Herding teslas

during an admittedly less than sober night on the bike thread we were talking about teslas and other self driving cars...
you know how they have all these anti collision systems?
would it be possible to box one in and steer it wherever we want?

bump

To a certain degree, yes.

But it's more likely they'll just come to a complete stop.

if you invade its forward collision avoidance zone it would probably stop, but if you stayed out of that, and just got in the way of radar guided cruise control, that might work... (not sure what technological fuckery tesla has, just spewing out my late night brain contents kek)

It'd merely slow down to avoid running you over.

I'm more interested in seeing how they react to lane splitting with regard to their pedestrian avoidance stuff.

My gramp's yaris boops angrily at lane splitters
But what about 4-6 bikes circling the car and getting it wherever?
Could be used to jump wealthy hippies

I'd image the car would slow to a halt of there is an object it cannot avoid. It may change its course once or twice, but it will eventually stop when the on board computer realizes that the obstacle hasn't moved. Even more so with like 6 bikes, because the car will detect even more objects

>in your lifetime, you will be able to dress up as the biker gang from Mad Max 1 and bully numales and their cuckmobiles with your buddies

What a time to be alive.

I AM THE NIGHT RIDER

Veeky Forums tanker raids when?

Presumably, for "fully" autonomous vehicles to be road legal, they'll need to be able to respond properly to emergency vehicles and traffic stops.

If the car has no driver (or the driver is passed out or whatever), the easiest thing would be to "convince" the car that you're a cop, and pull it over. The car could then be stolen, or the driver robbed, or whatever.

It'll be interesting to see what sort of mechanisms emergency vehicles end up using to "authenticate" themselves to self-driving cars, and the chaos that ensues when criminals figure out ways to spoof it.

the car uses GPS to travel to its desitnation

if it goes out of that gps path it would just redirect or come to a stop until it was able to redirect

>yfw in your lifetime there will be an Veeky Forums NRA-equivalent where people will say they can have my steering wheel when they pry it from my cold, dead hands

>yfw you can only buy yfw 30MPH governors
>yfw auto trans only
>yfw annual background/health screening

>yfw the average person can't be trusted with a 2,000lb assault vehicle
>yfw it's for the children

Don't be stupid. A car, in America, only has to follow the necessary requirements of the year it was built in.

for now

>Implying that first-world governments won't force obsolescence to phase out fossil fuel combustion and manually-driven vehicles

taking my shitbox to africa see you nerds later.

"No"

You can legally drive a tin Lizzy on the road even without any safety equipment, doors or emissions equipment. You can't take that away, but you can de-incentivise it by making insurance more or something, but you can't take away that liberty.

Plus I'm not going to even begin to describe how a self driving car won't work in the vast majority of the country

Unless you want nuclear powered cars, which would be awesome, tell me a better way to ship a truck of vape pens from New Orleans to salt lake city.

Well, you already stated one way companies can help make it happen - sending insurance rates thru the roof.

Or the government (state or federal) can massively increase inspection/registration costs. Or they can say "no more importing parts", raise taxes on gas (not directly related, but will correspond with older, human-driven vehicles), another "cash for clunkers" type thing, etc.

Once self-driving cars become viable (and they will eventually), there will be a media campaign to portray people that want to have control over their vehicle to be at the very least "grandpas" if not dangerous, backwards hicks and/or murderers. People will demand legislation to eliminate/mitigate/limit their exposure to those drivers and vehicles.

If you don't think the government can and will take away something that isn't even enshrined in the Constitution, you're fucking nuts.

Why would a cop pull over a self driving car? They literally can't do anything wrong in a perfect world.

1. stolen
2. registered owner is wanted on a warrant
3. car is operating in some kind of restricted area
etc.

Consider this. In America it's federally illegal to remove emmisions equipment. You literally can't sell a car without it. In Colorado, you legally must wear a seatbelt.
I have neither of those in my truck, but it's grandfathered in. That's what's going to happen. You might not be able to buy a new GT-R but it won't be powered by a turbo 3.8

Also for self driving cars, please tell me how that will work in the badlands when Jim John needs to get to the neighboring farm and you have no cell signal and no information on the road networks?

You can't.

You wouldn't be able to steal a self driving car
There's better ways to arrest someone then randomly in a car.
Cars would probably have GPS blacklist zones for dangerous roads and whatnot.
I mean I get it sort of, but there's ways around it.

>would it be possible to box one in and steer it wherever we want?

Tesla is working with nvidia on automated driving software. So Tesla is not really going it alone. It just doesn't promote nvidia which has also partnered with BMW. Or rather, VW and BMW partnered with nvidia in order to make use of their software which has a head start on most everyone else except google, GM, and the proprietary part of what Tesla has.

So your herding of cars will need to consider the approaches that tesla, GM, google, or nvidia use in their self-driving autobots.

GM made early studies of a selected group of their new car buyers to see what self-driving options these users considered to be acceptable. Most of the options involved the vehicle moving to the side of the road (if possible without liability harm) and coming to a stop. The idea of the vehicle also coming with a "red button" override was also provided in testing. It would move the car to the safest side of the road and come to a stop (as well as alerting authorities).

Ironically, GM got a lot of feedback from users that the "red button" was a bad idea!

>But what about 4-6 bikes circling the car and getting it wherever?
>Could be used to jump wealthy hippies
That doesn't work. Today's VIP cars have legal allowance to run perps over in an attempt to get away. Whether or not VIPs will be allowed to purchase software with options to use FORCE to ESCAPE a KIDNAP or ROBBERY attempt is another thing. But I suspect that the wealthy and powerful will be allowed to use car software that the general public is not legally allowed to have or use. This is all part of privilege. Since it already exists, then it is not such a farfetched idea to move it to software that certain people are more valuable than others and thus have more rights than other people and can do things that normal people are legally not allowed to do.

