Jump to content
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Consumers Confused by Driver-Assist Technology Names

      Consumers think that with names like Co-Pilot 360, ProPilot, or Autopilot, the car should be able to drive itself.

    According to research issued by AAA, 40 percent of Americans expect driver assist systems with names like ProPilot, Co-Pilot 360, or Autopilot to give the vehicle the ability to drive itself.

    In a quote to Automotive News, Director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations at AAA says "Somewhere in there, you'd think a pilot is involved, but indeed no, human driving is still required."

    AAA examined 34 vehicle brands to identify the number of driver-assistance names used and found 40 different terms used to describe automated emergency braking, 20 terms for adaptive cruise control, and 19 different lane-keeping assist names. 

    At CES this year, a coalition of automakers, safety advocates, and others launched Partner for Automated Vehicle Education (PAVE). This organization is dedicated to the promotion of these technologies while simplifying the language used to describe them.



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    1 minute ago, Robert Hall said:

    I can see how they would be.  After 33 years of driving, I don't need this $h! in a car. 

    I am sure people said same thing when automakers started using seat belts and air bags ...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, Robert Hall said:

    I can see how they would be.  After 33 years of driving, I don't need this shit in a car. 

    I really want adaptive cruise control in my next car.  It is nearly impossible to search for on the used car aggregators like AutoTrader.com because there is such inconsistent use in the term.  

    • Upvote 4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I don't use cruise control, so I'm not sure the advantage of adaptive..maybe in heavy traffic freeway driving with lots of stop and go? 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Also, the point of this that every automaker calls these systems differently.  It really is confusing.

    Edited by ykX
    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Just now, Robert Hall said:

    I don't use cruise control, so I'm not sure the advantage of adaptive..maybe in heavy traffic freeway driving with lots of stop and go? 

    Any situation where the speed of the traffic in front of you may be variable and below the speed you are traveling at.  When I have a car with ACC, I just set the speed to 5 or 10 over the limit and let the predominant traffic speed govern my progress. 

    1 minute ago, ykX said:

    Also, the point of this that every automaker calls these system differently.  It really is confusing.

    yes... that's the problem.  Adaptive Cruise, Active Cruise, Distronic, Intelligent Cruise Control, Sense*.... all the same thing. 

    *Sense is the name of a bigger group of options at Honda also, but the Adaptive is called Honda Sense.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I will totally agree that all the various Marketing names is a confusing Shit Storm of WTF for the average driver.

    Now the Average driver seems to have gotten dumber and dumber as we have individuals in the various state and federal gov that thinks driving is more of a right than the reality that it is a privilege earned. As such we have a growing group of DMF's that should not even be driving and this has led to the following nanny devices being forced on everyone.

    Reality, Let me have the CHOICE to disable this stuff as the computer CANNOT act as fast as the brain in reading all the various issues on the road. There could be a very valid reason for me to drift out of a lane of traffic. I DO NOT want the auto fighting me to put me back in the lane especially if I am avoiding something in the road that the computer does not read properly or understand. Last thing I need is a computer trying to force me to drive over a piece of steel that will damage my auto versus moving out of the lane a bit to avoid it.

    These nanny devices need to be optional and not forced on us just like seatbelt laws that penalize you for wearing them yet you find non on the mass transit or school buses and the double standard by the police for not wearing them, talking on a cell phone and playing with their computer. :glare:

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    23 minutes ago, dfelt said:

     

    Reality, Let me have the CHOICE to disable this stuff as the computer CANNOT act as fast as the brain in reading all the various issues on the road.

    Reality is that the computer is MUCH FASTER than the human brain.  It just these automotive systems are still far from perfection. 

    26 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    These nanny devices need to be optional and not forced on us just like seatbelt laws that penalize you for wearing them yet you find non on the mass transit or school buses and the double standard by the police for not wearing them, talking on a cell phone and playing with their computer

    School buses have seat belts nowadays.  Also, seat belts saved countless lives, so will these systems.

    Also, fatalities on the roads consistently going down compared from 50s and 60s even though there is more and more cars on the road.  Only, because cars become safer.

    US_traffic_deaths_per_VMT%2C_VMT%2C_per_capita%2C_and_total_annual_deaths.png

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Reality is that the computer is MUCH FASTER than the human brain.  It just these automotive systems are still far from perfection.   

    Given how buggy software, is I don't trust computers to completely take control of a car. I work in the software industry, there is a lot of bad code out there and bad programmers... unless systems are built to the level of reliability and quality of NASA space mission systems or airplane auto pilot systems, I wouldn't trust them.   I especially don't trust a bunch of fucking Silicon Valley millennial 'bro-grammers'...

    Edited by Robert Hall
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

    Given how buggy software, is I don't trust computers to completely take control of a car. I work in the software industry, there is a lot of bad code out there and bad programmers... unless systems are built to the level of reliability and quality of NASA space mission systems or airplane auto pilot systems, I wouldn't trust them.   I especially don't trust a bunch of f@#king Silicon Valley millennial 'bro-grammers'...

    I agree in regards to buggy software. However,  as you said software is flying airplanes and rockets right now.  Eventually, the automakers will have to have same level of software reliability, because lives will depend on that.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 minutes ago, ykX said:

    I agree in regards to buggy software. However,  as you said software is flying airplanes and rockets right now.  Eventually, the automakers will have to have same level of software reliability, because lives will depend on that.

    More than lives....once it starts saving insurance companies money..it will be there. The cost of car accidents is often astronomical given injury and suffering costs. Does not take much of a reduction for insurance companies to mandate that this stuff be installed and lobby congress for laws regarding it.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    12 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    More than lives....once it starts saving insurance companies money..it will be there. The cost of car accidents is often astronomical given injury and suffering costs. Does not take much of a reduction for insurance companies to mandate that this stuff be installed and lobby congress for laws regarding it.

    Very good point, most of the time money talks louder than lives.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @ykX

    Correct we can build computers that are faster than the Human brain. Yet working in the Enterprise Storage business with Developers daily and the amount of bugs added into software, I still want my OPTION in regards to which Nanny devices I use.

    Yes Seatbelts save lives, but it should still be OPTIONAL. Not enforced fined use. There are times NOT wearing a seatbelt can be safer than wearing it, 4x4 off road is a perfect example. 

    Not all buses have seatbelts, none of the school buses or public buses in Washington State have them and they are not mandatory. What state are you in that has seat belts on school buses?

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    @ykX

     

    Yes Seatbelts save lives, but it should still be OPTIONAL. Not enforced fined use. There are times NOT wearing a seatbelt can be safer than wearing it, 4x4 off road is a perfect example. 

    Nobody is going to give you a ticket if you not wearing your seat belt off road.

    And I think it is good that it is enforced because like you said previously most people irresponsible morons, who would not put seat belts just because they are lazy or forgot.

