On 08/04/2022 08:22, Andy Burns wrote:

> Do self-driving vehicles even talk to each other (or back to the
> mothership) in real-time?  Are there standards for compatibility between
> manufacturers?

Just think of the number of vehicles a car may have to talk to when
everyone gets in their cars at the same time in a parking lot or field
at the end of a well attended sporting event, or similar.

How will a self driving car know what to do when in these situations
when there are humans directing traffic to either give a fair chance of
exit to multiple queues of traffic or direct you in a different
direction to the sat nav wants to go, perhaps down a two mile dirt track?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 05/04/2022 00:50, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart
> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> This is Britain, don't forget. The change-over would be cars at first
>>> to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Jim
>>
>> Electric scooters first please.
>
> Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like
> without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
> they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.

+1
Around my way there are a couple of a******s who regularly travel up and
down the pavements at 20 mph weaving in and out of pedestrians who may
be in their way. These electric scooters are near silent until, at the
speed they are travelling, they are very close.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 08/04/2022 09:36, alan_m wrote:
> On 05/04/2022 00:50, Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Apr 2022 08:50:33 +0100, Roderick Stewart
>> <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> This is Britain, don't forget.  The change-over would be cars at first
>>>> to see how it went, followed by lorries a few weeks afterwards.
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>
>>> Electric scooters first please.
>>
>> Makes no difference. The f***ers operating them just go where they like
>> without regard to anybody or anything else anyway. Untouchable, until
>> they go under a lorry. Proof that Darwin is right... eventually.
>
>
> +1
> Around my way there are a couple of a******s who regularly travel up and
> down the pavements at 20 mph weaving in and out of pedestrians who may
> be in their way. These electric scooters are near silent until, at the
> speed they are travelling, they are very close.
>

I should say these are the two wheeled "kids" look alike type electric
scooter.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 03/04/2022 14:59, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
> I noticed the original Perry Mason being screened the other day, the sound
> on that was quite good, albeit mono. I never could stand that series.

EVERY case solved in the last 5 minutes when the murderer who has only
been subpoenaed as a witness confesses to the crime.

The one man law firm of Perry Mason, his personal assistant, office
secretary and the private detective used for every case all add to the
massive fee.

Why did this one plot series run for so long on USA TV?

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Fri, 08 Apr 2022 07:48:44 +0100, Indy Jess John
<bathwatchdog@OMITTHISgooglemail.com> wrote:

>I wonder what happens when every self-driving vehicle on the road
>simultaneously updates to a software version with a dangerous bug in it?

What happens if a self-driving vehicle crashes or makes a decision
that kills someone after the owner has changed a user setting?

Or the owner *hasn't* changed a user setting that might have prevented
the crash if it had been set differently?

Or all the user settings are at defaults because the owner is unaware
that they can be changed?

Or the vehicle is secondhand and still has the previous owner's choice
of user settings?

Who's to blame?

I don't think it will be technology that holds back the implementaion
of self-driving vehicles. It will be bureacracy, as usual.

Rod.

On 08/04/2022 09:56, Roderick Stewart wrote:
> Who's to blame?

I thought remembered something about this just did a search.

"A legal review prepared for the British government recommends that
those using autonomous vehicles be immune from prosecution if their car
breaks the law – even if the infraction results in death."

Going to be some very rich lawyers!

On 08/04/2022 09:31, alan_m wrote:
> Just think of the number of vehicles a car may have to talk to when
> everyone gets in their cars at the same time in a parking lot or field
> at the end of a well attended sporting event, or similar.

And someone will hack the software so they get priority over all other
road users, even emergency services.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 08/04/2022 09:31, alan_m wrote:
>> Just think of the number of vehicles a car may have to talk to when
>> everyone gets in their cars at the same time in a parking lot or field
>> at the end of a well attended sporting event, or similar.
>
> And someone will hack the software so they get priority over all other
> road users, even emergency services.
>

My guess is we will get there, but not for another decade or two. The
technology is simply not mature enough, in terms of sensors,
communications, computing power, reliability and above all software. The
software has to be as adaptable as the human brain, and despite the hype we
are nowhere near that yet. Once we have software of that power there will
be all sorts of consequences for society, not just driverless cars.