I came here to see a flurry of bad puns about a plethora of new mums going into labour. I was disappointed.
13 posts • joined 15 May 2012
Agreed. In the immortal words of Syndrome from the Incredibles "If everyone is super, no one will be" A laudable sentiment that ultimately got him killed. he died mainly because of the way in which he defended his philosophy, but the so called hero's were really the ones that escalated the confrontation simply because they could not deal with the fact that they would no longer be dominant. (this is really just my deliberately obtuse take on the plot because its more fun this way).
Re: Safer cars?
Vantablack is not available for sale to private individuals. If a car could be fooled by it so could a human driver who could be more easily fooled as people lack the array of detection devices available to a mechanical object. I think it is an interesting but moot point. The car or person would operate in the same way, they may either detect the presence of the object in relation to its surroundings (why is there a person shaped hole in front of me) or not at all in which case the probably tragic outcome would be the same.
Re: Different people?
No, I dont think that its the general population that will ultimately come to accept AV (autonomous vehicles), regulators will have to be convinced first and then it becomes inevitable as insurance companies drive up non-adopters premiums so high that adoption becomes almost mandatory.
I couldn't agree more. Certainly the car needs to recognise as much as possible without intelligent stop signs, pedestrian walks (pedestrian cell phone location services data feeds), traffic lights, road marking chips etc etc, but all of this technology would provide an extensive safety net, and where it existed, dramatically speed up the cars decision making times. It seems to me that all of the traffic control systems are really just designed for one type of driver, the human one, shouldn't we be now catering for the artificial one too?