    9 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Not all buses have seatbelts, none of the school buses or public buses in Washington State have them and they are not mandatory. What state are you in that has seat belts on school buses?

    I live in NJ, both of my kids are in school, elementary and middle, and their buses have seat belts.

    Edited by ykX
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The majority of these problems is because people don't read the Car's owner manual and salesman don't explain it correctly.  Again most consumers are the problem.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    21 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Nobody is going to give you a ticket if you not wearing your seat belt off road.

    And I think it is good that it is enforced because like you said previously most people irresponsible morons, who would not put seat belts just because they are lazy or forgot.

    I live in NJ, both of my kids are in school, elementary and middle, and their buses have seat belts.

    Here in washington, I doubt the forest rangers will bother, but they wrote the law to include on or off road, personal seatbelts must be worn at all times or else you are eligible to be fined.

    Glad to hear NJ has seat belts on the school buses, here they do not  but should I think. I would also like to see them on public buses but I doubt that will ever happen.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    7 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Here in washington, I doubt the forest rangers will bother, but they wrote the law to include on or off road, personal seatbelts must be worn at all times or else you are eligible to be fined.

    Glad to hear NJ has seat belts on the school buses, here they do not  but should I think. I would also like to see them on public buses but I doubt that will ever happen.

    In NJ seat belt law states:

    "Applies to all passengers (including the rear seat), who are at least 8 years of age or at least 57 inches tall, and each driver and front seat passenger of a passenger automobile, operated on a street or highway. All of these occupants are required to wear a properly adjusted and fastened seat belt system."

    Off road is not required

    • Thanks 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Never saw seatbelts in school buses back in the day, I remember reading the theory at the time was thick padded seats were enough for kiddos bouncing around.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 hours ago, ykX said:

    Reality is that the computer is MUCH FASTER than the human brain.  It just these automotive systems are still far from perfection.

    Um...NO!

    First of all, a computer...computes. But its because a HUMAN made a program for the computer to compute.

    So NO! 

    A computer is NOT faster than a human brain.  A human brain designed a code for the computer to follow...

    You may be talking about artificial intelligence. And we are not there yet. People in the A.I. business say we are not far off A.I.   They say A.I. will be a thing in the next 20-50 years when computers and robots will be in our lives full with A.I. 

    But I STILL do not think autonomous driving will be a thing by then either.

    WHY?

    Because the human brain is a fantastic thing... It took us 20 000 years to get us where we are. Survival of the fittest and natural selection is the darnedest thing.  

    In a normal human, where old age has not deteriorated brain and muscles, where youth may be too foolish and not wise enough...the human eyes, the human brain, the human reflexes, the other human senses,  HUMAN INTUITION and HUMAN INSTINCT, HUMAN PERCEPTION and HUMAN EXPERIENCE all work together almost INSTANTANEOUSLY...and then there is our 20 000 year old adrenaline factor when all that that I just mentioned gets to be magnified by 1000%.   Something that computers do not do! 

    You could see this at work if you watch sports.  If you compare passed Olympic triumphs to now, or incredible sports feats. Such as speed skiing, or moguls, or boxing....or football.   When a running back is trying to squeeze through a hole, but two huge guys are blocking his way, then he sees an opening completely on the other side, shifts his body, his weight and then...ZOOM, gets through that tiny opneing that was their for a split second and he is on his way to a touchdown. 

    The way a running back processes that info.  All the while trying to receive the football from his QB. Running to the side, front, looking out for holes, looking not to get tackled, pushing away his own teamates and others trying to tackle him. Shifting his weight and his position, all the while remaining on his feet, balancing himself, sprinting all this time. Bouncing off people. Running, jumping, skipping...all this is done with his eyes, his feet, his ears(balance and actually hearing things) and his brain controls all that INSTANTLY!!!

    Or a quarter back doing the same thing as that running back. Has to make a split second decision on whether to give the football away to his running back, pass it in the air or run with it when he sees a blitz coming to him...and more often than not, the decision made was a good one as the QB does NOT get sacked, but succeeds in getting a good play done.

    An extreme skier, going down a mountain (no trails), like going down a mountain...with just his gut feeling, his athletic prowess and his ability to make a split second decision, to correct his balance, to correct direction...

    I could do hockey or baseball analogies too. The thing is, day after day, week after week, year after year, game in and game out, we see athletes do these things...

    Its remarkable how fast our brain with our muscles react to the situations that happen in front of us right this second and we make a decision right away and our bodies react to that decision without missing a beat...and we keep our balance, while we throw our balance off kilter, our brain makes the necessary adjustments to land the way we wanna land, whether we wanna land on our bum, on our feet, on our hands, and when we do land, we could bounce back and unto the next split second decision we gotta make. And we continue that cycle until our opponent has made his decisions to stop us...

    When mother nature is concerned. Sometimes mother nature gets the best of us...and we die...but sometimes we beat mother nature...as in the extreme skiing example.

    What computers may do faster than us, is actually use its computing power to solve an equation, or pump the brakes faster than we can because our leg muscles are not faster than hydraulics...but when split second decisions need to be made, and movement corrrection and reaction need to be made that instant, a trained human being is still  faster than ANY computer out there....20 000 years of evolution will do that...

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    I really want adaptive cruise control in my next car.  It is nearly impossible to search for on the used car aggregators like AutoTrader.com because there is such inconsistent use in the term.  

    i still haven't tried the adaptive cruise in our van yet.  maybe once weather gets warmer and roads reliably clean i may try it.  I'm not even sure but i wonder if the van has park assist also.  But i am not super trustworthy with that.......

    ultimately i think something like Cadillac Super Cruise is where its at.  I can tell you that it would be a godsend for travel on rural interstates.....

    7 hours ago, dfelt said:

    I will totally agree that all the various Marketing names is a confusing Shit Storm of WTF for the average driver.

    Now the Average driver seems to have gotten dumber and dumber as we have individuals in the various state and federal gov that thinks driving is more of a right than the reality that it is a privilege earned. As such we have a growing group of DMF's that should not even be driving and this has led to the following nanny devices being forced on everyone.

    Reality, Let me have the CHOICE to disable this stuff as the computer CANNOT act as fast as the brain in reading all the various issues on the road. There could be a very valid reason for me to drift out of a lane of traffic. I DO NOT want the auto fighting me to put me back in the lane especially if I am avoiding something in the road that the computer does not read properly or understand. Last thing I need is a computer trying to force me to drive over a piece of steel that will damage my auto versus moving out of the lane a bit to avoid it.

    These nanny devices need to be optional and not forced on us just like seatbelt laws that penalize you for wearing them yet you find non on the mass transit or school buses and the double standard by the police for not wearing them, talking on a cell phone and playing with their computer. :glare:

    I have lane keep on both vehicles, and both are turned off 99% of the time.  I could see a benefit to it for some drivers, who drift a lot........lane keep is another one of those things i wouldn't trust in inclement weather.

