing say 150 mph, bumper to bumper, in a train, all controlled automatically. You can switch off, sleep, read. When you want to exit you go through some kind of exiting procedure an leave the train.

And Mercs have also introduced on some cars proximity sensors that activate the brakes. With this Uber accident, that would have worked.

Dan Neely23-Mar-18 5:36

23-Mar-18 5:36

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Take cars on motorways, doing say 150 mph, bumper to bumper, in a train, all controlled automatically. You can switch off, sleep, read. When you want to exit you go through some kind of exiting procedure an leave the train.

Trains more than a few cars long are going to need dedicated lanes because they become obstacles to anyone trying to change lanes. Driving at 150 MPH is going to be a lot more limited. Outside of the Autobahns very few roads are designed for traffic that fast. Locally even if the turns were banked steeply enough to keep cars from flying off into the guard rails the g-forces on passengers would suck. Short of completely new construction that continuously sliced through hills and bridged valleys I don't think anything above 90 MPH or so would be viable from a passenger comfort standard on most of the divided highways in western PA.

Munchies_Matt wrote:
And Mercs have also introduced on some cars proximity sensors that activate the brakes. With this Uber accident, that would have worked.

Collision alerts and emergency braking are well on their way to being standard features. My guess'd be that they'll be among the next set of safety features to be mandated by various govts. Although I hope the software gets better about false alerts first. (My '17 Accord doesn't combine the collision warning radar with the camera feed from lane following and generates a lot of false positives from oncoming traffic on curved highways.)

Munchies_Matt23-Mar-18 5:39

23-Mar-18 5:39

Of course, I am talking way into the future. The energy source will need to be in the tarmac, perhaps inductors.

Dan Neely wrote:
Although I hope the software gets better

Dont we all, in all things! Smile | :)