|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:35 pm
So that I can program instead of driving.....
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:42 pm
I hate driving
I would pay a lot for it if you did!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 8:42 pm
Well, Google already has self driving cars
And for a lot of robotics competitions the robots have to drive themselves for the beginning in the "autonomous" stage
So yeah, IT CAN BE DONE
Though it's not the program that's the problem, but it's the red tape around having a self-driving car to get you places that'd be annoying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:18 am
I think you're too late to sign up for the DARPA Grand Challenge for cars. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:35 am
Its already been done. I've seen it. Its just a lot of the testing and red tape and things, but its already possible.
I'd just prefer it because it means cars are less likely to have accidents if its a computer driving rather than a person as they are capable of absorbing so much more data and acting SOOOO much more logically than people. It would make driving a million times safer if it was all computer controlled
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:08 am
Cannibal Horsey Its already been done. I've seen it. Its just a lot of the testing and red tape and things, but its already possible. I'd just prefer it because it means cars are less likely to have accidents if its a computer driving rather than a person as they are capable of absorbing so much more data and acting SOOOO much more logically than people. It would make driving a million times safer if it was all computer controlled I thought people were capable of taking in far more data than computers, and process that data even quicker. It's just that we got so much more to process (including every body function we're using and our emotions) that we mess s**t up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 2:23 am
Gakre Cannibal Horsey Its already been done. I've seen it. Its just a lot of the testing and red tape and things, but its already possible. I'd just prefer it because it means cars are less likely to have accidents if its a computer driving rather than a person as they are capable of absorbing so much more data and acting SOOOO much more logically than people. It would make driving a million times safer if it was all computer controlled I thought people were capable of taking in far more data than computers, and process that data even quicker. It's just that we got so much more to process (including every body function we're using and our emotions) that we mess s**t up. People might absorb more data but they don't actually properly take it in. we get millions of bits of information every second and only really take in about 40 of those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 3:11 am
I want my car to be a. An Autobot
b. The Knight Industries Two Thousand
c. Herbie
d. Chauffeur-driven by Mercy
e. Christine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:51 pm
Gakre Cannibal Horsey Its already been done. I've seen it. Its just a lot of the testing and red tape and things, but its already possible. I'd just prefer it because it means cars are less likely to have accidents if its a computer driving rather than a person as they are capable of absorbing so much more data and acting SOOOO much more logically than people. It would make driving a million times safer if it was all computer controlled I thought people were capable of taking in far more data than computers, and process that data even quicker. It's just that we got so much more to process (including every body function we're using and our emotions) that we mess s**t up. Well, it depends on the thing that the brain is processing For things like math and other computational aspects, a computer is maaaaaaaany times better than a human, so for something just like driving, a program might be better. The amount of numbers a human can memorize can be stored in a few kilobytes on a computer Then again, for the more human aspects, such as facial recognition, humans are many times better, as we have been evolved to recognize faces. That being said, the number of faces we can recognize is absurd, like it'd take terabytes of computer space to process those high resolution photos So computers are weird Also, judgement is difficult to program into computers, which is probably why we don't have them driving cars more. Computers just do stuff, and for something like cars a lot of people have concern about this
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:24 pm
SoulSkourer For things like math and other computational aspects, a computer is maaaaaaaany times better than a human, so for something just like driving, a program might be better. The amount of numbers a human can memorize can be stored in a few kilobytes on a computer Not necessarily. Our main handicap when it comes to race against a computer in mathematics lie in the time we would have to spend to analyse the mathematical problem. Before we would even know what to calculate: the computer would have gotten the problem fed directly into its "brain", calculated it and printed it onto a screen. If we would remove the delays from receiving the problem and expressing it, I believe we would potentially be able to do it quicker than the computer. Our brain may also have the disadvantage of forgetting how to do something if we aren't doing it frequently. The computers' processors literary does nothing but receive binary signals trough logical gates (AND, OR, XOR and NOT gates) and return binary signals based on the system of gates, which we find easier to tell them to use for mathematical calculations (which again define everything a computer does). SoulSkourer Also, judgement is difficult to program into computers, which is probably why we don't have them driving cars more. Computers just do stuff, and for something like cars a lot of people have concern about this Your judgement is usually based on your experiences. It's not as difficult as it is time consuming to to feed a computer a lot of different experiences to develop its judgement. The most basic thing to do is to feed it the laws of what it can and cannot do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:38 am
