Autonomous Vehicles NOT Ready for Prime-Time

Non-Suzuki related topics. Anything can go here.
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

KuroNekko wrote:more objective data as computers get involved.
And we all know computers are flawless right? Microsoft never has any issues. Who do you think writes the code that runs the computers? Tests the code? Creates those test plans? uhhh people. This irrefutable data you refer to is only as good as the coding AND THE TESTING, behind it. We have a saying here...sure, anyone can program a PLC, very few can make that PLC control a process or system with complete repeatability, reliability and have it be problem free. These "computers" that everyone puts so much faith in were just responsible this week for allowing duplicate votes to be logged here in several local PA elections. Causing grief and delays and expense. Who's fault? What the remedy in a time critical application? Well now, that's about as simple a data gathering task as anyone could be asked to code and it got ef'd up. Shocking. Keep swallowing the kool-aide...once all this BS is in place, like anything else that's shoved down our throats, it'll never go away and we'll just be expected and required, by law, to keep dealing with the expense and aggravation of it all. I'd commented elsewhere about what the costs could easily look like for 'diag and repair' (if you could find anyone competent enough) of this whiz-bang-chit. That's an entirely different discussion really. You think a buck-twenty an hour for some wrench monkey to work on your car is robbery? Only to cause more harm than good? Just wait., you ain't seen nuthin'. You only see the benefits of all of this non-sense like most people. Then, when reality hits sfter-the-fact, are abhorred by the unintended consequences. We keep repeating history and never learn from it.

And how about all them hackers out there who have their way, unrestricted and anonymous, with everything and anything connected to the good ole internet? Again and entirely different discussion, but yet a crucial reality in the autonomous effort. We haven't even begun to contemplate all the what-ifs that could transpire 'for no reason' while one is blissfully and mindlessly being shuttled down the highway in your satellite connected, GPS guided, bluetooth camera controlled rolling WiFi hotspot. So who's at fault then? I don't know about you, but I don't relish the thought of an 80,000 pound truck anywhere near me going 70mph w/ modern day, internet connected, technology behind the wheel. No thanks. You want to take decades to work this chit out, 'learning as time goes on as you say, fine, do it on a frigging deserted island somewhere and stay the hell off the roads I'm driving until the entire automation package achieves the unachievable flawlessness.

More vehicles on the road stopping for 'no reason' is going to cause MORE accidents and more traffic tie-ups, especially in the long-term interim, as was just proven. That's been my gripe with the entire concept. When automation doesn't know (read isn't programmed) how to handle a given situation, that's when the fun starts. That's the exception handling programming and testing I've referred to before. I'd also reported a long time ago that during a somewhat controlled 'test' of my car's AWD/traction control system, in some light greasy snow, I'd learned where its limits were and proved to myself that the systems (hardware,software) can be pushed to the limit of "can't deal with it" or, if you prefer, 'cannot compute' which then produces the infamous affect of automation: 'for no reason'. Furthermore, when the car gave up the ghost 'for no reason', disengaged, stopped computing, whatever you would like to call it, the vehicle was physically way out of control...as in non-recoverable. Quite simply I exceeded the cars hardware and software capability. This is the destructive testing in automation. Now the auto makers sure as hell aren't going to advertise to you where those limitations are because that would be like admitting fault or guilt...not going to happen. Hence the my "notions" regarding the in-justice system and "good time to be a lawyer"' and "lawmakers creating laws for that which they have <0 knowledge of" comments. The automation behind the car's systems allowed me, lulled me, to get in to the situation in the first place. Then said...ehh sorry man , I'm done, enjoy the ride. That's how automation works. It's not magic, it's not super-human. In fact it's very human in the sense that there's no way humanly possible to account for, in the coding, the entire spectrum of 'what-ifs'. This is my point. I've said it before... the fact is automation likes repeatability and predictability. Our road systems are everything but. I know what your going to say...that the automation wouldn't have allowed me, Mr. incapable human, get myself in to trouble. BS. This will be another gov controlled and monitored aspect of our humanly existence. Here's my not-so reactive concerns about the automation which I've mentioned previously in regards to the epically in-adequate traffic control systems I currently live with: all I'll say about a road system full of driverless robots is I hope you'll enjoy spending many, many, many hours sitting in the transportation device, in gridlock, trying to get where ever it is you're going.

