Weird News

[Lamplighter]

Maybe this belongs in the "You know you are old" thread
... but I find this completely weird and insane.

Wall Street Journal
Amir Efrati
September 25, 2012, 11:00 PM

California Legalizes Self-Driving Cars

California on Tuesday became the third state to effectively legalize
self-driving car technology, which Google and many automakers are developing.

I was sensitized to something similar several weeks ago when I drove
into an industrialized area of PDX for the first time in a couple of years.
At a railroad crossing (with a stop sign) there is another sign that says something like:
"Beware - driverless trains on these tracks"

My thought was "Jeez, has the Afghanistan War brought us drone trains now" ?
But I can sort of understand driverless (commuter) trains,
but I'm way too old to accept driverless cars on the roads.

[glatt]

The DC Metro used to be driven by computer and the drivers were only there to make announcements and to open the doors.

Then there was the accident because of the faulty track sensors, so now the drivers drive the trains again. There have been two driver error accidents since that switch was made.

Out at Dulles airport, the trains to the far terminals have no drivers at all. Everything is automated, and they are much smoother riding than Metrorail ever was.

I think when the system works, computer controlled vehicles are better. But we've all seen how computers can fail.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by glatt

I think when the system works, computer controlled vehicles are better. But we've all seen how computers can fail.

All systems can fail, but when computers fail we freak out because they fail in a way that we can't envision ourselves doing.

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

Maybe this belongs in the "You know you are old" thread
... but I find this completely weird and insane.
California Legalizes Self-Driving Cars
<snip>

Today, this was in the PC World...

US road safety agency issues policy on driverless cars

Self-driving vehicle technology is not yet at a stage that
it can be authorized for use by the public for general driving,
according to a U.S. Department of Transportation recommendation to state governments.

If a state decides to permit operation of self-driving vehicles other than for testing,
at a minimum it should require that a person licensed to drive self-driving vehicles
should be seated in the driver's seat, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
said in a preliminary statement of policy on automated vehicles released Thursday.

The licensed driver should "be available at all times in order to operate
the vehicle in situations in which the automated technology is not able
to safely control the vehicle," it said.

<snip>

As they did when the first automobiles were introduced to the horse-drawn carriage age,
they should also require an adult on-foot carrying a red flag and a lighted lantern
to precede each driver-less car at all times.

.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

... they should also require an adult on-foot carrying a red flag and a lighted lantern to precede each driver-less car at all times.

Meanwhile, over the past decade, Google already has driven these automated cars for almost one-half million miles. But only in states that permit innovation and the creation of jobs - CA, NV, and FL.

DARPA's Grand Challenge in 2004 and 2007 should be known to all. Since (if I recall) a Federal law required half the military convoy type vehicles to be autonomous long before 2020.

[Lamplighter]

My latest post above was a feeble attempt at humor. But more to the point...

How many times do drivers demonstrate their intent or courtesy
by interior hand-signals to another driver ? e.g., "you go first"
It's one of the reasons cited for not allowing darkened front windshields.

If a "licensed person" is required to be in the driver's seat and ready to take over.
What's the point of a driver-less car ?

For free-way driving, maybe... and especially on long, uninterrupted trips.
But as someone who thinks some basic decisions were wrong back
when we allowed train transportation to wither in favor of cross-country trucking,
I think car+passenger transport trains running on tracks along side our existing freeways
would be more economical, faster and safer than Google/GM/etc's driver-less cars "just because they can".

ETA: The insurance companies will have a ball figuring out who
is responsible, and who will pay, for accidents that are bound to happen
Alert to Programing Engineers: Get your liability insurance now.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

I think car+passenger transport trains running on tracks along side our existing freeways
would be more economical, faster and safer than Google/GM/etc's driver-less cars "just because they can".

If you can take the train, you don't need the damn car. Where these vehicles shine is locally, where there isn't an alternative. And don't tell me improve public transit, that's a red herring that's expensive, impractical, and won't work in 95% of the US.

[Lamplighter]

If you can take the train, you don't need the damn car.
Where these vehicles shine is locally, where there isn't an alternative.

That sounds like a stockholder of Hertz/Enterprize/Budget/etc.

And don't tell me improve public transit, that's a red herring
that's expensive, impractical, and won't work in 95% of the US.

Agreed.

[footfootfoot]

Hitler Fried Chicken

“The place opened last month and nobody quite knows what to make of it. I went in for a bite last week and got some fried chicken, which was pretty good, and asked the guy behind the counter why it was called Hitler. He just shrugged his shoulders and said the owners had thought it was good image.”

Or to quote the interwebs, "What this is I don't even."

[tw]

Originally Posted by Lamplighter

My latest post above was a feeble attempt at humor.

I believe you meant sarcasm. That part was subtle and obvious.

Driverless cars means more jobs when we no longer need chauffeurs and autobody repair shops. That's not sarcasm. That's how jobs are created.

Unload the car. Then tell it to go park itself in the garage. Another feature that has long been demonstrated. But, like in all innovative products, it takes many years to get to market. Even cell phones that track the arrival of your bus were demonstrated over a decade before it became common in State College PA. Innovation takes that long.

A driverless car is inevitable. But many want to blame the machine rather than the source of most failures - the human. Did we not learn this from cars whose brakes did not work? Of course. Only reason those cars crashed in every case - human failure. Often followed by more human responses - lies or denials.

And again, the way to make jobs is to replace humans from mundane tasks. A car can drive itself to the car wash when it needs cleaning. Why waste a human minute?

[Lamplighter]

OK, I know you folk in the East are not terribly concerned,
but here in the Pacific NW, and especially in Oregon, we are deeply
involved with cougars (mountain lions).

A few years ago that dreaded organization, The Humane Society,
launched a public campaign to put an end to the use of dogs (hounds)
while hunting cougars, etc.
Surprisingly, ,that public referendum passed, mainly by the
highly populated Portland, Salem, and Eugene voters.
The ODFW rules were changed, and since then have prohibited the use
of dogs in hunting cougars, bears, and maybe one or two kinds of other game.

It's always been legal in Oregon(with a hunting license) to hunt them,
but a single hunter or even group of hunters is very ineffective,
and many hunters are taken by the "thrill of the hunt" and
"reading the hounds" as the dogs chase and "tree" the animal.

So, hunters were outraged by the vote, and it's been a public fight ever since.
And now, a Bill has been introduced in the Oregon Legislature to nullify the public referendum.

Now in Oregon, that right there is a No, No.
Legislators often lose their next election if they vote to overturn a public referendum.

But now this... a string of 3 sightings of cougars in the PDX metropolitan area...(very coincidental ?)

KATU.com
6/1/13
ODFW to investigate cougar sighting near OHSU

PORTLAND, Ore. – Two people, separately, say they saw a cougar
early Thursday morning near Oregon Health & Science University in Southwest Portland.
And the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is investigating whether
a wild cougar is prowling around the hospital's parking garages.
The calls about a mysterious cat came from separate hospital rooms at about 2 a.m.

OHSU checked security cameras and found nothing.
But on Friday, police put up warnings for the 20,000 patients, employees and students at the hospital.
<snip>
The last time biologists from Oregon Fish and Wildlife confirmed an actual cougar roamed the area was in Gresham in 1996.
According to ODFW, there has never been a documented case in Oregon of a cougar attacking a person.