|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jun 4, 2016 22:28:49 GMT
Weird how the same circumstances can produce different results. I was raised by women too, but the type of women who wanted to talk everything through and ask a lot of questions that I had to answer  I actually calculated it out one day. The word ratio between my wife and I is about 3000 to 1. It's not as bad as one would think. I've developed the art of very selective hearing. As a "think while I talk" person who also likes feedback, you can probably imagine I wouldn't do well in a relationship like that, no matter which one of us was getting the 3000 words in. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 4, 2016 22:36:49 GMT
I actually calculated it out one day. The word ratio between my wife and I is about 3000 to 1. It's not as bad as one would think. I've developed the art of very selective hearing. As a "think while I talk" person who also likes feedback, you can probably imagine I wouldn't do well in a relationship like that, no matter which one of us was getting the 3000 words in. growing up, I always wanted to take my time and evaluate. I hated those timed math drills in grade school. my parents actually drilled me in making fast decisions. However, I still tend to default to deliberation when I have the leisure. of course, emergency services often doesn't afford that luxury. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jun 5, 2016 1:21:14 GMT
I actually calculated it out one day. The word ratio between my wife and I is about 3000 to 1. It's not as bad as one would think. I've developed the art of very selective hearing. As a "think while I talk" person who also likes feedback, you can probably imagine I wouldn't do well in a relationship like that, no matter which one of us was getting the 3000 words in. After 35 years I got use to it. Like I said, selective hearing. Only problem is you have to clean the filter out more often. |
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Jun 5, 2016 3:47:49 GMT
Okay, I've got to ask: How the dickens do you come up with that ratio? Count all the words in an hour and multiply by 24?
I'm not doubting you; I'm genuinely curious.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jun 5, 2016 4:01:56 GMT
I sat there one morning listening to her ramble on for about 30 minutes. I timed how many words she would say in one minute. I then multiplied that number by 30. I then kept track of how many words I said in that 30 minute period. The ratio came out 3000 to 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 5, 2016 4:20:35 GMT
I have never understood the talk at a problem without looking for a solution part that many women get into.
My own wife included.
My mother can ramble on for hours about some problem she has and how its affecting her so badly, but not actually get anywhere... and then when you suggest a solution, she goes and does something completely different anyway.
I have used the phrase when I hang up the phone "Thats an hour I will never get back."
And howcome they always call JUST as your about to start something important?.. like start cooking the main meal?..
"Just a quick question"
How I fear that phrase...
No it isnt, it will have several sub-questions, a sub-sub clause or two, half an hour grilling on how I am going to fix it, disbelief that I aint about to drop everything drive 400mile and do just that, and then drive 400 mile back, which is a whole day, its the only day off I got this weekend, and yes I did have plans....
Yes I can put a new runner on your garage door.
However.
If you call the man from the shop, the local handy-man, he can be there in half the time, and get it fixed cheaper than it would cost me in one of the two tanks of fuel its going to cost me just to get there....
Fuel costs to visit my Mother is over £200.
Yeah sure I have that kind of money kicking about all the time. Totally spare. And no we didnt need a new microwave.fridge/washing machine/dishwasher/new television that we had saved that money for...
Yes it WOULD be a lot easier if I lived closer.