    I like things like blind spot and cross path, i don't really depend on them, but they help assure me sometimes if i feel i am being too aggressive on judging depth.

    a couple items i like, rainsense wipers, and auto high beams.  super convenient, and you can shut them off it you want.  but those two aren't really autonomous driving features per se.

    the surround view camera is a sweet option to check to see if you have parked well in a parking stall.  a short look on the screen if you're out of whack and need to repark.

    Edited by regfootball
    • Upvote 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    11 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Um...NO!

    First of all, a computer...computes. But its because a HUMAN made a program for the computer to compute.

    So NO! 

    A computer is NOT faster than a human brain.  A human brain designed a code for the computer to follow...

    Computer computes much faster than a human brain.  The fact that the program is written by a human has nothing to do with it.  Modern airplanes, helicopters and missiles  mainly  controlled by a computer which can calculate based on sensors necessary changes and do them in micro seconds.  Human can never be as fast.  Artificial intelligence is a completely different animal, computer can not make DECISIONS yet as fast or as good as human operator. 

     

    9 hours ago, regfootball said:

    i still haven't tried the adaptive cruise in our van yet.  maybe once weather gets warmer and roads reliably clean i may try it.  I'm not even sure but i wonder if the van has park assist also.  But i am not super trustworthy with that.......

    I used adaptive cruise once when my dad had a loaner loaded Mazda 6.  It actually worked really well on a highway.  You set a distance you want to follow car ahead of you and the car will slow or speed up as necessary.

    Lane assist in my experience mostly is just an annoyance. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    16 hours ago, Guest Joe said:

    The majority of these problems is because people don't read the Car's owner manual and salesman don't explain it correctly.  Again most consumers are the problem.

    Car dealers are a huge problem...they are more worried about selling warranty's and stuff through the F and I guy than selling products. I think it is immoral to force manufacturers to be legally mandated to sell through dealer networks. 

    I could see a Tesla esque future from a dealership standpoint. 

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    58 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Computer computes much faster than a human brain. 

    That is what I said...

    12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    First of all, a computer...computes.

     

    12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    What computers may do faster than us, is actually use its computing power to solve an equation, or pump the brakes faster than we can because our leg muscles are not faster than hydraulics

     

    58 minutes ago, ykX said:

    he fact that the program is written by a human has nothing to do with it.  Modern airplanes, helicopters and missiles  mainly  controlled by a computer which can calculate based on sensors necessary changes and do them in micro seconds.

    And yes it does. Our brain is the one that has deciphered to make codes for this computing power. 

    Besides, our brain ALSO computes in microseconds.  When we play sports, you think our brain does not use math and compute this mathematical equation in front of us and makes the necessary adjustments to our muscles and reflexes?

    Read my examples on my post about sports and then process that info with the examples you gave about the military...

     

    Why we do have computers in the military though?

    Because computers DO compute faster than we do and the calculations that they make are more accurate than what humans could do. At a faster rate, and we WILL make errors in adding things up. Stupid mistakes. 

    So to eliminate the "human" factor, computers control the missiles and the like.  But make no mistake about it. We could also make those calculations. If we were in control of those devices since the missiles were invented, late 1940s. That we give us 70 years worth of experience that we humans would be able to compute on the fly.  Lots of errors in the process, but in 2019, we would have perfected our formulas to use on the fly...

    Remember, we used complex computing tools  and camera lenses to drop bombs in WW2. It was an approximation of where we wanted those bombs to fall. And because we did not want to fail in the mission, we dropped a shyte load of bombs on the targets, but we hit our targets, and the surrounding areas but we did calculate for wind friction, altitude, velocity, gravity, etc...and what we learned from WW2 went on to the codes the computers use today to calculate how the smart missiles and smart bombs would travel and lock on to their target...  

     

    58 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Human can never be as fast.

    Oh....but we are...

    In certain situations. Like sports...or racing other cars on the same track...

    We see an an  autonomous Audi  go around a track faster than a normal driver ever could. True.

    What we do NOT see however is that the track is PRE-PROGRAMMED in the Audi's computer brain...

    A VETERAN race car driver, when he KNOWS that track like the back of his hand, is JUST as fast...

    What we do NOT see is that put that autonomous Audi on that track with OTHER HUMAN driven cars, because us humans have one thing that computers will NEVER have a code for, is that we are UNPREDICTABLE...THAT is ONE of our traits of many that makes us human that separates us from the rest of the animal world...

    Put that autonomous Audi on a track with other race cars, and that Audi will probably not win...as there are too many factors to compute and that WE have not PROGRAMMED it for...yet pro race car drivers do those mathematical problems every Sunday since the 1940s in NASCAR, or just about 100 years in Daytona...

    OUR experience is the same as a computer code...  A computer code that WE INVENTED...

    58 minutes ago, ykX said:

    The fact that the program is written by a human has nothing to do with it. 

    And here it is...

    And yes it does as a computer will not perform unless its programmed to do so.   And if there is an error in code. Failure is the result.

    When we fail, we also have the capacity to correct the failure almost instantaneously.  THAT is how powerful and fast our brain acts and reacts.   

    And we do this because:

    12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    In a normal human, where old age has not deteriorated brain and muscles, where youth may be too foolish and not wise enough...the human eyes, the human brain, the human reflexes, the other human senses,  HUMAN INTUITION and HUMAN INSTINCT, HUMAN PERCEPTION and HUMAN EXPERIENCE all work together almost INSTANTANEOUSLY...and then there is our 20 000 year old adrenaline factor when all that that I just mentioned gets to be magnified by 1000%.   Something that computers do not do! 

     

    58 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Artificial intelligence is a completely different animal, computer can not make DECISIONS yet as fast or as good as human operator. 

    And finally, you end up acknowledging what Ive said all along...

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @oldshurst442  Your example with autonomous Audi has nothing to do with active safety systems and more to do with auto pilot systems like we see on Tesla and Cadillac.   That is AI systems, and they are still not at the right level of development. 

    Also, your examples with sports are irrelevant too.  Fastest human reaction ever recorded is 120 milliseconds, which is extremely fast for a human but extremely slow for a computer.  Computers can react 100 to 1000 times faster.

    As was mentioned before, yes, there can be a mistake in a code, and those mistakes will have to be worked out.  

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    34 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Also, your examples with sports are irrelevant too.  Fastest human reaction ever recorded is 120 milliseconds, which is extremely fast for a human but extremely slow for a computer.  Computers can react 100 to 1000 times faster

    No they dont...

    desktop computers do NOT have limbs and muscles to do anything...unlike humans

    THIS is how the fastest computer/robot reacts...

     

     

    This is how a human reacts:

     

     

    Computers do NOT have reaction times. They have computing times...

