Apple’s recent macOS 10.13.4 update is causing some havoc among people using screen extenders like Duet Display and Air Display, as well as USB DisplayLink-connected monitors. AppleInsider – Frontpage News
Bad drivers may soon get some crucial tips on the road from Apple, if the company’s latest patent ever becomes a reality. While everyone in tech is working on driverless car systems, it appears that Apple is looking into ways to make it safer for humans to get behind the wheel too. Apple filed for […]
Traffic sucks. It hinders every major metropolitan center worldwide. Now New York City, the planet’s second-most-congested city, might have a solution. If they do it right, it might catch on.
The idea is simple: congestion pricing. Want to drive in a busy part of the city? Pay a fee.
This is a win-win. It would discourage tight-fisted drivers from going there — or maybe from driving at all — which would reduce emissions. For drivers that do pay, the city can spend the money it collects on projects that reducecongestion. In New York, for example, that would mean using the funds to improve the city’s subway and bus systems, which, let me tell you, are in dire need of a cash injection.
There are a few cities worldwide that already have congestion pricing systems in place. But it hasn’t caught on yet in the U.S., in part because it’s not all that appealing to the average voter.
“It is almost universally acknowledged among transportation planners that congestion pricing is the best way, and perhaps the only way, to significantly reduce urban traffic congestion,” wrote a team of urban planners from UCLA in a 2016 issue of Access Magazine. “Politically, however, congestion pricing has always been a tough sell. Most drivers don’t want to pay for roads that are currently free, and most elected officials—aware that drivers are voters—don’t support congestion pricing.”
In NYC, the idea has been around for more than a decade. In 2007, then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg proposed the idea of congestion pricing in New York. His proposal never made it past the state assembly. Last summer, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo revisited the concept, telling The New York Times it was “an idea whose time has come.”
In October 2017, Cuomo assembled a state task force, Fix NYC, to draft a proposal on how congestion pricing would best work in New York. In that proposal, the group suggested charging vehicles a set price to enter busy areas of Manhattan depending on the vehicle’s size and intended use: $ 11.52 for passenger cars, $ 25.34 for trucks, and $ 2 to $ 5 per ride for taxis and for-hire vehicles.
According to the Fix NYC proposal, the city could implement the fee for taxis and for-hire vehicles within a year, with truck and car fees following in 2020.
Fix NYC delivered the proposal to state lawmakers in January. Those lawmakers are currently working to deliver the state’s new budget by April 1, and they could decide to include congestion pricing within it.
If it doesn’t happen in NYC, other cities in the U.S. may give congestion pricing a go. Portland, Oregon, is also exploring congestion pricing, and a group in Los Angeles is promoting the idea as well (San Francisco tried, and failed, to pass its own congestion pricing system in 2010).
If New York does decide to take a chance on congestion pricing, it could start a domino effect across the nation.
It seems as though the biggest hurdle will be simply implementing the system. That’s at least what happened in Stockholm. “The closer you get to implementation, the more the drawbacks stand out,” Stockhold transportation director Jonas Eliasson told StreetBlog NYC. “If you survive this valley of political death, and people actually see the benefits, and also realize that, in addition to the benefits, it’s actually not as bad as you thought — it’s not so hard adapting to this — then support starts going up again.”
Affectiva this week announced its Automotive AI platform for monitoring humans. If the idea of a robot watching you while you drive bothers you, consider that most accidents are caused by distracted drivers. An AI that knows whether you’re paying attention or not could potentially save as many lives as one that does the driving for us. Even with driverless cars on the roads now, it’ll take at least a decade for the kind of massive fleet rollouts the experts predict. For better or worse, people are going to remain behind the wheels of at least some cars for a…
Affectiva, an MIT Media Lab startup, has launched the Automotive AI service, which enables the manufacturers of connected vehicles and in-car systems to track drivers’ and passengers’ emotional responses.
The system is designed to boost road safety.
Affectiva said that its AI model offers a deep understanding of driver and occupant emotions, cognitive states, and reactions to the driving experience, including joy, surprise, fear, and anger. More significantly for road safety, it can also identify drowsiness, yawning, and other signs of fatigue.
It does this by measuring facial expressions and voice tones in real time. The system tracks the head and face, analysing expressions, sounds, yawning, eye-closing, and blinking patterns to understand the emotions and states of mind of both drivers and passengers.
Affectiva said it is working with the likes of Porsche, Daimler, BMW, robotaxi startup Renovo, and vehicle safety systems providers such as Autoliv, as well as hardware providers NVIDIA and Intel. This suggests that new connected cars will come equipped with the AI in the near future.
Affectiva’s aim is to combine the software with other onboard systems to make for a more connected drive. For example, the AI could trigger audiovisual alerts or seat belt vibrations to ensure the driver remains engaged, and intervene in dangerous driving situations that may stem from fatigue or distractions.
By sensing fatigue, anger, or frustration the AI can determine if an autonomous car should take control from its driver – and when it is safe to pass back control.
The software could also call upon a virtual assistant to guide divers through alternative ‘road rage free’ routes if they seem angry, or play a soothing playlist to calm them down.
The system isn’t just focused on drivers: passengers are equally important, said Affectiva. Passenger reactions could be used to personalise video or music playlists, or adjust heating and lighting, while the autonomous driving style could be altered if passengers seem anxious or uncomfortable.
Affectiva used a database of six million faces from 87 countries to build its AI model. The startup has also developed a voice analysis tool for the makers of AI assistants and social robots.
This innovative mix of AI, in-car systems, connected cars, and autonomy holds great promise for the future of safer, more pleasurable driving for all – if these systems are designed and deployed sensitively.
Too intrusive or insistent a presence in cars may trigger some of the problems that AI is designed to solve. At heart, both driving and personal transport are about people; too machine-like an experience and many car owners or users may begin to feel that the humanity is being taken out of the picture.
Uber is being accused of its drivers denying rides to a Texas woman with cerebral palsy on “approximately 25 separate occasions” across 2016 and 2017, according to a new lawsuit filed today. The woman claims that drivers repeatedly canceled rides because she requires the use of a service dog. The complaint, filed in Northern California District Court, accuses Uber of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Texas Human Resources Code, and the plaintiff is seeking damages for “intentional infliction of emotional distress.”
The plaintiff, D’Edra Steele, details a number of instances in which she was allegedly denied service by Uber drivers in the lawsuit. Many of the claims revolve around Uber drivers refusing her service and…
“MIT = Mathematically Incompetent Theories (at least as it pertains to ride-sharing),” Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi tweeted.
The average Uber driver makes less than $ 4 an hour, at least according to a new paper published by MIT. In fact, the study, which coupled data from a survey of 1,100 drivers with vehicle cost information, found that 74 percent of drivers earned less than minimum wage in the state they worked in.
“Perhaps most surprisingly, the earnings figures suggested in the paper are less than half the hourly earnings numbers reported in the very survey the paper derives its data from,” Hall writes in a new post.
Even Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi sounded off on Twitter, saying MIT stood for “Mathematically Incompetent Theories.”
The Rideshare Guy survey — the underlying data used for the paper — found Uber drivers made an average of $ 15.68 an hour — but that’s before the costs of gas, maintenance and other expenses.
The MIT paper then incorporated the cost-per-mile for driving for Uber.
A brief on the study, which won’t be released in full for a few months, reads:
A Median driver generates $ 0.59 per mile of driving, and incurs costs of $ 0.30 per mile. 30% of drivers incur expenses exceeding their revenue, or lose money for every mile they drive. (Figure 1) On an hourly basis, the median profit is $ 3.37 per hour and 74% of drivers earn less than the minimum wage in the state where they operate.
Still, Uber claims the researchers’ methodology was flawed and further that drivers may not have understood the questions they were asked.
This is the crux of the company’s argument:
The Rideshare Guy survey asks a number of questions about how much drivers earn and how many hours they work per week. The most important are questions 11, 14, and 15.
Q11: “How many hours per week do you work on average? Combine all of the on-demand services that you work for.”
Q14: “How much money do you make in the average month? Combine the income from all your on-demand activities.”
Q15: “How much of your total monthly income comes from driving?”
The problem in this case is inconsistent logic on the part of the paper’s authors. Consider this: for question 14, the authors assume respondents are reporting income from *all* sources, not just on-demand work. As a result of this assumption, the authors discount the earnings from Q14 by the answer to Q15, “How much of your total monthly income comes from driving?”
For example: if a driver answered $ 1,000 to $ 2,000 to Q14, the authors would interpret that as $ 1,420.63² according to their methodology. If the respondent then answered “Around half” to Q15, the authors conclude this driver made $ 710.32 driving — half what they actually earned from driving with ridesharing platforms.
However, and perhaps just as important, the authors also assume that drivers understood Q11 perfectly well and that the hours reported only applied to on-demand work. As a result, they divide an incorrectly low earnings number by the correct number of hours.
We’ve reached out to the researchers and will update when we hear back.
Arizona will now allow self-driving cars to operate in the state without a safety driver behind the wheel. Governor Doug Ducey signed an executive order this week making it legal for these vehicles to operate on their own as long as they abide by all… Engadget RSS Feed
Intel is introducing a new feature for its processors with integrated graphics, allowing games to be automatically optimized on systems. The feature is similar to Nvidia’s GeForce Experience, an application that’s designed to tweak game settings so they work best on a laptop or PC. Intel’s new graphics control software is particularly useful on laptops that aren’t really designed to run games, and it works on all Skylake or newer processors.
PC World reports that this new driver update includes support for Intel’s new Kaby Lake G chips that have AMD’s Radeon Vega graphics built in. Dell and HP are both launching laptops with these new processors, and they should be a lot better for gaming. Battlefield 1, Battlefield 4, American Truck…
The gig economy was supposed to be the great equalizer. Shuttling people around town, shopping for groceries, or putting up with a temporary tenant are about as gender neutral as a job can get. So why are men earning seven percent more when driving for Uber? A new study thinks it has pinpointed the cause. And if you’re assuming it’s sexism — a fair guess considering Uber’s reportedly toxic culture and past issues with female employees — you’d be wrong. The study, co-authored by Uber, Stanford, and the University of Chicago, relied on two years of Uber data from 1.9…