(07-02-2016 10:13 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  More news says this guy was watching a DVD while driving.

aren't you arguing Tesla "at fault" sir?

(07-02-2016 08:20 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:12 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  I'm a huge supporter of what Tesla is trying to do as far as electric transportation goes, but we're just not ready for self-driving cars yet for any company. Go ahead and try to develop the technology, but there are so many pitfalls to this kind of endeavor that this is a place where overly cautious attitudes must prevail. We have no clue what the stats would look like if half the road was going off automation yet half was still self-drive.

The problem is that from an information polling POV, the car is its sole data point. The system needs to mimic the collision avoidance systems that planes have. Self driving cars probably need to make up 40% of cars on the road with limited networking before the dream is realized

I would take it to the point of implementing an entire contained system constructed and retrofitted based on magnetic technology to create jobs for the former 'farmers'....

but what do I know....people have grown accustomed to sittin' on their arse with the thumbs attached to phone....

kinda tough to right the ship once ya spoil the biatches....

(07-02-2016 10:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:13 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  More news says this guy was watching a DVD while driving.

aren't you arguing Tesla "at fault" sir?

Yes, and they remain so in part.

The system still failed.

(07-02-2016 10:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:13 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  More news says this guy was watching a DVD while driving.

aren't you arguing Tesla "at fault" sir?

Yes, and they remain so in part.

The system still failed.

again, I'm arguing the metaphorical side of "practicing medicine" v. negligence and the value of law....

sometimes I understand thingys w/o 'that' sheepskin....

law is necessary as a control mechanism....which means lawyers are necessary like rx folks...

however, I don't see anything other than an argument that results positively in the one that files suit in this instance...$$$$$.....5 star style

but that's just me yammering in the 'sip as I finalize this day....

(07-02-2016 11:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:13 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  More news says this guy was watching a DVD while driving.

aren't you arguing Tesla "at fault" sir?

Yes, and they remain so in part.

The system still failed.

again, I'm arguing the metaphorical side of "practicing medicine" v. negligence and the value of law....

sometimes I understand thingys w/o 'that' sheepskin....

law is necessary as a control mechanism....which means lawyers are necessary like rx folks...

however, I don't see anything other than an argument that results positively in the one that files suit in this instance...$$$$$.....5 star style

but that's just me yammering in the 'sip as I finalize this day....

Science tells us what we can do and philosophy tells us what we should do.

(07-02-2016 11:24 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 11:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:17 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:13 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  More news says this guy was watching a DVD while driving.

aren't you arguing Tesla "at fault" sir?

Yes, and they remain so in part.

The system still failed.

again, I'm arguing the metaphorical side of "practicing medicine" v. negligence and the value of law....

sometimes I understand thingys w/o 'that' sheepskin....

law is necessary as a control mechanism....which means lawyers are necessary like rx folks...

however, I don't see anything other than an argument that results positively in the one that files suit in this instance...$$$$$.....5 star style

but that's just me yammering in the 'sip as I finalize this day....

Science tells us what we can do and philosophy tells us what we should do.

don't disagree....however, I still argue the side of experimentation to promote efficiency being an overall benefit relative to knee-jerk self promoting ambulance chasing liability laws....

again, there is a difference in negligence v. trial and error.....common sense law is a lost art....

they come in treys.....the ones that can, the ones that cannot, and the ones that ignore

(07-02-2016 10:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 08:20 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:12 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  I'm a huge supporter of what Tesla is trying to do as far as electric transportation goes, but we're just not ready for self-driving cars yet for any company. Go ahead and try to develop the technology, but there are so many pitfalls to this kind of endeavor that this is a place where overly cautious attitudes must prevail. We have no clue what the stats would look like if half the road was going off automation yet half was still self-drive.

The problem is that from an information polling POV, the car is its sole data point. The system needs to mimic the collision avoidance systems that planes have. Self driving cars probably need to make up 40% of cars on the road with limited networking before the dream is realized

I would take it to the point of implementing an entire contained system constructed and retrofitted based on magnetic technology to create jobs for the former 'farmers'....

but what do I know....people have grown accustomed to sittin' on their arse with the thumbs attached to phone....

kinda tough to right the ship once ya spoil the biatches....

That's a system a like as well, but it is completely different from the regular driving problem Tesla and Google are trying to crack. The self contained system should be cars getting onto pods that can go 120-170 mph to compete with regional air travel.

(07-02-2016 07:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 06:51 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(07-01-2016 11:10 AM)Niner National Wrote:  Human drivers kill hundreds, maybe thousands of people a day.

Tesla very clearly tells you not to take your hands off the wheel. This, for now anyway, is supposed to be like a more advanced version of lane assist that other manufacturers offer. It's not a carte blanche to be a moron on the road.

Unfortunately though, people are terrible, and will willingly put their lives and the lives of others in danger for convenience. We see it every day with people using cell phones while they drive.

Lmao.... Dont take your hands off the wheel of auto pilot. What a joke this company is.

I think the term "auto pilot" is a very loose description of what these systems actually do.. I think "driver assist" is more accurate.

Yep, apparently this Tesla model was not designed to be and should not have been considered fully self driving. Tesla forces drivers to acknowledge the system has limits before they can allow it to control the steering wheel.

How does Tesla refer to this car in their marketing? Does it imply "auto pilot"? If so, that's dumb and probably negligent. Any use of computers should tell you they aren't perfect and certainly not something to bet your life on. But there are always going to be a few idiots that get weeded out, like someone watching a movie instead of looking at the road.