Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

Roborace - Driverless Formula E support series


  • Please log in to reply
946 replies to this topic

#751 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 6,435 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 13 December 2017 - 08:38

it's one thing to design an AI system to drive at legal speeds and do legal things, completely different to make one that pushes the limit. There are a lot of problems to solve before it can go anywhere near a competitive pace while still being reliable.

The car in the video was slow because is was properly tuned to make sure it doesn't crash :)



Advertisement

#752 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 13 December 2017 - 14:12

But did you see the robot doing the back flip ? 

 

Yeah. When Mark Webber tied that in his car he wasn't completely successful.



#753 king_crud

king_crud
  • Member

  • 4,296 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 14 December 2017 - 10:14

Those things are amazing. You seen the latest one where the robot does a backflip?


Robot Wars have had backflipping robots for years

#754 Kodza

Kodza
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 14 December 2017 - 19:49

Are you serious to discuss machines without drivers as racing event?

 

Exhibition without point, that is this "circus"



#755 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 14 December 2017 - 20:51

Are you serious to discuss machines without drivers as racing event?
 
Exhibition without point, that is this "circus"


If they’re racing, yes, deadly serious.

Dog racing is racing, and they don’t have drivers.

#756 Kodza

Kodza
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 15 December 2017 - 01:14

Payas, yes dog racing is racing. But there is blood and flesh, here is only machine.

Can you go and congratulate to machine No. 22?

Sorry, pointless discussion.



#757 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 15 December 2017 - 02:43

The machines are still created by people, and they can go up and collect the trophies.



#758 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 08:21

Payas, yes dog racing is racing. But there is blood and flesh, here is only machine.
Can you go and congratulate to machine No. 22?
Sorry, pointless discussion.


Yes, just as I can congratulate a dog. You know that I can speak to my phone and it understands me, and that’s “just” a machine. Then of course you can congratulate the team behind it, as john says.

Anything can be raced, provided there’s more than one of them. To go back to your original comment, there’s probably more point to this series than human piloted cars, because it’s related to development of AI. If you’re not interested, just don’t watch.

#759 maximilian

maximilian
  • Member

  • 4,804 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 15:38

The machines are still created by people, and they can go up and collect the trophies.

 

Once we get to the point where machines are directly created by machines, there won't be "competition" anymore... because the machines will collaborate for the greater machine good!   ;)



Advertisement

#760 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 20:05

Yes, just as I can congratulate a dog. You know that I can speak to my phone and it understands me, and that’s “just” a machine. Then of course you can congratulate the team behind it, as john says.

Anything can be raced, provided there’s more than one of them. To go back to your original comment, there’s probably more point to this series than human piloted cars, because it’s related to development of AI. If you’re not interested, just don’t watch.

 

Yes, we tried to race snails when I was in 6th-form. It proved quite tricky to keep them on the track (rather like modern F1).



#761 SlipLtd

SlipLtd
  • Member

  • 977 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 20:07

What if it never works because truly advanced AI considers going around in circles as fast as possible, well... pointless?

What if the greatest development that comes out of this endeavour is a realization that competition is purely human? An irrational pursuit fuelled by ego, hubris, machismo and testosterone. An activity whose only byproducts are adrenaline, entertainment with some material and financial ressource waste.

Edited by SlipLtd, 15 December 2017 - 20:07.


#762 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 15 December 2017 - 21:17

All of those companies are well ahead of Roborace on this tech, they don't need a racing series to help them with any of their autonomous car development.

Fully autonomous cars will hardly ever be legal anyway

#763 Stephane

Stephane
  • Member

  • 2,184 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 22:21

What if it never works because truly advanced AI considers going around in circles as fast as possible, well... pointless?

What if the greatest development that comes out of this endeavour is a realization that competition is purely human? An irrational pursuit fuelled by ego, hubris, machismo and testosterone. An activity whose only byproducts are adrenaline, entertainment with some material and financial ressource waste.

 

Well, we know this already



#764 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 22:54

Fully autonomous cars will hardly ever be legal anyway


I’m sure they will one day.

#765 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 15 December 2017 - 23:04

I’m sure they will one day.

In year 2150 maybe?

To talk about autonomous driving and autopilots, lets put the example of planes... they fly in straightline with pretty much no obstacles in the way and are much easier to make them autonomous, yet in all those years they still need the pilot to be there all the time. Why is that?

