Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    By Drew Dowdell •

    Consumers Confused by Driver-Assist Technology Names

      Consumers think that with names like Co-Pilot 360, ProPilot, or Autopilot, the car should be able to drive itself.

    According to research issued by AAA, 40 percent of Americans expect driver assist systems with names like ProPilot, Co-Pilot 360, or Autopilot to give the vehicle the ability to drive itself.

    In a quote to Automotive News, Director of Automotive Engineering and Industry Relations at AAA says "Somewhere in there, you'd think a pilot is involved, but indeed no, human driving is still required."

    AAA examined 34 vehicle brands to identify the number of driver-assistance names used and found 40 different terms used to describe automated emergency braking, 20 terms for adaptive cruise control, and 19 different lane-keeping assist names. 

    At CES this year, a coalition of automakers, safety advocates, and others launched Partner for Automated Vehicle Education (PAVE). This organization is dedicated to the promotion of these technologies while simplifying the language used to describe them.

    Go to articles

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    oldshurst442
    11 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    *counts G&G members*

    Seems about right... ?

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Haha 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    frogger
    19 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

     

    comic-bob-and-doug-e991927d.jpeg?ver=154

    waynes-world-thumbs-up.gif

     

    • Haha 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    oldshurst442

    http://news.mit.edu/2014/in-the-blink-of-an-eye-0116

    Quote

     

    In the blink of an eye

    MIT neuroscientists find the brain can identify images seen for as little as 13 milliseconds.

    Anne Trafton, MIT News Office 
    January 16, 2014

    Imagine seeing a dozen pictures flash by in a fraction of a second. You might think it would be impossible to identify any images you see for such a short time. However, a team of neuroscientists from MIT has found that the human brain can process entire images that the eye sees for as little as 13 milliseconds — the first evidence of such rapid processing speed.That speed is far faster than the 100 milliseconds suggested by previous studies. In the new study, which appears in the journal Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, researchers asked subjects to look for a particular type of image, such as “picnic” or “smiling couple,” as they viewed a series of six or 12 images, each presented for between 13 and 80 milliseconds.“The fact that you can do that at these high speeds indicates to us that what vision does is find concepts. That’s what the brain is doing all day long — trying to understand what we’re looking at,” says Mary Potter, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and senior author of the study.This rapid-fire processing may help direct the eyes, which shift their gaze three times per second, to their next target, Potter says. “The job of the eyes is not only to get the information into the brain, but to allow the brain to think about it rapidly enough to know what you should look at next. So in general we’re calibrating our eyes so they move around just as often as possible consistent with understanding what we’re seeing,” she says.Other authors of the paper are former MIT postdoc Brad Wyble, now at Pennsylvania State University, postdoc Carl Hagmann, and research assistant Emily McCourt.Rapid identificationAfter visual input hits the retina, the information flows into the brain, where information such as shape, color, and orientation is processed. In previous studies, Potter has shown that the human brain can correctly identify images seen for as little as 100 milliseconds. In the new study, she and her colleagues decided to gradually increase the speeds until they reached a point where subjects’ answers were no better than if they were guessing. All images were new to the viewers.The researchers expected they might see a dramatic decline in performance around 50 milliseconds, because other studies have suggested that it takes at least 50 milliseconds for visual information to flow from the retina to the “top” of the visual processing chain in the brain and then back down again for further processing by so-called “re-entrant loops.” These processing loops were believed necessary to confirm identification of a particular scene or object.However, the MIT team found that although overall performance declined, subjects continued to perform better than chance as the researchers dropped the image exposure time from 80 milliseconds to 53 milliseconds, then 40 milliseconds, then 27, and finally 13 — the fastest possible rate with the computer monitor being used.“This didn’t really fit with the scientific literature we were familiar with, or with some common assumptions my colleagues and I have had for what you can see,” Potter says.Potter believes one reason for the subjects’ better performance in this study may be that they were able to practice fast detection as the images were presented progressively faster, even though each image was unfamiliar. The subjects also received feedback on their performance after each trial, allowing them to adapt to this incredibly fast presentation. At the highest rate, subjects were seeing new images more than 20 times as fast as vision typically absorbs information.“We think that under these conditions we begin to show more evidence of knowledge than in previous experiments where people hadn’t really been expecting to find success, and didn’t look very hard for it,” Potter says.Simon Thorpe, director of the Centre de Recherche Cerveau & Cognition at the University of Toulouse, says the results “illustrate beautifully” that the brain can make sense of briefly presented images.

     

     

    https://www.scienceabc.com/humans/how-fast-can-the-human-brain-process-images.html

     

    Quote

     

    How Fast Can The Human Brain Process Images?

     

    Have you ever cursed yourself for being too slow or for your brain being a bit dull? If so, give yourself a break and prepare for a new cool fact about your brain that will ease your worries!

