Think of all the things you could say to your car if it were your chum instead of some stinking, oil-leaking beast. You could talk about road hazard tires, weather, and, my favorite, trip maps. I wonder what My Chum the Car will say if I ask if it has ever seen "Deathrace 2000?" (Scientific American: When Your Self-Driving Car Wants to Be Your Friend Too)
Honda unveiled one of the more ambitious—and fanciful—visions for AI in the cockpit at last week’s U.S. Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas. Its New Electric Urban Vehicle (NeuV) is a self-driving concept car that uses Honda’s talking Automated Network Assistant, or HANA, to analyze and respond to data the vehicle collects about driver and passenger preferences and behavior. HANA would essentially be a rolling virtual assistant in the mold of Amazon Alexa and the similar smartphone assistants that Apple, Google and Microsoft have programmed into their handsets.
- SA
Jeebers, HANA will have a pleasant female voice, won't she. Maybe she could offer some tips of gifts for yer squeeze for Valentine's Day and it would all be, gosh, so chummy.
It's enough to make a '57 Chevy commit suicide with its own exhaust headers (wide open, of course).
This news may be curdling yer breakfast in yer guttywuts but we've already flogged the fact there will be future roads and you won't be driving on them. We're not really convinced these self-driving cars will really get it done since they will still gridlock the cities, they will just be cuter about it. That's going to severely flame the automated fleet truck operations so you have a conflict even before the game starts.
That goes into the roads are a bad solution for personal transportation anyway so we need to build downwards instead of sideways. The regulars have seen multiple pieces of that one but no need for the detail of it now.
One thing we know for sure is some group of people can't control its drinking, not here and not anywhere. Self-driving cars stop the problem when cops can't. Cops can go out there with machine guns, tanks, and helicopters but, sure as hell, eventually some drunkie will just drive right into them.
It seems an obvious thing with self-driving vehicles that people will be able to get wasted a lot more and stay wasted more of the time. That probably won't change things much for stoners since we're buzzed most of the time anyway; we just don't drive much. You may find it turns into a boom town for drunkies, tho.
There was dancing in Scientific American with the idea of sentience in increasing the intelligence of the software in the car but those writers seriously need to get a grip on something ... it's a car and not a religious experience.
My biggest asset with computers is that, regardless of the size, I wasn't afraid of them and my attitude was highly prosaic: if it breaks, fuck it ... we'll fix it, and bring it back up again. Doesn't it seem there's quite a bit of fear just now, particularly for AI since, oh no, maybe it will end up smarter than me.
It's better than that, Roger Rabbit, because they won't just end up smarter, they will be better, stronger, and, faster. So, sure, be scared, Rog. Father Isaac invented the Three Laws of Robotics seventy-five years ago but you never hear the (cough) futurists mention them. Eventually they will.
Honda unveiled one of the more ambitious—and fanciful—visions for AI in the cockpit at last week’s U.S. Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas. Its New Electric Urban Vehicle (NeuV) is a self-driving concept car that uses Honda’s talking Automated Network Assistant, or HANA, to analyze and respond to data the vehicle collects about driver and passenger preferences and behavior. HANA would essentially be a rolling virtual assistant in the mold of Amazon Alexa and the similar smartphone assistants that Apple, Google and Microsoft have programmed into their handsets.
- SA
Jeebers, HANA will have a pleasant female voice, won't she. Maybe she could offer some tips of gifts for yer squeeze for Valentine's Day and it would all be, gosh, so chummy.
It's enough to make a '57 Chevy commit suicide with its own exhaust headers (wide open, of course).
This news may be curdling yer breakfast in yer guttywuts but we've already flogged the fact there will be future roads and you won't be driving on them. We're not really convinced these self-driving cars will really get it done since they will still gridlock the cities, they will just be cuter about it. That's going to severely flame the automated fleet truck operations so you have a conflict even before the game starts.
That goes into the roads are a bad solution for personal transportation anyway so we need to build downwards instead of sideways. The regulars have seen multiple pieces of that one but no need for the detail of it now.
One thing we know for sure is some group of people can't control its drinking, not here and not anywhere. Self-driving cars stop the problem when cops can't. Cops can go out there with machine guns, tanks, and helicopters but, sure as hell, eventually some drunkie will just drive right into them.
It seems an obvious thing with self-driving vehicles that people will be able to get wasted a lot more and stay wasted more of the time. That probably won't change things much for stoners since we're buzzed most of the time anyway; we just don't drive much. You may find it turns into a boom town for drunkies, tho.
There was dancing in Scientific American with the idea of sentience in increasing the intelligence of the software in the car but those writers seriously need to get a grip on something ... it's a car and not a religious experience.
My biggest asset with computers is that, regardless of the size, I wasn't afraid of them and my attitude was highly prosaic: if it breaks, fuck it ... we'll fix it, and bring it back up again. Doesn't it seem there's quite a bit of fear just now, particularly for AI since, oh no, maybe it will end up smarter than me.
It's better than that, Roger Rabbit, because they won't just end up smarter, they will be better, stronger, and, faster. So, sure, be scared, Rog. Father Isaac invented the Three Laws of Robotics seventy-five years ago but you never hear the (cough) futurists mention them. Eventually they will.
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
- WIKI: Three Laws of Robotics
Since just about everything DARPA does is in violation of most of those Laws, you really might want to consider throwing a net over that nest of maniacs without waiting too much longer.
Asimov wrote those laws in 1942, so what's the delay, Mac?
No comments:
Post a Comment