(January 15, 2019 at 11:24 am)Yonadav Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 10:46 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Ok, so she can't convert decimals to fractions.  Unless she's going to be an engineer or a mathematician or sommat, what does it matter?  Why would a pastry chef or an auto mechanic or a trauma surgeon need that particular skill?  Why would a poet need to know how to smelt ore?  Why should a radiologist need to know iambic hexameter?

Boru

I'm not necessarily looking for agreement from you.  I'm just pointing out that we can't be sure of what else is lost when rudimentary mathematical literacy is lost. When I was young a lot of rebellious teenagers who didn't like to go to school and were thinking about dropping out, asked questions exactly like the questions that you are asking here. I guess those mid-20th century rebellious teenagers were ahead of their time (even though they could convert a decimal to a fraction).

*shrug*  Most people in the world couldn't foresee the ramifications of the loss of hunter/gatherer skills, but we seemed to have coped pretty well.

My point is that what we call 'basic life skills' changes constantly, always has done. I refuse to get all fatootzed that little Johnny can't solve second order differentials in his head the way grandad could.

Boru

Boru

(January 15, 2019 at 11:48 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 11:24 am)Yonadav Wrote: I'm not necessarily looking for agreement from you.  I'm just pointing out that we can't be sure of what else is lost when rudimentary mathematical literacy is lost. When I was young a lot of rebellious teenagers who didn't like to go to school and were thinking about dropping out, asked questions exactly like the questions that you are asking here. I guess those mid-20th century rebellious teenagers were ahead of their time (even though they could convert a decimal to a fraction).

*shrug*  Most people in the world couldn't foresee the ramifications of the loss of hunter/gatherer skills, but we seemed to have coped pretty well.

My point is that what we call 'basic life skills' changes constantly, always has done. I refuse to get all fatootzed that little Johnny can't solve second order differentials in his head the way grandad could.

Boru

Boru

You might be right. It might not matter. But it might matter.

(January 15, 2019 at 3:14 am)onlinebiker Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 1:45 am)bennyboy Wrote: Damned kids buy flour in a BAG, instead of just grinding it at home like decent folk!~

And they think flour is mined like coal.

Pffttt

---

(January 15, 2019 at 2:00 am)Mr.Obvious Wrote: Such a system needn't be perfect, it only has to ride better than THE median driver, to become benefactory.
I'd rather have ten die because of a computer's fault than a hundred because of human fault.

And again --- overlook the point.


These systems work NOW

And they will ( like the drivers) age - then NOT . work. Then you will see the accident rate from things like rear end collisions spike - because users got used to having collision avoidence....

So it might work for 500 years before an emp blasts all selfdriving cars to smithereens. Killing a million people trapped in deathmobiles in an instant. If for each year in those 500 years 10.000 people die less because the computer does it better than THE human mind; isn't that worth THE one million toll?

Edit:
Misunderstood.
My bad, understand your point now.
But still; it's just a matter of checking up on THE systems and making those checkups required by law, isn't it?

(January 15, 2019 at 12:17 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 3:14 am)onlinebiker Wrote: And they think flour is mined like coal.

Pffttt

---

And again --- overlook the point.


These systems work NOW

And they will ( like the drivers) age - then NOT . work. Then you will see the accident rate from things like rear end collisions spike - because users got used to having collision avoidence....

So it might work for 500 years before an emp blasts all selfdriving cars to smithereens. Killing a million people trapped in deathmobiles in an instant. If for each year in those 500 years 10.000 people die less because the computer does it better than THE human mind; isn't that worth THE one million toll?

Edit:
Misunderstood.
My bad, understand your point now.
But still; it's just a matter of checking up on THE systems and making those checkups required by law, isn't it?

Ever known someone to scam an emissions testing??

Those systems are laughably simplistic compared to the AI systems now being used - and you can expect future systems to be more complex, and more expensive. You can count on the costs of maintenance of such equipment being a major part of the expenditures for that vehicle.

Count on people thinking - "Can I get by without it"???

(January 15, 2019 at 1:16 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 12:17 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote: So it might work for 500 years before an emp blasts all selfdriving cars to smithereens. Killing a million people trapped in deathmobiles in an instant. If for each year in those 500 years 10.000 people die less because the computer does it better than THE human mind; isn't that worth THE one million toll?

Edit:
Misunderstood.
My bad, understand your point now.
But still; it's just a matter of checking up on THE systems and making those checkups required by law, isn't it?

Ever known someone to scam an emissions testing??

Those systems are laughably simplistic compared to the AI systems now being used - and you can expect future systems to be more complex, and more expensive. You can count on the costs of maintenance of such equipment being a major part of the expenditures for that vehicle.

Count on people thinking - "Can I get by without it"???

Do people routinely disable their power steering and anti-lock brakes?

Boru

(January 15, 2019 at 8:15 am)AFTT47 Wrote: The systems will likely use multiple layers of redundancy and be programmed to pull over in stop if any one element fails.

This is just a lame attempt to justify the silly argument that people are reduced by having machines do their labor. Instead, it frees them up to do other things.

