As another member suggested, why not contact Slate, plead your case, and then report back on what they say?
If you have ever spent any time driving around Seattle, youād know that a substantial portion of the population would benefit from really good self driving techā¦assuming those drivers are better at operating the software than actual driving. It would make all the people here who do know how to drive feel much better about hitting the road.
you are not great at jokes... but I did check after I replied... I didnt find anything that confirmed your claim so I assumed you were "joking"
Not all people suck at driving. However there are a lot of people who doā¦.and for a variety of reasons. Iām not against self driving tech. Iām just against Slate offering it or allowing/supporting 3rd party solutions that are DIY. I know how to drive and I donāt want to subsidize those who donāt by paying a higher price for the additional, unwanted tech.
it isnt so much that people suck at driving, they do, but there are too many distractions to avoid, phone, billboards, radio, our stupid emotions, other drivers, kids throwing candy at eachother, for us to be able to focus 100% on driving that makes us bad drivers. Computers are statisticaly just better at it, and the more cars that have computers at the wheel the better, in my opinion.
You are making a lot of assumptions. Also, sucking at driving includes allowing distractions to bother you, not driving at the speed limit, driving recklessly, not checking mirrors and blind spots, and not using turn signals amongst other things. I'm a cyclist and I can't tell you how many times a car has turned right directly in front of me without looking...will a computer do that? The number of cameras alone required to make self driving safe is a cost I don't think Slate is willing to pass on to the consumer.
Exactly what I expected.Update from Slate regarding the question.
This is what i asked...
" Good morning,
I know that the blank slate is not going to offer any automated driver assist systems other than the basic ones that are required, automatic braking, etc. I am curious if Slate has thought about working with, or at least allowing a third party such as comma.ai's openpilot system (https://comma.ai/openpilot) to enable some more advanced driver assist systems such as automated lane centering, and adaptive cruise control to the Slate as an aftermartket add on."
I am good with that response, and it makes sense.
We will see how the truck works with the aftermarket system when it comes out.
TDMA is sweet, I spent some time in the emergency radio space, and P25 phase 2 (TDMA) doubled the amount discrete chanels on the same frequency (with the same 12.5 kilohertz seperation), it esentially doubled the bandwitdh on the network. So applying that tech to vehicle module communication makes sense. CAN has been around for a very long time now (early 1990s) and it is quite slow in comparison. Especially when there are multiple high bandwith modules on the same network that you would need to have to do the types of things that Tesla and other vehicles are trying to do with cars these days.
Good Level 2 would be all I would want, something that can keep it in a lane on the highway and come to a complete stop in traffic without constantly needing to put my hands on the wheel would be great. I dont want to read a book while driving.