    We have computing times, plus we have reaction times...

    Computers are a LONG LONG way before they become robots and their electrical wires are as thin as ours and our as compact and cleanly tucked away into their metal bodies, unlike ours that are nicely placed in and around our skeletons with our muscles.   

    Like I said, the human brain has 20 000 years of evolution behind it and our bodies are a marvel...

    No human created machine could top what our human brains could perform and how EFFICIENT our human bodies are and together how we act and react in our environment.  With a computer, it takes a HUMAN invented code to perform. 

    With humans...20 000 years of evolution is where we are at as of now...and we have FREE THINKING!!! 

    All this to say, all these safety gadgets in our cars, if we too the time to INSTRUCT proper DRIVING skills instead of wasting our energy creating electronic gadgets, we wouldnt have the need for electronic safety gadgets. 

    But then again, the human factor of errors and laziness and lack of attention will always bite us in the ass...

    But I repeat...NO COMPUTER is FASTER than we are acting and reacting...actual movement...when we travel.

    There are faster things than us in this world, sharks swimming in the water, cheetahs running in the wild,  including F16s that we invented...and there will come a time when those fighter aircraft will be a computer flying it, but not because we cannot process that speed, but because our bodies CANT WITHSTAND THE G FORCES...

    Make no mistake about it, our brains are fast enough to calculate the speeds and our reflexes WILL be up to the task to accommodate those speeds through evolution, but there is one area where evolution stops. We do have limits. Our bodies our not equipped to withstand those G Forces. Our brains willl be smashed up against our skulls, that is instant concussion.

    Our internal organs would be thrashing around in our rib cage...but our brain and muscles and our electrical highways of nerves and the like...are definitely up to the task...

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @oldshurst442

    1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

    desktop computers do NOT have limbs and muscles to do anything...unlike humans

    What the hell are talking about???!!   I have no access to youtube at work and frankly I have no time or patience to read your long winded responses that are way off point.  I don't need lectures from you about how hardware and software works since I happen to be an electrical engineer, and I work with both hardware and software.

    The automated braking system for example is there to warn and prevent or minimize rear end collisions.  They have been proven to eliminate or substantially reduce  rear end collisions when used appropriately.   There are other systems that more or less useful as well.  With some time, a standard will be worked out for all manufacturers, similar to what is done for seat belts, airbags, and structural integrity of the cars.   They probably soon will be crash tested to a particular standard like everything else.

    Edited by ykX
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Confusing names or not, a lot those consumers should be operating heavy machinery as it is. Autonomous driving is any oxymoron that is destined to fail in so many ways unless the basic transportation infrastructure itself is completely overhauled to accommodate it (dedicated lanes and roads for example). We can’t even have an infrastructure week much less the capability of accommodating what needs to happen to actually make this viable without utter calamity and catastrophe.  

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    32 minutes ago, ykX said:

    @oldshurst442

    What the hell are talking about???!!   I have no access to youtube at work and frankly I have no time or patience to read your long winded responses that are way off point.  I don't need lectures from you about how hardware and software works since I happen to be an electrical engineer, and I work with both hardware and software.

    The automated braking system for example is there to warn and prevent or minimize rear end collisions.  They have been proven to eliminate or substantially reduce  rear end collisions when used appropriately.   There are other systems that more or less useful as well.  With some time, a standard will be worked out for all manufacturers, similar to what is done for seat belts, airbags, and structural integrity of the cars.   They probably soon will be crash tested to a particular standard like everything else.

    Its a shame that you are en electrical engineer...

    No patience?

    yeah...

    Lets call it that...

    I

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    No they dont...

    desktop computers do NOT have limbs and muscles to do anything...unlike humans

    THIS is how the fastest computer/robot reacts...

     

     

    This is how a human reacts:

     

     

    Computers do NOT have reaction times. They have computing times...

    We have computing times, plus we have reaction times...

    Computers are a LONG LONG way before they become robots and their electrical wires are as thin as ours and our as compact and cleanly tucked away into their metal bodies, unlike ours that are nicely placed in and around our skeletons with our muscles.   

    Like I said, the human brain has 20 000 years of evolution behind it and our bodies are a marvel...

    No human created machine could top what our human brains could perform and how EFFICIENT our human bodies are and together how we act and react in our environment.  With a computer, it takes a HUMAN invented code to perform. 

    With humans...20 000 years of evolution is where we are at as of now...and we have FREE THINKING!!! 

    All this to say, all these safety gadgets in our cars, if we too the time to INSTRUCT proper DRIVING skills instead of wasting our energy creating electronic gadgets, we wouldnt have the need for electronic safety gadgets. 

    But then again, the human factor of errors and laziness and lack of attention will always bite us in the ass...

    But I repeat...NO COMPUTER is FASTER than we are acting and reacting...actual movement...when we travel.

    There are faster things than us in this world, sharks swimming in the water, cheetahs running in the wild,  including F16s that we invented...and there will come a time when those fighter aircraft will be a computer flying it, but not because we cannot process that speed, but because our bodies CANT WITHSTAND THE G FORCES...

    Make no mistake about it, our brains are fast enough to calculate the speeds and our reflexes WILL be up to the task to accommodate those speeds through evolution, but there is one area where evolution stops. We do have limits. Our bodies our not equipped to withstand those G Forces. Our brains willl be smashed up against our skulls, that is instant concussion.

    Our internal organs would be thrashing around in our rib cage...but our brain and muscles and our electrical highways of nerves and the like...are definitely up to the task...

     

    Dude...all I got to say is I was having a decent day until you bring the Cowboys in....would downvote this one if there wasn't a chance of a free meal if I visited your restaurant in Montreal.

    2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Its a shame that you are en electrical engineer...

    No patience?

    yeah...

    Lets call it that...

    I

    Lets keep things civil boys.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    16 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Dude...all I got to say is I was having a decent day until you bring the Cowboys in....would downvote this one if there wasn't a chance of a free meal if I visited your restaurant in Montreal.

    Lets keep things civil boys.

     

    Yeah...

    Call him on it...as HE does NOT want to play nice. To learn...

    2 hours ago, ykX said:

    and frankly I have no time or patience to read your long winded responses that are way off point.  I don't need lectures from you about how hardware and software works since I happen to be an electrical engineer

    As I am JUST a humble hotdog vendor and hamburger flipper...

    HE on the other hand...HE is smarter than I and HE has NO time for me...

     

    16 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Dude...all I got to say is I was having a decent day until you bring the Cowboys in....would downvote this one

    PHOQUE the Dallas Cowboys!!!

    Look at what a HUMAN BEING was able to do....THAT is the message...I couldnt care less what the dude's uniform was...

    All I care is that dude's athletic ability and brain allowed him to do...

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    All I want is a dog that does not s#!t on my hardwood floor...looks like the good gentleman from New jersey advocates technology that could provide that.