And in cars, with roads, with corners, and lots of traffic, its a thousand times more complicated. I think its almost impossible to make a perfect software algorythm for fully autonomous and fully safe driving cars, too many variables and too many unexpected stuff can happen.

#766 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 15 December 2017 - 23:07

In year 2150 maybe?To talk about autonomous driving and autopilots, lets put the example of planes... they fly in straightline with pretty much no obstacles in the way and are much easier to make them autonomous, yet in all those years they still need the pilot to be there all the time. Why is that?And in cars, with roads, with corners, and lots of traffic, its a thousand times more complicated. I think its almost impossible to make a perfect software algorythm for fully autonomous and fully safe driving cars, too many variables and too many unexpected stuff can happen.


Sure, maybe in 2150. Given how close the likes of google are today, I expect to see it in my lifetime though. Of course it’s complicated, but if our error prone squishy minds can handle it, a machine should be able to too.

#767 BalanceUT

BalanceUT
  • Member

  • 2,055 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 16 December 2017 - 00:38

Fully autonomous cars will hardly ever be legal anyway

One of the silliest things I've ever seen written on these forums. 



#768 BalanceUT

BalanceUT
  • Member

  • 2,055 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 16 December 2017 - 00:58

Fully autonomous cars will hardly ever be legal anyway

 

I’m sure they will one day.

I expect my 8 year old daughter will probably learn how to drive in 2025. I expect even then that she will be sharing the road routinely with autonomous vehicles (mostly trucks, though some cars will be out there). I expect that she will drive in a car for the last time about 10 to 15 years later (2035 to 2040) and that within a few years after that it will be illegal for a human to drive a car on the common roadways. Driving will be relegated to recreation only, somewhat like horse riding is now. 

 

Comparison: My grandmother was born in 1906. The automobile had been around for the early adopter's set for several decades, of course. She was 12 years old (1918) before she rode in an automobile for the first time (she lived in rural Texas, just a few miles west of Fort Worth). It was an extremely rapid transition from the 19-teens to the practical adoption of the automobile for nearly everyone. The horse went from mainstream transportation to the margins of utility to nearly only recreational and specialty use over the course of a few decades. (My grandmother told me the story of her first ride in an automobile in 1990 as we flew together in a jet airliner from Dallas to Albuquerque.)

 

Technology advances much more quickly now. The economic push is HUGE for autonomous vehicles. The most common occupation in many US states is 'truck driver' which is often a local delivery person. The way to reduce the costs of delivery is to reduce the skill level needed for the person on the truck, maybe eliminate the person on the truck entirely. Once the data is accumulating that autonomous vehicles are responsible for fewer accidents than their human-driven counterparts, the push to make driving illegal on the common roadways will accelerate. 

It's gonna happen, and sooner than a lot of people think. 

 



#769 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 01:33

In year 2150 maybe?

To talk about autonomous driving and autopilots, lets put the example of planes... they fly in straightline with pretty much no obstacles in the way and are much easier to make them autonomous, yet in all those years they still need the pilot to be there all the time. Why is that?

And in cars, with roads, with corners, and lots of traffic, its a thousand times more complicated. I think its almost impossible to make a perfect software algorythm for fully autonomous and fully safe driving cars, too many variables and too many unexpected stuff can happen.

 

Ah, but the future I see (don't like it, I should say) is where autonomous vehicles will come quickly because governments want them - so human-driven vehicles will be outlawed by increasing taxes on human-drive vehicles, providing huge incentives to go autonomous, making the most convenient roads autonomous vehicles only, steering people to abandon private vehicles in favor of subscribing to a services that will send an autonomous vehicle to you within a few minutes of you asking for one (for a price hard-to-resist price that will, of course, go up as time goes on).

 

Just like there's little choice but to use LED lighting now, there will be little choice but to use autonomous vehicles in the (quite near) future.



#770 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 07:39

I expect my 8 year old daughter will probably learn how to drive in 2025. I expect even then that she will be sharing the road routinely with autonomous vehicles (mostly trucks, though some cars will be out there). I expect that she will drive in a car for the last time about 10 to 15 years later (2035 to 2040) and that within a few years after that it will be illegal for a human to drive a car on the common roadways. Driving will be relegated to recreation only, somewhat like horse riding is now. 
 