I am working for 1 of the 3 biggest automotive suppliers in the world (and arguably currently by far the most succesful one), and i am working in R&D of brake systems for automated driving. To be precise, i am working on this exactly, as project manager for new (and not yet customer-and-public-road-ready functions and architecture). So much for my credentials.


Multiple layers of redundancy? Sorry, but thats . Quasi redundancy, yes, sort of. Real redundancy? Fuck no, muuuuuuuuuch too expensive. Consider this: For a modern electic car, you need a brake system with electric boost, the standard vacuum boster (driven by combustion engine) is no option anymore. If your electric however boost fails, you are stuck with (according to international regulations, so its LEGAL) 0.3g decel and 500N at the pedal (good luck putting 500N to your brake pedal if you are no pro) per mechanical design. 0.3g is ca. what you could achieve with a conventinal cable pulled parking brake (a la Steve McQueen doing a 180 during a car chase in his vintage Mustang). Did you ever try to stop your car with the cable pulled parking brake? Try it!!!! But please not at home, rather on WalMarts parking lot if i may add. I did it once on our test facility, and my pants still have this brown hue.
Now....considering this dangerous (but still legal) scenario, do you think Ford (pick any other OEM) agreed to pay for 10$ extra and real redundancy? A second battery maybe or even a buffer (in case battery or wiring fails) for a single safe braking to full stop? Or even redundant drivers for the electric motor? Fuck, no! 10$ extra per system, multiplied with 20mio systems my employer alone sells per year? Are you fucking crazy?


You have no idea how big the $-pressure is in this industry and what kind of cheap components and tech in general is used to make this possible. You have no idea how many secret safety relevant Software updates your car receives during routine maintenance in your garage, just to avoid PR desasters by having to announce callbacks. You have no idea, how far beyond the usual specified temperatures etc our devices work and how we have to turn TWO blind eyes toward design verification test results. We ahve left the field of being serious many years ago. The current Diesel scandal etc. is just the tip of the iceberg.
Just one last example. The current CPUs we are using (and i am talking about the TOP ones!!!) cost around 3$, and have 166MHz clock with 5MB RAM. This is whats gonna drive your oh-so-modern-brake-by-wire-highly-automated-brake system ECU, which will provide many of the crucial functionalities for HAD. Sure its CPU-pairs working in lockstep, providing ASIL C (at least) safelty level, but have a closer look at what ASIL C means and compare to how we put it into action, and you will be up for an unpleasant surprise.

If you think that future cars will only be remotely similar to modern fly-by-wire airliners, then you will be up for a very rude awakening....and if you have a closer look at how those airliners and their systems are made....the Titanic suddenly doesnt seem to be such a bad design.

I dont know how many hundred (or thousand) $ your super-super leather interior will cost, but if our HAD brake system ECU is more than 100 bucks, were out of business quicker than you can say "Nappa Leather".

(January 15, 2019 at 1:29 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 1:16 pm)onlinebiker Wrote: Ever known someone to scam an emissions testing??

Those systems are laughably simplistic compared to the AI systems now being used - and you can expect future systems to be more complex, and more expensive. You can count on the costs of maintenance of such equipment being a major part of the expenditures for that vehicle.

Count on people thinking - "Can I get by without it"???

Do people routinely disable their power steering and anti-lock brakes?

Boru

Yes. They do. I have seen p/s pumps that froze up, and rather than spend the money on a pump - they simply stuck on the " manual steering" version of the serpentine belt.

The car I am currently driving has the ABS disabled - as one of the surge solenoids is defective - and makes a hammering noise. The previous owner simply unplugged the main plug. The power brakes still work with the ABS disabled. The ABS is superfluous anyway. We have several other cars of the same make that did not come ABS equipped.

And consider - those two systems are nothing compared to the cost and complexity of collision avoidance systems.

You can count on people doing the cost/ benefit analysis, and cost will come up short.

(January 15, 2019 at 1:49 pm)Deesse23 Wrote:

---

I am working for 1 of the 3 biggest automotive suppliers in the world (and arguably currently by far the most succesful one), and i am working in R&D of brake systems for automated driving. To be precise, i am working on this exactly, as project manager for new (and not yet customer-and-public-road-ready functions and architecture). So much for my credentials.


Multiple layers of redundancy? Sorry, but thats . Quasi redundancy, yes, sort of. Real redundancy? Fuck no, muuuuuuuuuch too expensive. Consider this: For a modern electic car, you need a brake system with electric boost, the standard vacuum boster (driven by combustion engine) is no option anymore. If your electric however boost fails, you are stuck with (according to international regulations, so its LEGAL) 0.3g decel and 500N at the pedal (good luck putting 500N to your brake pedal if you are no pro) per mechanical design. 0.3g is ca. what you could achieve with a conventinal cable pulled parking brake (a la Steve McQueen doing a 180 during a car chase in his vintage Mustang). Did you ever try to stop your car with the cable pulled parking brake? Try it!!!! But please not at home, rather on WalMarts parking lot if i may add. I did it once on our test facility, and my pants still have this brown hue.
Now....considering this dangerous (but still legal) scenario, do you think Ford (pick any other OEM) agreed to pay for 10$ extra and real redundancy? A second battery maybe or even a buffer (in case battery or wiring fails) for a single safe braking to full stop? Or even redundant drivers for the electric motor? Fuck, no! 10$ extra per system, multiplied with 20mio systems my employer alone sells per year? Are you fucking crazy?


