Hurricanes Lounge XXVII: BURN THE NEW SERVERS!

Status
Not open for further replies.

NotOpie

"Puck don't lie"
Jun 12, 2006
9,218
17,639
North Carolina
Yet, somebody is ultimately responsible. If you make a machine that makes egregious errors, the system has a recourse for that. It isn't any where near capable of repaying for the loss of life, but that's where liability laws come into play. And you're right, lots of people kill lots of other people in cars all the damn time...and usually somebody's responsible. Ultimately, somebody (or entity - insurance company) shoulders the burden of those costs.

My point is that it will be more complex in the future of determining who has the ultimate fault and therefore liability. And anybody who says the state (meaning government of any size) does not have a vested interest in minimizing the recognition of that liability is kidding themselves and doesn't get the way that government works.
 
Jun 21, 2016
7,216
29,654
Latvia
Sometimes they are, but sometimes it's the newness of it and/or the maturity of the technology. People don't even blink about technology (auto-pilot) flying the plane for them, or computer programs operating a subway for them, or dispensing insulin or other drugs into them, etc.. Auto driving cars are difficult because there's way more human interaction (Pedestrians, other drivers, etc...)than the examples I gave, the technology isn't as mature and it's taking something out of our own hands (vs. a pilot already flies a plane for us, or a conductor on a subway or a Dr./Nurse dispensing medicine, etc..)

I drove 8 hours yesterday (all highway) and the number of times someone was swerving in front or next to me because they couldn't put down their damn phone was alarming. Twice I had to move over into the shoulder to avoid being hit. The number of times there was a car that stayed in the left lane, all the time while cars backed up, tailgate other cars, try and pass on the right, etc... never ceases to amaze me.

I do get the ethical dilemma though. It's tough, because fundamentally, people aren't very good at driving either.
Do old people like you are even allowed to drive?:naughty:
 

vorbis

bunch of likes
Feb 9, 2013
2,533
13,328
YTZ
as someone who has done countless very long road trips, and has had driver/courier jobs both in town and long distance, I could rant for months about the left lane, and how there's too many damn people in it all the time, in every state I've been in, because people like the *idea* of passing people more than actually passing people, and oh god I'm doing the rant anyways aren't I. shutting up before things get out of hand.
 

Sens1Canes2

Registered User
May 13, 2007
10,667
8,293
Sometimes they are, but sometimes it's the newness of it and/or the maturity of the technology. People don't even blink about technology (auto-pilot) flying the plane for them, or computer programs operating a subway for them, or dispensing insulin or other drugs into them, etc.. Auto driving cars are difficult because there's way more human interaction (Pedestrians, other drivers, etc...)than the examples I gave, the technology isn't as mature and it's taking something out of our own hands (vs. a pilot already flies a plane for us, or a conductor on a subway or a Dr./Nurse dispensing medicine, etc..)

I drove 8 hours yesterday (all highway) and the number of times someone was swerving in front or next to me because they couldn't put down their damn phone was alarming. Twice I had to move over into the shoulder to avoid being hit. The number of times there was a car that stayed in the left lane, all the time while cars backed up, tailgate other cars, try and pass on the right, etc... never ceases to amaze me.

I do get the ethical dilemma though. It's tough, because fundamentally, people aren't very good at driving either.
BBA, I think for me the issue lies in who is “responsible” for the driverless car. When we get out on the roads, we’re kind of “all in this together,” such as it is. We all make turns, passes, and lane changes with consideration for the other cars on the road (well, MOST people do). If something happens, someone gets “blamed,” it’s someone’s fault, but ultimately life goes on. We all accept that, yes, the human-driven car is responsible for many many deaths, but its use outweighs the risks.

With the driverless car, we’re not quite sure who to blame when something happens. We haven’t quite processed that yes, it’s still only a car, and supposedly the computer will drive better than the human. But in these individual tragic cases, we get the idea that “would this have happened if Jane was actually driving and the computer?” It’s understandable that we’d look at the micro if we’re close to the victim, rather than the macro.
 

Boom Boom Apathy

I am the Professor. Deal with it!
Sep 6, 2006
48,174
97,102
BBA, I think for me the issue lies in who is “responsible” for the driverless car. When we get out on the roads, we’re kind of “all in this together,” such as it is. We all make turns, passes, and lane changes with consideration for the other cars on the road (well, MOST people do). If something happens, someone gets “blamed,” it’s someone’s fault, but ultimately life goes on. We all accept that, yes, the human-driven car is responsible for many many deaths, but its use outweighs the risks.

With the driverless car, we’re not quite sure who to blame when something happens. We haven’t quite processed that yes, it’s still only a car, and supposedly the computer will drive better than the human. But in these individual tragic cases, we get the idea that “would this have happened if Jane was actually driving and the computer?” It’s understandable that we’d look at the micro if we’re close to the victim, rather than the macro.