Comparison: My grandmother was born in 1906. The automobile had been around for the early adopter's set for several decades, of course. She was 12 years old (1918) before she rode in an automobile for the first time (she lived in rural Texas, just a few miles west of Fort Worth). It was an extremely rapid transition from the 19-teens to the practical adoption of the automobile for nearly everyone. The horse went from mainstream transportation to the margins of utility to nearly only recreational and specialty use over the course of a few decades. (My grandmother told me the story of her first ride in an automobile in 1990 as we flew together in a jet airliner from Dallas to Albuquerque.)
 
Technology advances much more quickly now. The economic push is HUGE for autonomous vehicles. The most common occupation in many US states is 'truck driver' which is often a local delivery person. The way to reduce the costs of delivery is to reduce the skill level needed for the person on the truck, maybe eliminate the person on the truck entirely. Once the data is accumulating that autonomous vehicles are responsible for fewer accidents than their human-driven counterparts, the push to make driving illegal on the common roadways will accelerate. 
It's gonna happen, and sooner than a lot of people think.


I don’t think human driven cars will ever be illegal, except maybe on certain designated roads. People are still allowed to ride horses and ride bicycles on public roads, except on motorways. I’d imagine something like that happening.

#771 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 16 December 2017 - 09:00

I expect my 8 year old daughter will probably learn how to drive in 2025. I expect even then that she will be sharing the road routinely with autonomous vehicles (mostly trucks, though some cars will be out there). I expect that she will drive in a car for the last time about 10 to 15 years later (2035 to 2040) and that within a few years after that it will be illegal for a human to drive a car on the common roadways. Driving will be relegated to recreation only, somewhat like horse riding is now. 
 
Comparison: My grandmother was born in 1906. The automobile had been around for the early adopter's set for several decades, of course. She was 12 years old (1918) before she rode in an automobile for the first time (she lived in rural Texas, just a few miles west of Fort Worth). It was an extremely rapid transition from the 19-teens to the practical adoption of the automobile for nearly everyone. The horse went from mainstream transportation to the margins of utility to nearly only recreational and specialty use over the course of a few decades. (My grandmother told me the story of her first ride in an automobile in 1990 as we flew together in a jet airliner from Dallas to Albuquerque.)
 
Technology advances much more quickly now. The economic push is HUGE for autonomous vehicles. The most common occupation in many US states is 'truck driver' which is often a local delivery person. The way to reduce the costs of delivery is to reduce the skill level needed for the person on the truck, maybe eliminate the person on the truck entirely. Once the data is accumulating that autonomous vehicles are responsible for fewer accidents than their human-driven counterparts, the push to make driving illegal on the common roadways will accelerate. 

It's gonna happen, and sooner than a lot of people think.


You realise technology has to evolve for human needs and not for the sake of evolving into futuristic bullshit? I dont want or need autonomous driving, and much less human driving to be banned, because many people like me like to drive... other than when I go to a party and drink, then that it would be useful.

Human driving to autonomous driving has no comparision at all with the horse to car... the horse to car is a huge evolution and huge improvement for everybody, the other isnt. As I said, it is only some futuristic bullshit that it may be kinda useful for some, but for others it isnt. Reminds me of tablets.... "oh so futuristic, this might replace PCs completely.... yeah, no, this is a useless toy"

Also, yeah, you are very "intelligent" if you think eliminating so many jobs (truck drivers) is a good thing then :lol:

 

Ah, but the future I see (don't like it, I should say) is where autonomous vehicles will come quickly because governments want them - so human-driven vehicles will be outlawed by increasing taxes on human-drive vehicles, providing huge incentives to go autonomous, making the most convenient roads autonomous vehicles only, steering people to abandon private vehicles in favor of subscribing to a services that will send an autonomous vehicle to you within a few minutes of you asking for one (for a price hard-to-resist price that will, of course, go up as time goes on).
 
Just like there's little choice but to use LED lighting now, there will be little choice but to use autonomous vehicles in the (quite near) future.

WHo cares what government wants. What matters is what people want. Many people want to drive themselves, and many car manufacturers like their cars to be driven by humans anyway, even if they need to do that autonomous thing...
BMW for example, they said they would always be cars to driven BY HUMANS first and foremost.


Edited by NixxxoN, 16 December 2017 - 09:03.


