Detweiler and Sons

cthia wrote:
New safety technologies always need fine-tuning. Like airbags - the earlier ones were dangerous. They've become much better, though.

I read this post regarding the link to the accident and immediately rang my sister. Then she insisted we threeway my niece. "See, I told you so!"

My niece is shocked.

Then my sister says...

"Besides, we already have driverless cars. Pay attention the next time you're driving. 1 out of every 5 cars on the road doesn't have a driver. Oh, there's someone sitting at the wheel alright, but I assure you, no one is at home!"

[/quote]

First Automatic transmissions, Then the Japanese trying to build automatic transmissions. Then driverless trains. Now driverless 18 wheelers. Someone is trying to suck all the UN out of FUN. I don't like it. I certainly hope these driverless systems are not using=Windows as their operating system. All we need is a computer system crash as a big truck tries to wend it's way through the Columbia Gorge on I-84 next Tuesday. 55+ mph winds and snow and possible ice on the roads.

munroburton wrote:https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/man-followed-gps-drove-off-disused-bridge-ramp-wife-dies-police-say/

Driverless cars will not rely on only GPS. They'll also be using all sorts of sensor systems to monitor the road surface ahead, obstructions, heck - even read signs us humans fail to!

It's simple enough to prevent the accidental backseat driving scenario you postulate, with:
1) Voice command relating to vehicle operations should not register unless a button, ideally on the steering wheel, is pressed(this allows ICE functions ).
2) Seat occupancy sensors
3) Grip sensors on the steering wheel

It should also be possible to monitor intoxication, although I've heard of an urban legend where a drunk caught a racoon in order to provide his car(fitted with a breathalyser) with a sober reading.

New safety technologies always need fine-tuning. Like airbags - the earlier ones were dangerous. They've become much better, though.

cthia wrote:I read this post regarding the link to the accident and immediately rang my sister. Then she insisted we threeway my niece. "See, I told you so!"

My niece is shocked.

Then my sister says...

"Besides, we already have driverless cars. Pay attention the next time you're driving. 1 out of every 5 cars on the road doesn't have a driver. Oh, there's someone sitting at the wheel alright, but I assure you, no one is at home!"

WeirdlyWired wrote:First Automatic transmissions, Then the Japanese trying to build automatic transmissions. Then driverless trains. Now driverless 18 wheelers. Someone is trying to suck all the UN out of FUN. I don't like it. I certainly hope these driverless systems are not using=Windows as their operating system. All we need is a computer system crash as a big truck tries to wend it's way through the Columbia Gorge on I-84 next Tuesday. 55+ mph winds and snow and possible ice on the roads.

I'd just be happy, if the OS was Windows, that it wouldn't tell me that I cannot turn my machine off to try and quickly reboot until updates are downloaded. And then when I finally get it shut off and try to reboot, it makes me wait again until updates are finished installing. I don't foresee anyone having that much time.

Talk about a more poetic blue screen of death.

cthia wrote: I'd just be happy, if the OS was Windows, that it wouldn't tell me that I cannot turn my machine off to try and quickly reboot until updates are downloaded. And then when I finally get it shut off and try to reboot, it makes me wait again until updates are finished installing. I don't foresee anyone having that much time.

Talk about a more poetic blue screen of death.

Or a more ironic one.

Actually I hav e driven through Seattle's downtown and completely lost GPS signal. I'm sure it happens in other cities with lots of high rises. While I'm sure it wouldn't affect the radar and sonar and ABS,and all the other autonomous features, But I'd hate missing that turn.

WeirdlyWired wrote:

Or a more ironic one.

Actually I hav e driven through Seattle's downtown and completely lost GPS signal. I'm sure it happens in other cities with lots of high rises. While I'm sure it wouldn't affect the radar and sonar and ABS,and all the other autonomous features, But I'd hate missing that turn.

I believe the integrated GPS systems in car already get inputs from the car's other systems (speedometer, steering inputs, etc), so when they lose GPS signals they can continue updating your movement down the road. (They'd get lost/confused if you turned too much, or did a burnout, but if driving routinely they can handle signal drop-out better than standalone GPS or smartphones)

An autonomous driving system could go one better and 'see' the cross streets as you drove so it should know when you'd reached your turn even long after you lost GPS in a city.

Jonathan_S wrote:

WeirdlyWired wrote:

Or a more ironic one.

Actually I hav e driven through Seattle's downtown and completely lost GPS signal. I'm sure it happens in other cities with lots of high rises. While I'm sure it wouldn't affect the radar and sonar and ABS,and all the other autonomous features, But I'd hate missing that turn.

I believe the integrated GPS systems in car already get inputs from the car's other systems (speedometer, steering inputs, etc), so when they lose GPS signals they can continue updating your movement down the road. (They'd get lost/confused if you turned too much, or did a burnout, but if driving routinely they can handle signal drop-out better than standalone GPS or smartphones)

An autonomous driving system could go one better and 'see' the cross streets as you drove so it should know when you'd reached your turn even long after you lost GPS in a city.

Exactly. I gather a lot of people haven't been following the discussion in the auto industry about self-driving cars. The big turnaround this last year is that almost everyone has given up on Level 3 - that is, a car that needs the driver to take over in an emergency. They consider that it's both too dangerous and too difficult for the relatively modest benefit over Level 2. They're going right to Level 4 or 5, and expect to be there by the end of the decade.

The other thing is that they're going to a utility model, like Uber or Lyft, rather than planning on selling them to civilians. That kind of car would have the local road system in its on-board computer, and wouldn't depend on GPS for anything local.

See https://www.wired.com/2017/01/human-pro ... ving-cars/ .

JohnRoth wrote:
Exactly. I gather a lot of people haven't been following the discussion in the auto industry about self-driving cars. The big turnaround this last year is that almost everyone has given up on Level 3 - that is, a car that needs the driver to take over in an emergency. They consider that it's both too dangerous and too difficult for the relatively modest benefit over Level 2. They're going right to Level 4 or 5, and expect to be there by the end of the decade.

The other thing is that they're going to a utility model, like Uber or Lyft, rather than planning on selling them to civilians. That kind of car would have the local road system in its on-board computer, and wouldn't depend on GPS for anything local.

See https://www.wired.com/2017/01/human-pro ... ving-cars/ .

Always trying to eliminate employees. Thank God for The Donald saving American jobs by tackling Silicon Valley

cthia wrote:

cthia wrote:One problem has been cited of a company wanting to have a design of "semi-autonomous" control. They realize that there are just some variables that you cannot foresee and in those instances (human instances—human element) their semi-autonomous design would return control back to the human.

Wait! What? WTF! ... scratch that! WHAT THE PHUCK!

Conversation replayed on the little black box...

"Don't give control back to me now!"

"But I'm drunk now."

"I'm in the back seat! Never mind what we're doing in the back seat!"

"No no no Siri! Do not return control! Noooo! Oh shit!"

Semi-autonomous designs suddenly make you into a designated driver. Do you have any idea of the responsibility of a designated driver? Where unlike the regular driver, a designated driver has to be ready at a moment's notice, without prior planning to actually drive! If I have to pay attention as alertly as if I was driving, then I may as well be driving... or the human element says I am NOT going to be paying attention and therefore in no position to assume control! Life is not a video game.

No one else sees the insanity of this?

With the craziness of technology and life on Earth nowadays and factoring in the insanity of politics... I'd get off of this planet on an alien spaceship if I had the chance.

"Alien to Mothership, please rendezvous and collect me at specified coordinates. These human MFs are getting reaaaaally crazy! They've gone way past WTF!"

Very late addendum:

It is believed that there is at least one spaceship that crashed on Earth and recovered in Roswell. If that is so, the reason it crashed most assuredly had to be because the moment it entered Earth's atmosphere it had to contend with the human element.

My hilarious niece rang me from the car where she was returning home from visiting her Aunt who has a daughter of similar age riding with. Her cousin was telling her mom, my sister, to relax. My niece says to her Auntie, "one day there'll be driverless cars and you won't have to contend with this mess."

"Driverless cars?! Whose fine idea is that one?! Before they go and do a foolhardy thing like that, they better solve the problem of the GPS trying to route you onto a fricking bridge THAT HASN'T BEEN BUILT YET!"