You have no idea how big the $-pressure is in this industry and what kind of cheap components and tech in general is used to make this possible. You have no idea how many secret safety relevant Software updates your car receives during routine maintenance in your garage, just to avoid PR desasters by having to announce callbacks. You have no idea, how far beyond the usual specified temperatures etc our devices work and how we have to turn TWO blind eyes toward design verification test results. We ahve left the field of being serious many years ago. The current Diesel scandal etc. is just the tip of the iceberg.
Just one last example. The current CPUs we are using (and i am talking about the TOP ones!!!) cost around 3$, and have 166MHz clock with 5MB RAM. This is whats gonna drive your oh-so-modern-brake-by-wire-highly-automated-brake system ECU, which will provide many of the crucial functionalities for HAD. Sure its CPU-pairs working in lockstep, providing ASIL C (at least) safelty level, but have a closer look at what ASIL C means and compare to how we put it into action, and you will be up for an unpleasant surprise.

If you think that future cars will only be remotely similar to modern fly-by-wire airliners, then you will be up for a very rude awakening....and if you have a closer look at how those airliners and their systems are made....the Titanic suddenly doesnt seem to be such a bad design.

I dont know how many hundred (or thousand) $ your super-super leather interior will cost, but if our HAD brake system ECU is more than 100 bucks, were out of business quicker than you can say "Nappa Leather".

---

Great, got the scene from fight club in my head. 

(January 15, 2019 at 1:16 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:

(January 15, 2019 at 12:17 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote: So it might work for 500 years before an emp blasts all selfdriving cars to smithereens. Killing a million people trapped in deathmobiles in an instant. If for each year in those 500 years 10.000 people die less because the computer does it better than THE human mind; isn't that worth THE one million toll?

Edit:
Misunderstood.
My bad, understand your point now.
But still; it's just a matter of checking up on THE systems and making those checkups required by law, isn't it?

Ever known someone to scam an emissions testing??

Those systems are laughably simplistic compared to the AI systems now being used - and you can expect future systems to be more complex, and more expensive. You can count on the costs of maintenance of such equipment being a major part of the expenditures for that vehicle.

Count on people thinking - "Can I get by without it"???

Count on people dying because of new technologies? And accompagnying neglect? Sure. But like how a seatbelt might choke THE occasional person, their addition saves lives. And THE introduction of boilers had poisoned countless people, but also saves many developing deadly pnumonia and freezing of to death.

(January 15, 2019 at 2:40 pm)wyzas Wrote: Great, got the scene from fight club in my head. 

Thats exactly how it works.

I remember sitting in the office of my super-super-supervisor (director and boss of overall electronics of brake systems), telling him that we really need this new transistor type, which costs 2 additional cents* compared to the one we currently have in use. He asked me why we need it: i told him its smaller and performs better. He asks if the current one fulfills requirements. I tell him "barely, and in case of field returns we lose $ (if proven its our design fault and not random component error)". His final answer: and how many ECUs with the old transistor do we have to produce/sell until we have saved enough money for this?

Ever since then i never ever entered his office again without any new idea that wasnt cheaper and better.

We use componens for 135°C requirements which actually are, per datasheet of supplier, only qualified for 120°. We just apply pressure on our suppliers until they agree to make (up) a paper stating that the component can...probably, hopefully, whatever also withstand 135°C....under certain conditions.....mostly at lower temps, with long time not powered up.....
thats how cheap we are, and now please think again about systems with multiple layers of redunancy. Does it sound like a company with the attitude i just decribed will make something like a PROPER system with multiple layered redundancies?

The solenoid valves OLB mentioned, of course they fail....they get hot like fuck if some ABS function (actually TCS puts most strain on an ECU, it is the control function that produces most power dissipation) is active for an amount of time. They get in excess of 170°C and we overmold them to mitigate this problem (better dissipation of heat). Otoh we make careful calculations and tests to figure out in which ECU variants exactly we can leave out the overmold, because.....its fucking expensive, several cents per ECU!!!!!

*make your own calculations: we are indeed selling ca. 20mio ABS and ESC systems each year. 2c per ECU amounts to 200k$, just for this one, single, electronic component. Then consider how many components an ECU has (in excess of 200 discrete components) and how many mechanical and hydraulic parts.
Then let it sink in for a while......

Looking at Ed N. and the burnt up car:
Fucking hell...do you know that words like "fire" and "burn" are not allowed to be used in relation with burnt up ECUs (and often the vehicle burns down as well) for over 10 years now? The japanese customers were the first ones who got *concerned* when we told them about these risks. Ever since then, such an event is called "rapid corrosion", and management suddenly felt much more comfortable, on both sides.