On 11/12/07, Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "I see a human, better give him wide berth". Certainly, the ability to > detect and deal with pedestrians will be required before these things > become street-legal.
Well, I think we'll see robotic vehicles first play a significant role in war zones (including populated urban settings) with flashing lights and audible warning devices advising bystanders of their responsibility to avoid the risk. A difficulty (and this is only my limited, personal opinion) is that as the problems become more subtle, the corresponding requirements for extended inference increase exponentially. But I realize that what we're talking about here are really subtle problems, as in really quite small. > I can easily imagine that next-years grand challenge, or the one > thereafter, will explicitly require ability to deal with cyclists, > motorcyclists, pedestrians, children and dogs. Exactly how they'd test > this, however, I don't know ... Well it's clear from this and an earlier post of yours today that you (among relatively few others here) have a sound grasp of the big picture, and anything remaining is just minor detail. Makes me wonder why I tend to make everything so complicated. - Jef ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=64347199-d76b50
