GM will be the likely vendor and they haven’t had any major problems. What this accident in AZ might do is dissuade Disney from letting GM bring those cars to property until they are closer to T5 certification; that’s fully autonomous, no human action needed.
Uber is in loads of trouble. They actually disabled Volvo's SUV's Safety System Before Fatality. Both Intel who supplies chips to Aptiv who have worked on the Volvo XC90 stated "that it tested its own software after the crash by playing a video of the Uber incident on a television monitor. Mobileye said it was able to detect Herzberg one second before impact in its internal tests, despite the poor second-hand quality of the video relative to a direct connection to cameras equipped to the car."
If what you are saying is true -- and I'm not saying it isn't -- then why has TDO not shut down the monorail system by now? I mean, is that not the logical conclusion of the attitude you are describing? There are plenty of other forms of transportation at WDW already in place that they can direct people to, and it's certainly easy enough to add more buses to increase capacity. So why continue to shoulder the expense of the monorail?
Why, indeed.
Please tell me there isn't a move to shut it down...
Last I heard they were looking to update it but that seems to have died down as of late.
I wonder how these cars are going to deal with deer? They don’t exactly know traffic laws.
In theory, they should detect the deer and react accordingly.
I see nationwide no fault insurance. As for bodily harm liability, I have no idea how this ,would work. If technology is in control, how can the operator incur liability?
You (people) have to make the same decision, but, I'll repeat... YOU have to make them not some machine. I think that someday they will be the thing, but, until they have had a long period of time with no incidents it will not gain the public's confidence. Just in the past few months there have been two (that we know of) incidents of accidents because no one was controlling the vehicle except the computer. The computer can only anticipate situations if they are programmed to do so. That is an iffy proposition at best.
The inherent problem with AI is that each solution to a possible incident must be learned. Therefore, an incident must occur in order to be learned from with additional incidents needed to refine the learned algorithm.
To me there are two things that will have to be overcome and both of them are people. First they have to convince people that turning over control of something that is inherently dangerous over to a buzzing chunk of circuits and 1010101010's. Second, they have to convince people that driving isn't fun and that we should just become couch potatoes no matter what the activity. We do allow that in airplanes because, frankly, we don't really know what is happening or how to do it, but, at least at this point, we still know that there is a crew up front at least watching the gauges and the planes relationship to oncoming mountain ranges. How many people do you know that aren't control freaks. That alone will delay progress for generations.
The first part of your comment seems right, but I’m not sure the second part is. AI can “learn” from historical data. The value of AI is that it can learn solutions in anticipation of possible outcomes rather than having to wait until every possible scenario actually occurs.
That's the thing, no one really knows until presented with the situation and at the point the brain makes about a zillion calculations and then might even find a third alternative that wasn't included in the computer program. No one really knows how one would react, but, I think that most would choose not to plow down a group of people. We all have some degree of humanity, I would hope. It's not the dying, it's the lack of choice that bothers me. And would the car even know that there were a bunch of people there and not just some random bushes until after it had pointed itself in that direction. And would you rather have the computer make that decision so you can walk away and have a "machine" to blame. Something that you still have to live with because you made the decision to ride in a car that you were not in control of. It seems to me that there would be unlimited algorithm's in every movement that is made. The car is not going to get sued, you or the manufacturer will be spending out the cash. You can bet that before you can incorporate that technology into your life, you will be signing off the right to go after the manufacturer for damages. The fine print will need the Hubble Telescope strength Microscope to be able to read.
