PC Pals Forum
General Discussion => Science & Nature => Topic started by: Simon on December 11, 2011, 21:52
-
Every year, 1.3 million people are killed and 50 million injured on the world's roads. Carmakers are racing to create a vehicle that will never crash, but can it be done and will drivers accept a computer that overrides their driving?
Less than 30 years ago, "clunk clicking" ourselves into our car seat belts seemed like the cutting edge of road safety technology. Since then, we've seen airbags, anti-lock braking systems and crumple zones fitted to new cars.
Now the arrival of crash avoidance technology - systems that can alert drivers to danger and even take action to prevent accidents from happening - promises to cut the number of crashes on our roads.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15820069
-
I welcome the idea and have no doubt none of us will be in the driving seat in 50 years time. I also predict that cars will not have internal combustion engines to propel them. A couple of friends of mine already have cars that can park themselves. 8-)
-
The problem would be that computers cannot possibly take into account every eventuality, and some human control would always be required, in my opinion. With the keeping in lane control, for example, what would happen, say, in thick fog, if you suddenly had to change lanes to avoid a collision? If the car is fighting against the driver, that might put him at quite a disadvantage. I'm sure there would be fail safe mechanisms built in, but I'd find it pretty scary to have no control over the vehicle myself.
-
But there will be no controls at all Simon. No steering wheel and no pedals. SatNav will take care of everything. That would suit me down to the ground. 8-)
-
That's handy, because in 50 years time, when all this happens, you'll probably be in the ground. :laugh:
-
And a good thing too. :laugh:
-
No going for the urn on the mantelpiece, Clive? ;)
-
I have my eye on the nearby field of sheep. ;D
-
:laugh:
-
:sheeplove:
-
;D
-
There'll be loads of crashes. By then, CERN will have come up with some new theory-of-everything based on the properties of the Higgs Bosun particle which might be announced tomorrow... assuming they can get enough physicists in the same press conference at the same time... although several of them might inadvertently be scattered throughout Somerset despite their promises to be at the press conference... and if the particle isn't actually confirmed tomorrow it will have been confirmed in the 11th dimension which is close enough to mean that if the errant scientists can get to Italy they'll soon be back in Geneva before anyone notices that Somerset has a surplus of physicists anyway...
... so all these particle physicists will suddenly appear in the air, fifty feet above the Los Angeles Interstate and holding onto the tails of tabbies, screaming, "Schrodinger, your bloody cat decided it wanted to see how it would land when dropped from a great height. Poisonous gas just didn't have the same sort of appeal." Then they'll splash down onto all the cars below, no doubt with the last victim yelling, "Programme that into your lovely GPS satellites, you Newtonian chimps".
-
Gill, relax. Calm down and have a jam sandwich. The universe will continue to be pretty much the same long after both you and I have gone mouldy. Now what was that question again?
-
new theory-of-everything based on the properties of the Higgs Bosun particle which might be announced tomorrow.
other way around - the theory predicts the particle. Oh and its Boson.
-
:music: In the navy :music: ;D
-
other way around - the theory predicts the particle. Oh and its Boson.
Thank you Sam. That's the last time I attempt humour on this forum.
-
We need smilies, Gill. ;) I had no idea your post was humourous - it went straight over my head! :laugh:
-
Well, let's be honest, there's not a lot of hair to stop it. :devil:
-
:bawl:
-
:laugh:
-
Thank you Sam. That's the last time I attempt humour on this forum.
Didn't sound humorous in the slightest to me. Sorry, but I have lots of friends who are killing themselves working on this project, I don't like to think their efforts are taken so lightly. Also I find it very hard to let possible misunderstandings of physics sit there on a public domain.
-
I find it very hard to let possible misunderstandings of physics sit there on a public domain.
Remember your own impatience with others the next time you are corrected. If only you knew how many of your grammatically erroneous posts have tempted me to detail corrections. However, I do not believe that such actions benefit a forum, so I simply accept that we all have our weak points.
Goodbye, everyone. It used to be fun. I have certainly been helped by people here in the past and I would like to think that I have made a positive contribution too.
-
You certainly have, Gill. I'm not sure I understand what the problem is here. Haven't we all made posts on occasions that people haven't "got", or have fallen a bit flat? I'm sure Sam meant no offence in offering a correction on what he took to be a factual post, or at least, one where I think the intended humour passed us all by. It would be a shame to lose you over this. :(
-
It would indeed be a shamed to lose you over such a seemingly trivial matter Gill. I'm certain that Sam did not intend to cause offence.
-
Gill, come back or the puppy gets it.
-
:laugh:
Stay, Gill, you're the only one who can argue with Sam. ;)
-
Remember your own impatience with others the next time you are corrected.
Impatience? What - a line of explanation? Sorry next time I'll write an essay on the subject.
Thanks for the posts.