    9 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    PHOQUE the Dallas Cowboys!!!

    Look at what a HUMAN BEING was able to do....THAT is the message...I couldnt care less what the dude's uniform was...

    All I care is that dude's athletic ability and brain allowed him to do...

    All references to the Cowboys are offensive. I am triggered and need a safe space.

    13 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    Food 🤤 Food

    @oldshurst442 Pictures please of your food! :drool:

    Better that pictures of his Ford....what a difference one letter can make. Don't like Fords any more than I like dogs s#!tting on my floor. And you all that 'blu was the only angry old man yelling at people to get off of his grass.

    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, A Horse With No Name said:

     

     I am triggered and need a safe space.

    Well...that is the ONE area where computers excel and humans fail...

    Although having emotions actually IS a wonderful thing. So...I take that back! 

     

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Well...that is the ONE area where computers excel and humans fail...

    Although having emotions actually IS a wonderful thing. So...I take that back! 

     

    Emotionless cars are a bad thing. Driving to st Louis and back over the weekend has reminded me about just exactly how bland the automotive landscape has become.

    Edited by A Horse With No Name
    spelling

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Emotionless cars are a bad thing. Driving to st Louis and back over the weekend has reminded me about just exactly how bland the automotive landscape has become.

    What bland auto Emotion less scaring attacked you? 🤔

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    38 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Call him on it...as HE does NOT want to play nice. To learn...

    Dude, I am trying to explain to you and you are just rumbling random things.  It seems to me you are the one that doesn't want to listen or learn.  

     

    4 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

    No they dont...

    Here is your response to everything I wrote.  I gave a number of semi scientific examples but you don't listen.  In that case why should I waste yours and mine time?

     

    38 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    As I am JUST a humble hotdog vendor and hamburger flipper...

    HE on the other hand...HE is smarter than I and HE has NO time for me...

    Nobody is claiming to be smarter than anyone.  I am just trying to say that I am familiar enough with  similar electronic hardware and software.  

    Edited by ykX
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    6 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Dude, I am trying to explain to you and you are just rumbling random things.  It seems to me you are the one that doesn't want to listen or learn.  

     

    Here is your response to everything I wrote.  I gave a number of semi scientific examples but you don't listen.  In that case why should I waste yours and mine time?

     

    Nobody is claiming to be smarter than anyone.  I am just trying to say that I am familiar enough with  similar electronic hardware and software.  

    You seemed perfectly rational and sane to me anyways,

    • Thanks 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The question isn't how fast humans are... it's how distracted they are.  That's what the nannies are there for because most humans are too busy texting or updating facebook to have their full attention on the road.   Even the fastest human reactions won't rival computers if the human is distracted by their phone.

    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    36 minutes ago, ykX said:

    Dude, I am trying to explain to you and you are just rumbling random things.  It seems to me you are the one that doesn't want to listen or learn.  

     

    Here is your response to everything I wrote.  I gave a number of semi scientific examples but you don't listen.  In that case why should waste yours and mine time?

     

    Nobody is claiming to be smarter than anyone.  I am just trying to say that I am familiar enough with  similar electronic hardware and software

    Ummm...NO!

    And I GAVE YOU EXAMPLES ON REAL LIFE...and on the Random Thoughts thread (where you might not have gone to that thread, understandably so) then you would realize even more what I am trying to convey...

    software...

    Human deciphered programs for computers to follow.  And YOU yourself said:

    5 hours ago, ykX said:

    As was mentioned before, yes, there can be a mistake in a code, and those mistakes will have to be worked out.  

    Electronic hardware...

    If you thought about the human body and human brain as a machine, using our brain and central nervous system as our electronic hardware AND software, then you would realize where I am coming from. 

    All that I said is and will always BE relevant.  All that was said by ME is just COMPUTER programming. Programmed by humans using THEIR brains... 

    It does not matter what domain we are talking about.

    The point is that the human brain acts and reacts FASTER than any computer as a computer NEEDS a PROGRAM to work...

    The program that a computer has does in fact COMPUTE the mathematical codes FASTER than what we as humans can do. 

    BUT...in no way does it react faster than what WE do as humans...

    What do humans do? 

    Well...

    The very first Olympics. The shot put and the long jump and the discus throw. The human brain, 2500 plus years ago, used math to make us humans try to jump or throw farther than our other human competitor. 

    Angle of approach, speed and momentum to achieve long distance.  You know...when we jump, we rock are bodies back and forth to achieve momentum and we try to get the ideal angle to launch ourselves. 

    Well. We perfected that. Our brain perfected that. THAT was even before we created mathematical equations.

    Over the course of our existence , we deciphered mathematics and we also invented computers to...compute...

    1110010010011100101001

    1001001111000100100100

    1110001110010101001001

    1100100111000011110101

     

    A computer will calculate faster than we will ever do. But...those calculations are limited in the codes and programs we have made for the computer to compute. Different computer and robotics with different codes do different things.

    Our brains, do not process data that way. But our brains DO process math, and through our 20 000 years of evolution, use our reflexes and muscles and eye sight and our hearing to act and react in our environment.  And our athletic ability proves what we can do. And...computers if not programmed to run a simple task as simple as  running the bases in baseball, will NOT perform that task.

    If we program the computer to run the bases, then it will run them...but how will it run the bases if a computer does not have limbs?

    Oh...it will calculate how fast we humans run bases. Oh... it may even be able to hit a 150 MPH fast ball that us humans cant hit let alone throw, but, will it be able catch a ball, look where the runner is running, decide if it has to throw at 3rd, or 2nd base or make an out at first or tag the runner all the while leaping to catch the ball,  actually catching it,  landing in a position to actually throw the ball,  making the decision where to throw the ball, at an angle where the ball will get to its destination ON target...all in the a time frame of a second or two at the max?

    Because...we humans do that...

    And if you do not want to listen to that...then I cannot help you. 

     

    PS: military computer radars and lidars and the such lock unto SEVERAL targets at once  and do the necessary calculations to hit their targets FASTER than we can ever react to. True. 

    But those computers are still performing MATHEMATICAL equations PROGRAMMED by US! 

    A military computer cannot play baseball...the actual game. Not in video game format. THE actual game...

     

    If you noticed...the reference of me explaining an infield play is similar to what military radars and lidars and missile launchers do...but us humans actually do it. Our bodies and our brains do it. 

    We have perfected our brain power and our reflexes and muscles to act and react quickly. 

    US...our bodies. Our brains.

    The computer just follows codes...codes that WE programmed the computer to follow.

    So yeah...computers are NOT faster than the human brain...

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    These systems also have more "eyes" than we do. It is virtually impossible for us to be looking both fore and aft at the same time and for our brains to process each view separately.  Computers can do that... even have a 360-degree view of the car's surroundings.   