Now, growing up driving hi-powered heavy RWD cars and trucks, this kind of horsing around is nothing I hadn't felt or experienced before. The point being in those vehicles w/o all the tech, I'd have never gotten nearly as far in to 'the situation' I was in during the test in the first place. My brain, and not some damn computer's, wouldn't have allowed me to since I'd have felt and known the inevitable was coming.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

The problem I have with your perspective is that you keep making assumptions. You assume that the people behind automated driving technologies are the same folks behind problematic voting systems or terrible programming. You assume that automated driverless cars will cause problems that humans wouldn't or couldn't. You assume this and that. You're basically a pessimistic critic on the technology (and I can respect that), but you're assuming too many things to be true of things yet to come. When you give examples of the flaws of computerized systems and automation, you point to rather irrelevant automated systems as if the same programmers or company was behind that and automated driving. When you post articles about incidents involving automated driving, not only myself but others have pointed out that in nearly all of them, the cause of the accident was human error, not the automated driving system.

My arguments has always been predicated on the reality of how things are today. Cars are technically safer than ever yet the fatality rate from auto accidents in America have gone up in the last few years. It's not hard to imagine why: cheaper fuel prices and the proliferation of distracting technology (namely smartphones). Furthermore, studies are now showing that driver fatigue is increasing at an alarming rate and causing more accidents than drunk drivers. This is the reality today and thousands of people die or are injured each day due to these human-related causes. Realistically, more people die on the road per day from human error than any computer-caused error, probably ever. I'm not so sure why you are concerned about faulty voting systems and the flaws of computers when you're statistically much more likely to die from a drunk driver than anything related to computers. I don't understand why you fear computers so much over the blatantly flawed human, many of which can't even give two shits about driving safely even for their own good. You think they're looking out for you? I'd love to see a machine that exhibits such negligence from volition. You also brought up accountability. You argued that at least with a human, you can find them accountable. I'm not sure why that reactive approach is desirable. I'd rather prevent an accident from happening in the first place rather than making sure the human that killed or injured my loved one (or myself) is found responsible. Proactive vs. reactive. Only one of them prevents something from happening in the first place.

Given this reality of the conditions today, I can't say I share your pessimism about automated driving in the future. Sure, there can be errors in programming, the threat of hackers, etc. but machines don't get drowsy, drunk, distracted by Facebook or Tweets, or want to drive like they're in Fast N' Furious. Like I've said many times, these are the factual reasons why there are accidents. Not vehicular failure, not faulty road conditions, not hacked traffic lights, etc. It's because of the human behind the wheel in nearly every single case in human history. On the contrary, machines don't choose to be negligent or reckless so it's very likely that automated driving will be significantly safer for people.

I'm not advocating for a time I give up my driver's license and say humans shouldn't be allowed to drive anymore. If anything, I'm a living example of the contrary given I drive a "primitive" manual transmission car and ride a motorcycle (what's ABS?). However, most on the road don't enjoy driving or riding a vehicle. It's a necessary chore for them, not a cherished privilege, therefore many often choose to do something else while driving or be in a condition not suitable for driving. Hence, It's just logical to say for the millions who don't want to drive themselves for the plethora of reasons they have, automated driving would be beneficial and safer.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

Ronzuki wrote:
KuroNekko wrote:more objective data as computers get involved.
Oh, and by this quote, I was talking about evidence. And yes, objective data is fantastic as evidence. Things like surveillance footage, cell site analysis, GPS records, account log-ins, computer searches, phone data dumps, etc. are all very powerful in a court of law. Similarly, a vehicle that can yield data in a crash is very powerful as evidence vs. the account from someone's memory, you know, after they wake up in the hospital from a concussion.
Keep in mind that due to the powerful nature of objective data as evidence, many commercial fleets, especially trucks, employ not only dash cameras but driving recorders that continuously log data. In the result of an accident, the data is preserved, creating an objective data record of the vehicle prior to the crash.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

Oh, and by this quote, I was talking about evidence. And yes, objective data is fantastic as evidence. Things like surveillance footage, cell site analysis, GPS records, account log-ins, computer searches, phone data dumps, etc. are all very powerful in a court of law. Similarly, a vehicle that can yield data in a crash is very powerful as evidence vs. the account from someone's memory, you know, after they wake up in the hospital from a concussion.
Keep in mind that due to the powerful nature of objective data as evidence, many commercial fleets, especially trucks, employ not only dash cameras but driving recorders that continuously log data. In the result of an accident, the data is preserved, creating an objective data record of the vehicle prior to the crash.[/quote]

Yep...big brother always watching whether you want them to or not. All in the name of safety again, right? Technology can not solve the overpopulation and congestion issues we've created for ourselves. That's a pipe-dream. I can easily argue that technology is directly responsible for the increase in horrific crashes. Technology allowing drivers to feel a false sense of security in how fast they're driving, how close they follow others vehicles at those unsafe speeds relying on anti-lock brakes to save their ass. Then when all else fails, the 40 airbags deploy to save their life.

Objective data. OK. Just like the black-box in the 04 Rubicon recording my vehicle's incorrect speed, right? Data you say, evidence, to be used against me should I cause a horrific crash. Incorrect objective data used as evidence that you and everyone else put so much faith and absolution in w/o fully understanding EXACTLY how that information came to be. I can easily report incorrect machine speeds in any automation system. Unless someone is CHECKING the data for accuracy periodically, whatever I chose to report is the truth. Once again, more expense.

These trucking fleets you speak of, might they be the same fleets owned by greedy companies forcing their drivers to illegally operate their trucks or lose everything? The same trucking fleets that screw their human drivers, forcing them to cook their books? I support those individuals who are lobbying against automated trucking. All in the name of the almighty dollar. Make no mistake about the true nature of automation. It is implemented to put people out of work. First and foremost, to put more dollars in the share holders pockets period. When an automation project, of any size or scale, we embark on fails to achieve someone's perceived ROI in the time allotted, we sure as hell here about it. That ROI, 8 times out of 10, is achieved (by calculation) by the savings realized by eliminating bodies first. The quality component is a very distant second.

Hey while we're chatting about how wonderful and absolute all this technology and data is, maybe you can help me out here and explain, exactly and objectively, why the TPMS system in the wife's SX4 has lit the idiot light on her way home when all 4 tires were reading 33psi when I got home and checked? Obviously the data to the black box was telling the black box to light the light. Or was it the sensor? hmmmm. So what to do cause that damn light is so annoying...ok, increased pressure to 35 psi in all 4 tires last night. Drove around 20+ miles today and the light went out after about 3/4 of the way through the round trip. Two ignition cycles since the air increase. Hmmm...flakey technology (say it ain't so!) adding cost to the car. Something that I never wanted and don't need. BTW, pressure checked w/ my annually verified (NIST traceable lab) analog pressure gauge. So what's the deal there aye? Did the technology just "fall asleep" behind the wheel? :shock: Anyway, it'll eventually, and likely, come back on again resulting in some more expensive, time consuming aggravation on our part for some POS technology that we never wanted, but none-the-less, had shoved down our throats, presumably, in the name of safety. So I say, the deal there is, an expensive government overreach.

You say I'm a pessimist, (maybe so, been called worse) but remember, I deal with automation every single day. I've witnessed, experienced, designed around and been burned by much nifty tech in my years that has been sold as the end-all be-all to this problem or that. I have extensive practical real world experience with automating many different processes and in many different industries. Do you?
Until one walks-the-walk...not going to apologize because I'm just not one to lay down and have things rammed down my throat without a fight. I have to drive cars to get to work. I'm not interested in a continuation of my work day when I get into the vehicle to leave the job behind.

That's me point matey. Too much of a good/bad thing. I'll speak out against the over use of invasive unwanted BS any chance I get.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

I have no experience in automation, but again, this is what I'm talking about. Your experience in manufacturing automation cannot be equated to that of all driverless technology in vehicles. This isn't even your field in automation, correct? Your perspective is akin to one saying, "Suzukis are shitty cars. I had a Suzuki Reno once and it was a total piece of shit. The Kizashi must be just as bad. Good riddance to Suzuki!" You and I will be quick to say that the Reno wasn't actually a Suzuki and that it was the product of Daewoo under the overarching management of GM. Suzuki didn't design, engineer, or produce the Reno. It was simply badged as a Suzuki (hence, the same name) therefore the Reno doesn't actually represent Suzuki engineering or quality. These are facts. Even then, the Reno example has more to do with Suzuki than your experience in manufacturing automation compared to driverless vehicle automation (all of which aren't even the same) given the field is much more diverse than Suzuki's line up of vehicles. I doubt any of the companies or technologies in either manufacturing automation or driverless technology are related to each other. You can also take this flawed perspective to just about anything to realize its weakness. "I had a bad experience with a podiatrist so I don't trust doctors with a diagnosis anymore. I'm not going to a doctor about this odd bump on my chest." or "I lost a child custody case in court due to a sloppy but expensive lawyer. I don't trust lawyers anymore so I'm representing myself in court in my upcoming tax fraud case." All of these arguments are flawed given it relies on a specific experience that isn't actually representative of the entire field of practice or industry. I mean no personal offense, but I am certain all automation isn't the same. After all, the kind of automation Tesla is involved in is different than that of Uber. Ford is also working on automation and it's independent to that of Tesla and Uber.

And while you certainly have more experience with automation than I, digital evidence is in my field. In fact, my very specialty in the field. If you think such evidence is Big Brother watching you, you'll be shocked to realize how much the contrary is true. Tech companies are famous for not cooperating with the government in unlocking the phones of suspects even in high profile cases, some involving terrorism or mass shootings. I'm sure many will say it's because this or that (insert conspiracy theory) but the actual reason is because doing so would create a legal precedence for a government agency to request the intrusion of privacy of any customer at a lower legal standard. Tech companies want to prevent this so they don't comply if there is any legal reason allowing them to refuse cooperation or even legal compliance. This is why the government uses third parties. When companies like Apple realize the vulnerabilities that allowed third parties to breach their security measures, they release updates to patch them. This is hardly an in-bed-with-government situation in reality.

Furthermore, digital evidence does wonders for those who are factually innocent of the crimes or liability they are accused of. I was personally involved in the dismissal of felonies of actually innocent defendants with cell site analysis, surveillance footage, GPS geo-tags, etc. In the case of an auto accident, it's not the government you should be worried about, but the other party or parties in a civil case. In such an instance, digital evidence can be a huge help and like I already mentioned, is a reason why fleets have implemented them in their vehicles. And no, it has less to do with management and control and more to do with legal defense in the event of an accident. I actually learned about this technology at a conference focused around digital evidence and the presenter was an industry expert in automotive evidence. He discussed how this sort of data logging has helped fleets and companies better determine the cause of accidents and protect themselves from lawsuits. The cherry on top is that these devices don't even store the data unless an event triggers the data lock-down. Basically, upon sensing an accident or unusual condition, like severe braking, the device captures the data for preservation that it would otherwise purge. Again, not what you expected in reality.

All that being said, it's not that I am totally in disagreement with you. I do agree with your points about how automation threatens jobs. In fact, I think replacing humans is the goal of some huge names behind the technology and Uber is a prime example. They would probably love to do away with hired drivers and run a fleet of driverless cars to get customers where they need to go. However, can you blame them? As with any company, profits are their goals and #1 loyalty. Such implementation of automation would be very profitable in a short amount of time and probably be safer too not only in driving, but also in incidents of assault. Speaking of which, there was a sexual assault just 3 days ago in my area involving an Uber driver assaulting a female customer. That wouldn't be a concern with a driverless car and I'm sure many women would prefer one to take them home alone after a night out rather than an unknown male driver.

Lastly, about technology like TPMS: Yes, it's very annoying when things go wrong and warnings flash. However, recall how this all came about. People were dying from accidents related to under-inflated tires. Ford blamed the Firestone tires and Firestone blamed Ford. Regardless of the actual culprit, under-inflated tires were exposed as a risk to drivers. TPMS was implemented to warn drivers of low pressures that they may not realize. I consider myself a "car guy" and even then I still appreciate this technology. Less than a month ago, my TPMS warning went off. I checked all my tires and they all looked fine. However, when I checked with a pressure gauge to be sure, I saw that the rear right was 10 PSI low. Odd, I thought, as I didn't notice anything about the tire and it didn't look different from the others. I filled up and the warning went away. The next day, the TPMS warning was on again. I looked at all the tires again and they seemed fine, but the pressure reading of the right rear was again lower. I then examined it very carefully and found a headless nail in the tire hidden between the tread. Had it not been for the TPMS, I wouldn't have noticed the issue until much later, probably creating a greater problem. Keep in mind that modern low profile high performance tires like my Michelin Pilot Sport A/3 3's have thick sidewalls that don't give much even when pressure is significantly lower. It's harder than ever to tell when tires have low pressure just by looking at them. TPMS is definitely a benefit in my book and this incident exemplifies why to me personally. It helps the driver keep their vehicle in better condition to improve safety.
Ronzuki wrote: Hey while we're chatting about how wonderful and absolute all this technology and data is, maybe you can help me out here and explain, exactly and objectively, why the TPMS system in the wife's SX4 has lit the idiot light on her way home when all 4 tires were reading 33psi when I got home and checked?
As for this, I don't know but my guess is this: The East Coast recently had a cold spell and temperatures have dropped. The air pressure in tires drop in colder temperatures and increases in higher temps, like when driven. This is why you're not supposed to measure pressure when the tires are warmer from being just driven. I imagine your wife's SX4's tires were below the threshold for some part of her drive home (probably at the beginning), but warmed up and increased the PSI in the tires. Hence, when you measured them, they were higher than the pressure that initially set them off. After all, you measured them after she got home at 33 PSI when warm, correct? That's what an SX4 is supposed to have when cold with less than 1 mile of driving or over 3 hours of standing, according to a Suzuki SX4 manual. When you inflated the tires and drove the car, the TPMS warning was reset which takes a number of miles. I'm not claiming to be an expert, but this doesn't seem like a case of a technological poltergeist and the recent cold spell is the likely culprit.

So again, technology can be annoying and expensive but if you look at why its implemented in the auto industry, it's often related to safety. Furthermore, it seems that auto companies don't seem to mind R&D on these technologies therefore it is likely seen as investments into making competitive products. After all, people generally don't consciously buy a vehicle that's less safe than others. If anything, automakers have pushed back at the government on the mandates of fuel economy standards than safety.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

The fascination with that which one truly doesn't understand astounds me.

The same basic principles, processes, rules, standards, functional spec creation, destructive testing and all the other methodologies of automation apply, no matter WHAT gadget, giznoid, machine, process or system you are attempting to automate. Problem is autonomous vehicles, the machines, are only one small, albeit very expensive, part of extremely complicated, dynamic, non-standard, non-repeatable, multiple systems. Roads, traffic, existing traffic control, no traffic control, other public maneuvering areas not governed by traffic control and not subject to any traffic laws (rules), one state versus the next, and on and on. The roads alone vary so greatly and are very non-standard across throughout the country. Automation doesn't do variations very well. There isn't enough tax payer money on the planet to implement the needed systems that would be required in order to have the entire 'system' function reliably. Mark my words, we'll be paying more taxes to allow some peoples' profiteering pipe-dreams to be playing on the roadways with this crap. Introducing only one small part,these autonomous cars/trucks, into a dynamic system requiring full automation, is half-assed automation. And yes, I've certainly been there, and due to (lack of) the all-mighty dollar, done that. In every single instance, the 'system', the automation failed to live up to those people's expectations that lack the full understanding of what automation truly is. Again all these simple concepts apply to automating cars and trucks. And my experience tells me loud and clear this automation project has epically expensive fail written all over it. I could care less if it's a car, or, very similarly, an AGV (Automatic Guided Vehicle) delivering industrial whatever from point A to point B, which, I have extensive experience implementing at the vehicle and system levels. I can assure you with great confidence that without all the rest of the components in the system working in complete harmony with the AGV, a loaded AGV quickly becomes a 12,000 pound road-block.

Money. We have some serious traffic problems around here caused by the automation systems in place already...traffic lights. One part of the monster system. The areas that affect my travels directly are all waiting for MONEY to correct the traffic signals. DOT doesn't want to pay, hey the politicians don't drive those roads so what do they care. So the local township has to wait for state grant MONEY in order to put a Band-Aid on the problem.

As for the tires, as I said, measured after I got home...tires cold. All 4 verified again, same 33 psi, next morning before inflating to 35 psi. So what's the technological problem? What's the algorithm to light the light? Based upon the system's purpose and description of operation, it should have never come on. No logical explanation for the light. One little expensive piece of a fully autonomous machine that doesn't work. And which I'll be expected, and required, to spend time and money on.
And for what purpose?

All these nifty features manufacturers continually, and slowly, introducing in to cars and trucks, as practice, to move towards the goal of eliminating drivers. I find the methodology very interesting. Experimentation, paid for by consumers with the products they buy. First, air bags...great idea, saves lives....until predictably, greed and/or failure to give a crap sets in. Remind me again how many millions of air bags needed to be replaced that never will? Many of the affected vehicles will be out of service long before they'll get around to coughing up the cash and other resources required to change them all out in a timely, useful manner. Yeah, park the car and don't driver it until it's fixed. Thanks, that's very helpful.

My point in all of this all along has been it'll all be unreliable at best and expensive as hell.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

Something else I just noticed and find interesting here....nearly 1600 views on this topic and no one else has an opinion? Yet I read a lot, on this forum alone, about the technological problems with the cars (even though they are few) and the complaints surrounding the expenses associated with the diagnosis' and repairs. Interesting.

Kudos to you KuroNekko, I always enjoy our engagements and your thoughtful, well written responses.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

Ronzuki wrote:Something else I just noticed and find interesting here....nearly 1600 views on this topic and no one else has an opinion? Yet I read a lot, on this forum alone, about the technological problems with the cars (even though they are few) and the complaints surrounding the expenses associated with the diagnosis' and repairs. Interesting.

Kudos to you KuroNekko, I always enjoy our engagements and your thoughtful, well written responses.
Most people want to stay out of this sort of thing. LOL. I also see on other forums that many moderators shut "debates" like these down. Given I'm a mod here myself, I don't like the approach of silencing people with different views. Regardless, good debate.

To end it, here's another clip you'll likely enjoy of automation failures, courtesy of Robocop once again.

2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
Woodie
Posts: 1167
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:09 am
Location: Laurel, MD

I'm thoroughly enjoying the thread, and have no chance of adding anything intelligent, you guys are doing great. I lean toward Ronzuki's point of view, but you've both got good points and are doing great at presenting them.

I can see a slight up side of TPMS, but the hassles and costs are just not worth it. I'm not in the computer (well, maybe on the fringe) or automation business, but I've based a career on the FACT that everything fails and I'm doing pretty well, quite a beer belly to prove it. Look at NASA, a full on, country wide effort very much in the public eye, everything triple redundant; still four major F-ups, three deadly and the fourth a near miracle to not be deadly. This autonomous vehicle thing has not yet been exposed to the cavalier attitude of the mass public. Every computer system in the world is dependent on constant updates, some of which introduce new problems. What happens when the same people who ignore the amount of air in their tires can't be bothered to get regular software patches? Or still can't be bothered to maintain their car, when the automation is relying upon the car to perform as it was designed? The computer is making life or death decisions based upon what it expects from the braking and handling capabilities it was told the car had, but it doesn't know that the owner went down to K-Mart and put on the crappiest tires that would barely hold up the weight?

Getting in my car one day last week I noticed this on the car parked next to me. I was very reassured upon noticing that it had a TPMS system:

Image
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

KuroNekko wrote: Most people want to stay out of this sort of thing. LOL. I also see on other forums that many moderators shut "debates" like these down. Given I'm a mod here myself, I don't like the approach of silencing people with different views. Regardless, good debate.
I would hope this type of debate certainly wouldn't be shut-down. It is, after all, automotive in nature. And since there are no more Kizashis in our future, the discussions of what to replace this extremely well designed machine with will become more and more common. All here who own, drive and appreciate the Kizashi, we're all going to be saddled with seeking out similar replacements, with the same great features and at a similar price-point. I just don't want it to be anything autonomous. :roll: :mrgreen:
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
Post Reply