Page 1 of 1

"Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 1:38 pm
by Fairportfan

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:27 pm
by Mark N
Great, smart cars for dumb people. What a future.

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 6:35 pm
by Fairportfan
I just like the "announcing that they're gonna announce"...

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:52 pm
by Jabberwonky
They're holding up a picture of the trial balloon they might fly...

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 10:17 pm
by MerchManDan
They're just letting the world know they're going to run a flag up the pole & see who salutes.

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:41 am
by ShneekeyTheLost
Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:15 am
by NOTDilbert
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."
Already done that, in current and past Jarrod Jewelry ads.....

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:44 am
by MerchManDan
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."
It is, but I'm not a fan of these slippery-slope arguments. They make for good thought experiments, but I'm pretty sure cars won't ever be programmed to decide to turn right just because they don't want to turn left.

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:25 am
by ShneekeyTheLost
MerchManDan wrote:
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."
It is, but I'm not a fan of these slippery-slope arguments. They make for good thought experiments, but I'm pretty sure cars won't ever be programmed to decide to turn right just because they don't want to turn left.
I'm not worried about intentional programming so much as buggy code or faulty sensors. Imagine, for example, if the OS for your car was written by Microsoft, and having a BSoD at highway speeds...

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:27 am
by MerchManDan
Ah, okay. That would definitely be cause for concern.

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 6:40 am
by Atomic
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:
MerchManDan wrote:
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."
It is, but I'm not a fan of these slippery-slope arguments. They make for good thought experiments, but I'm pretty sure cars won't ever be programmed to decide to turn right just because they don't want to turn left.
I'm not worried about intentional programming so much as buggy code or faulty sensors. Imagine, for example, if the OS for your car was written by Microsoft, and having a BSoD at highway speeds...
Funny enough to think of, but actually VERY dangerous! The Atlantic Airbus crash in 2009 is one example. The aircraft had a speed sensor fail at altitude, and the co-pilot responded the the alarm by pulling Back on the stick (side mounted control, not the big kind) in response to an apparent over-speed. From there, the aircraft stalled at 30,000 feet, and eventually fluttered it's way down to a mere 60 knots, falling at just near stall speed. The programming turned off the stall alarm, thinking it was about to land, and automatically kept the aircraft reasonably centered and level. The senior pilot was pushing Forward on the stick (not seeing the co-pilot's stick position), trying to get the nose down and speed back up, but the aircraft had already decided it was landing (thanks to the co-pilot's stick position) and ignored him. Result? Splat.

Ditto the 1988 Airbus crash at the Paris Air Show. The pilot did a low-and-slow pass, requiring the nose be held high to keep flying. However, when he tried to add power to pull up and away, the computer said "no, we're landing, dammit!" and blocked the throttles from advancing.

It's a design philosophy. Boeing designs the control systems to be overruled by the pilots. Airbus trusts HAL.

Re: "Hello, Department of Redundancy Department. Greetings"

Posted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:29 am
by chibichibi01
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:
MerchManDan wrote:
ShneekeyTheLost wrote:Well, the article itself is a bit more sobering. How long until our cars say "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you do that..."
It is, but I'm not a fan of these slippery-slope arguments. They make for good thought experiments, but I'm pretty sure cars won't ever be programmed to decide to turn right just because they don't want to turn left.
I'm not worried about intentional programming so much as buggy code or faulty sensors. Imagine, for example, if the OS for your car was written by Microsoft, and having a BSoD at highway speeds...
nut just that, but if the map hasn't been updated? Then you're flying through a construction site, or off the road when it thinks you're on.

I know my GPS sometimes has this issue and it's been updated just recently, where it will say I'm off road on the Interstate, and were I to be ten feet to the left like it wants me to be I'd be driving on the wrong side of the road!