Self-driving cars--seriously?

[Kev Williams]

I'm perfectly fine with self-braking cars, and self-parking cars, but I for one DO NOT want to share any roadway whatsoever with a self-DRIVING car. http://www.engraver1.com/gifs/thumbdown.gif

I'm worried enough about driving next to human-driven cars, especially when on one of my bikes. At least humans can usually hear HORNS.

I don't trust computers. Go ahead and tell me how jetliners land themselves. But you'll notice the pilot is still at the controls, just in case. But this nonsense I hear about Uber wanting to be the first 'Johnny Cab', scares the bageezuz outta me. PEOPLE should drive cars. Or walk.

Just curious what other people think.

[Jim Andrew]

Think this is coming along at the right time for someone my age. There are a LOT of old people on the road, and having the ability to put an address into the car for your destination, and the car taking you there will be great for old people.

[Sam Murdoch]

They are known in the biz as "AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES" though someone cracked that he won't consider a car truly autonomous until when you tell it to take you to work it takes you to the beach instead. :D

I'm not too worried about it. The technology will advance faster than our reflexes and I believe the end result will be greatly enhanced safety and much more interesting family vacations or weekend getaways of bliss with your Dear one. Imagine all the possibilities ... :rolleyes:

[Art Mann]

My opinion is that self driving cars will never be a success until the government forces the entire population to give up control of their vehicles. Autonomous cars always follow the rules. That means human drivers are always at the advantage and can bully the self driving cars and its passengers any time they like. Think about it.

[Sam Murdoch]

My opinion is that self driving cars will never be a success until the government forces the entire population to give up control of their vehicles. Autonomous cars always follow the rules. That means human drivers are always at the advantage and can bully the self driving cars and its passengers any time they like. Think about it.

Insurance companies will force the issue. The not so free market will win that battle.

[Bert Kemp]

I ride a motorcycle. Everyday I have cars cut me off, pull out in front of me, run red lights and come close to hitting me. I think they will make the roads safer when there is more of them.

[Mel Fulks]

The crash test robots..... warning, don't call them "dummies ",are demanding promotion. And have some well oiled lobbyists

[Mike Chance in Iowa]

It's not just cars. Trucks too. https://youtu.be/Wweoh7WJNUw

I look at them as a safety option to help enhance/improve the driver's ability, but I see it coming to a time in the future where there is no driver in the seat.

[Art Mann]

Think about this scenario. You are riding along in your self driving Tesla sedan and a car pulls up behind you and starts tailgating. Your car will immediately slow down to try to maintain a safe distance for the speed. The car behind just keeps pushing towards your bumper. Your vehicle will slow down some more. This will continue until your mighty Tesla stops to let the other car go on by. If you were driving the car, you might speed up a little and change lanes to avoid the bully. There might be lots of other options in that particular situation that a rule following computer can't even imagine, much less execute.

[Dave Zellers]

It's not just cars. Trucks too.

I agree it's coming and won't be stopped but how will we handle income when the robots take half the jobs?

there are some serious challenges, no, opportunities lying ahead. :cool:

But folks have been worrying about this stuff forever.

[Barry McFadden]

Anyone who thinks that self driving cars are a good idea or cars that "automatically" do this or that should watch this demo of a Volvo with automatic pedestrian detection!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_47utWAoupo

[Frederick Skelly]

I'm not a fan of them, but I think they are going to happen. Still a lotta bugs to work out yet.

Art: I'm not following you. Why would the designer tell the car to "slow down to maintain a safe distance" with a car tailgating behind me? There are other alternatives, like "move to the right lane".

[Keith Outten]

I wonder what will happen when your car gets a virus and you see a text warning on the dashboard that says send one thousand dollars via PayPal immediately or I will run your car into a concrete wall?

What happens when a solar flare interrupts the GPS connection and your riding along at 60 MPH? Will all of the cars around you go haywire? Is this a big bang theory?

:)
.

[Prashun Patel]

The death rate (either by people or miles driven) is way down since the 50's. Even the absolute number of deaths is down dramatically since the 70's.
However, motor vehicle deaths appear to still be the leading (or #2) cause of non-health related deaths in the US for people between the ages of roughly 5 and 65, according to the CDC.

I think we underestimate the advances in safety that have been made. However, we also underestimate the sheer magnitude of the danger of driving.

Computers will solve the problem of distracted drivers, and will reduce the number of these types of driving deaths. However, whether it's technology, war, or nature, humans overestimate their ability to foresee the complete implications of their decisions. We will likely just replace one problem with a different kind of problem - and it's probably not the one we all think.

[Malcolm McLeod]

I ride a motorcycle. Everyday I have cars cut me off, pull out in front of me, run red lights and come close to hitting me. I think they will make the roads safer when there is more of them.

I drive a car. Everyday I have motorcycles cut me off, pull into an already small following distance in front of me, split lanes, drive on the shoulder, pass at double the speed limit, and ride wheelies while standing on the seat in the HOV lane. Where's the autonomous motorcycles?

I saw a trivia note the other day, that car ownership will plummet by 2030 as large segments of the population switch to ride sharing and autonomous car services to meet their routine needs. Get used to it.

As for the autonomous cars, they will evolve. If you can foresee a potential problem today (GPS failure or viruses), developers will formulate a solution.

And just for giggles, maybe your taxes will be reduced? Autonomous cars can 'platoon'; humans need ~2 seconds of reaction time, or about 120' spacing at 70mph. Computers could set up a comm link to the car at the head of a platoon (>2 cars 'linked' in a lane). If the first car brakes, the last car is braking in 8-10 miliseconds. This allows safe following distances of ~2' at 70mph. Result is higher speeds, more cars on a given road, faster commutes, less road construction, and lower taxes. (Okay, Okay!! I've met a politician and this is just a dream - - at least the lower taxes part.)

[glenn bradley]

My opinion is starting to shift. I originally felt as you do; learn to drive or don't drive. Unfortunately, there is too much money in letting poorly trained morons operate motorized deadly weapons (I can do a lot more damage in one shot with a car than I can with a .45). This being the reality it is probably better that those who cannot drive, ride in a car that can.