    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    39 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    The question isn't how fast humans are... it's how distracted they are.  That's what the nannies are there for because most humans are too busy texting or updating facebook to have their full attention on the road.   Even the fastest human reactions won't rival computers if the human is distracted by their phone.

    My daughter and I took an uber in Buffalo where the driver was on Facebook the whole trip. Daughter reported driver...uber was not happy.

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    56 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    These systems also have more "eyes" than we do. It is virtually impossible for us to be looking both fore and aft at the same time and for our brains to process each view separately.  Computers can do that... even have a 360-degree view of the car's surroundings.   

    There is no need for that many "eyes" when we drive and ALL of us our FOCUSED in OUR driving...

    But even then...our reflexes are fast that we CAN correct errors in others or our own...

    But this is what "eyes" you are referring to though?

    Because we are far far away from autonomous driving...these are  compilations  of Tesla Model S autopilot failures that TESLA ALWAYS says that HUMAN drivers NEED to be ALERT to take over the driving...

     

    because when we are alert, our brains do a fantastic job of avoiding accidents. Our reflexes, our experiences and our brain power do that!

     

    THIS is what other kinds of humans do with our brain power and athletic prowess

     

    We could even...fly...well...glide... I mentioned the very first Olympics when the Ancient Greeks dreamed of flying. Hell...Wilbur and Orville never thought this would happen either just over 100 years ago, but here we are...what OUR brain power could calculate to do... 

     

    And if you are gonna skip these videos...at least watch this last one...to see how well and FAST our brains and our athletic prowess processes mathematical equations...

     

     

    You guys you try all you want to discredit me...Im GIVING VISUAL proof for god's sake! 

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    7 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Even computer eyes can get blinded... and that's what happened with the Tesla. 

    Sure.

    But...still does not change the fact that a human brain still processes the info fast enough to correct any imperfections to which Tesla says that in auto-pilot mode...a HUMAN is still required to take over the wheel if need be... 

    Computers are NOT faster than the human brain... 

    The human brain is a magnificent organ. Its capable of directing all kinds of information, controlling all the motor skills while making decisions, correct decisions and reapplying information and readjusting motor skills at a blink of an eye.  It does that with the nervous system, the eyes and the human limbs. All communicate without a lapse in time...in perfect harmony. 

    Something that computers do NOT do!  All computers do is just read code...and act according to what that code says for it to do...granted. Today's computers have billions and billions amounts of code that computers process. It still takes a helluva lot of electricity, electric motors, servers and computing power to do so...

    We, as humans...all we got is just 1 brain, 2 eyes, 2 ears, 4 limbs and a central  nervous system...producing enough electrical pulses tom power our muscles. And with the videos that I have posted both in the the Random Thoughts Thread and in this one, goes to show you you well our brain functions...WITHOUT codes and programs...\

    Our codes and our programs is our evolution...

    ITS WHAT WE DO NATURALLY!!!!

    Therefore...NO computer...so far...is as fast as we are. 

    We do not compute as fast as a computer. But we ACT AND REACT in our environment faster that it! 

    It aint hard to comprehend that!  Unless of course you guys do not want to admit Im right...

    Not the first time either...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Again, these computers are not necessarily designed to be faster. They're designed to be paying attention 100% of the time.  Even someone watching the road can be day-dreaming and not see something.  I catch myself on mental autopilot often during my commute... not the best place to be when driving. 

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Again, these computers are not necessarily designed to be faster. They're designed to be paying attention 100% of the time.  Even someone watching the road can be day-dreaming and not see something.  I catch myself on mental autopilot often during my commute... not the best place to be when driving. 

    Well...

    humans were never designed to be driving, flying...going in excess of...what?  3 mph walking and about 15 mph running in a short amount of time...

    Yet...we evolved to be doing just that. To make machines that make us go faster than the speed of sound and our brains and muscles act fast enough to control that machine.

    Or average joes to be driving their cars going 60 mph on a daily basis and we control that car. Our brains and our reflexes our eyes adapting to those speeds quite easily I might add...

    Sports and flying aircraft at the speed of sound does take a certain amount of training...I will admit. 

    But we have evolved and  our brains now does 60 mph...instead of 15mph...

    And we do it quite good...

    Image result for drifting gif

     

    I repeat...computers are NOT faster than the human brain...

     

    Edited by oldshurst442

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 1/28/2019 at 11:46 AM, Drew Dowdell said:

    According to research issued by CCAP41, 40 percent of Americans ARE REALLY FCKN STUPID...

     

    • Haha 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    The question isn't how fast humans are... it's how distracted they are.  That's what the nannies are there for because most humans are too busy texting or updating facebook to have their full attention on the road.   Even the fastest human reactions won't rival computers if the human is distracted by their phone.

    Well...yeah...

    To which I have mentioned that in the first post....

    But...AGAIN...

    COMPUTERS are NOT faster than the human brain...

    Even the nannies react slow because all the billions and billions of codes that WE have programmed into the nanny...there is always something that does NOT compute well...

    And WE ALL have ADMITTED to it!!!

    7 hours ago, ykX said:

    yes, there can be a mistake in a code, and those mistakes will have to be worked out.  

     

    43 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Even computer eyes can get blinded... and that's what happened with the Tesla. 

    But I have shown how the human brain...*SIGH* 

    THROUGH EVOLUTION...20 000 years of evolution...our brain CORRECTS errors like these and takes the proper measures to adjust and well...we adjust...sometimes we dont and die...

    But sometimes we do alright for ourselves...

    yet another phoquing video...

    Just listen to what he says...if you wanna...because I KNOW you guys do NOT want to admit YOU are wrong...

     

     

    • Sad 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 1/28/2019 at 12:04 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

    I really want adaptive cruise control in my next car.  It is nearly impossible to search for on the used car aggregators like AutoTrader.com because there is such inconsistent use in the term.  

    I agree 2000%! 1: I want it as well. 2: It really is almost impossible to narrow your vehicle search results down to ones with or without it. That's gear-grinding. 

    On 1/28/2019 at 2:53 PM, dfelt said:

    Yes Seatbelts save lives, but it should still be OPTIONAL. Not enforced fined use. There are times NOT wearing a seatbelt can be safer than wearing it, 4x4 off road is a perfect example. 

    I agree that seat belts should be optional even though I wear one 100% of the time, even moving vehicles around the driveway out of habit. I think it is ridiculous that it is a law(at least in IL) to wear a seat belt. Insurance companies probably love that. they get to charge people the same and there are less overall injuries. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    4 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    Just 40 percent?

    *counts G&G members*

    Seems about right... 😂

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    11 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    *counts G&G members*

    Seems about right... 😂

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    19 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

     

    comic-bob-and-doug-e991927d.jpeg?ver=154

    waynes-world-thumbs-up.gif

     

    • Haha 3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    http://news.mit.edu/2014/in-the-blink-of-an-eye-0116

    Quote

     

    In the blink of an eye

    MIT neuroscientists find the brain can identify images seen for as little as 13 milliseconds.

    Anne Trafton, MIT News Office 
    January 16, 2014

    Imagine seeing a dozen pictures flash by in a fraction of a second. You might think it would be impossible to identify any images you see for such a short time. However, a team of neuroscientists from MIT has found that the human brain can process entire images that the eye sees for as little as 13 milliseconds — the first evidence of such rapid processing speed.That speed is far faster than the 100 milliseconds suggested by previous studies. In the new study, which appears in the journal Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, researchers asked subjects to look for a particular type of image, such as “picnic” or “smiling couple,” as they viewed a series of six or 12 images, each presented for between 13 and 80 milliseconds.“The fact that you can do that at these high speeds indicates to us that what vision does is find concepts. That’s what the brain is doing all day long — trying to understand what we’re looking at,” says Mary Potter, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and senior author of the study.This rapid-fire processing may help direct the eyes, which shift their gaze three times per second, to their next target, Potter says. “The job of the eyes is not only to get the information into the brain, but to allow the brain to think about it rapidly enough to know what you should look at next. So in general we’re calibrating our eyes so they move around just as often as possible consistent with understanding what we’re seeing,” she says.Other authors of the paper are former MIT postdoc Brad Wyble, now at Pennsylvania State University, postdoc Carl Hagmann, and research assistant Emily McCourt.Rapid identificationAfter visual input hits the retina, the information flows into the brain, where information such as shape, color, and orientation is processed. In previous studies, Potter has shown that the human brain can correctly identify images seen for as little as 100 milliseconds. In the new study, she and her colleagues decided to gradually increase the speeds until they reached a point where subjects’ answers were no better than if they were guessing. All images were new to the viewers.The researchers expected they might see a dramatic decline in performance around 50 milliseconds, because other studies have suggested that it takes at least 50 milliseconds for visual information to flow from the retina to the “top” of the visual processing chain in the brain and then back down again for further processing by so-called “re-entrant loops.” These processing loops were believed necessary to confirm identification of a particular scene or object.However, the MIT team found that although overall performance declined, subjects continued to perform better than chance as the researchers dropped the image exposure time from 80 milliseconds to 53 milliseconds, then 40 milliseconds, then 27, and finally 13 — the fastest possible rate with the computer monitor being used.“This didn’t really fit with the scientific literature we were familiar with, or with some common assumptions my colleagues and I have had for what you can see,” Potter says.Potter believes one reason for the subjects’ better performance in this study may be that they were able to practice fast detection as the images were presented progressively faster, even though each image was unfamiliar. The subjects also received feedback on their performance after each trial, allowing them to adapt to this incredibly fast presentation. At the highest rate, subjects were seeing new images more than 20 times as fast as vision typically absorbs information.“We think that under these conditions we begin to show more evidence of knowledge than in previous experiments where people hadn’t really been expecting to find success, and didn’t look very hard for it,” Potter says.Simon Thorpe, director of the Centre de Recherche Cerveau & Cognition at the University of Toulouse, says the results “illustrate beautifully” that the brain can make sense of briefly presented images.

     

     

    https://www.scienceabc.com/humans/how-fast-can-the-human-brain-process-images.html

     

    Quote

     

    How Fast Can The Human Brain Process Images?

     

    Have you ever cursed yourself for being too slow or for your brain being a bit dull? If so, give yourself a break and prepare for a new cool fact about your brain that will ease your worries!

    What if I told you that your brain can process certain types of information within as little as 13 milliseconds. To put that in perspective, it takes you 300 to 400 milliseconds to blink your eye, which is 1/3 of a second. This means that your brain can identify what it’s looking at approximately 30 times faster than you can blink your eye!

    giphy (13)

    Research: Theme of an image

    Scenic information in the environment hits the retina, which transfers it through electrical signals to the area of the brain that processes visual information, where it can then be interpreted. Scientists in the past thought that a rudimentary interpretation of these images to understand their general theme took at least 1/10 of a second. However, new research conducted by researchers at MIT’s Brain and Cognitive Sciences department has helped to reveal this fascinating new fact.
    wa40l

    Method of study

    In their study, participants were rapidly presented with a set of six or twelve images one after the other with each image being exposed for 13 to 80 milliseconds.  Participants were asked to detect a picture specified by a name (e.g., smiling couple) that was given just before or immediately after the sequence. As predicted, as the exposure times decreased, participant performance of the task declined, but they could still accurately detect the majority of the time. Even at 13 milliseconds, participant responses was more than 50% accurate, suggesting that they were not just guessing. Want to try it? Look at the image below and see if a ‘car and street’ image is available. The images are changing at a speed of 200 ms which is still quite slow.

    wa2x9

    However, there’s a catch. There is a small possibility that they could report the accurate description of an image because after a while, they were more skilled at detecting in short times. Also, researchers couldn’t present the images for shorter than 13 milliseconds due to technical difficulties. To prevent both these factors, further research should be conducted by flashing different images individually for shorter times to arrive at a stronger conclusion and establish an average threshold for human beings visual recognition speed.

    In order to remember the finer details of an image, we would definitely need more time than 13ms.

    More trivia? In case of information that we see, images or scene related information is processed faster than words or sentences. Different and more steps of processing are involved in reading a word which makes it longer. Take a look at the image below. Which one did you understand more quickly?

    source: rhdeepexploration.wordpress.com

    source: rhdeepexploration.wordpress.com

    How fast is our brain?

    Our brain has around 100 billion neurons in it. 100 Billion! That’s a lot of processing power. This lets us have responses which feel instantaneous. It takes 400-500 milliseconds (1 millisecond = 0.001 seconds) on average for us to respond to visual stimuli. If you consider that half of this time is spent in second motor signal and giving the response, the time taken to just analyze and decide on the response is really low. Neuronal activity of around 50-100 milliseconds is enough to create the information and approximately 20-30 milliseconds are required to identify and discriminate complex visual stimuli.

    Why can’t we calculate as fast as a Supercomputer?

    So now we know that our brain is really fast. But we still need computers to analyze things or perform calculations. It is said that a computer whose power is comparable to the brain could process more than 38 thousand trillion operations per second and hold about 3,584 terabytes of memory. Overwhelming, isn’t it? So much power and we can’t clear our exams properly. IBM’s BlueGene supercomputer is one of the fastest supercomputers. It has a computational capability of 92 trillion operations per second and 8 terabytes of storage. So why can’t we be that quick?

    Well, the difference lies in how the brain and a computer function. There can be no simple comparison between a code being executed and a neuron firing. A supercomputer, when given a particular operation, concentrates it’s computing power to figure out and complete the operation. It can dedicate its power to specific function. But where the supercomputer is still

    lagging behind, is having a single conscious thought.

