Separate names with a comma.
Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.
Discussion in 'The Pub' started by simon varley, May 27, 2011.
as if we didn't already know. from our in-house magazine:
I thought the idea of "big brother" was that there was 1 overiding controller of everything. All the processing in this system is done by each individual car. So this is more of a car that drives itself. This is good. It takes away control from all the people who dont want to be there. If you dont want to do something, it is unlikely you will do it well
Ah thats not big brother.. maybe you should go read 1984 again.. If you were driving along and had negative thoughts about the government and were kidnapped and brainwashed, that would be big brother.
Emergent technologies not related to surveillance don't fall into the BB category imo. If they were gps tracking you (or brainwashing you into thinking 3kmh over the speed limit is deadly), then you're getting warmer
I have zero problem with assist systems that could potentially save me from being rear ended by a distracted soccer mum who didn't see the red light. Neither do I have an issue with someone being alerted that they're drifting into my lane.
so you'd be okay if these were fitted on your bike then?
I wonder how the system decides that lane departure is unintentional. Lack of indicator use?
There are different factors on a bike, but if they were able to be effectively implimented, then i wouldn't have a problem. I cant think of a situation i would need to run into the back of a car 8-[
I would think that it would monitor the steering wheel, if the wheel remains in its previous position (straight ahead), but exits a lane it is unlikely a person was trying to change lanes, since you usually turn the wheel into the lane. It would probably look at if you drift slowly into the lane, or if the movement over the lane line is quite fast
If it was a vibrating steering wheel or a warning flashed on a HUD then I might be OK with it but when it interferes with my control of the vehicle that is a resounding NO THANKS.
driver can now excuse killing someone as a glitch it the cars computer.
anyone who buys a car for those features should'nt really be on the roads anyway.
and if the same technology comes to bikes, you'll be able to kill a pedestrian under the same excuse
but that'd be ok wouldn't it?
yep, ok by me
If that was true, we would see a spate of people being let off because traction control or ABS failed.
That is bullshit, if people can't drive they should catch public transport, not buy a car that drives itself.
All this safety technology crap is just going to make us stupider. I'm for airbags, but computers controlling the vehicle for you? What happens when it fails? Collision, more than likely one that was easily avoidable if the driver wasn't being a dumb fu/ck and expecting the computer to brake the car for them.
Its an assist system, not a control system. Only cuts in when the driver ****s up.
Like ABS. Surely you wouldn't begrudge cars abs?
currently they allready get let off anyway with no excuse.
brake failure could be conscrued as a good excuse.
the more automated the vehicle becomes the less driver responsibilty.
I'm guessing it uses cameras on the front to work out if it's keeping in a lane, and hopeing it has some really good software to go with it - Several really busy intersections in Orange here have had the lanes re-marked as the roads have been changed/upgraded/widened, and the old line markings are just painted over with black or tar :yikes:
Can't tell the old from the new in the dark and/or rain. Wonder how well it would handle it...
Also can't wait to hear of the first idiot to run of the side of a single "lane" dirt road while the system is wondering "where the fark am I?"