[Brian Henderson]

The problem is, there are a lot of people, myself included, who simply like to drive. We are not going to give up that autonomy for anything.

[Pat Barry]

Self driving cars can't be any worse than drunk drivers, teenagers or adults texting while driving, etc. At least they won't be distracted by nonsense when they are proceeding along, plus, they will know where they are going and will do expected things when issues arise. Bring them on.

[Art Mann]

It would not be good to attempt to move into the right lane if there is a big truck next to you.


I'm not a fan of them, but I think they are going to happen. Still a lotta bugs to work out yet.

Art: I'm not following you. Why would the designer tell the car to "slow down to maintain a safe distance" with a car tailgating behind me? There are other alternatives, like "move to the right lane".

[Bert Kemp]

True Malcolm but if an idiot on a motorcycle hits you he's more likely to kill himself then you, on the other hand if an idiot in a car hits me I'm a goner.


I drive a car. Everyday I have motorcycles cut me off, pull into an already small following distance in front of me, split lanes, drive on the shoulder, pass at double the speed limit, and ride wheelies while standing on the seat in the HOV lane. Where's the autonomous motorcycles?

I saw a trivia note the other day, that car ownership will plummet by 2030 as large segments of the population switch to ride sharing and autonomous car services to meet their routine needs. Get used to it.

As for the autonomous cars, they will evolve. If you can foresee a potential problem today (GPS failure or viruses), developers will formulate a solution.

And just for giggles, maybe your taxes will be reduced? Autonomous cars can 'platoon'; humans need ~2 seconds of reaction time, or about 120' spacing at 70mph. Computers could set up a comm link to the car at the head of a platoon (>2 cars 'linked' in a lane). If the first car brakes, the last car is braking in 8-10 miliseconds. This allows safe following distances of ~2' at 70mph. Result is higher speeds, more cars on a given road, faster commutes, less road construction, and lower taxes. (Okay, Okay!! I've met a politician and this is just a dream - - at least the lower taxes part.)

[Dan Friedrichs]

For those of you asking the "Well, how will it know what to do if....?", or "What if....goes wrong?" - type questions: do you really think you're the first to think of those situations? I don't mean that rudely, but some of the most valuable companies in the world (Google, Apple, Tesla) are spending billions of dollars on this - if there were a show-stopping problem that a layman could anticipate with 10 seconds of thought, presumably they've also thought about it (and devised a solution)...

We've gotten acclimated to the risk of driving to the point we don't realize how dangerous it is. The lifetime odds of dying in a car accident are something like 1:600. That's WAY too high for my comfort. Self-driving cars will drastically reduce that, as virtually ALL accidents are the fault of driver failures.

You "simply like to drive"? I really like to shoot guns, but I don't get to do it in the middle of a congested metropolitan downtown - I go to a private range or something similar. That's where you'll be doing your driving, in the future, if you want.

[Malcolm McLeod]

True Malcolm but if an idiot on a motorcycle hits you he's more likely to kill himself then you, on the other hand if an idiot in a car hits me I'm a goner.

This makes me feel so much better - - knowing I'll probably survive the accident someone else is going to cause. Who needs manners or skill; we've got air bags.

[Matt Meiser]

Reminds me of the horseless carriage debates.

[Mike Circo]

I won't believe the driverless car hype until I see one drive in a Chicago winter.
6:00 am in January, still pitch dark, it's been snowing for 4 hours and the plows haven't been out yet. A two lane road with no shoulder covered in snow so you can barely make out the street from the ditch. Snow is freezing on all surfaces, you must keep the wipers on high, the inside blower on hot on the window to keep a small area open to see. Oncoming headlights illuminate the falling snow and create glare on your windshield. There is a glaze of ice under the snow in the tracks, but not in the untraveled areas so you get better traction off the centerline a bit.

When a "driverless" car can handle that and other similar weather events I see here year round (Raging downpours, fog, condensataion on the windows, low angle sun right in my face... etc.) only then will I believe it. As far as I hear, they are testing these in more fair weather states, not in really bad conditions.

[Pat Barry]

Reminds me of the horseless carriage debates.
What do you remember about those old timer?

[Rick Potter]

All the gas stations locally sell fuel that is 10% ethanol. Blood alcohol levels for drunk drivers start at .08.

Can a car get a ticket for drunk driving?

[Matt Meiser]

I thought you had a plug in electric Rick?

[Keith Outten]

Who will be responsible when a there are mechanical or electrical problems that cause an accident? It won't be the owner, or the insurance company that's for sure. If the car manufacturer is responsible can you imagine how much the price of a new car will be. Maybe this is part of the plan to make personal transportation to expensive for the middle class.

[Malcolm McLeod]

I won't believe the driverless car hype until I see one drive in a Chicago winter....

Cameras (incld infrared), ultrasonic sensors, and radar need much, much smaller 'view' apertures than our heads. And so, require much lower heating demand to keep them clear. They ignore glare too.

Lane keeping? Embed a mag tape in the road.

As for traction, wait 'til you see this new-fangled thing called "ABS". It seems that a microprocessor, with appropriate sensors and actuators, can actually apply the brake more effectively than a human.

If we're not careful, any day now cars will have stability control, traction control, steering 'nudges' when we get too close to the lines, maybe even drowsy/distracted driver detection? ....Surely it won't be better than a human?

Me, I drive 114 miles every day and can't wait to be able to sleep, or read, or work on my way to work/home.

Edit: By the way, anybody look in their engine bay lately. Still see a mechanical linkage from the steering wheel to the wheels?? ...Wonder what happened to it?:confused: Could it be some of that CPU voodoo doing the steering? Wonder who's going to pay for it when I hit something after all four of the redundant processors and the actuators fail?

[glenn bradley]

The problem is, there are a lot of people, myself included, who simply like to drive. We are not going to give up that autonomy for anything.


Absolutely agree. Drivers who can prove that they are aware of how to properly operate a motor vehicle should have the option ;-) A free (the insurance companies could fund this out of what they spend on paperclips) test drive every 3 or 4 years should be adequate perhaps with shortening intervals as the driver ages.

