It's not clear whether they're killing them any quicker than other cars.Teslas on auto are killing motor bikers in USA,
Do an internet search, its not fake news.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not clear whether they're killing them any quicker than other cars.Teslas on auto are killing motor bikers in USA,
Do an internet search, its not fake news.
Although with self driving cars, we're going to have to get used to the fact that even if they are safer overall, they'll still have silly accidents:Article looking at the safety stats of self-driving taxi trials in San Francisco... TLDR:... looks like they are at least on par with and probably safer than humans.
Are self-driving cars already safer than human drivers?
I learned a lot by reading dozens of Waymo and Cruise crash reports.arstechnica.com
yeah, what do i google bikers killed in usa by teslas ?Teslas on auto are killing motor bikers in USA,
Do an internet search, its not fake news.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
It will depend on the programming. I don't know how many have been in a Tesla but it shows on a screen a representation of whats in front and to the sides it picks up people walking on the pavement and dogs! In the scenario you give I suspect that the majority of drivers would actually instinctively head away from the oncoming vehicle.What happens then if a car coming in the opposite direction has a blow out and veers towards you? The car is too close for the AI to stop it so presumably your car would take avoiding action, possibly preferring the "soft" footpath to a head on collision with the other car.
the car has a constant "bubble" around it looking for safety all the time....and is supposed to take the safest route.What happens then if a car coming in the opposite direction has a blow out and veers towards you? The car is too close for the AI to stop it so presumably your car would take avoiding action, possibly preferring the "soft" footpath to a head on collision with the other car.
The limitation of the Tesla system then is that presumably will never be better than a human driver but it sounds like the driverless taxis in LA are already. It also sounds like from reading the article that if the other vehicles on the road were also driverless the accident rate could be significantly lower still. Cue lots of people complaining about their rights to have accidents being taken away!My understanding is that the approach everyone is taking to their automated driving systems is to program in rules of the road and how to respond.
Except Tesla. They just provide millions of hours of recorded driving to self learning system so it eventually behaves like a natural driver.
Both methods have their pros and cons. Tesla argue that their method is more flexible as it'll work anywhere and is likely to know how you respond in complex situations where hard rules can conflict. The downside is that you can't train for a scenario unless you've got examples of it. So how will it know how to respond to a pedestrian walking out in front without that situation happening? Volunteers?
This is an oversimplification as Tesla can still set objectives for the AI to achieve, so it still has rules, just they guide rather than dictate.
It learns from humans. It doesn't mean it can't outperform. It can react faster and using far more detailed inputs and control on things like how much each wheel is slipping.The limitation of the Tesla system then is that presumably will never be better than a human driver but it sounds like the driverless taxis in LA are already. It also sounds like from reading the article that if the other vehicles on the road were also driverless the accident rate could be significantly lower still. Cue lots of people complaining about their rights to have accidents being taken away!
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
Exactly my point it wouldn't happen! Why would they be traveling too close or fast to stop? Your scenario would never exist
It's tragic news on both counts, when I learnt to fly many years ago, part of the training was to be taught about the genuine blind spot in human eyes.It is where the optic nerve goes beyond the rear of the eye. With a motorcycle being razor thin as it approaches a junction,the gap in the picture caused by the blind spot is rewritten by the brain . this means when the driver of the car says the bike came from nowhere ,I just didn't see him...its invariably true .The answer is to rock backwards and forwards at junctions to cover the blind spot.Why this is not taught in the driving test,I will never know.Terrible, thoughts with all those involved.
My daughters brother in law had a bike accident last Sunday outside Settle after a car apparently turned across him.
He was in surgery for 8 hours and had 40 units of blood on the day. Still not regained consciousness and likely to have life changing injuries when he recovers. Making me rethink whether or not to continue riding.
