The article on the end of the link below popped up on one of my feeds this morning. Not altogether my cup,of tea and I doubt I would ever watch it on person or on streaming media but fascinating to find out more about none the less...
Discuss 
Richard
The science behind it is fascinating.
I have as much interest in watching it as I do in watching someone else play a video game. That is, none at all.
Streetwiseguy said:The science behind it is fascinating.
I have as much interest in watching it as I do in watching someone else play a video game. That is, none at all.
Agreed. Seems more like a programming challenge than a sport? The science is cool but meh I'm not interested in watching.
I'm pretty sure I'm the only person here that is more interested in seeing what the cars can do without the limitations imposed by the fragile sack of meat behind the steering wheel.
"Enter autonomous racing, a field that’s not just about high-speed competition but also pushing the boundaries of what autonomous vehicles can achieve and improving their safety".
Everything old is new again. But that aspect of R&D for real-world applications actually makes it more interesting, for me.
I dont watch racing at all, but this interests me. Im an engineer and the design, engineering, science behind all of this is what intrigues me. (Same with meatbag-racing, but often that part isn't really covered)
As I see it, autonomous racing is a bit like space launches. For hardcore nerds it's awesome, but for the general public it's only interesting the first couple of times. The personality of the driver behind the wheel is essential for a racing series to get general popularity.
I think they should use human corner workers and spotters to really stretch the AI. Will they be able to see a corner worker poking a furled black flag in warning? See that corner worker pressing their PTT button on the headset right after they make a dodgy move? Analyze audio from their spotter? The human element still needs to be there. It could be fun if they give the AIs personality profiles.
"leave me alone, human...I know what I'm doing.
Well, this could be useful for racing really dangerous cars. You don't need much safety equipment in them.
Of course, making sure the "driver" systems survive would be a good idea cost wise, so you might have to add some cost back in.
RevRico said:I'm pretty sure I'm the only person here that is more interested in seeing what the cars can do without the limitations imposed by the fragile sack of meat behind the steering wheel.
Yeah, but you could accomplish that with remote control. At least that way there's still human skill involved.
If you're watching for the quality and excitement of the racing iteslf, with the right technology and rule set, I see potential for the racing itself to actually become more enjoyable than modern professional motorsports. It doesn't much matter to me whether the human responsible for the car making a more aggressive pass than anybody else on the track stick is a programmer or a driver. But if you're watching for the antics that come from bruised egos colliding, then maybe not so much.
However, I've not really found spectating any sport to be all that exciting anyways. For me it's more about the sensory experience. I'd rather participate at the lowest level than spectate at the highest level. So the biggest problem I would foresee is the gradual loss of opportunity for to have that experience at those lowest levels, as the autonomous side of the competition would inevitably trickle down and gradually take over at the amateur level as well too.
But how will we get the shots of the worried wife/girlfriend on the pit box as the race winds down, thereby missing the crucial pass for the lead?
RevRico said:I'm pretty sure I'm the only person here that is more interested in seeing what the cars can do without the limitations imposed by the fragile sack of meat behind the steering wheel.
racerfink said:But how will we get the shots of the worried wife/girlfriend on the pit box as the race winds down, thereby missing the crucial pass for the lead?
They'll show shots of the programmers worried girlfriend.
I always go back to this: once upon a time someone did a computer calculation of how fast an F1 car could go........and then Ronnie Peterson went faster because he was doing things the computer programmer woukd ever think to do.
I have programmer friends and they are way smarter than I could hope to be................but I can't count the number of times I've done something and they've said "why would you do it that way" followed by "it shouldn't do that".
Even a lowly amateur such as myself does things the folks doing the programming would never think to do. I preload the throttle during extreme threshold braking to settle the the rear end of the car........and also because I run a lot of rear brake basis to rotate the car and it also keeps the rear tires from locking. This habit is a carry over from my motorcycle racing
When I watch racing I want to see some guy come up with something outside the box.......like Alonso adjusting the diff on corner entry and then again mid corner and finally on exit.
So this is my long winded way of saying no thanks.
In reply to Tom1200 :
The autonomous nature does nothing to prevent seeing 'outside the box' driving solutions born of human ingenuity. It seems you may be taking more issue with the current underdevelopment of a technology in its infancy, than any inherent limitations of the concept itself.
In reply to Tom1200 :
You just need a programmer who also drives race cars to solve this. It's probably already been solved (any coders in here?)
There have been autonomous car racing for years now. It was a big deal when the first car actually finished the race. After that, seeing it was less interesting.
I went to check up on how Roborace was going, turns out it died a quiet death almost 2 years ago before they ever got any cars up to a respectable race pace:
Impressive but, nah. I want the humans being human on the spot not once removed.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:The personality of the driver behind the wheel is essential for a racing series to get general popularity.
That would require giving a berkeley about what a "celebrity" thinks.
F1 cars generate more than enough downforce to drive upside down. Meatbag can't handle it.
120+ degree turns at speed? Car sure, meatbag no.
What beer to drink or "artist" to listen to or brand to buy? Ask a human I guess, but who really gives a E36 M3 when they're covered in logos telling you who pays for them anyway.
But I'm the guy that thinks ramps should randomly pop up on straight aways, and every 10 laps of a NASCAR race, last place should turn around and drive the opposite direction.
RevRico said:That would require giving a berkeley about what a "celebrity" thinks.
F1 cars generate more than enough downforce to drive upside down. Meatbag can't handle it.
They can make the downforce, but neither the fuel nor oil systems are designed to feed properly when the car is upside down so it wouldn't stay up there very long. I expect the driver could remain conscious upside-down long enough for the car to fall off when the engine dies. :)
As for the "celebrity" -- if you look at F1 the only team that really has any fans is Ferrari. Other than the tifosi most F1 fans are fans of drivers, and will follow that driver from team to team.
You'll need to log in to post.