>NRA-equivalent where people will say they can have my steering wheel when they pry it from my cold, dead hands

No, driving is a privilege, not a right. You are insisting that driving is a right and not a privilege.

>Since it already exists, then it is not such a farfetched idea to move it to software that certain people are more valuable than others and thus have more rights than other people and can do things that normal people are legally not allowed to do.


I can't wait for the librul cognitive dissonance when a bunch of niggers on bikes get blown away by Bernie Jr.s Tesla's minigun with the $50,000 BLASTBLACK software option

>No, driving is a privilege, not a right. You are insisting that driving is a right and not a privilege.
10A
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

9A
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people


In other words, just because it isn't in the Bill of Rights doesn't mean the right doesn't exist.

Im losing my fucking shit in the laundromat right now, thank you user

>You wouldn't be able to steal a self driving car
Why wouldnt you be able to?

>Ironically, GM got a lot of feedback from users that the "red button" was a bad idea!

Wait so is it an override button that gives you full control or some sort of cuckbutton that parks you immediately and renders your vehicle immobile while emergency services is contacted?

It's 2020. During the day, I ride self-driving cars.

During the night, I hunt them.
._._._.

The Night has finally come.

I waited patiently. I am used to it.

No one thought of me as a threat.
After all, I only drove a Miata. It has no EcoBoost.

Taylor Swift got into her self-driving ecoboost car. It was a tight fit because the car was so small and her legs were long.

Her ecoboost car took off efficiently and drove towards her next venue.

I wielded my stickshift Miata efficiently, darting between all the self-driving cars.

Too polite and full of defensive driving algorithms, the Tesla & GM self-driving cars made way for me as they tried to avoid collisions. I took advantage of that.

I praised the inventors of the Miata. "Thank you for not filling the world full of EcoBoost"

After all, if the world was full of EcoBoost, I would be at a disadvantage on the road.

But the road is not only for ecoboosted cars. Those with skill are able to coax success from non-boosted cars by driving cleverly.

I often am forced to drive cleverly on the Road.

After all, I only have a Miata.

Pulling alongside Taylor Swift's self-driving car, I noticed the model type was known to be one that refused to run over people-shaped objects or trolleys.

I moved in front and pushed the button to send gas from the canisters to several blow up dolls.

They inflated immediately.

The wind picked them up and dropped then into the road in front of the self-driving car.

True to its algorithm, Taylor Swift's self-driving car preferred to crash the car gently into the road barrier instead of running over people or trolleys in the roadway.

Take that you ecoboost Bitch!

Sure, Taylor Swift was known to go through boyfriends at a prodigious rate.

But why did she have to drop me as her boyfriend? She didn't drop me for personality or looks. The reason stung.

She dropped me as her boyfriend
when
she
found
out
I
drove
a
Miata.

The "right to drive a motor vehicle" has never been recognized as a right in any form of the word in any state in any jurisdiction or precinct. But go ahead keep making up rights you don't have. If what you said was actually true then taking away people's drivers licenses would be unconstitutional

10/10 if I understood the ecoboost meme, as it stands I give 2/10 didn't even grin.

>Wait so is it an override button that gives you full control or some sort of cuckbutton that parks you immediately and renders your vehicle immobile while emergency services is contacted?

It is not to disable the computer and return physical control. That would be wrong. It forces the vehicle over to the side of the road and shuts it down. You use the red button if there is some sort of emergency or if the vehicle is misbehaving or there is some situation the vehicle cannot handle.

A full takeover button would be bad because in the future, self-driving vehicles are supposed to be able to be Dominated. You saw the domination principles at work in anime (Ghost in the Shell, etc) where the ambulance or government car can order vehicles off the road, or go off to the side of the road, or to have normal citizen vehicles automatically give a larger physical clearance around a VIP vehicle and allow the VIP vehicle to pass on a priority basis.

Thus, someone like Kanye West could drive along, and your self-driving car would automatically get out of her way so she could pass you. You can force override by moving the steering wheel to try to block her, but that will be recorded in logs for police review and you will get an aggressive driving fine for trying to block Kanye West's car from passing you.

Doesn't matter
9th Amendment.

>Welcome to Apple car, please insert drivers licence

I wouldn't mind that kind of invasion of privacy if cars required certified encrypted "credit card style" cards to be inserted for drivers license and driving insurance before the car starts. Too many drivers out there who have neither.

There would be plenty of complaints saying that checking for a valid drivers license prevents use of the vehicle in an emergency, thus if someone dies, Apple will be sued.

Vehicles are not for emergency purposes. Call a fucking ambulance

they would probably just have certificates for emergency cars. they would broadcast their certificate from the government to nearby autonomous vehicles to signal their status.

unfortunately there is no constitutional right for motorized vehicles.

after the ban of cars they will just use it to undermine the guns

This was my point exactly. Driving isn't even constitutionally protected. There's basically nothing in their way from regulating human-driven cars out of existence, either explicitly via legislation/regulation, or implicitly via pricing/parts availability.

KILL YOUR SELF

I HAVE A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY


MY GRANDFATHER DROVE TROOP TRANSPORT BOATS ONTO THE SHORES OF NORMANDY SO THAT I COULD HAVE MY RIGHT TO PRIVACY