#772 Kraken

Kraken
  • Member

  • 980 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 10:27

 

 

WHo cares what government wants. What matters is what people want. Many people want to drive themselves...

 

Do you have a source of fact for that statement? Most people I know who drive on the roads see it as a necessary evil and would much rather someone did it for them. I know racing drivers, both amateur and professional, who feel the same way about the majority of journeys. For most people a car is a means of getting from A to B and nothing else 99% of the time.



#773 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 16 December 2017 - 10:32

Do you have a source of fact for that statement? Most people I know who drive on the roads see it as a necessary evil and would much rather someone did it for them. I know racing drivers, both amateur and professional, who feel the same way about the majority of journeys. For most people a car is a means of getting from A to B and nothing else 99% of the time.

Most people? Source please?
All I know is that many people like to drive, just as you know many people dont like it.

Also lets not talk about "governments" as if all governments in the world had the same ideas and policies. This is not for you but for the previous member I quoted.



#774 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 11:59

You realise technology has to evolve for human needs and not for the sake of evolving into futuristic bullshit? I dont want or need autonomous driving, and much less human driving to be banned, because many people like me like to drive... other than when I go to a party and drink, then that it would be useful.

Human driving to autonomous driving has no comparision at all with the horse to car... the horse to car is a huge evolution and huge improvement for everybody, the other isnt. As I said, it is only some futuristic bullshit that it may be kinda useful for some, but for others it isnt. Reminds me of tablets.... "oh so futuristic, this might replace PCs completely.... yeah, no, this is a useless toy"

Also, yeah, you are very "intelligent" if you think eliminating so many jobs (truck drivers) is a good thing then :lol:

 

WHo cares what government wants. What matters is what people want. Many people want to drive themselves, and many car manufacturers like their cars to be driven by humans anyway, even if they need to do that autonomous thing...
BMW for example, they said they would always be cars to driven BY HUMANS first and foremost.

 

Well, governments usually care more about what big business wants than what people want - and they make the rules. But, yes, it's really about what powerful businesses want. The motor industry is investing large sums into these vehicles. They want to see them happen. The technology businesses are investing large sums too. They also want to see this happen. Uber (and others) are positioning themselves to be the ones to put in place the service. People in big cities are already abandoning private cars for things like Uber and Zip. Everything that's happening at the moment is converging on this. It will be very hard for people to resist.



#775 R Soul

R Soul
  • Member

  • 1,519 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 16 December 2017 - 12:27

A lot of drivers have a homicidal interest in checking their phones. It won't take long for AI to be safer than them.



#776 BalanceUT

BalanceUT
  • Member

  • 2,055 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 16 December 2017 - 14:59

Well, governments usually care more about what big business wants than what people want - and they make the rules. But, yes, it's really about what powerful businesses want. The motor industry is investing large sums into these vehicles. They want to see them happen. The technology businesses are investing large sums too. They also want to see this happen. Uber (and others) are positioning themselves to be the ones to put in place the service. People in big cities are already abandoning private cars for things like Uber and Zip. Everything that's happening at the moment is converging on this. It will be very hard for people to resist.

Zip cars are not only in urban areas. I was a bit stunned to see two zip cars in designated parking spaces of my college situated in rural Appalachia. I didn't think the market was viable out here.  

 

That college has about 50% of its students come from the urban areas of Baltimore to Washington. About half of those students do not know how to drive, do not have a license (don't need it because of the ubiquity of public and private transportation services). They get out here and realize that public transportation is not as ubiquitous and decide they need to learn to drive and get a cheap car. Such a unique situation that the college has a driver's education class taught jointly with the local high school. 

 

Zip cars are laying an infrastructural footprint to transition to autonomous vehicles as soon as legally allowed. 


Edited by BalanceUT, 16 December 2017 - 15:16.


#777 BalanceUT

BalanceUT
  • Member

  • 2,055 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 16 December 2017 - 15:16

 

Also, yeah, you are very "intelligent" if you think eliminating so many jobs (truck drivers) is a good thing then :lol:

 

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that I thought it was a good thing... looking back over my post... yep, never said that. I simply said it was a thing that was a costly part of delivery that corporations were looking at eliminating. It is NOT a good thing for the people involved, quite obviously. It's just one of many areas where AI and other technological advances will eliminate jobs. 