[Mel Fulks]

Rick, that is some seriously mature ...and hilarious thinking!

[Dan Friedrichs]

Who will be responsible when a there are mechanical or electrical problems that cause an accident? It won't be the owner, or the insurance company that's for sure. If the car manufacturer is responsible can you imagine how much the price of a new car will be. Maybe this is part of the plan to make personal transportation to expensive for the middle class.

I'm more optimistic. It's conceivable that the total cost of car ownership goes down significantly, as they'll crash MUCH less often. Insurance will cost almost nothing.

Also, think of how the "sharing" economy impacts this. Most cars are very poorly "utilized" - they spend most of the day in a garage or parking lot, being used for brief trips between. Garages and parking lots take up a LOT of room. What if you could just "summon" a car using a phone app, have it arrive, drive you to where you want to go, and then head off to pick up its next passenger? Suddenly, that car is maximally utilized, parking spaces are re-developed for more productive uses, and no one actually needs to spend the capital to buy a car, since one can just be "rented" for the trips you want.

Need a truck to pick up some plywood? Summon one. No need to have that "beater" in the driveway going unused 364 days a year. Need a large van for a family vacation? No problem.

To me, that seems like a way to make transportation much cheaper for everyone, not more expensive...

[Kev Williams]

I saw a trivia note the other day, that car ownership will plummet by 2030 as large segments of the population switch to ride sharing and autonomous car services to meet their routine needs.
I have a Readers Digest book "How In The World" that's all about modern technology, and how it all works. Like, underwater buried phone lines-- oh yeah, this book was written in 1991, and is actually pretty hilarious at times!

-- like the flat-out statement: "By the year 2020 the world's know oil reserves are due to run out." Here it is 2-1/2 years away and the world has more oil than it knows what to do with ;)

--so much for 'future trivia'...


What happens when a solar flare interrupts the GPS connection and your riding along at 60 MPH?
Anyone who hasn't had a computer problem in the past 2 years, post up! And exactly, what IF an autonomous car loses its ability to function at 60mph? What's the "on-error then-" plan? Shoot out warning flares? Pull over? How can it pull over if it doesn't know how to drive? Just stop? That's about the only actual thing the car could do, slowly stop. And that plan will work just dandy at 60mph in traffic...

Someone mentioned driving in Chicago in Winter- How about in Utah at ANY time? There's 3 people in Utah that actually DON'T speed up to block a would-be lane-changer with his turn signal on. (I'm one of them :D ) How do you train an autonomous car for aggressive driving?

Self driving cars will NOT save lives, they'll only make a few people more rich....

[Edwin Santos]

Reminds me of the horseless carriage debates.

Based on your avatar, you look great for your age Matt.

[Dan Friedrichs]

Anyone who hasn't had a computer problem in the past 2 years, post up! And exactly, what IF an autonomous car loses its ability to function at 60mph? What's the "on-error then-" plan? Shoot out warning flares? Pull over? How can it pull over if it doesn't know how to drive? Just stop? That's about the only actual thing the car could do, slowly stop. And that plan will work just dandy at 60mph in traffic...


In all seriousness: do you think you're the first person to consider those issues? Do you think the thousands of highly-trained engineers at Tesla, Google, and Apple haven't considered those problems and decided that they can be solved?

[Malcolm McLeod]

... And exactly, what IF an autonomous car loses its ability to function at 60mph? ....

So we have solar flares and viruses identified as root-causes of this 'autonomous loss of ability'. That's 2, and we'll multiply x3 to account for the unknowns...?? Then divide by 4 for redundant processors. So, 1.5 failure modes per 100,000 miles.

Compare that to the teenager down the street: phone, facebook, twitter, snapchat, texts from 137 people, ipod, radio, rain, THAT song on the radio, eek - snow, bump in the road, a passing car, adjust the mirror, check out self in mirror, wonder if I can drive for Uber, a passing hottie, a billboard, wonder if I can be a model, a squirrel, look - up in the sky, a bird, a plane, no - gotta check my makeup, cool tree. OK, now for the next mile of road...:eek::eek:

...Odd stance on technology, from someone who's signature indicates you clearly embrace technology.

Just thought of this: In my formative years, I lusted after a '55 Mercedes Gullwing; it would meet ALL of my transportation needs! My sons are currently at the same approximate ages as I was, and they too lust after something that will meet ALL of their transportation needs - - the Uber app on their mobile phone. ....Guess which of us has fulfilled our transportation fantasy.:cool:

[Sam Murdoch]

* Redundancies * Redundancies * Redundancies * No matter, this will happen with or without our approval but in 20 or 30 years rather than 5 or 10 (though in the short term there will be some of this action on our highways). Wait for it ...

[Rick Potter]

Hi Matt,

Yup, I have a plug in car, matter of fact, my wife likes it so much I have two plug in cars now. Both Ford C-Max Energi's. They don't drive themselves though, but they can park themselves. They go about 20 miles on juice, then the motor turns on, and they operate like a Prius. Perfect for most short trips, and local driving like the wife's car, which has averaged 201MPG since new. Mine gets driven farther, and made a trip to Idaho last year and it has averaged 101 MPG since new. 37 MPG on gas during the Idaho trip.

[Ole Anderson]

I don't need a car to drive me from point A to point B. I need a car that just makes long distance highway driving easier. Auto braking, adaptive cruise control, auto steering to keep me in the lane I want to be in. To do everything needed to adapt to city driving, backing out onto my busy street, merging onto a freeway, finding a parking space at Piggly Wiggly requires so much more than just highway driving. Keep it simple to start. We are getting there with adaptive cruise, emergency braking and lane departure, just add the auto steering and we will be good to go. And keeping my 8'6" (not counting the mirrors) wide motor home between the concrete barriers and the semi next to me while in 11 foot narrow lanes in a construction zone chicane while raining at night would be nice...

Anyone care to venture what we will be seeing as far as technology in 100 years?

[Pete Simmons]

" By the way, anybody look in their engine bay lately. Still see a mechanical linkage from the steering wheel to the wheels?? ...Wonder what happened to it?"

Can any one name a car on the road today that goes NOT have some kind of mechanical steering linkage? I think there are a couple that are close but they still have a backup mech method.

Many cars today have electric assist. My RAV4 for one. My steering computer gave out but still had a somewhat heavy but workable mech system.

[Kev Williams]

oh, the irony-- I'm running down self driving cars and one of my customers from way-back walks in today. Needs a SS license plate frame engraved with the Spacex logo...
After a few pleasantries, I find out that for the past 5 years he's been working with Elon Musk as one of his electrical engineers...

go figure :D

[Kev Williams]

...Odd stance on technology, from someone who's signature indicates you clearly embrace technology.
Most of my machines are pushing 30 years old, 6 of my 8 computers are running XP, one is running 98SE... My "new" tech is all from China...

I may need technology to make a living, but I hardly EMBRACE it--- I simply endure it because I HAVE to-- why do you think I don't trust computers? ;)

[Malcolm McLeod]

" By the way, anybody look in their engine bay lately. Still see a mechanical linkage from the steering wheel to the wheels?? ...Wonder what happened to it?"

Can any one name a car on the road today that goes NOT have some kind of mechanical steering linkage? I think there are a couple that are close but they still have a backup mech method.

Many cars today have electric assist. My RAV4 for one. My steering computer gave out but still had a somewhat heavy but workable mech system.

My questions were rhetorical (perhaps very soon to be literal). ....This was 2013 article (https://www.wired.com/2013/05/al_drivebywire/), and it had 3 computers. If they have 30,000,000 miles without logging a need for the referenced fail-safe, when will the bean counters push the engies to 'just leave the mechanicals out, no one will care'...??

[Pat Barry]

I don't need a car to drive me from point A to point B. I need a car that just makes long distance highway driving easier. Auto braking, adaptive cruise control, auto steering to keep me in the lane I want to be in. To do everything needed to adapt to city driving, backing out onto my busy street, merging onto a freeway, finding a parking space at Piggly Wiggly requires so much more than just highway driving. Keep it simple to start. We are getting there with adaptive cruise, emergency braking and lane departure, just add the auto steering and we will be good to go. And keeping my 8'6" (not counting the mirrors) wide motor home between the concrete barriers and the semi next to me while in 11 foot narrow lanes in a construction zone chicane while raining at night would be nice...

Anyone care to venture what we will be seeing as far as technology in 100 years?
Sounds like you want to sleep while driving...autonomous vehicle

[Mike Chance in Iowa]

I drive a car. Everyday I have motorcycles cut me off, pull into an already small following distance in front of me, split lanes, drive on the shoulder, pass at double the speed limit, and ride wheelies while standing on the seat in the HOV lane. Where's the autonomous motorcycles?

They are getting closer. Check out all the bells and whistles Ducati has that improve rider safety (including traction and wheelie control, cornering lights)


I won't believe the driverless car hype until I see one drive in a Chicago winter.


They are getting closer. https://youtu.be/IY7O_-nWUbk

I recall reading years ago about testing sensors or markers buried in the snow in Canada or Alaska, but I can't find any reference to it on the internet.


What do you remember about those old timer?

Ha! Very good one!



To me, that seems like a way to make transportation much cheaper for everyone, not more expensive...

I agree with this concept, but I wouldn't be one that would want to use it. I wouldn't want to be the next person in the vehicle after a busy, exhausted adult and 4 active kids with sticky food and sticky fingers were in it.

[Frederick Skelly]

It would not be good to attempt to move into the right lane if there is a big truck next to you.

Sure. But why not program it to look right and wait for the lane to clear, and other choices - like a human would do. (Note: Not all options available to a human of course. For example, dont want the autonomous car to give the tailgater a one-finger salute. :D)

[Doug Garson]

Anyone remember voice recognition software from 5 or 10 years ago? Anyone use Google Maps with voice recognition for navigation today? No comparison. Anyone remember Lotus 123 or Excel from 5 or 10 years ago vs Excel today? Remember trying to format a cell and get a spreadsheet to print the way you want it to look? Again no comparison. Given that the rate of improvements in technology are accelerating rapidly any deficiencies in self driving cars will be overcome a lot faster than any deficiencies in human behavior like texting while driving or allowing other distractions to cause accidents. I like to drive but I'm retired and have the luxury of avoiding rush hour commuting. When I was working I took public transit most of the way. If I had to commute today without the option to take public transit I'd have a hard look at self driving cars. I can see a future when if you want to drive yourself you go to an amusement park, pick your car (1973 Datsun 240Z) and the track (Mosport (I'm Canadian)) and go for it. Of course it will all be digital and the amusement park will be in your basement. I don't think self driving cars will be the norm this year but I bet they will be sooner than many expect.

[Dave Zellers]

Resistance is futile.

The left lane will be reserved for emergency vehicles and politicians and the right lane will be for the regular people.

[Doug Garson]

Resistance is futile.

The left lane will be reserved for emergency vehicles and politicians and the right lane will be for the regular people.
Guess which lane will be maintained and which will be full of potholes?

[Chris Parks]

If we're not careful, any day now cars will have stability control, traction control, steering 'nudges' when we get too close to the lines, maybe even drowsy/distracted driver detection? ....Surely it won't be better than a human?

Strange, my car has all that now and more, it stops in traffic without me touching the brakes, takes off when the car in front moves, keeps its distance from the car in front, let's you know if there are cars in the adjacent traffic lanes and more. Give the European manufacturers three years and all this stuff and way more will be in electric vehicles and I can hardly wait for that day. I hope not but I think Tesla is going to get bull dozed when that happens which will be a shame as they are the ground breakers in all this.

[Wayne Lomman]

For me this is another example of the imposition of control. Organisations and governments rely on control of the masses to bolster their power and driverless cars are a means of exercising this control.
The other point is that driver's cars are laughably irrelevant in my rural area. You can't even get to my place with a gps - you get lost in paddocks kilometres away - so how will they guide a driverless car?
Finally, can someone please tell me what is going to happen to the spare people that all the artificial intelligence is steadily replacing and how are all these fancy gadgets going to be purchased when the people have no jobs and therefore no income? Cheers

[Malcolm McLeod]

... please tell me what is going to happen to the spare people that all the artificial intelligence is steadily replacing...

We'll give them positions as traffic control technicians, post them at all the intersections that frail GPS systems mis-guide on, and then we can all get to your place.;)

I believe your 'jobs' argument was used by the Union of Amalgamated Brotherhood of the Traveling Buggy-whip Manufacturer's Guild. This too shall pass.

[Pat Barry]

The other point is that driver(less)cars are laughably irrelevant in my rural area. You can't even get to my place with a gps - you get lost in paddocks kilometres away - so how will they guide a driverless car?
All they have to do is track your route one time with a GPS and bingo, problem solved.

by the way, what are paddocks?

[Chris Parks]

GPS hasn't reached Tasmania yet.:)

Paddock: a small field or enclosure where horses are kept or exercised. Sometimes though they can be very large like square miles large in Oz.

[Curt Harms]

They are getting closer. Check out all the bells and whistles Ducati has that improve rider safety (including traction and wheelie control, cornering lights)



They are getting closer. https://youtu.be/IY7O_-nWUbk

I recall reading years ago about testing sensors or markers buried in the snow in Canada or Alaska, but I can't find any reference to it on the internet.



Ha! Very good one!




I agree with this concept, but I wouldn't be one that would want to use it. I wouldn't want to be the next person in the vehicle after a busy, exhausted adult and 4 active kids with sticky food and sticky fingers were in it.

Or colds or flu. I was a semi-hermit for a while and don't think I ever came down with a sniffle.

[Jim Andrew]

I would not be concerned about people being replaced by robots. People with ambition who want to create products or services will be able to find work, or make their own job. People who really do NOT want to work may find themselves unemployed. A long trip where I am not familiar with the road makes a driverless car appealing to me. Maybe someone will create an app for your phone to make your old car driverless.

[Chris Parks]

And garbage trucks...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJSHXr8i-ZU

[Larry Edgerton]

Self driving trucks will drive the change, and that change will drive the next great depression. Look up what the number one job is in each state, it will surprise you.

[Edwin Santos]

Self driving trucks will drive the change, and that change will drive the next great depression. Look up what the number one job is in each state, it will surprise you.

You are 100% right and yes I was surprised. I did not realize truck driving was the most common job in so many states. Equally interesting was the article that says the main reason for this is immunity to globalization and technology (yet), the two forces that have decimated the numbers of many other jobs. I don't know enough to use thew word depression but if your point is that a meaningful bite out of trucking jobs due to self driving technology will have major repercussions, I would not be betting against you.

[Chris Parks]

I worked as a driver and in the end as a manager in the interstate trucking industry and it is a whole other world. The truck loss rate and driver injuries and fatalities that occur because of scheduling and driving during the periods when the body says it should be asleep are enormous. Autonomous trucks will be the single best thing that can happen for the industry when they arrive. There is a world shortage of drivers for a good reason, the job is simply very unpleasant in most cases.

[Wayne Lomman]

This is why I have stopped telling everyone what a good place Tasmania is to live in. It is an island in the Southern Ocean with the cleanest air on earth, it has plenty of fish in the ocean and lakes, you can grow anything bar tropical fruit, half the place is still unexplored, we have few politicians, we have hydro electricity, and I can still freight most things in overnight. I am devastated that gps doesn't work....!

Oh, and a paddock is any area inhabited by livestock. Fences are optional. Persons of debatable intelligence are considered to be a few kangaroos short in the back paddock. I'll stop there. Cheers

[Doug Garson]

The other point is that driver's cars are laughably irrelevant in my rural area. You can't even get to my place with a gps - you get lost in paddocks kilometres away - so how will they guide a driverless car?
Actually that would be very simple and low tech. The same way a taxi driver takes you home if he can't find your address in his GPS. Voice recognition would allow you to direct the car where to turn.

[Chris Parks]

Actually that would be very simple and low tech. The same way a taxi driver takes you home if he can't find your address in his GPS. Voice recognition would allow you to direct the car where to turn.

I don't know if voice recognition works with the Tasmanian language. :) Seriously, I have never seen or used a voice recognition system that can be said to actually work properly, I suppose I should try the one in my car but I can't be bothered dealing with it.

[Kev Williams]

From very little googling:


A record-high 53.2 million vehicles were recalled in 2016 in the United States, and one in four vehicles on the road has an open recall. You can't assume you're safe if you purchase luxury brands either, as some of the most dangerous recalls have impacted premium car makers such as BMW.

I've known for sometime now from picking stuff up at the back room at Walmart that almost every child car-seat ever made has been recalled, but I didn't realize that every 4th car I see has been recalled. But it doesn't surprise me. And I hardly expect self-driving cars to fare much better...

[Doug Garson]

Chris, if you haven't tried voice recognition lately you're in for a pleasant surprise if my experience is typical. The voice recognition in Google maps is excellent. Last summer we were on a trip in a friends Audi Q5 and he tried unsuccessfully on several occasions to input the address of the cottage we were going to into the cars GPS with no success. Then he tried google maps on his phone, worked every time. If you have a contacts address in your phone you can navigate to their house just by saying their name. Ditto with a restaurant or store, no need to know the address just say the name of the store and it finds it for you. So maybe skip the car GPS and go straight to your phone.

[Chris Parks]

From very little googling:



I've known for sometime now from picking stuff up at the back room at Walmart that almost every child car-seat ever made has been recalled, but I didn't realize that every 4th car I see has been recalled. But it doesn't surprise me. And I hardly expect self-driving cars to fare much better...

I think a large number of these recalls are the world wide air bag problem. A woman was recently critically injured in Oz when one of these faulty air bags was triggered in an accident.

[Larry Edgerton]

I worked as a driver and in the end as a manager in the interstate trucking industry and it is a whole other world. The truck loss rate and driver injuries and fatalities that occur because of scheduling and driving during the periods when the body says it should be asleep are enormous. Autonomous trucks will be the single best thing that can happen for the industry when they arrive. There is a world shortage of drivers for a good reason, the job is simply very unpleasant in most cases.


I would not argue that it will be good for the trucking industry, its the truckers and their families that are my concern.

[Chris Parks]

I would not argue that it will be good for the trucking industry, its the truckers and their families that are my concern.

A dead or injured driver or other road users was always my concern and I did not want to be any part of that. How would I explain to a family that I sent out a driver who should not have been behind the wheel and he won't be coming home? Yes, I get your concern but there is enough work that drivers won't be displaced just moved and it won't happen overnight, it will take decades. The driver shortage is in large part driven by the internet and all the online shopping we do so there will be no unemployment more likely a shortage as there has been.

[Robert Willing]

I don’t mean to be cynical but from your list of automated toys you at least trust something automated, or do you run them manually?

[Chris Parks]

I use them as much as possible especially in traffic. I was in a traffic jam for an hour a while back and besides pressing one button to resume because it times out after the car has been stationery for a time I did not touch any other control besides the steering wheel but the next model will do the steering itself in a traffic jam I am told. It does take a leap of faith especially the braking part but in time you get used to it. This sort of technology is obviously still being refined and has faults but by and large it works pretty well. My car for instance will not stop automatically if it comes up to a car already stationery at an intersection for instance or can lose track of a car ahead around a sharp bend but I have gotten used to that now. It will not self steer as the Tesla does for more than 15 seconds at a time either which bugs me a bit, the Europeans are not willing to go as far as Tesla right now but it can't be far off. When the model 3 Tesla comes out I am going to have a real hard look at that.

[Wayne Lomman]

Does anyone really think that automation is introduced for the benefit of ordinary people? I haven't noticed many charitable organisations investing in these technologies. It is simply a new way to transfer money and power from the working and middle-class to the big end of town. These technologies will cost and we will all have to pay. Cheers
( be grateful I edited out the next 2 paragraphs. Does anyone actually value freedom?)

[Dan Friedrichs]

Does anyone really think that automation is introduced for the benefit of ordinary people?

I see the automation as beneficial. I want a self-driving car. My productivity will go up when I can work or relax instead of drive. I want a self-driving truck - it'll mean I can get stuff, faster. I want production lines automated as much as possible - it'll mean the stuff I can buy is cheaper.

Will all this mean a lot of low- and medium-skilled workers will be in trouble? Probably. Is the solution to eschew progress? Probably not.

[Greg Peterson]

There was time when people couldn't imagine a operatorless elevator.

[Chris Parks]

Does anyone really think that automation is introduced for the benefit of ordinary people? I haven't noticed many charitable organisations investing in these technologies. It is simply a new way to transfer money and power from the working and middle-class to the big end of town. These technologies will cost and we will all have to pay. Cheers
( be grateful I edited out the next 2 paragraphs. Does anyone actually value freedom?)

Tin foil hat working well Wayne. Why do some people see a conspiracy in every single thing?

[Stan Calow]

Whenever I express skepticism about some new technology development, my millennial nephew always reminds me ". . . they aren't trying to sell it to you, old man".

[Malcolm McLeod]

A light switch automates lighting a candle. Hydraulics on a track hoe is just an automatic shovel. A tractor is an automated horse and plow. Typesetting and printing presses for books, magazines, and newspapers - more automation. A pump on a water supply line - more automation. The fill valve on a toilet tank - more automation. The toilet's flush valve - just an automated honey bucket. A band-saw..... well, everybody knows what that is.

And I do truly value my freedom. I could have the freedom to strike a match, shovel, starve, remain ignorant. Or, I can enjoy the freedom of progress.



Does anyone really think that automation is introduced for the benefit of ordinary people? ....
Does anyone actually value freedom?)

So, Yes and yes.

Is this sentiment just anti-automobile-automation? Or, do you chose to live in the stone age (excepting of course your electricity, your PC, and your ISP)?

[Wayne Lomman]

Good, there are still some who value freedom. It even allows you the freedom to interpret that differently to me. Does it allow you to call me a tin foil hat wearer and belonging in the stone age? Yes it even allows that. Does it allow me to reject the usefulness of a driverless car because it is laughably irrelevant in my beautiful, remote rural landscape? Yes it does. Perhaps driverless cars make sense in a controlled urban environment. If so, good. I wish you all well. Cheers

[Curt Harms]

.................................................. .......
I am devastated that gps doesn't work....!


I'll bet GPS/Glonass/Galileo works just fine. Road and address databases on the other hand ......................

[Brian Elfert]

I want to know how a self driving vehicle works off the beaten path. What happens when I don't have a street address or GPS coordinates to plug in for my off the beaten path driving? How is the car going to know which fork to take on the goat path to my destination? How will the car know on some roads that you can't drive down the middle of the dirt path or the vehicle will high center and get stuck?

These are all real world scenarios at a Boy Scout camp I am going to in just over a week. I spend a week every year driving all over the camp helping get the camp ready to open for the summer.

[Keith Outten]

I just have to ask.

If your self driving car is capable of going from point "A" to point "B" and back automatically could you send your truck to the store or a friends home and have it pickup materials or people? Possibly take your son to the baseball game and bring him back home.

[Pat Barry]

I want to know how a self driving vehicle works off the beaten path. What happens when I don't have a street address or GPS coordinates to plug in for my off the beaten path driving? How is the car going to know which fork to take on the goat path to my destination? How will the car know on some roads that you can't drive down the middle of the dirt path or the vehicle will high center and get stuck?

These are all real world scenarios at a Boy Scout camp I am going to in just over a week. I spend a week every year driving all over the camp helping get the camp ready to open for the summer.
I suppose first off, someone needs to know where you want to go and that there is a road going there. After that it won't be too hard because eventually all the cars we are discussing will have GPS and be totally interconnected. Kind of like the BORG from Star Trek

[Malcolm McLeod]

... every 4th car I see has been recalled. ...

I've had 3 recalls in ~6-8 yr memory: 1 to inspect for cracks on the 'B' pillar; 2 to inspect that the floor mats don't impede use of the brake. Not all recalls are for catastrophic, head-line grabbing issues - - but they still get lumped into the total.