No I am not moving house.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jun 5, 2016 8:02:34 GMT
I sat there one morning listening to her ramble on for about 30 minutes. I timed how many words she would say in one minute. I then multiplied that number by 30. I then kept track of how many words I said in that 30 minute period. The ratio came out 3000 to 1. That's a word every 0.6 seconds! How'd you ever fit in the one you got to say?  |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jun 5, 2016 12:18:40 GMT
I sat there one morning listening to her ramble on for about 30 minutes. I timed how many words she would say in one minute. I then multiplied that number by 30. I then kept track of how many words I said in that 30 minute period. The ratio came out 3000 to 1. That's a word every 0.6 seconds! How'd you ever fit in the one you got to say? Edgewise. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 5, 2016 14:18:50 GMT
I have never understood the talk at a problem without looking for a solution part that many women get into. My own wife included. My mother can ramble on for hours about some problem she has and how its affecting her so badly, but not actually get anywhere... and then when you suggest a solution, she goes and does something completely different anyway. I have used the phrase when I hang up the phone "Thats an hour I will never get back." And howcome they always call JUST as your about to start something important?.. like start cooking the main meal?.. "Just a quick question" How I fear that phrase... No it isnt, it will have several sub-questions, a sub-sub clause or two, half an hour grilling on how I am going to fix it, disbelief that I aint about to drop everything drive 400mile and do just that, and then drive 400 mile back, which is a whole day, its the only day off I got this weekend, and yes I did have plans.... Yes I can put a new runner on your garage door. However. If you call the man from the shop, the local handy-man, he can be there in half the time, and get it fixed cheaper than it would cost me in one of the two tanks of fuel its going to cost me just to get there.... Fuel costs to visit my Mother is over £200. Yeah sure I have that kind of money kicking about all the time. Totally spare. And no we didnt need a new microwave.fridge/washing machine/dishwasher/new television that we had saved that money for... Yes it WOULD be a lot easier if I lived closer. No I am not moving house. I believe it is generally accepted that a woman will have a tendency to be unable to mull over a problem alone and in silence. there has been at least one author who has made a comfortable living explaining that when a woman explains a problem to a man, she does not want advice unless she specifically asks for it, whereas if a man explains a problem to a man, he wants advice. we do have a running joke, however, with one of our firefighters. in any instructional setting or meeting, he is only allowed two questions and two follow-ups. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 5, 2016 14:19:59 GMT
That's a word every 0.6 seconds! How'd you ever fit in the one you got to say? Edgewise. and with a crowbar. "I haven't spoken to my wife in years. I don't want to interrupt her" Rodney Dangerfield (I believe, otherwise, it was W.C. Fields) |
|
|
|
Post by WhutScreenName on Jun 24, 2016 14:43:45 GMT
If this has already been posted, my apologies. I've not actually read through the posts in this thread, but based on the subject, this is clearly the correct place to put this. I find it very interesting to read, and how the article basically says Ethics aren't subjective after all, they are objective and scientific (I'm paraphrasing). Worth the read I think. Your Self-Driving Car Will Be Programmed to Kill You—Deal With It |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 25, 2016 2:15:24 GMT
If this has already been posted, my apologies. I've not actually read through the posts in this thread, but based on the subject, this is clearly the correct place to put this. I find it very interesting to read, and how the article basically says Ethics aren't subjective after all, they are objective and scientific (I'm paraphrasing). Worth the read I think. Your Self-Driving Car Will Be Programmed to Kill You—Deal With Itkind of a misleading article - considering that the car will also provide protection to its occupant(s) that a pedestrian won't have. so would I hit a bank to avoid a pedestrian if I was driving? I would hope if an accident was unavoidable, I'd save the pedestrian. however, I would most likely not be able to react fast enough to make the decision. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 25, 2016 6:53:41 GMT
If this has already been posted, my apologies. I've not actually read through the posts in this thread, but based on the subject, this is clearly the correct place to put this. I find it very interesting to read, and how the article basically says Ethics aren't subjective after all, they are objective and scientific (I'm paraphrasing). Worth the read I think. Your Self-Driving Car Will Be Programmed to Kill You—Deal With Itkind of a misleading article - considering that the car will also provide protection to its occupant(s) that a pedestrian won't have. so would I hit a bank to avoid a pedestrian if I was driving? I would hope if an accident was unavoidable, I'd save the pedestrian. however, I would most likely not be able to react fast enough to make the decision. I go back to "If you cant stop in the space you can see" dilemma, in that, the Human mid, id taught correctly, can "predict" the unknown. Just yeaterday, I see a plank-with-a-mobile on the pavement walking diagonally towards the roads edge. Will the pedestrian stop?. I start to cover the brakes as they put one foot on the road I start to hit them hard, I sort of knew this may happen... Thankfully at that point, the pedestrian stopped dead, realising they should look, saw me in their blind spot, and leapt backwards to the pavement, off the road. I would have been able to stop if I had needed to, because I am always looking for the plank-with-mobile, when I aint busy dealing with others. I also adjust my speed accordingly due to pedestrian density and availability to roads. On some Manchester streets, signed at 30, with a decent pedestrian density, I am doing 20 max, some even 15 max, because I cant watch ALL of them ALL of the time. Even the ones with railings, having seen someone leap the railings and trip, falling head-first to a tarmac breakfast, just yards in front of a bus. The bus thankfully wasnt going that fast. Road conditions, and planned escape routes, I look for them, so on a narrow stretch of road, I am going slower, because of my lack of escape route should it all go pedestrian. Therefore, if I had a car that drove its self, and wasnt able to stop in time to save me, then I suggest that that car should not pass its driving test. I want a car that drives BETTER than I do?... They are spending millions on this, so therefore, I expect perfection. If its not, than I dont want that car driving, where are the full manual controls, if there isnt any, get me one that has. In the case of the pedestrian that "Jumps out without looking" and is fully to blame for their jay-walking blatant ignorance of road safety, if the car decides to punish ME for that act................ I dont think I could handle that. If I am driving a Bus full of people, then "Majority wins" and the people on the bus comes first, therefore, in the case of that just mentioned jay walker, I wouldnt even emergency stop lock all four wheels because of the likelihood of insecure passengers joining me in the driving seat issue, I brake hard, sure, but not so hard that I would seriously injure any passengers on board. So whats the difference in impact to the jay walker between a 40 ton wagon, a bus load of passengers, or a private car?.. a lot LESS on the private car that probably has pedestrian safety crumple zones on its bonnet, and would slow down a hell of a lot quicker anyway... Why should a decision be made to sacrifice the life of the car driver JUST because it isnt a bus full of passengers?. I say "Moral dilemma" that perhaps I cant answer fully on this issue. In the case of the pedal cycle that jumped out from behind a van the other day, scared several buckets of whats good for the roses outa me, lifted the back wheels of the 12 tonner I was driving clear off the floor under braking, woke up the whole street with the noise of the tyres and horn, and left a crumpled mess of young lad where he swerved outa my way and fell off his bike without hitting anything other than the floor, No Software in the whole of existence that even if it DID have xray vision and could have seen that kid on the bike behind that van would have been ale to react quicker that I did... nor would it have been able to brake that hard it lifted the back wheels off the floor, and miss that kid. So it would have had to swerve into the garden wall on the other side of the road?... maybe even flip the truck on its side?.. Instead I balanced the whole wagon on the front axle and no one got seriously hurt. Can your software work out a better plan than that?. No I didnt intend to lift the back wheels, maybe not that high, maybe it was just the full extension of the suspension, but there was a distinct thunk as it landed and stopped rocking. This is the daily life of a truck driver.... Just when you thought you may have seen it all?.. I can prove you havnt. Can software handle that?. I dont think so. Not yet anyway. They are getting there, but not yet. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 25, 2016 11:30:18 GMT
kind of a misleading article - considering that the car will also provide protection to its occupant(s) that a pedestrian won't have. so would I hit a bank to avoid a pedestrian if I was driving? I would hope if an accident was unavoidable, I'd save the pedestrian. however, I would most likely not be able to react fast enough to make the decision. I go back to "If you cant stop in the space you can see" dilemma, in that, the Human mid, id taught correctly, can "predict" the unknown. Just yeaterday, I see a plank-with-a-mobile on the pavement walking diagonally towards the roads edge. Will the pedestrian stop?. I start to cover the brakes as they put one foot on the road I start to hit them hard, I sort of knew this may happen... Thankfully at that point, the pedestrian stopped dead, realising they should look, saw me in their blind spot, and leapt backwards to the pavement, off the road. I would have been able to stop if I had needed to, because I am always looking for the plank-with-mobile, when I aint busy dealing with others. I also adjust my speed accordingly due to pedestrian density and availability to roads. On some