|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 17, 2024 13:59:11 GMT
It's making trade unions extra nervous and even more angry about the future www.cityam.com/welcome-aboard-this-is-a-driverless-train-unions-begin-their-own-demise/The trade unions are very luddite-y, let's face it, they hate change. And Mick Lynch of the RMT is straight out of the 1970s trade union stories The thing is the trade unions are necessary to help workers, but they also go too far sometimes, society only works with all elements pushing and pulling and playing their part without one monopolizing everything You're not going to get driverless trains on our complex, fast and very dense rail networks, that article is a triumph of idiocy by someone who probably can't even spell 'safety case' let alone understand one. The DLR that he quotes as an example runs treacle like slow on a very very simple route with huge inter train gaps. Oh yes we all know human beings are so much safer than machines. Definitely. Its why we have three people there when using a cherry picker in case one wanders off for a coffee. Much safer. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,633
|
Post by Steve on Aug 17, 2024 15:23:39 GMT
No apologies for giving you the actual position.
The laws of tort and manslaughter not forgetting human nature look far more askance on a human allowing an unproven machine power to make a mistake and causing harm than a human making same mistake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 17, 2024 19:08:47 GMT
No apologies for giving you the actual position. The laws of tort and manslaughter not forgetting human nature look far more askance on a human allowing an unproven machine power to make a mistake and causing harm than a human making same mistake. Yesterdays man. We rely on machines to keep us safe in thousands of places today. My own car has a dozen devices that overrule my actions in an emergency. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,633
|
Post by Steve on Aug 17, 2024 19:46:32 GMT
No apologies for giving you the actual position. The laws of tort and manslaughter not forgetting human nature look far more askance on a human allowing an unproven machine power to make a mistake and causing harm than a human making same mistake. Yesterdays man. Ignorant man ^ (hopefully that's an end to the jibe tit for tat) And each will have a peer reviewed safety case usually to ISO 26262 for the use cases they deal with and usually achieving such by narrowing down the use cases where they have full autonomy. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 18, 2024 8:12:12 GMT
Ignorant man ^ (hopefully that's an end to the jibe tit for tat) And each will have a peer reviewed safety case usually to ISO 26262 for the use cases they deal with and usually achieving such by narrowing down the use cases where they have full autonomy. I'm referring specifically to you stating todays conditions on the future. Where we see more and more that our safety is based on non human thinking and testing. Of course we will have driverless trains and they will be as safe or safer than the current ones. Same with driverless cars and lorries. They wont text people while driving on a motorway. Wont fall asleep, drive while drunk, miss a signal. |
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,633
|
Post by Steve on Aug 18, 2024 8:47:08 GMT
Dream on, seems you forget that every machine, every line of software has a human in the chain of its generation and at times they make mistakes.
But what do I know, I've only got over 20 years of designing and/or certifying safety critical systems to UK and international laws.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2024 8:51:19 GMT
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 3,633
|
Post by Steve on Aug 18, 2024 9:01:38 GMT
Reminds me of that parking game you can get for the smart phone. The 'use case' sets for any system interacting with the effectively unconstrained public become a nightmare to define and even worse, to test and verify to. Flight Control software, Engine control software, ABS software etc are very simple in comparison to driverless trains on variable networks. And even they have had issues. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 18, 2024 9:04:05 GMT
Dream on, seems you forget that every machine, every line of software has a human in the chain of its generation and at times they make mistakes. What's that got to do with anything. The systems on driverless train will be designed by a human. But the train will still be driverless. But you've been retired a while and a lot has changed in the last few years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2024 9:08:37 GMT
Reminds me of that parking game you can get for the smart phone. The 'use case' sets for any system interacting with the effectively unconstrained public become a nightmare to define and even worse, to test and verify to. Flight Control software, Engine control software, ABS software etc are very simple in comparison to driverless trains on variable networks. And even they have had issues. Was actually trying to figure out how a coordinated system of air roads would work for flying car traffic, the entire thing boggled my mind, all the probabilities - Storms/flight height/telegraph poles/birds - inclement weather events - Managing going over pedestrian areas and potential noise - Not blocking other traffic - What to do to manage faults and crashes - What to do about would-be terrorists who have a potential missile to destroy buildings via their flying car We need that teeth chattering emoji.. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 18, 2024 9:20:45 GMT
Reminds me of that parking game you can get for the smart phone. The 'use case' sets for any system interacting with the effectively unconstrained public become a nightmare to define and even worse, to test and verify to. Flight Control software, Engine control software, ABS software etc are very simple in comparison to driverless trains on variable networks. And even they have had issues. Was actually trying to figure out how a coordinated system of air roads would work for flying car traffic, the entire thing boggled my mind, all the probabilities - Storms/flight height/telegraph poles/birds - inclement weather events - Managing going over pedestrian areas and potential noise - Not blocking other traffic - What to do to manage faults and crashes - What to do about would-be terrorists who have a potential missile to destroy buildings via their flying car We need that teeth chattering emoji.. Flying cars will never take off (Boom boom) Sorry. Anyway they wont because energy cost per mile is far higher than wheeled vehicles. As for terrorists, most attacks are stopped by intelligence, not physical blocks. Otherwise we would see light planes and drones carrying bombs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2024 9:29:11 GMT
Ok, you go with that, flying cars will never take off. Maybe you don't realise that energy cost per mile will go down as they are made more efficient.
There have been many incidents of light planes and drones carrying bombs, as you well know. If we have flying cars that are taken over with a hack, they can be crashed into places much like a big drone
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 18, 2024 9:36:27 GMT
Ok, you go with that, flying cars will never take off. Maybe you don't realise that energy cost per mile will go down as they are made more efficient. There have been many incidents of light planes and drones carrying bombs, as you well know. If we have flying cars that are taken over with a hack, they can be crashed into places much like a big drone Its pure physics keeping a vehicle up in the air takes far more energy than keeping it rolling along the ground. As the cost per mile falls for flying cars so it will fall proportionally for wheeled ones always making them cheaper. Where flying cars might take off is for long journeys and over water. But we already have these cars, we call them planes. Imagining these flying cars in the future If the sci fi I read has credibility they are banned from build up areas because of the risk of accidents (A ford Mondeo falling out of the sky into your garden) So they land outside the town and drive in. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 18, 2024 10:25:33 GMT
The labour party paying off its clients The most applicable model to use here is a criminal syndicate. The labour party has lots of 'cousins' Thank goodness you never over exaggerate Orac  I am a drama queen at heart.  There is method to my madness. You will dismiss the notion as an exaggeration, but then you will ask 'how much of exaggeration?' |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 18, 2024 12:13:24 GMT
Thank goodness you never over exaggerate Orac I am a drama queen at heart. There is method to my madness. You will dismiss the notion as an exaggeration, but then you will ask 'how much of exaggeration?' Only I don't. My position was already that I wanted to see Corbyn's more outrageous proposals such as having a union rep on the board of a company were dropped. Unions representing their workers is fine with me. Equally the pay rises to match inflation are considerably less than the average 14% my business has had to give to retain staff over the last year. So I'm happy. |
|