 

There's a reason I'm teaching a class named "Our Cyborg Future" next semester, because it's a world my students will experience. Just as my grandmother was telling me a story on a jet airliner about riding in a car the first time 70 years prior. She said of the changes she'd seen in communication (telephones) and transportation and electricity and air-conditioning and entertainment (movies and television), "It's been a wonderful time to be alive." But, she could not have imagined living in that world when she was a child. We will not be able to imagine the world our grandchildren will live in, but it will be amazing and possibly awful. We will be augmented with machines, computers and communications systems. It will happen or we will be left behind by the intelligent machines we build (It won't be Planet of the Apes, but Planet of the AIs). It will happen. I might live to see only a tiny bit of it. My daughter will live it daily by the time she's middle-aged. Her children may be augmented from their teen years onwards. 

 

Humans driving cars on race tracks will be quaint as we now see 4-in-hand competition. It's exciting and different, but only for very few a passion to follow weekly. Watching people control machines via mental link may be a thing, maybe not. People will do it, if nothing more than as the next stage of simulated driving like the eRacing championship. The world is changing. Get on board or wave goodbye as the virtual train pulls out of the geometrically disassembling station. 



#778 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 13,247 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 15:44

Payas, yes dog racing is racing. But there is blood and flesh, here is only machine.

Can you go and congratulate to machine No. 22?

Sorry, pointless discussion.

You'll be the first up against the wall when the robots and AI take over. And they will.  :drunk: 



#779 Kraken

Kraken
  • Member

  • 980 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 16:03

Payas, yes dog racing is racing. But there is blood and flesh, here is only machine.

Can you go and congratulate to machine No. 22?

Sorry, pointless discussion.

 

No you go and congratulate the engineers and programmers. Basically the guys who are most responsible for wins in "conventional" top level motorsport as well but get none of the credit because people think the driver is the most important piece of the puzzle.



Advertisement

#780 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 16 December 2017 - 16:28

Well, governments usually care more about what big business wants than what people want - and they make the rules. But, yes, it's really about what powerful businesses want. The motor industry is investing large sums into these vehicles. They want to see them happen. The technology businesses are investing large sums too. They also want to see this happen. Uber (and others) are positioning themselves to be the ones to put in place the service. People in big cities are already abandoning private cars for things like Uber and Zip. Everything that's happening at the moment is converging on this. It will be very hard for people to resist.

I find amazing that you defend what those powerful businesses want, instead of defending your own interests.


Edited by NixxxoN, 17 December 2017 - 05:39.


#781 maximilian

maximilian
  • Member

  • 4,804 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 17:09

"But I like fetching my water from the river and defecating in the woods, so indoor plumbing should not be introduced for anyone!"  :drunk:


Edited by maximilian, 16 December 2017 - 17:09.


#782 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 December 2017 - 23:14

I find amazing that you defend those powerful businesses want, instead of defending your own interests.

 

What on earth makes you think that I endorse this view of the future? I hate the whole idea. I hate the people pushing it and dictating, what I see as, a poor future for many. But I can't pretend it's not going to happen just because I don't want it to. There's a big difference between explaining what (I think) might happen and agreeing with it.


Edited by pdac, 16 December 2017 - 23:16.


#783 Terry Walker

Terry Walker
  • Member

  • 2,962 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 17 December 2017 - 04:20

Sounds like watching two computers play chess. Who cares except the programmers?  Next: robo-olympics. Exciting algorithms compete for the 100 metres... New cooking contest: robo-chefs instead of cooks. (Make the robo-chefs eat what they cook, I say.) 

 

If motorsport goes driverless, it is likely to to spectatorless, too. Damned if I'd pay to go to a circuit see driverless cars "race". And if there are no spectators at the track, and it's purely for TV, why not just CGI it and cut out the hardware altogether?



#784 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 17 December 2017 - 05:39

What on earth makes you think that I endorse this view of the future? I hate the whole idea. I hate the people pushing it and dictating, what I see as, a poor future for many. But I can't pretend it's not going to happen just because I don't want it to. There's a big difference between explaining what (I think) might happen and agreeing with it.

 

With such pessimistic and "defeatist" attitude you wont get what you want, thats for sure


Edited by NixxxoN, 17 December 2017 - 11:54.


#785 Kodza

Kodza
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 17 December 2017 - 09:51

You'll be the first up against the wall when the robots and AI take over. And they will.  :drunk:

Good joke, but robots never take over.

 

 

No you go and congratulate the engineers and programmers. Basically the guys who are most responsible for wins in "conventional" top level motorsport as well but get none of the credit because people think the driver is the most important piece of the puzzle.

You will be right if you are first to jump yo engineers and congratulate them today when Vettel win. You can't even say who exactly design this car.

Answer you offer shows how low level of understanding what sport is prevails.

Sport is and only is - competition between humans.

That is definition of sport.



#786 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 10:22

Sport is and only is - competition between humans.
That is definition of sport.


That’s not set in stone. Definitions of words can change, and do change, with their usage.

#787 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,186 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 17 December 2017 - 10:24

 

Next time race wheel-to-wheel on the same piece of track. Or maybe that would be too confusing for the Robocar...


Edited by sopa, 17 December 2017 - 10:25.


#788 Kodza

Kodza
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 17 December 2017 - 13:01

That’s not set in stone. Definitions of words can change, and do change, with their usage.

 

Well, that is set in stone. In science it is.

But in forum discussion it can change IOI.



#789 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,451 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 14:14

Well, that is set in stone. In science it is.
But in forum discussion it can change IOI.


The word “sport” is not defined by science. In English words are defined by usage. I don’t know if that’s the case in your native language.

Tbh I’ve never seen a definition of sport that includes exclusivity to human participation.

#790 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 14:40

With such pessimistic and "defeatist" attitude you wont get what you want, thats for sure

 

I prefer realistic. I'm pretty sure I know what's possible and what's not now.  I'm not worried for myself, just sad for those a few years younger than me.



#791 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 14:44

The word “sport” is not defined by science. In English words are defined by usage. I don’t know if that’s the case in your native language.

Tbh I’ve never seen a definition of sport that includes exclusivity to human participation.

 

I agree with this. However, I would say that there's many 'sports' that fail to capture the imagination of the public well. I would predict that racing autonomous vehicles would be up there with them. The human element is a crucial factor in capturing interest, I think.



#792 BalanceUT

BalanceUT
  • Member

  • 2,055 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 17 December 2017 - 15:03

I find amazing that you defend what those powerful businesses want, instead of defending your own interests.

 

 

What on earth makes you think that I endorse this view of the future? I hate the whole idea. I hate the people pushing it and dictating, what I see as, a poor future for many. But I can't pretend it's not going to happen just because I don't want it to. There's a big difference between explaining what (I think) might happen and agreeing with it.

 

 

With such pessimistic and "defeatist" attitude you wont get what you want, thats for sure

 

Why do you insist in misrepresenting what people type? Oh, I know, because it changes the topic of conversation. You've shifted it from the losing ground on which you stood (if autonomous vehicles are the future) to new ground for which a person is a cad for taking a side opposite of you (desirability of an autonomous future). Well played, except for the raw transparency of it. 

Shifting goalposts is a pathetic ruse of debate. Stop. 



#793 NixxxoN

NixxxoN
  • Member

  • 2,277 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 17 December 2017 - 16:05

Why do you insist in misrepresenting what people type? Oh, I know, because it changes the topic of conversation. You've shifted it from the losing ground on which you stood (if autonomous vehicles are the future) to new ground for which a person is a cad for taking a side opposite of you (desirability of an autonomous future). Well played, except for the raw transparency of it. 

Shifting goalposts is a pathetic ruse of debate. Stop. 

 

Shifting goalposts? I dont even know what does that mean.

Misinterpretation is your opinion, i made my own interpretation so does everyone else.

And I dont know what you mean about "losing ground", if you want we can go back there no problem



#794 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 13,247 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 16:27

Good joke, but robots never take over.

 

 

Who is going to stop them ? Emotional, weak  fleshy us ? I don't think so. Personally I look forward to our future clinical overlords. It's obvious that people cannot run the world properly themselves. 



#795 Kodza

Kodza
  • Member

  • 630 posts
  • Joined: February 16

Posted 17 December 2017 - 17:04

The word “sport” is not defined by science. In English words are defined by usage. I don’t know if that’s the case in your native language.

Tbh I’ve never seen a definition of sport that includes exclusivity to human participation.

 

I agree with this. However, I would say that there's many 'sports' that fail to capture the imagination of the public well. I would predict that racing autonomous vehicles would be up there with them. The human element is a crucial factor in capturing interest, I think.

 

Well, I do not agree.

Do not know your education / profession but mine includes that and I have to learn.

Sociology, philosophy, law, economy, and in general science recognize sport as a human activity.

You can feel that machine are doing sport, but in real word that not make sense.

Anyway, I am free to predict that "machine sport" will not become more then another wonder and will not grow up to real race level.

And "main" race event of Formula-e will slowly but for sure going to disappear.



#796 johnmhinds

johnmhinds
  • Member

  • 7,292 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 17 December 2017 - 19:10

The definition of words isn’t decided by any of those people, its definition is just a reflection of its usage by the public.

Motor racing is the act of racing vehicles, the pilots can be humans, dogs, monkeys or machines but it would still be classed as a sport.

Edited by johnmhinds, 17 December 2017 - 19:11.


#797 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 8,355 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 17 December 2017 - 22:58

Well, I do not agree.

Do not know your education / profession but mine includes that and I have to learn.

Sociology, philosophy, law, economy, and in general science recognize sport as a human activity.

You can feel that machine are doing sport, but in real word that not make sense.

Anyway, I am free to predict that "machine sport" will not become more then another wonder and will not grow up to real race level.

And "main" race event of Formula-e will slowly but for sure going to disappear.

 

Well, I'm just someone who left school at 18 with a couple of A-levels and made my way, as best I could, through the big wide world.


Edited by pdac, 17 December 2017 - 22:59.


#798 WOT

WOT
  • Member

  • 474 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 18 December 2017 - 01:00

The definition of words isn’t decided by any of those people, its definition is just a reflection of its usage by the public.

Motor racing is the act of racing vehicles, the pilots can be humans, dogs, monkeys or machines but it would still be classed as a sport.

 

Not 100% sure on this. There will need to be quite some change in definitions, if at all, before "sport" between machines is accepted, as all the definitions refer to "human" attributes:
 
From various dictionaries - Sport:
o An athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.
o An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
o A game, competition, or activity needing physical effort and skill that is played or done according to rules, for enjoyment and/or as a job
 
From Wikipedia - Sport:
o- According to Council of Europe, European Sports Charter, article 2.i, " "Sport" means all forms of physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and mental well-being.
o- Other bodies advocate widening the definition of sport to include all physical activity. For instance, the Council of Europe include all forms of physical exercise, including those competed just for fun.
o- There has been an increase in the application of the term "sport" to a wider set of non-physical challenges such as video games, also called esports, especially due to the large scale of participation and organised competition, but these are not widely recognised by mainstream sports organisations.
 
I guess that's why they call it "artificial intelligence"....


#799 scolbourne

scolbourne
  • Member

  • 515 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 18 December 2017 - 04:13

We already have Robowars and Battlebots on TV and it seems to have caught the publics interest fairly well.

I think it can definately be called a sport, but it shows that even with robots you need quite strict rules to ensure an interesting competition.

I think once the teams have the software sorted for Roborace, we will start seeing fun races. I suggest a very tight twisty course on a slippery surface (ice, mud  or gravel) where we will see the full car control that has been achieved. What we do not want is the car building a map of the circuit and just taking the racing line with no drifting or delicate car control taking place.



Advertisement

#800 maximilian

maximilian
  • Member

  • 4,804 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:40

We already have Robowars and Battlebots on TV and it seems to have caught the publics interest fairly well.

I think it can definately be called a sport, but it shows that even with robots you need quite strict rules to ensure an interesting competition.

I think once the teams have the software sorted for Roborace, we will start seeing fun races. I suggest a very tight twisty course on a slippery surface (ice, mud  or gravel) where we will see the full car control that has been achieved. What we do not want is the car building a map of the circuit and just taking the racing line with no drifting or delicate car control taking place.

 

There is also drone racing on TV... the one key difference at the moment is - these machines are all still controlled by humans.  Arguably, the machines would or could do much better if they were run by AI at this time.  Would it still be as interesting to watch to those watching now - debatable, but possible.  A lot of battlebot fights are won or lost due to human error, failure to react/reacting too slow and/or not being able to bring the machine under control with whatever interface they are using - all factors that could be eliminated or minimized if the machine steers itself and is programmed to destroy.  Slippery slope, that, though!  :lol: