Driverless vehicles

stroppy
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:57 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby stroppy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:40 am

LEO wrote:
stroppy wrote:As to your suppositions about the Dunning~Kruger effect...I understand things quite well, thank you.


I am sure your do think you understand things quite well.

But that's just your inability as someone with clearly low intelligence to recognize their own ineptitude.


I just HAD to comment on this before I leave this place. Spare me the poisonous barbs of those who think they are superior such as you, Leo. I would be happy to match wits with you any day. I was blessed to have had a very good education courtesy of Gough Whitlam's free tertiary education system. So sad that kids these days are saddled with HECs but that is another argument.

I'm supposing you are a lawyer or cop. I find lawyers an interesting class of people. Very good wordsmiths (generally...there are some garbled posts here which defy decoding) and great raconteurs but sometimes saddled with terrible tunnel vision and not much of a handle on the "real world". This is so with many professions. Pharmacists are probably worse. Cops are also interesting people. I count a number of them as personal friends. All blessed with good brains however some friends of theirs (also in the force) are as dumb as dog...well you know what I mean.

Sometimes people such as yourself make the most hilarious written errors when they are up on their high horses pontificating vigorously. Look at the quote from your last post (above). I'm sure your prodigious intellect was running at full steam trying to work out an insult you thought would troll me nicely. All you did, however, was trip yourself on your own ineptitude. :lol:

Now I do hate long goodbyes. Adieu my dear boy. You may now return to normality dishing out your learned advice to the frightened and terrified great unwashed. The people Gravy thinks cannot formulate laws.

LEO
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:33 pm

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby LEO » Tue Jul 04, 2017 9:03 am

stroppy wrote:Now I do hate long goodbyes. Adieu my dear boy. You may now return to normality dishing out your learned advice to the frightened and terrified great unwashed. The people Gravy thinks cannot formulate laws.


Seems like you're one of those people who don't want to take responsibility for their own actions loves playing the victim. You want to balame everyone else for your own lack of impulse control.

You can't even leave a forum on your own, you have to beg to be banned. Then you get all stroppy when you don't and the fact no one cares if you stay or go.

Can see why you picked your username, very fitting.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby Hardy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:39 am

sometimes saddled with terrible tunnel vision and not much of a handle on the "real world"

I note your "real world" is the one inhabited by people without any specialist skills or training. i.e. anyone who purports to know more than you about a subject is not in the real world - they are in a vacuum far removed from what the minions are dealing with. But when a lawyer's job is to apply the laws made by the courts and parliament, it is little wonder people who have no understanding whatsoever of things like the Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure and common law think the lawyers have lost touch with reality. In fact, it is the lawyer that is bringing you up to date with reality because those laws are your reality.

Gravy
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:25 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby Gravy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 5:55 pm

stroppy wrote:The people Gravy thinks cannot formulate laws.
Well, they can't... unless they hold a majority in parliament. So I'm not really sure what your point is other than perhaps stating a fact.

stroppy wrote:I'm supposing you are a lawyer or cop. I find lawyers an interesting class of people. Very good wordsmiths (generally...there are some garbled posts here which defy decoding) and great raconteurs but sometimes saddled with terrible tunnel vision and not much of a handle on the "real world". This is so with many professions. Pharmacists are probably worse. Cops are also interesting people. I count a number of them as personal friends. All blessed with good brains however some friends of theirs (also in the force) are as dumb as dog...well you know what I mean.
I'd like to know what profession you practiced prior to your retirement as I'm sure it would be just as easy for others to trot out the stereotypes to bash you over the head with.

stroppy wrote:As to your suppositions about the Dunning~Kruger effect...I understand things quite well, thank you.
Would such examples of your understanding include citizen's arrest, citizen's prosecutions, the difference between criminal and civil proceedings, absolute liability offences, what "offence" actually means and the meaning of the phrase "This will be my final post here"? Coz, you know, you're kind of fitting the bottom quartile like a freaking glove.

Gravy
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:25 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby Gravy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:18 pm

stroppy wrote: I'm sure your prodigious intellect was running at full steam trying to work out an insult you thought would troll me nicely. All you did, however, was trip yourself on your own ineptitude.
Best not to throw stones in glass houses, stroppy. In the context of a debate, it is far more of an advantage to have a firm understanding of the topic and make a typographical or grammatical error than to have both perfect grammar and absolutely no clue on the subject at hand (civil vs criminal, citizen arrest, et cetera).

Sometimes people such as yourself make the most hilarious factual errors when they are up on their high horses pontificating vigorously. :wink:

stroppy
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:57 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby stroppy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:26 pm

Hardy wrote:
sometimes saddled with terrible tunnel vision and not much of a handle on the "real world"

I note your "real world" is the one inhabited by people without any specialist skills or training. i.e. anyone who purports to know more than you about a subject is not in the real world - they are in a vacuum far removed from what the minions are dealing with. But when a lawyer's job is to apply the laws made by the courts and parliament, it is little wonder people who have no understanding whatsoever of things like the Evidence Act and Criminal Procedure and common law think the lawyers have lost touch with reality. In fact, it is the lawyer that is bringing you up to date with reality because those laws are your reality.


Your first sentence is a nonsense really not worth debating however I will tell you that I DO respect specialists in their field and their knowledge however I have met many specialists who know a huge amount about their field but not much else about their real world. For example...a doctor who does not know enough to check the air in his car tyres or a pharmacist who does not know anything about how the parliament or senate works. I respect specialists who have not only an excellent understanding of their main field but also a great general knowledge as well. Understand?

stroppy
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:57 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby stroppy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:29 pm

LEO wrote:
stroppy wrote:Now I do hate long goodbyes. Adieu my dear boy. You may now return to normality dishing out your learned advice to the frightened and terrified great unwashed. The people Gravy thinks cannot formulate laws.


Seems like you're one of those people who don't want to take responsibility for their own actions loves playing the victim. You want to balame everyone else for your own lack of impulse control.

You can't even leave a forum on your own, you have to beg to be banned. Then you get all stroppy when you don't and the fact no one cares if you stay or go.

Can see why you picked your username, very fitting.


"Balame"?

You keep making these errors. One would think an intelligent person like you would proof-read what they write.

I'm not "begging to be banned". I believe that I have not met the forum's T&Cs. I may be wrong.

stroppy
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:57 am

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby stroppy » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:32 pm

Gravy. I had a rather high-paying professional career before I retired. I don't need to go into it more than that seeing that you, Leo and Day have not publicly announced your occupations here.

This little titbit of information will probably leave you guessing for hours. :)

BTW, it is correct that the general population do not formulate laws however they make the democratic decision to elect members of parliament and senate who support an agenda of policies and possible laws which they like. Unpopular laws and punishments have been struck out because of the weight of public opinion. The death penalty is the best example. The next law(s) which will eventually be changed relate to euthanasia. Laws regarding this issue will also, similarly, be changed because of the weight of public opinion. I am heavily involved in the debate about euthanasia (pro) and look forward to the day our politicians are brave enough to face down the religious nuts and enact reasonable and safe laws regarding this issue.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby Hardy » Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:27 am

The End is Nigh!! Driverless buses to commence operation at Latrobe Uni in April.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/human ... zkjiq.html


Driverless vehicles in which the car is in complete control and a human does not need to be present will soon be on public roads under an Andrews government plan.

The state government will move to allow highly automated vehicles to be driven on public roads under organised trial conditions, in changes to the Road Safety Act due to be introduced in Parliament on Tuesday.

La Trobe and Melbourne University, Transurban and a swathe of luxury manufacturers have already been granted permission to trial autonomous vehicles on private land or on sealed off public land.

The proposed amendments - which will apply to companies and research groups - will allow trials on public roads, where they will mix with ordinary vehicles and public transport.

Minister for Roads and Road Safety Luke Donnellan said self-driving vehicles were an important step to reduce road trauma, with 90 per cent of crashes on Victoria's roads resulting from human error.

"Victoria is a world leader in automated vehicles and these important changes will allow Victorian researchers to run some of the safest and most ambitious trials being conducted anywhere in the world," Mr Donnellan said.

A party seeking a permit to run a trial will make an application to VicRoads and demonstrate that they meet stringent guidelines to ensure safety.

Police will have the power to prosecute the permit holder if the vehicle does not comply with the conditions of their trial permit, even if they are not in the vehicle or near it. The trials would be monitored by VicRoads.

The permit scheme will include requirements to ensure safety and appropriate insurance.

VicRoads is already investigating how road networks and traffic signals would need to change to ensure the cars can use the network safely.

Current hurdles in the technology include difficulty identifying lane markings, lights, street signs, kangaroos and completing hook turns.

The state government's move comes after all Australian transport ministers endorsed new national enforcement guidelines addressing the question of driver liability at a Transport and Infrastructure Council meeting on Friday last week.

The guidelines state that a human driver is responsible for complying with road traffic laws when a vehicle has "conditional automation" engaged, which is when a car automatically controls speed, steering and monitors its surrounds, but requires a driver be inside it.

"These guidelines provide clarity around who is in control of a vehicle at different levels of automation," said chief executive of the National Transport Commission Paul Rette. "They confirm that a human driver is responsible for the driving task when conditional automation is engaged."

The commission states that by 2020, vehicle registration data is likely to include fields relating to the level of driving automation, or relevant automated functions (such as traffic jam assist).

These guidelines are part of a broader road map of reform to support automated vehicles, with the Commission setting a target of an "end-to-end regulatory system" across the country by 2020.

Melbourne University Transport for Smart Cities Professor Majid Sarvi said the government's proposed changes would be "massive" for researchers and sent a clear signal to car manufacturers and technology businesses that "Victoria is open for business".

Professor Sarvi is leading an ambitious transport research project fitting thousands of sensors across a 1.2 square kilometre "test bed" in inner-Melbourne to study traffic planning, pedestrian flows, public transport efficiency and freight movements

The project has already tested an autonomous bus on Drummond Street in Carlton, but the road was sealed off.

Professor Sarvi would be applying for a permit to operate these vehicles as soon as it becomes available to test how the technology integrated with other drivers and to see whether it could help passengers get to and from their closest public transport stop.

"A lot of people would like to do things in this space, to have on-road testing available would be amazing," he said.

Hardy
Site Admin
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 10:00 am
Location: Melbourne Victoria
Contact:

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby Hardy » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:06 am

I notice the legislation controlling use of automated driver system vehicles says the driver of an automated vehicle can’t incur demerit points if the vehicle is being used in autonomous mode:
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... s46ea.html
Driver includes the registered operator for speed camera offences.
How on earth does the Traffic Camera Office know if the vehicle is being used in autonomous mode?

LEO
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 7:33 pm

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby LEO » Fri Jun 22, 2018 7:27 pm

Has VicRoads approved the use of autonomous vehicles on the "highway" yet?

allde
Posts: 740
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 12:46 pm

Re: Driverless vehicles

Postby allde » Sat Jun 23, 2018 11:12 pm

Hardy wrote:.
How on earth does the Traffic Camera Office know if the vehicle is being used in autonomous mode?


Perhaps it can be an App on their Mobile phone, which they need to hold in their hands at all times whilst the vehicle is in automated mode. ;-)


Return to “Everything else....”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest