They did it!
 

Four of the twenty three autonomous automobiles which took part in the Grand Challenge sponsored by DARPA finished! Once started on the course, the vehicles had to operate completely without any control by humans. Last year none of the entries completed even eight of the required one hundred seventy five miles.

Now that’s an amazing improvement in the technology!

Wasn't Stanford U. the first to finish? Heard some of the report on the news last night.

Wow! I'll have to tell Mr. Osuche. :D

Scarecrow,

Yessir! It is official, Stanford's "Stanley" won the $2 million.

A fifth vehicle, TerraMax, has also completed the course. An amazing achievment.

Sorry jseal, you've lost me on this one.

They've made the point that the ultimate aim is autonomous fighting machines, basically robot tanks.

Though it's a technically brilliant exercise, autonomous war vehicles are a bad thing.

It's a terrible thing when a human pulls the trigger on another, no matter how neccessary it is.

Just to send out machines to hunt and kill humans without conscience or moral judgement ( which is a slightly different thing) is evil.

And if one goes rogue? Could you count that as friendly fire, given that a killer machine has no friends, just allies.

Oldfart,

That’s DARPA’s goal.

Remember that the internet - not the Web, the internet – was created by DARPA.

Look what happened to that Pentagon funded project. This technology won’t be the first time that one of DARPA’s swords has been beaten into a ploughshare! No possible way this one stops with Uncle Sam’s Freedom Fighters!

This is an integration event – not new ideas.

The GPS technology was freed up by Clinton in 2000 (I think). The sensor integration is a function of commercial multiprocessor parallel communication. Object discrimination is a function of Hard AI. You have to love this one – the functionality of the CPUs scattered throughout these machines was a direct spin off of DARPA funded VLSI research!

While I still disagree with PalaceGuard about his more speculative projections of future computer power, I feel confident that at the current rate of improvement, the likelihood of cars driving themselves in 50 years is, as Dr. Thrun of the Stanford team said, “a no-brainer”.

To your point in re the military applications: yes, it remains a real, present, and in my opinion an increasing danger. As the “human cost” of initiating military engagements decreases with the introduction of pilotless war vehicles (air, and now land) the probability of each one being realized increases. If you want a nightmare scenario, imagine if you will, a brigade of M1A2s approaching a city – and they are unmanned. The support vehicles (fuel & munitions) could also be, but probably wouldn’t be autonomous (the fog of war, etc), but air superiority could be secured by UAVs.

In closing, the Genie is out of the bottle. We’ll never get it back in. We have all seen how difficult it has been managing proliferation of WMDs – both the successes as well as the failures. This one has NO state secrets – NONE, NADA, ZILCH. Won’t this be fun to manage?

Manage?

We'll be lucky to manage species survival.

So good CAN come from it.

Oh, a lot of good can come from it. The answer to problems caused by technological advancements has always been...better technological developments.


The problem of political maturity, which is the ultimate root of warfare, however, is not so obvious.

Gentlefolk,

Before we get too far down the irrelevant/no big deal/who cares road, what about people with disabilities? Here are a few numbers from the U.S. 200 Census:

4.1 million
The number of people age 16 to 64 with a sensory disability involving sight or hearing. This group accounts for 2.3 percent of the total population.
11.2 million
The number of people age 16 to 64 with a condition limiting basic physical activities, such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, lifting or carrying. This group accounts for 6.2 percent of the total population.
6.8 million
The number of people age 16 to 64 with a physical, mental or emotional condition causing difficulty in learning, remembering or concentrating. This group accounts for 3.8 percent of the total population.
3.1 million
Number of people age 16 to 64 with a physical, mental or emotional condition causing difficulty in dressing, bathing or getting around the home. This group accounts for 1.8 percent of the total population.
11.4 million
Number of people age 16 and older with a condition that makes it difficult to go outside the home to shop or visit a doctor. This group accounts for 6.4 percent of people who are of this age.
21.3 million
Number of people ages 16 to 64 with a condition that affects their ability to work at a job or business. They account for 11.9 percent of people who are of this age.

Do you think any of them might benefit from this technology?

For further information, follow this link http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-17.pdf

Probably not.

The idea of sending your autonomous shopping cart to the mall to pick up your groceries and medicines

or a bubble car to pick up the kids from school is seductive, but expensive.

There currently exists alternatives within the financial reach if the guv'mint'd just bite the bullet.

Save the pies in the skies for dessert.

Oldfart,

Interesting POV. I suspect that there may be quite a few people with disabilities who would like to enjoy the freedom that you and I take for granted. You know, hop in the car and SAY "Take me to the pharmacy/park/shopping mall/..." and be able to enjoy doing just that.

Perhaps not.

jseal

As I said before, if the state does it's duty, this can be done cheaper and more efficiently by a

committed free taxi service.

Many of the same people need assistance just to get from home to the car.

Do it once and do it right.

Oldfart,

Well, perhaps it boils down to personal preference. I must admit that I do prefer a generalized solution to any particular set of government programs.

As for managing the potential military applications of the technology – how about if gekkogecko finds some immature politicians to resolve this issue – I’m sure that that will be much better than leaving it to the tender mercies of a mature political system.

Great point.