I think that's possibly partly true if you only have one eye but with both open the blind spot in one eye is covered by a seeing area in the other. Also the blind spot is probably far enough off centre not to have any effect looking down a road. If you rock backwards and forwards but look in the same direction the blind spot will stay in the same place as it's a fixed distance off the centre of vision not related to head position.It's tragic news on both counts, when I learnt to fly many years ago, part of the training was to be taught about the genuine blind spot in human eyes.It is where the optic nerve goes beyond the rear of the eye. With a motorcycle being razor thin as it approaches a junction,the gap in the picture caused by the blind spot is rewritten by the brain . this means when the driver of the car says the bike came from nowhere ,I just didn't see him...its invariably true .The answer is to rock backwards and forwards at junctions to cover the blind spot.Why this is not taught in the driving test,I will never know.
Although with self driving cars, we're going to have to get used to the fact that even if they are safer overall, they'll still have silly accidents:
Presumably why emergency services ceased using the term ‘accident’ years ago now. That term almost excuses anyone of responsibility/liability by suggesting the outcome was unavoidable, unforeseen, could not be predicted or mitigated in advance etc.I don’t believe there are such things as accidents.
There’s always a cause and an outcome.
Subscribers do not see these advertisements
I agree although I think there are often several factors that cause an incident to occur. It could be poor road design innapropriate speed limits a tired driver the other one speeding etc. My concern sometimes is that people want an easy explanation.Presumably why emergency services ceased using the term ‘accident’ years ago now. That term almost excuses anyone of responsibility/liability by suggesting the outcome was unavoidable, unforeseen, could not be predicted or mitigated in advance etc.
I think that's possibly partly true if you only have one eye but with both open the blind spot in one eye is covered by a seeing area in the other. Also the blind spot is probably far enough off centre not to have any effect looking down a road. If you rock backwards and forwards but look in the same direction the blind spot will stay in the same place as it's a fixed distance off the centre of vision not related to head position.
The blind spot in humans is located about 12–15° temporally and 1.5° below the horizontal and is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide so you have approximately 25 degree wide uninterrupted central field of view in each eye with the blind spot in one eye covered by the other.
If you lose the sight in one eye after adapting it's perfectly legal to drive despite the blind spot.
When people don't see a motorbike I think it's poor concentration
You make some valid points,but rather than bore everyone with the minutiae of human eyesight I will just refer you toI think that's possibly partly true if you only have one eye but with both open the blind spot in one eye is covered by a seeing area in the other. Also the blind spot is probably far enough off centre not to have any effect looking down a road. If you rock backwards and forwards but look in the same direction the blind spot will stay in the same place as it's a fixed distance off the centre of vision not related to head position.
The blind spot in humans is located about 12–15° temporally and 1.5° below the horizontal and is roughly 7.5° high and 5.5° wide so you have approximately 25 degree wide uninterrupted central field of view in each eye with the blind spot in one eye covered by the other.
If you lose the sight in one eye after adapting it's perfectly legal to drive despite the blind spot.
When people don't see a motorbike I think it's poor concentration
Where exactly do you expect me to look at that! The physiology is factual I can get into minutiae if you like but I suspect that the main benefit of physically moving backwards and forwards while looking down the road will be some apparent movement of any object against the background due to paralax but mainly concentrating longer and being aware.You make some valid points,but rather than bore everyone with the minutiae of human eyesight I will just refer you to
"Human Performance and limitations "by RD campbell and M Bagshaw chapter 3 in particular the experiment on page 25.
Ok. Get used to outcomes that would have been unlikely with a human driver. Even if safety is better overall.I don’t believe there are such things as accidents.
There’s always a cause and an outcome.
Sorry if that sounded condescending ,but to reply to the valid points you made and further the concept would of taken ages to put in writing and required scanning medical drawings etc and I am not sure people would of been interested to that extent .Your right although in theory it should not happen ,in practice facial features such as the nose stop vision from both eyes overlapping.Where exactly do you expect me to look at that! The physiology is factual I can get into minutiae if you like but I suspect that the main benefit of physically moving backwards and forwards while looking down the road will be some apparent movement of any object against the background due to paralax but mainly concentrating longer and being aware.
By the way I did a fair bit of flying too a big problem with young pilots is empty space myopia if you're interested!
Subscribers do not see these advertisements