I want to know how a self driving vehicle works off the beaten path. What happens when I don't have a street address or GPS coordinates to plug in for my off the beaten path driving? How is the car going to know which fork to take on the goat path to my destination? How will the car know on some roads that you can't drive down the middle of the dirt path or the vehicle will high center and get stuck?...

With the right inputs (sensors ::3D cameras, laser range finders, proximity sensors, etc.) and the right software, you can make a vehicle that is capable of making the same dirt path decisions as a human - just faster. The Mars rovers are using much of this today.



I just have to ask.

If your self driving car is capable of going from point "A" to point "B" and back automatically could you send your truck to the store or a friends home and have it pickup materials or people? Possibly take your son to the baseball game and bring him back home.

That is one of the principal concepts I have seen referenced as driving the automation initiatives: you could put your child in a car and it takes them to school (no teenage side-trips, no distracted driving); send the car to the grocery store (Kroger already has the option for online ordering, they pick and bag it, you just pull into the p/u lane and your order is brought to the car, swipe your card, and go). BORG could be simple - order online and provide a p/u vehicle license # and time, BORG picks the materials, charges your acct, and loads them. They snap a pic of the order in the vehicle, send it to you as a 'shipment' notice, and you que the vehicle to return to your chosen location.

And ponder this: What percentage of our infrastructure is devoted to parking a car, that by definition isn't being used? What percentage of the time that you own (or make payments on) your vehicle is it actually in use (i.e. moving)? What is the cost of the dedicated creature comforts and human cockpit in a vehicle? (Comfy seats, carpet, radio, AC/heat, room to stretch, glass, mirrors.) What would a dedicated 'errand' vehicle without these creature comforts cost - if you only paid for the time it was actually being used for your task?

Want a look at the future of transport? Look what the military is doing with drones and fighters. Human limit is ~9-10 G's sustained in a turn; even the old F-16 is mechanically sound to about 16 G's. Ditch the pilot and it will out-turn nearly anything - and keep the pilot safe in a rear area. Now you can get rid of all the life support systems and GUIs that the pilot requires. ...They have the budget now, but soon the technology will be widely available. Ground troops? Look at what is happening with automated ammo carriers and MedEvac systems.

...Future's so bright, gotta wear shades.:cool:

Wayne, please note my earlier post asked if you 'chose', but did not state 'you belong'. I am merely curious where you chose to draw your line in the sand opposing modernity, and certainly meant no offense.

[Steve Demuth]

Me, I drive 114 miles every day and can't wait to be able to sleep, or read, or work on my way to work/home.




++++

If I could get a self driving car that worked only on the open highway and only in decent conditions, but which really required no human attendance in those situations, I'd spring for it tomorrow. That would give me back 6+ hours / week now spent doing essentially nothing.

[Steve Demuth]

Exactly. Ten years ago computer vision was a dream. Today we have systems in the lab where I work that outperform the best radiologists and pathologists in specific diagnostic tasks. In ten more years if you have a CT scan read and it is not checked by computer you'll have grounds for a malpractice suit.

We passed a very important inflection point in what machines can do in the last ten to fifteen years. Many things that common sense tells you require a human are going to be done by machine as a result.

[Steve Demuth]

I don't know if voice recognition works with the Tasmanian language. :) Seriously, I have never seen or used a voice recognition system that can be said to actually work properly, I suppose I should try the one in my car but I can't be bothered dealing with it.

Physicians where I work dictate thousands of medical records through voice recognition every day. Accuracy is very good. I use it to write emails, and get way better results than with typing on thus damned iPad.

[Wayne Lomman]

Gps works globally as a system I am sure but it is not applied to remote areas as a map. Simple supply and demand economics. You may not know that Australia is not much different in area to USA but has less than 10% of the population. This translates into vast areas of land with almost no people. I recently worked on the Nullarbor Plain where where I knew for an absolute certainty that there was no other human being within the surrounding 650 square kilometres. It was hundreds of kilometres to the nearest visible signs of human impact other than the track I used. I live in Tasmania where to the west is remote and rugged terrain all the way to the Southern Ocean. There are no gps maps for this. Gps location, yes. I use it when required and as emergency support, but I don't need it as such. I happen to work with high technology equipment located in remote areas from time to time. No-one is going to automate any vehicle I use because I am - by fate or whatever - someone that does not fit the mold. Its cheaper not to bother.
I look at urban and interstate highway landscapes mostly from the outside and cannot imagine living in such a rigorously controlled environment that it would be better to have a driverless car. One size does not fit all. Cheers

[Brian Elfert]

I suppose first off, someone needs to know where you want to go and that there is a road going there. After that it won't be too hard because eventually all the cars we are discussing will have GPS and be totally interconnected. Kind of like the BORG from Star Trek

GPS does zero good if the roads you are traveling on are not any map. Some of the roads at the Scout camp are not on any published map of the camp on purpose. They are places that they don't want the Scouts and leaders visiting by car, but the staff and volunteers doing work at camp need to drive off the beaten path. The camp itself has a street address, but nothing within the camp has a street address.

I am not against this technology by any means. I just think there are a lot of fringe areas that may not be accounted for in early versions of these vehicles. Is an autonomous car at some point just going to stop and refuse to go on because the car doesn't know how to get there even though the human passenger knows the route? What happens when I need to go off the road a ways to get tools and materials up to a building? Will the vehicle know that it can't take the shortest path because there are native grasses that can't be driven over? Can an autonomous vehicle back up or go forward a few feet so the human passengers don't have to step out into mud or a puddle?

[Bob Turkovich]

Per gps.gov, smartphone GPS systems only have an accuracy of 16 feet (and that's with ideal conditions). Signal blockage, weather conditions, satellite geometry, etc. can all have a negative effect.

Accuracy can be improved down to a few centimeters with dual-frequency receivers or augmented systems. Most automotive GPS systems have neither.