That's my sister. She's always had the uncanny ability of seeing obstacles before they are built!

munroburton wrote:https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/man-followed-gps-drove-off-disused-bridge-ramp-wife-dies-police-say/

Driverless cars will not rely on only GPS. They'll also be using all sorts of sensor systems to monitor the road surface ahead, obstructions, heck - even read signs us humans fail to!

It's simple enough to prevent the accidental backseat driving scenario you postulate, with:
1) Voice command relating to vehicle operations should not register unless a button, ideally on the steering wheel, is pressed(this allows ICE functions ).
2) Seat occupancy sensors
3) Grip sensors on the steering wheel

It should also be possible to monitor intoxication, although I've heard of an urban legend where a drunk caught a racoon in order to provide his car(fitted with a breathalyser) with a sober reading.

New safety technologies always need fine-tuning. Like airbags - the earlier ones were dangerous. They've become much better, though.

cthia wrote:I read this post regarding the link to the accident and immediately rang my sister. Then she insisted we threeway my niece. "See, I told you so!"

My niece is shocked.

Then my sister says...

"Besides, we already have driverless cars. Pay attention the next time you're driving. 1 out of every 5 cars on the road doesn't have a driver. Oh, there's someone sitting at the wheel alright, but I assure you, no one is at home!"

No one listens to me, but what I preach is as obvious as daylight.

cthia wrote:

Annachie wrote:Then again, it's always possible that the kids were naturally carried by Detwriler's wife.

The planning board would have to recognize the family bonding that actual pregnancies would create, and that it would be benificial heading into the end game.

Just a thought.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

That would make hers the "Womb of all malignant evil?"

Technically, can't Detweiler and his sons be considered to be Siamese twins, since they share the same delusions of grandeur and sanity. They are conjoined at the lip.

Except that it is clear that these Siamese twins were created by fission of the egg. LOL

Their ideology and the extent to which they are willing to carry it are evil. But in other ways as they interact with each other, they seem quite normal.

The Detweilers are fanatics, but not insane.

Don

-

cthia wrote:

Annachie wrote:Then again, it's always possible that the kids were naturally carried by Detwriler's wife.

The planning board would have to recognize the family bonding that actual pregnancies would create, and that it would be benificial heading into the end game.

Just a thought.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

That would make hers the "Womb of all malignant evil?"

Technically, can't Detweiler and his sons be considered to be Siamese twins, since they share the same delusions of grandeur and sanity. They are conjoined at the lip.

Except that it is clear that these Siamese twins were created by fission of the egg. LOL

n7axw wrote:Their ideology and the extent to which they are willing to carry it are evil. But in other ways as they interact with each other, they seem quite normal.

The Detweilers are fanatics, but not insane.

Don

-

Evil is normal unto evil. Darkness is normal unto darkness.

Yet, how can evil be sane?

cthia wrote:
Evil is normal unto evil. Darkness is normal unto darkness.

Yet, how can evil be sane?

Evil's difficulty is not a lack of rationality. In fact you can have something evil which is profoundly rational because the difficulty is deeper than that. The Detweilers' issue has to do with a moral compass that is profoundly warped in that it has reshaped morality into something that excludes "normals" from its sense of obligation and concern.

What I am describing here is far more common than one might think. It rears its ugly head any time you have any group of people exhibit what we might call tribalism. That is illustrated by the fact that most primative peoples name for itself is in its own language is "the people." The implication here is that outsiders are on some level subhuman. For such folk, no obligation exists outside of the tribe. Within the tribe, they can laugh, love, exhibit kindness, and act as normal, healthy human beings. But outside of the tribe those obligations do not exist.

The Mesa genetically modified lines are like that. Anyone who participates in the uplift of the race is human among whom normal human relationships might exist. Outsiders are only tools to serve their end and who are ultimately destined for oblivion. There is no obligation toward such. We might refer to the Detweilers as the ultimate true believers whose commtiment to their vision and their determination to bring that vision to pass by any and all available means qualifies them as fanatics.

Look around. There is far too much of this sort of thing going on around us in our own reality and at this moment in time is causing us all sorts of trouble. It is far more common than you think and has ensnared lots of people who are otherwise decent human beings.

Don

-