View Single Post
  #6  
Old June 21st 05, 09:02 PM
Jim Yanik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(Matthew Russotto) wrote in
:

> In article >,
> Scott en Aztlán <newsgroup> wrote:
>>On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:19:02 -0500,

>>(Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Until cars are computer controlled and linked to a central
>>>>>> controller, driving will be horribly inefficient.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because centralized decision making has worked SO WELL in society
>>>>> as a whole.
>>>>
>>>>Who's talking about society? I'm simply suggesting cars are in
>>>>essence machines better controlled by computer(s) than moody,
>>>>differeing and sometimes drunk humans.
>>>
>>>Unfortunately for that suggestion, most drivers are better able to
>>>drive a car than any computer. In the "Grand Challenge 2004", a
>>>DARPA initiative to develop an unmanned ground vehicle, no team was
>>>able to pass the challenge. And that's _without_ traffic. It's a
>>>surprisingly difficult problem.

>>
>>Difficult != unsolveable.

>
> The problem is intractable given current and reasonably forseeable
> technology.
>
> The present-tense statement "cars are [..] better controlled by
> computers than [...] humans" is therefore false.
>


The communications bandwidth for all the vehicle sensors data to the
"system" and responses to each vehicle does not exist.
Object recognition alone would be overwhelming.

This makes about as much sense as Moller's aircar.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Ads