    What if I told you that your brain can process certain types of information within as little as 13 milliseconds. To put that in perspective, it takes you 300 to 400 milliseconds to blink your eye, which is 1/3 of a second. This means that your brain can identify what it’s looking at approximately 30 times faster than you can blink your eye!

    giphy (13)

    Research: Theme of an image

    Scenic information in the environment hits the retina, which transfers it through electrical signals to the area of the brain that processes visual information, where it can then be interpreted. Scientists in the past thought that a rudimentary interpretation of these images to understand their general theme took at least 1/10 of a second. However, new research conducted by researchers at MIT’s Brain and Cognitive Sciences department has helped to reveal this fascinating new fact.
    wa40l

    Method of study

    In their study, participants were rapidly presented with a set of six or twelve images one after the other with each image being exposed for 13 to 80 milliseconds.  Participants were asked to detect a picture specified by a name (e.g., smiling couple) that was given just before or immediately after the sequence. As predicted, as the exposure times decreased, participant performance of the task declined, but they could still accurately detect the majority of the time. Even at 13 milliseconds, participant responses was more than 50% accurate, suggesting that they were not just guessing. Want to try it? Look at the image below and see if a ‘car and street’ image is available. The images are changing at a speed of 200 ms which is still quite slow.

    wa2x9

    However, there’s a catch. There is a small possibility that they could report the accurate description of an image because after a while, they were more skilled at detecting in short times. Also, researchers couldn’t present the images for shorter than 13 milliseconds due to technical difficulties. To prevent both these factors, further research should be conducted by flashing different images individually for shorter times to arrive at a stronger conclusion and establish an average threshold for human beings visual recognition speed.

    In order to remember the finer details of an image, we would definitely need more time than 13ms.

    More trivia? In case of information that we see, images or scene related information is processed faster than words or sentences. Different and more steps of processing are involved in reading a word which makes it longer. Take a look at the image below. Which one did you understand more quickly?

    source: rhdeepexploration.wordpress.com

    source: rhdeepexploration.wordpress.com

    How fast is our brain?

    Our brain has around 100 billion neurons in it. 100 Billion! That’s a lot of processing power. This lets us have responses which feel instantaneous. It takes 400-500 milliseconds (1 millisecond = 0.001 seconds) on average for us to respond to visual stimuli. If you consider that half of this time is spent in second motor signal and giving the response, the time taken to just analyze and decide on the response is really low. Neuronal activity of around 50-100 milliseconds is enough to create the information and approximately 20-30 milliseconds are required to identify and discriminate complex visual stimuli.

    Why can’t we calculate as fast as a Supercomputer?

    So now we know that our brain is really fast. But we still need computers to analyze things or perform calculations. It is said that a computer whose power is comparable to the brain could process more than 38 thousand trillion operations per second and hold about 3,584 terabytes of memory. Overwhelming, isn’t it? So much power and we can’t clear our exams properly. IBM’s BlueGene supercomputer is one of the fastest supercomputers. It has a computational capability of 92 trillion operations per second and 8 terabytes of storage. So why can’t we be that quick?

    Well, the difference lies in how the brain and a computer function. There can be no simple comparison between a code being executed and a neuron firing. A supercomputer, when given a particular operation, concentrates it’s computing power to figure out and complete the operation. It can dedicate its power to specific function. But where the supercomputer is still

    lagging behind, is having a single conscious thought.

    This is where our brain is different and brilliant. Our brain has multiple parallel processes to carry out at the same time. One of them is keeping us alive. It is constantly active. Since your birth and until your death, the brain works for 24 hours, keeping track of everything and coordinating everything. External stimuli received through our 5 senses is another major task. And the biggest one, keeping us self-aware. Its processing power is stretched across various functions which it cannot stop to just to perform one single function.

    So, haven’t you always wished that you could be superhuman and process information at lightning speed? Turns out that you already can, but you simply don’t know how impressive your brain truly is. Maybe you should get practicing and flex those mental muscles a bit more often.

     

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    A Horse With No Name
    27 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

    Its a good thing Im Canadian,eh?!

    Im not included in this 40% count...

    If we went with Canadians on this site though...

    I do not know how many Canadians there actually are on this site...

    There is Fap, Frogger, Suave, myself...

    So with only those 4...Id say about 25% of Canadians are phoquing stupid... 

    You frogger and Suave are not stupid....so the logical conclusion is...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    oldshurst442

    https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/geeks-weigh-in-does-a-human-think-faster-than-a-computer/

     

     

    Quote

     

    A GFlop represents a billion operations per second. Now, you’re thinking of that Monday morning in class when your professor asked you to perform a simple calculation and your mind went blank. You’re ready to chalk up another point to computers, right? Wrong.

    While the transmission of electrical impulses may be slower in the brain than over wire, the processing power of the brain is represented by not one, but thousands of processors backed into one major super computer. One example is the retina, which is sort of like your computer web cam, in that it transmits light (images) to the brain for processing. Except the retina itself has its own processing power, sort of like a subprocessor – 100 million neurons packed into a one centimeter by one millimeter space.

     

    humaneye

    This stunning little processor is capable of processing ten images, each of about a million light points, every single second. Not only that, the data isn’t transmitted over a single fiber of nerve cells, but over a cable to the brain made up of a million of these fibers, all transmitting bits of data at the same time in parallel. If you multiply the processing power of this volume of neurons by the overall size of the average 1,500 cubic cm human brain, the overall processing power of the brain is about 100 million, million operations per second. For those of you who are trying to do the math with your super computer brain – that’s over 100,000 times more processing power than today’s cutting-edge super computer.

    Image and Language Recognition, Learning and Common Sense

    If our brains are such super computers, then why do we feel so dense and so slow sometimes? I don’t know about you, but I’m horrible at doing calculations in my head. The problem is that people think of computers only in terms of how many calculations it can do per second. The truth is, when it comes to intelligence there’s so much more to process than calculations alone. How do you calculate what the tone of someone’s voice implies they are really saying?  How do you calculate the irony of a joke that, when taken literally, makes no sense at all? This is where the true power of the human brain makes itself known.

    jokemilkHave you ever had a friend who was such a genius that they could perform the most astounding calculations in their head, or they could fathom the most complex equations or problems imaginable – yet when faced with the simplest common-sense joke, they just didn’t get it? This is the major difference between a human brain and a computer.

     

    Author Gary Marcus writes, in his book on the human mind that, “The fundamental difference between computers and the human mind is in the basic organization of memory.”

    What he means is that a computer organizes information in a logical way. To retrieve data, the computer uses logical storage locations. A human brain, on the other hand, remembers where information is stored based on cues. Those cues are other pieces of information or memories connected to the information you need to retrieve. This means that the human mind can connect an almost unlimited number of concepts in a variety of ways, and then sometimes disconnect or recreate connections based on new information. This allows the human to step outside the boundaries of what has already been learned – leading to new art and new inventions that are the trademark of the human race.

    There are a lot of other ways the human mind blows computers away – it can self repair itself, it can produce chemical reactions within its host body to induce instinctive reactions and protect itself from danger, it can handle every last function required to operate the machine of the human body while simultaneously processing information from outside that body, and most importantly it can continue learning and building new connections within that contextual storage array in ways that seem infinite.

    In short, the answer to the question “Does a human think faster than a computer?” is yes. And it can also do a whole lot more than that.

     

     

    3 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

    You frogger and Suave are not stupid....so the logical conclusion is...

    Thanx, but you are being tooo kind for me.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    ×

  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • oldshurst442
      Airplanes

      By oldshurst442 · Posted

    • oldshurst442
      Airplanes

      By oldshurst442 · Posted

    • oldshurst442
      Random Thoughts Thread

      By oldshurst442 · Posted

      I am STILL waiting for everybody and his brother to pull a "Im NEVER gonna drive a piece of shyte Toyota ever again"  like they did with GM, Ford and Chrysler.  But then again, Americans DID vote for Trump a SECOND time.... And Canadians WILL vote for Polievre...  Im asking too much.
    • oldshurst442
      Random Thoughts Thread

      By oldshurst442 · Posted

      I didnt click on @A Horse With No Name facebook link because: 1. Facebook. I try to avoid Facebook as much as possible. Not hard to do anymore. Hope it dies sson though. I digress. Ill save THAT rant for another day. I think Ill start another Toyota hatred rant in the coming days instead... 2. I sooooo much hate Toyota, that I cant even bring myself to celebrate over Toyota problem stories because of the hatred being soooooo strong that even I try to avoid ANYTHING Toyota related.   (I do like some vehicles they produce as a disclaimer) But...I did listen to this one   Alls I got to say is...Toyota NEVER even HAD that reliabilty thing EVEN in the 1990s as that video is saying as the engine sludge thing HAPPENED in the late 1990s.  And even THEN, Toyota blamed the consumer...  So blaming the consumer is NOTHING new to Toyota. But the video is bang on!!! And as I was youtubing googling Toyota to retrieve that video above...I ran into Scotty Kilmore.   And he JUST released this video     Not gonna watch these videos, so I do NOT know of he has a clickbait title, but even Scotty has just acknowledged Toyota boo boos.    I have watched Scotty like 4 or 5 videos 5 years ago or something like that.  But Ill repeat, Toyota NEVER had this mythical relkiabilty thing. Some cars were built like tanks from them. Some cars are STILL built like gtanks from them. But they have had they SAME amount, but probably MORE shytty cars failing then any OTHER OEM...   But hey...  The Toyota kool-aid was some delicious shyte back in the day. Glad I NEVER drank it though.  But if Scotty is TRULY dissing Toyota's reliability, it MUST be a very REAL thing. But it ALWAYS HAD been a thing.  Oh well...
    • oldshurst442
      Random Thoughts Thread

      By oldshurst442 · Posted

      @G. David Felt  is such a lazy ass bum, isnt he? He sleeps all day that  &@#%*!@$  bum!!!       We arent supposed to speak about Toyota problems.  You'll be called an @$$hole, be questioned of your ancestry and citizenship...   

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search