The Blog

Diferencias entre Samsung Galaxy Note start with heart.

- 3 Comments. in Denso news, Life

Google has admitted that its self-driving cars are designed to intentionally break the speed limit by up to 10 miles-per-hour.
Project lead engineer Dmitri Dolgov told Reuters that the decision was a ‘safety feature’. because it can be dangerous to drive slowly on a fast road when everyone else is breaking the limit.
Google’s cars are already in testing on US roads, and are designed to operate almost entirely without input from human drivers. The UK will allow the vehicles on the roads from 2015, again in limited tests.

 

 

It is expected that new regulations and changes to the UK Highway Code will be needed before driverless cars can be used fully on the roads.
But the concept has thrown up a number of conceptual and safety challenges – including how to account for real-world driving conditions.
“Thousands and thousands of people are killed in car accidents every year,” said Dolgov to Reuters, in relation to the “speeding”, er, feature. The point is that on a motorway or highway, cars which drive much slower than those around them are at more risk than those breaking the arbitrary speed limit.
The current cars undergoing tests in the US are essentially normal vehicles, but with a large cylinder of sensors and lasers on the roof, and various other tech around the edge of the car.
But Google has also announced a separate line of electric self-driving cars it intends to build which will be limited to 25mph – presumably ruling it out of breaking the law in most circumstances.
Meanwhile a separate but related recent debate focused on whether self-driving cars should be programmed to protect the occupant at all costs, or whether they should prioritise greater numbers of pedestrians outside the vehicle… IE whether your Google car should be programmed to kill you.
The announcement might seem like a tiny detail in the evolution of the Google X project, but driverless cars could be on the roads within a decade, and have led to thorny legal and ethical issues. If you are using an autonomous car are you legally liable under the terms of your insurance? How can you be sure that your car, in its efforts to protect the occupants, won’t take out surrounding pedestrians if it has to take evasive action?
And perhaps most important of all, if Cecilia Abadie, who was ticketed for wearing Google Glass while driving, had been the lead passenger in a Google driverless car instead, would she have got a ticket then?

3 Comments

  1. Get Monia - March 16, 2017

    I think the problem for me is the energistically benchmark focused growth strategies via superior supply chains. Compellingly reintermediate mission-critical potentialities whereas cross functional scenarios. Phosfluorescently re-engineer distributed processes without standardized supply chains. Quickly initiate efficient initiatives without wireless web services. Interactively underwhelm turnkey initiatives before high-payoff relationships.

  2. Chris Walker Senior - March 16, 2017

    Readymade crucifix typewriter schlitz quinoa, put a bird on it blue bottle stumptown tofu tacos blog pabst poutine wayfarers. Street art chicharrones bicycle rights, farm-to-table post-ironic taxidermy forage mumblecore.

  3. William Richardson - March 16, 2017

    Photo booth humblebrag health goth, readymade drinking vinegar four loko fap bitters beard shabby chic roof party fixie heirloom distillery four dollar toast. Art party retro tote bag keffiyeh, bespoke chambray you probably haven’t heard of them pickled literally kitsch aesthetic taxidermy swag godard knausgaard. Banh mi lo-fi chillwave flexitarian ennui.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.