    This is where our brain is different and brilliant. Our brain has multiple parallel processes to carry out at the same time. One of them is keeping us alive. It is constantly active. Since your birth and until your death, the brain works for 24 hours, keeping track of everything and coordinating everything. External stimuli received through our 5 senses is another major task. And the biggest one, keeping us self-aware. Its processing power is stretched across various functions which it cannot stop to just to perform one single function.

    So, haven’t you always wished that you could be superhuman and process information at lightning speed? Turns out that you already can, but you simply don’t know how impressive your brain truly is. Maybe you should get practicing and flex those mental muscles a bit more often.

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    27 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

    You frogger and Suave are not stupid....so the logical conclusion is...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/geeks-weigh-in-does-a-human-think-faster-than-a-computer/

     

     

    Quote

     

    A GFlop represents a billion operations per second. Now, you’re thinking of that Monday morning in class when your professor asked you to perform a simple calculation and your mind went blank. You’re ready to chalk up another point to computers, right? Wrong.

    While the transmission of electrical impulses may be slower in the brain than over wire, the processing power of the brain is represented by not one, but thousands of processors backed into one major super computer. One example is the retina, which is sort of like your computer web cam, in that it transmits light (images) to the brain for processing. Except the retina itself has its own processing power, sort of like a subprocessor – 100 million neurons packed into a one centimeter by one millimeter space.

     

    humaneye

    This stunning little processor is capable of processing ten images, each of about a million light points, every single second. Not only that, the data isn’t transmitted over a single fiber of nerve cells, but over a cable to the brain made up of a million of these fibers, all transmitting bits of data at the same time in parallel. If you multiply the processing power of this volume of neurons by the overall size of the average 1,500 cubic cm human brain, the overall processing power of the brain is about 100 million, million operations per second. For those of you who are trying to do the math with your super computer brain – that’s over 100,000 times more processing power than today’s cutting-edge super computer.

    Image and Language Recognition, Learning and Common Sense

    If our brains are such super computers, then why do we feel so dense and so slow sometimes? I don’t know about you, but I’m horrible at doing calculations in my head. The problem is that people think of computers only in terms of how many calculations it can do per second. The truth is, when it comes to intelligence there’s so much more to process than calculations alone. How do you calculate what the tone of someone’s voice implies they are really saying?  How do you calculate the irony of a joke that, when taken literally, makes no sense at all? This is where the true power of the human brain makes itself known.

    jokemilkHave you ever had a friend who was such a genius that they could perform the most astounding calculations in their head, or they could fathom the most complex equations or problems imaginable – yet when faced with the simplest common-sense joke, they just didn’t get it? This is the major difference between a human brain and a computer.

     

    Author Gary Marcus writes, in his book on the human mind that, “The fundamental difference between computers and the human mind is in the basic organization of memory.”

    What he means is that a computer organizes information in a logical way. To retrieve data, the computer uses logical storage locations. A human brain, on the other hand, remembers where information is stored based on cues. Those cues are other pieces of information or memories connected to the information you need to retrieve. This means that the human mind can connect an almost unlimited number of concepts in a variety of ways, and then sometimes disconnect or recreate connections based on new information. This allows the human to step outside the boundaries of what has already been learned – leading to new art and new inventions that are the trademark of the human race.

    There are a lot of other ways the human mind blows computers away – it can self repair itself, it can produce chemical reactions within its host body to induce instinctive reactions and protect itself from danger, it can handle every last function required to operate the machine of the human body while simultaneously processing information from outside that body, and most importantly it can continue learning and building new connections within that contextual storage array in ways that seem infinite.

    In short, the answer to the question “Does a human think faster than a computer?” is yes. And it can also do a whole lot more than that.

     

     

    3 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    You frogger and Suave are not stupid....so the logical conclusion is...

    Thanx, but you are being tooo kind for me.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Tesla Model Y appears to be plagued with poor sales, despite the company slapping 3 grand on the hoods a few months after their debut. GLOBAL sales thru June stand at 13,415, barely surpassing the Model X (12,461). Meanwhile, the Model 3 stands at 142,346. Chevy Bolt, globally, is at 11,496 thru June.
    • Final Story is an interesting read on the Ban of new gasoline auto sales starting in 2035 and how California Power Companies are seaking a streamlined approach to permitting by the Government if they are to build and install what is needed in power generation and grid distribution of created power to support the demands of the EV auto's by 2035. Power companies are wanting approval to build Vehicle-to-Grid or V2G technology to allow the cars that have full batteries to discharge back to the grid during high demand times. This would be a battery buffer on wheels approach to optimizing power distribution. Power Companies of California are expecting a jump of 25% more electricity demand by 2035 when this ice ban goes in effect. Having auto's charge up during the day when there is a surplus of solar generated electricity is a need as is having battery banks so that in the evening when solar drops off but AC and other needs are needed it can offset the demand. Also changing to LED to reduce power consumption by all light sources needs to happen sooner than later so reduce electricity waste. Smart Charging, Smart Storage and changes in how we do things such as excessive lights on at night. A change that will change how we see and do things. https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1129747_report-california-will-need-massive-grid-upgrades-for-2035-electric-car-push
    • FORD Anouncement - Today Ford announced their deal with Unifor in Canada of their new national labour agreement. Ford will be investing $1.8 Billion CAD to rebuild the Oakville Assembly Complex from an ICE production facility to a full time BEV manufacturing facility. https://electrek.co/2020/09/28/ford-investment-produce-battery-electric-vehicles-canada/ To Quote the deal from the story above: The deal includes several new benefits for Ford employees in Canada: Competitive alternative work schedules to maximize production flexibility Enhanced temporary employee program 2.5% wage increase twice over the life of the agreement C$7,250 ratification bonus for full-time permanent employees and $500 for temporary employees Reduced grow-in period for new hires from 11 years to eight years Interesting Read on the VW ID.4 and the Nissan Ariya EV's. Chasing the Tesla Model Y is a review of the industry and the slew of compact sized EV CUVs that are coming to market over the next 2 years. Interesting take on this is as follows: More than 200 miles of range is the price of entry, and a 300-mile version is probably needed to reassure nervous shoppers and attract attention; Fast charging at 125 kw is the minimum for the next few years, and 350-kw charging is coming on fast; $40,000 is the entry price point for an EV crossover, but it still takes convoluted math to produce an “effective price” that’s as low as the highest-selling entries; and Electric pickup trucks may get the buzz, but compact crossovers are where automakers see EV volume coming. A true generic look when you see these two side by side. https://chargedevs.com/features/volkswagen-id-4-nissan-ariya-bring-ev-drive-to-compact-crossovers-chasing-tesla-model-y/
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. TaurusSHO
      TaurusSHO
      (25 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...