That's a good question on fault and one I really haven't thought through. I guess in some regards, it might not be much different from an Airplane example, other than Airline crashes are much less frequent. When a plane crashes, is it the Pilot's fault (Pilot error), the Airline's fault (improper maintenance), the Airplane manufacturer's fault (Boeing, Airbus, etc..), the Engine maker's fault (GE, Rolls Royce, etc)? Even when there are human drivers, "fault" is not always clear. In this case, my understanding is it was 10:00 PM and she was crossing a busy road and not in a crosswalk. If a human was driving the car and hit her, would it be their responsibility in this instance? Ultimately, the police and courts would have to make a judgement based on the information they've learned after the fact.

In some ways, maybe it would be easier determining fault with driver-less cars, in terms of specifically what went wrong? The driver-less car should have a much better record of what exactly happened because it is taking in so much data, and I presume recording it, so that it should be very clear what happened leading up to and during the crash/incident.

I do agree that it's tough to look at the Macro level when something like this happens though. I firmly believe that driverless cars, at some point in time, will lead to safer travel conditions, but if one hit one of my family members while the technology was still being perfected, it would be a very tough sell.
 
Dec 30, 2013
1,903
2,857
BBA, I think for me the issue lies in who is “responsible” for the driverless car. When we get out on the roads, we’re kind of “all in this together,” such as it is. We all make turns, passes, and lane changes with consideration for the other cars on the road (well, MOST people do). If something happens, someone gets “blamed,” it’s someone’s fault, but ultimately life goes on. We all accept that, yes, the human-driven car is responsible for many many deaths, but its use outweighs the risks.

With the driverless car, we’re not quite sure who to blame when something happens. We haven’t quite processed that yes, it’s still only a car, and supposedly the computer will drive better than the human. But in these individual tragic cases, we get the idea that “would this have happened if Jane was actually driving and the computer?” It’s understandable that we’d look at the micro if we’re close to the victim, rather than the macro.

I mean the data already shows that even with their current level of refinement, they are better drivers than humans. Google has done ~2 million miles and has caused one accident. Granted, they haven't been shown to drive on icy roads yet, but it's just a matter of time. I think the main issue that will annoy ethics people is how the vehicles will respond to the trolley problem. If one of two people must be hit, how does it determine which party to hit?

If I had to guess/what I hope happens, insurance will be changed quite a bit. 1.) Prices will be significantly lower, which will be nice. 2.) If a vehicle was neglected as far as maintenance and upkeep goes, the insurance company could argue that it was on the driver, if not, insurance for Driver A would make Driver A whole, insurance for Driver B would make Driver B whole. In the case of a driver and a pedestrian, the Driver's insurance would make both parties whole if fault could not be shown. So insurance will be less about fault, more about simple liability.

I for one cannot wait to have fully automated vehicles. I want to be able to plug in an address and either read a book or go to sleep.
 

Finnish Jerk Train

lol stupid mickey mouse organization
Apr 7, 2008
4,035
7,924
Raleigh
Has anyone encapsulated their crawlspace? Our downstairs has a musty smell in the summer, so one of my spring projects is to redo the torn and not-quite-complete vapor barrier in the crawlspace before it gets humid. I'm curious if anyone has taken the extra steps of permanently sealing off the foundation vents and insulating the walls as well, and how well that works as a retrofit in our climate.
 

Finnish Jerk Train

lol stupid mickey mouse organization
Apr 7, 2008
4,035
7,924
Raleigh
I'm no expert, but that sounds like a way to ensure you keep the musty smell. And Radon.
The theory is that the vents actually introduce moisture from the outside air when it's humid, which then condenses on the surfaces inside the crawlspace. I've never seen standing water on the joists or anything, but I do wonder if we're getting some moisture in there because the smell comes and goes with the humidity.

The idea is to basically make the crawlspace a part of the conditioned envelope of the house. They do that by creating a vapor barrier that covers both the floor and the walls, all the way up to the rim joists. The walls are also insulated with rigid foam (at least sometimes). Supposedly this is becoming more common in new construction, but I can't say I spend much time crawling underneath other people's houses so I haven't seen it for myself.
 
Last edited:

geehaad

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2006
7,508
18,851
A friend of mine does that work in Raleigh, and I’d consider him to be very knowledgeable about it and good at helping you understand how it could be beneficial. If you want his deets, PM me.
 

Novacane

Registered User
Jan 25, 2012
24,981
9,010
Raleigh, NC
A suspicious package arrived in EB2 today at NC State causing an evacuation for those familiar with centennial campus. Apparently an “unstable man” was just walking down the halls disrupting classes as well. Kind of unnerving to go to class in EB3 a few hundred feet away acting like nothing is wrong

 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->