Manchester streets, signed at 30, with a decent pedestrian density, I am doing 20 max, some even 15 max, because I cant watch ALL of them ALL of the time. Even the ones with railings, having seen someone leap the railings and trip, falling head-first to a tarmac breakfast, just yards in front of a bus. The bus thankfully wasnt going that fast. Road conditions, and planned escape routes, I look for them, so on a narrow stretch of road, I am going slower, because of my lack of escape route should it all go pedestrian. Therefore, if I had a car that drove its self, and wasnt able to stop in time to save me, then I suggest that that car should not pass its driving test. I want a car that drives BETTER than I do?... They are spending millions on this, so therefore, I expect perfection. If its not, than I dont want that car driving, where are the full manual controls, if there isnt any, get me one that has. In the case of the pedestrian that "Jumps out without looking" and is fully to blame for their jay-walking blatant ignorance of road safety, if the car decides to punish ME for that act................ I dont think I could handle that. If I am driving a Bus full of people, then "Majority wins" and the people on the bus comes first, therefore, in the case of that just mentioned jay walker, I wouldnt even emergency stop lock all four wheels because of the likelihood of insecure passengers joining me in the driving seat issue, I brake hard, sure, but not so hard that I would seriously injure any passengers on board. So whats the difference in impact to the jay walker between a 40 ton wagon, a bus load of passengers, or a private car?.. a lot LESS on the private car that probably has pedestrian safety crumple zones on its bonnet, and would slow down a hell of a lot quicker anyway... Why should a decision be made to sacrifice the life of the car driver JUST because it isnt a bus full of passengers?. I say "Moral dilemma" that perhaps I cant answer fully on this issue. In the case of the pedal cycle that jumped out from behind a van the other day, scared several buckets of whats good for the roses outa me, lifted the back wheels of the 12 tonner I was driving clear off the floor under braking, woke up the whole street with the noise of the tyres and horn, and left a crumpled mess of young lad where he swerved outa my way and fell off his bike without hitting anything other than the floor, No Software in the whole of existence that even if it DID have xray vision and could have seen that kid on the bike behind that van would have been ale to react quicker that I did... nor would it have been able to brake that hard it lifted the back wheels off the floor, and miss that kid. So it would have had to swerve into the garden wall on the other side of the road?... maybe even flip the truck on its side?.. Instead I balanced the whole wagon on the front axle and no one got seriously hurt. Can your software work out a better plan than that?. No I didnt intend to lift the back wheels, maybe not that high, maybe it was just the full extension of the suspension, but there was a distinct thunk as it landed and stopped rocking. This is the daily life of a truck driver.... Just when you thought you may have seen it all?.. I can prove you havnt. Can software handle that?. I dont think so. Not yet anyway. They are getting there, but not yet. it partly depends on who is writing the control software, now, doesn't it? it may well be that in the event of "sudden sheeple" the car may decide a collision is unavoidable, and choose to sell the sheeple a slightly distressed self driving car, knowing that the driver is very likely to have a better chance of survival than the sheeple. on the other hand, in the case of sudden sheep, the car will most likely decide mutton is cheaper to replace than itself. its one of those situations where a well programmed car should be able to anticipate much better than a human, but can still be fooled - but it can then make the decision much more quickly than a human, and can minimize the damage while the human is still realizing that someone did the stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 26, 2016 6:54:57 GMT
Can it recognise a human bent over tying his shoelaces or otherwise "on all fours" above a large dog?.. or sheep?.. or even same human in a sheepskin coat?.. and before you say anything about anyone being so hipster to wear a sheepskin coat, bad news, old fashion is back.
The problem comes when you write the software that picks "One over the other", because the looser will always claim "Well YOU wrote it to try and kill me", as you state, but that decision has to be made, at some point.
Tbe human mind is still, in my opinion, able to pick out more complex decisions in a speed of teraflops than any computer.
If you try building the computer that can best the human, then you are into a world of expense, where the computer part is worth more than the car.
Its probably worth more than the human driving it as well.... but thats a moot point?..
Is probably going to be more complex than the thing you just bought your kid as "The best lap-top available" for his birthday present, and in all honestly, the most powerful computer "home entertainment" has seen.
Its either that or a car full of electronics.
Just look at the space required by goggles first pilot series test bed self driving cars.
Of course they will become cheaper to build.
And then I will predict that there will be an accident blamed on the driver because the computer didnt have "Sp1" software update in place.
And then, Hacking.
On the lighter side, I have mentioned the phrase "ten-men", as a Mancunian origin phrase of someone trying to be all they are not, I have already heard it voiced the Humans will start with shield technology that makes them look like a crowd of "ten men" to avoid being hit by one of those cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 26, 2016 13:48:54 GMT
Can it recognise a human bent over tying his shoelaces or otherwise "on all fours" above a large dog?.. or sheep?.. or even same human in a sheepskin coat?.. and before you say anything about anyone being so hipster to wear a sheepskin coat, bad news, old fashion is back. The problem comes when you write the software that picks "One over the other", because the looser will always claim "Well YOU wrote it to try and kill me", as you state, but that decision has to be made, at some point. Tbe human mind is still, in my opinion, able to pick out more complex decisions in a speed of teraflops than any computer. If you try building the computer that can best the human, then you are into a world of expense, where the computer part is worth more than the car. Its probably worth more than the human driving it as well.... but thats a moot point?.. Is probably going to be more complex than the thing you just bought your kid as "The best lap-top available" for his birthday present, and in all honestly, the most powerful computer "home entertainment" has seen. Its either that or a car full of electronics. Just look at the space required by goggles first pilot series test bed self driving cars. Of course they will become cheaper to build. And then I will predict that there will be an accident blamed on the driver because the computer didnt have "Sp1" software update in place. And then, Hacking. On the lighter side, I have mentioned the phrase "ten-men", as a Mancunian origin phrase of someone trying to be all they are not, I have already heard it voiced the Humans will start with shield technology that makes them look like a crowd of "ten men" to avoid being hit by one of those cars. well, it is definitely an opportunity to go WAAY down the rabbit hole, I'll give you that. comes back to what I said about it depending on the programmer. way back in the dark ages, my brother and his computer instructor had a challenge to see who could build the better computer tic tac toe game. the instructor made one fatal flaw - it was possible to decoy his game into making a defensive move when it could make a winning move. my brother's game couldn't beat it, because it never left an opening for a winning move. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Jun 27, 2016 1:02:38 GMT
@ silverdragon:
One thing that needs to be considered here is that most people aren't half as good at staying alert at the wheel as you are. The situations you've described above would in most cases end in someone getting seriously injured and the driver going, "He came out of nowhere!"
A computer may not be better than you. Hell, it may not even be better than me. But from what I've seen on the roads, even with the tech already available, it's sure to be better than at least 80% of all drivers out there, because most of them are selfish ducks-with-an-i who don't pay enough attention to what they're doing and are looking for any excuse they can come up with to blame someone else as soon as something goes wrong.
You know this as well as I do, if not better.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 27, 2016 2:49:36 GMT
@ silverdragon: One thing that needs to be considered here is that most people aren't half as good at staying alert at the wheel as you are. The situations you've described above would in most cases end in someone getting seriously injured and the driver going, "He came out of nowhere!" A computer may not be better than you. Hell, it may not even be better than me. But from what I've seen on the roads, even with the tech already available, it's sure to be better than at least 80% of all drivers out there, because most of them are selfish ducks-with-an-i who don't pay enough attention to what they're doing and are looking for any excuse they can come up with to blame someone else as soon as something goes wrong. You know this as well as I do, if not better. ight - it' similar to antilock brakes. not better than the best driver, but better than the average driver. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 27, 2016 6:48:31 GMT
@ silverdragon: One thing that needs to be considered here is that most people aren't half as good at staying alert at the wheel as you are. The situations you've described above would in most cases end in someone getting seriously injured and the driver going, "He came out of nowhere!" A computer may not be better than you. Hell, it may not even be better than me. But from what I've seen on the roads, even with the tech already available, it's sure to be better than at least 80% of all drivers out there, because most of them are selfish ducks-with-an-i who don't pay enough attention to what they're doing and are looking for any excuse they can come up with to blame someone else as soon as something goes wrong. You know this as well as I do, if not better. Can a autonomous car drive "Better" than many roller-skate drivers?.. its a given yes, because even today, you will see "that one" who makes you wonder if they even passed a test or not. In my own industry, they are already promising autonomous trucks. Can that same software pilot a 44 ton HGV?... Thats a whole different ball game, and its not cricket. How can you replace the best drivers on the road?. You get to see and notice the bare 10% of "Bad" divers first, so we are not attempting to tar the lot with the same brush, just the worst, but a bad truck drivers sticks out a hell of a lot more than just another ijurt noddy-car?. But even the worst Truck driver, I would take them over a random unknown car driver, in the task of hazard perception. Why?. Because at least they should have had the training to be able to spot and continue to look for hazards. I have seen some absolutely terrifying incidents in my life by bad decisions.... But that is a minority of the true number of otherwise sensible drivers?. Mostly we are a sensible bunch?. I have even been forced to swerve severely into the oncoming lane to avoid a pram rolling off the pavement. However, in that incident I was able to recover the vehicle without hitting anything?. DAYM lucky that day that the other direction lane was completely empty. But it was, so I used it, to make sure I hit nothing.... I do not doubt that many MANY other drivers have the same skill-set that I have in being able to look for and plan an "escape" and be able to recover the vehicle without crashing?. All this talk of having to pick and choose a victim to kill above other choices?.. should it not come down to being able to plan an escape FIRST, and in that, not evaluate an end decision until it is not possible for anything else to happen, but even then, plan that decision on being able to avoid killing anyone at all?.. If your going to crash, sound a loud alarm to give other people time to GTF outa your way for a start... And in that, why isnt there an emergency "YOU have control" alarm to pass to the Human... or is it that the human will be asleep at that time?.. I put myself out there as a HIGHLY trained driver with a lot of experience, and yes, you should expect I have better training than many other drivers, but that does not mean a roller-skate driver does not have an advanced licence either, or that no roller-skate driver is as good as I am, for a start, we all drive cars home at the end of the shift.... so we ARE those drivers... There is in truth a lot of bloody good drivers out there who can match my abilities with a car. I may not be the best car driver in the world, in fact you may assume I bloody well know I aint, as I must include people who are highly skilled stunt drivers and even instructors in that number, so just because I drive big stuff does not automatically put me in the top 1%, its more the top 10% of "safer" drivers. How long can I keep that up?. But how much under inspection are automated cars?. You can bet that every single accident WILL be reported front page news. Because of that, we are over-expecting a 100% safety record from every single on of them. And when forced to make a difficult decision, will that car ever be able to pick the "Right one"?.. I can see the day when automated cars will be as numerous as electric ones. I can see it, but I aint planning to make room for them just yet. And another thing... how the hell do I "Give way" to an automated car?. I ask because when sitting in a queue of traffic and there is an auto-car in the side street, how do I signal to the "Driver" that I am leaving a gap for them to come out of the side street... Or is that car going to "Push" its way out and force a gap?. If the car decides to push, sure as frogs is frogs, there will be a lot of people objecting and plainly refusing to make way when otherwise they would. Lanes merge?.. if I see an automated car making its way right up to the end of the lane and trying to cut in by forcing a gap at the last possible moment, aint happening on MY watch. How does an automated car deal with cars merging in front of it?.. does it allow, resist, or object 100%?. These vehicles are "New" "Strange" and "Unpredictable" I can see a lot of misunderstanding and possible resistance towards them. "Unpredictable"... Lane etiquet. Part of my "Sixth sense" on predicting other traffic is watching a car start to "lean" on the next lane... If it is far over to the right of the lane, chances are, its turning right. Automated cars do not do this. Its a human way of pre-indication that we accept. Putting the indicator on half a mile before the junction you want on surface roads (Non motorway) is kind of annoying... But sticking your car at the side of the lane your intending to turn into, is kind of acceptable and expectable behaviour?.. Thats just one example of many. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 27, 2016 13:28:17 GMT
you make a good point - how does the self driving car respond to bullying. I know in a merge, it will probably be programmed to zipper into the merge. but if the guy who should be merging behind tries to bully past, will it give way to avoid a collision, or will it stand its ground?
|
|