Gakre SoulSkourer For things like math and other computational aspects, a computer is maaaaaaaany times better than a human, so for something just like driving, a program might be better. The amount of numbers a human can memorize can be stored in a few kilobytes on a computer Not necessarily. Our main handicap when it comes to race against a computer in mathematics lie in the time we would have to spend to analyse the mathematical problem. Before we would even know what to calculate: the computer would have gotten the problem fed directly into its "brain", calculated it and printed it onto a screen. If we would remove the delays from receiving the problem and expressing it, I believe we would potentially be able to do it quicker than the computer. Our brain may also have the disadvantage of forgetting how to do something if we aren't doing it frequently. The computers' processors literary does nothing but receive binary signals trough logical gates (AND, OR, XOR and NOT gates) and return binary signals based on the system of gates, which we find easier to tell them to use for mathematical calculations (which again define everything a computer does). SoulSkourer Also, judgement is difficult to program into computers, which is probably why we don't have them driving cars more. Computers just do stuff, and for something like cars a lot of people have concern about this Your judgement is usually based on your experiences. It's not as difficult as it is time consuming to to feed a computer a lot of different experiences to develop its judgement. The most basic thing to do is to feed it the laws of what it can and cannot do. Well, our brains didn't exactly evolve to perform complex mathematical operations, and we don't all memorize crazy multiplication tables or anything. That being said also, would it be even possible to remove the delays from receiving the problem and expressing it? I guess it could be like IMPRINTED INTO OUR MIND, but a computer would be able to brute-force a solution faster than we could calculate. Hence the need for calculators Well, you could always "teach" a computer also. But that also takes a while, as there'd be a large portion of time where it'd just crash constantly But again, the human concern comes up where people might not want to take the risk of something bad happening because of a robot driver. I can already see the headlines where people against it blame the autopilot solely for the accident, rather than an accident on someone else's part (granted, if two autopilot vehicles crash, then there's probably a problem)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 4:03 pm
I want a car to run on purified owl's blood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:06 pm
Myrielle I want a car to run on purified owl's blood.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:35 pm
SoulSkourer Gakre SoulSkourer For things like math and other computational aspects, a computer is maaaaaaaany times better than a human, so for something just like driving, a program might be better. The amount of numbers a human can memorize can be stored in a few kilobytes on a computer Not necessarily. Our main handicap when it comes to race against a computer in mathematics lie in the time we would have to spend to analyse the mathematical problem. Before we would even know what to calculate: the computer would have gotten the problem fed directly into its "brain", calculated it and printed it onto a screen. If we would remove the delays from receiving the problem and expressing it, I believe we would potentially be able to do it quicker than the computer. Our brain may also have the disadvantage of forgetting how to do something if we aren't doing it frequently. The computers' processors literary does nothing but receive binary signals trough logical gates (AND, OR, XOR and NOT gates) and return binary signals based on the system of gates, which we find easier to tell them to use for mathematical calculations (which again define everything a computer does). Well, our brains didn't exactly evolve to perform complex mathematical operations, and we don't all memorize crazy multiplication tables or anything. That being said also, would it be even possible to remove the delays from receiving the problem and expressing it? I guess it could be like IMPRINTED INTO OUR MIND, but a computer would be able to brute-force a solution faster than we could calculate. Hence the need for calculators If by "crazy multiplication tables" you mean tables going beyond products of 10, we don't have to memorize them. It is easy 'nough to learn some simple system to multiply two numbers multiple digits (or at least it was easy for me during the first few years of primary school, whereof I now find two-digit numbers usually being easy 'nough to quickly calculate in my head). Also; from what I understand: Most people of the western societies has grown adept of using multiplication and division efficiently, possibly trough the commonly growing usage of mathematics since the Renaissance. However; most people discard these skills, as it's far easier to use a calculator when you've just begun your mathematical training.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:47 pm
•○♣☼♣○•
Driving can be delightfully fun. I wouldn't willingly give it up.
•○♣☼♣○•
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
