I really think there must be some forward-looking sensors scanning the road and instructing the suspension in how to act. It doesn't look like it's reactive in any way mechanical, like a spring compensating, but more proactive, where the suspension is acting before the mechanical parts even have a chance to sense any change in the road.

I think the bunny hop may simply be a happy accident where the system reacts to a discrete change in height with such an extreme set of actions (that actually begin first in the rear suspension) that it causes the car to bunny hop.

@Payback -- that helps with the "how", thanks.

A big part of my confusion was/is from how it started the hop *before* it got close to the object. Without driver input that would require sensors aiming ahead (some mix of cameras, sonar, laser range, etc.) that I can see being a part of a car built around such a system from the ground up, but would go beyond the scope of a drop-in "suspension replacement".

But I can see a reactive suspension system working like that -- it has a computer control unit that normally just responds to sensors in the suspension (reactive rather than predictive), but has a button that can manually initiate that maneuver just like you described. In that way I guess it isn't that much different from a Tesla Model S "insane mode"; driver initiates it and the computer (and car) does the rest.

Interesting.

3rd world country..check. This was not just one manufacturing defect. Clearly the main flywheel that grips the cables broke free from the gear box, but electrical sensors failed (door operation when in motion) and emergency brakes which trigger when wheels on the carriage spin to fast (ie not based on a computer triggering system) all failed or never existed to begin with.

Now they need to mate it with a motion sensor so it stops when someone is near...then you could hide it in someone's room and watch them go insane.

There's an aspect of this that I'm confused about:

In order for this to happen, he (the driver) had to have previously engaged the "Autopilot" so that it was operating at the time this occurred, correct? So if he would have been manually driving, it wouldn't have engaged the brakes (at least, not automatically)?

Assuming that is the case, I think this suggests that it would be very much a good idea to include an option to enable emergency / accident avoidance aspects of the autopilot even when you are manually driving.

I'm concerned about sensor faults etc. leading to weirdness if you couldn't turn that OFF if necessary, but barring that, as a driver I think I'd be happy to have this watching my back and covering for my human attention issues pretty close to ALL the time... Maybe it does actually work that way and I'm confused.

Anyway, I continue to be impressed with Tesla.

I wonder how these autopilot cars will handle non-marked roads?

Like for example, if you're driving along, and there's roadworks, and all of a sudden there are no lines, will the sensors be able to figure out where to go?

Not that I'm trying to excuse that sinks bigotry and disregard for human rights, but...
This is a well-known flaw. The infrared sensor on these things needs a bright surface to reflect it back. They also don't work often/well if you're wearing dark clothes, like a black shirt.
But still... fuck that sink.

But then you can't turn corners.

Also, I'd be more worried about it rolling into a road than into a wall, something the sensor won't be able to stop.

Personally I think baby strollers should incorporate dogs. That way you've got a pram that can stay, heel, or walk ahead of you without running off into traffic. You'd even get a built in kidnapper deterrent and alarm.

they should do it so it has another sensor on the back so the stroller stays in front of you (not behind) at a known distance, and it uses the sensor on the front just for obstacle avoidance

Absolutely. It's a mistake to make assumptions about what AI will be like. The doomsayers too often attribute human qualities to it. It's like speculating about alien intelligence. It will come in bits an pieces as we understand it more. My own guess is that, not weighed down by long obsolete genetic imperatives and human psychological pathologies, it will most likely be (in its higher form) an extraordinarily capable problem solver and prognosticator. It will lack the human flaws that typically motivate the killer AIs of science fiction. Of course, it will probably have it's own unique flaws. I do think it's wise to be wary of software that has developed beyond our capability to understand it (much as we don't understand the workings of our own consciousness).

Probably my primary concern about robotic weapons comes from a DARPA proposal I read about some time in the past. What they wanted was an autonomous, bird sized UAV. It would contain surveillance equipment and sensors, and be able to share the data it collects through a mesh network established with it's fellows and the commanders as well as receive orders. It would be intelligent enough to find a suitable strategic vantage point and hide itself. From there it would simply observe. With a large enough swarm of these, perhaps many thousands, you could send them into a city at night. They would each also potentially carry a small warhead allowing them to launch themselves at and destroy threats. Once these robots were entrenched, which might only take an hour or two, whoever controls them would effectively rule the city. Even if they were cut off from their command structure, they might still retain enough intelligence to recognize a particular individual, someone in a forbidden area, someone holding a weapon, or someone not brodcasting the right IFF signal, or any number of things. There might be no defense against such a thing (though there probably will be).

To me, that concept is terrifying. It's not huge hulking terminator-like war machines that could be the greatest threat, just flying, self-guiding, intelligent hand grenades. All someone would need is the capability to manufacture them. No raising an army, no speeches or threats, just a factory and a design. It's also not too far fetched to believe this capability might be available in just a matter of a few decades. They'll be easier to build than nuclear weapons, and oh so convenient and easy to deploy.

Um.... anyways, I dunno where I was going with that. Just lots of random pontificating, but because it's technology, it's silly to try to stop it with legislation. It will happen, as ChaosEngine rightly points out, the best course of action is to be on top of it and to understand it.

Sensors, gyroscopes, computers

*spammer

[admin note: this user inadvertently triggered our automated spam sensor, but does not appear to be a spammer]

Congratulations! Your video, First Microwave Upgrade in Forever: Infrared Heat Sensor, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 12 Badge!

Your video, First Microwave Upgrade in Forever: Infrared Heat Sensor, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I have a microwave that detects heat and has a "warm this"-button, using a weight sensor, heat sensor and humidity sensor to heat the food perfectly. It works great, and it's from 1994.