Now add to that the potential of mapping errors and the fact that there are multiple services that provide the maps. Two weeks ago I was on I-70 between Kansas City and St. Louis. For about a 2 mile distance, the GPS in my 2017MY vehicle showed that I was driving on a line about 100 yards parallel to I-70. I'm assuming that was a mapping error.

Google (and others) have been using LIDAR systems to improve positional accuracy (It's that big swivel device you'll see on the roof of the self-driving prototypes). It takes an instantaneous 3D map of the vehicles surroundings and compares it to stored data to help pinpoint location. The problem is it doesn't work in snow and heavy rain and gets confused if there is a change in the surroundings (e.g., building construction or demolition). The good news is that the major supplier of the 3D LIDAR sensor just lowered their pricing for a unit from $85000 down to $9000.:p (There are at least four additional (but less costly) sensors required.)

Im my pre-retirement days, I was somewhat involved in electronic throttle control system implementation. The fail-safe requirements (for both hardware and software) were enormous. I'm sure assisted steering and braking were the same. Fortunately, they were independent from each other.

For a truly self-driving vehicle you have to get all three (plus the positional systems) talking to each other. The potential for mistakes goes up significantly.

I think the days of an affordable, mass-produced, "take-me-anywhere while I sleep" vehicle are quite a few years away.

[Frank Drew]

For me this is another example of the imposition of control. Organisations and governments rely on control of the masses to bolster their power and driverless cars are a means of exercising this control.

Oh, please.


Finally, can someone please tell me what is going to happen to the spare people that all the artificial intelligence is steadily replacing and how are all these fancy gadgets going to be purchased when the people have no jobs and therefore no income? Cheers

I think this is a more legitimate concern; much of the modern economy will simply need fewer workers -- manufacturing will more and more rely on autonomous machinery (robots).

[Chris Parks]

All this technology is in early days and it can't be used universally yet due to lack of infrastructure to support it. I have been using GPS for a lot of years to log data on race cars and the early stuff was just woeful to the point where we initially abandoned it altogether. The biggest issue for places like where Wayne lives is the satellite coverage is marginal, simply put there are not enough satellites at any one time to give accurate reliable positional information and in Australia at the southern end of satellite coverage it is a common problem and Tasmania suffers the worst. It will happen but for some areas of the globe that is a long way off.

[Matt Meiser]

I just have to ask.

If your self driving car is capable of going from point "A" to point "B" and back automatically could you send your truck to the store or a friends home and have it pickup materials or people? Possibly take your son to the baseball game and bring him back home.

I would think that will come. The first real application everyone is clamoring for is ride-sharing vehicles. There's really no difference.

[Mark Blatter]

Physicians where I work dictate thousands of medical records through voice recognition every day. Accuracy is very good. I use it to write emails, and get way better results than with typing on thus damned iPad.


Watch this video on voice recognition for a good laugh.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FFRoYhTJQQ

[Rick Potter]

Let me put in an early order for the update kit for my non-smart cars. Here is my list....

1956 Ford Victoria

1955 Ford Thunderbird

1922 Ford Model T touring

Wake me up when the update kits arrive.

[Marvin Hasenak]

Because of medical problems I haven't driven in almost 15 years, I just sit other and watch the other drivers. Trust me, a broken down computer can drive as good or better than a lot of drivers on the road. If my wife goes shopping, I ride along, then because I cannot walk, I sit in the car and watch some of the drivers walking from the car to the stores. Some of them can't walk any better than they drive. In the last week I watched 2 people walk into the side of cars, because they had their phone stuck to their "nose". Those same idiots are also driving.

People watching has become an education in what the world has come to. Then there are the people that come out of the store and wonder around the parking lot looking for their car, those are usually good for a laugh or 2. Sometimes I am surprised they even know the way home, but they may not know.

[Curt Harms]

In the last week I watched 2 people walk into the side of cars, because they had their phone stuck to their "nose". Those same idiots are also driving.
..............................................
Sometimes I am surprised they even know the way home, but they may not know.

That's what they have their GPS enabled phones for.:D:D

[Lee DeRaud]

Garages and parking lots take up a LOT of room. What if you could just "summon" a car using a phone app, have it arrive, drive you to where you want to go, and then head off to pick up its next passenger? Suddenly, that car is maximally utilized, parking spaces are re-developed for more productive uses...IOW, we can finally stop using half or more of our woodshop space for car storage.

[Lee DeRaud]

Does anyone really think that automation is introduced for the benefit of ordinary people? I haven't noticed many charitable organisations investing in these technologies. It is simply a new way to transfer money and power from the working and middle-class to the big end of town. These technologies will cost and we will all have to pay. Cheers
( be grateful I edited out the next 2 paragraphs. Does anyone actually value freedom?)We value the freedom from political rants that normally accrues to reading SMC, so yes.

[Chris Parks]

IOW, we can finally stop using half or more of our woodshop space for car storage.

The car lives outside, I don't care how much it cost.

[Dave Zellers]

So how often do these cars that we are all going to be sharing get cleaned?

[Art Mann]

It appears that it is politically correct to advocate self driving cars but is politically incorrect to criticize the same idea. This isn't a thread about technology. It is a thread about political policy. I thought that was prohibited.

[Jim Andrew]

I don't care about the politics, just think a self driving car will be better than me steering it. If you have the money, they have auto steer for farm tractors. Perfect spacing and straight rows.

[terry mccammon]

Before I retired I drove approximately 80k miles a year going from plant to plant. I never had an accident, but in all seriousness, if I had $100 for every time I swerved into the shoulder/stood on the brake/etc. to avoid being side swiped by a truck (sometimes a car) who simply decided to come over into my lane while I was in it the quality of my scotch would increase significantly.

I was aware of this thread as I recently completed an approximately 2k round trip. On three separate occasions, at around 70 mph, a semi passed me on the left and then while I was still beside the truck proceeded to pull over forcing me onto the shoulder. Really? You passed me, did you forget I was here? Give me computer controlled cars and trucks ASAP.

[Kev Williams]

I started this thread, time for me to update it:


https://www.macrumors.com/2018/03/19/self-driving-uber-car-kills-pedestrian/
-An autonomous test vehicle being tested by Uber struck and killed a woman in Tempe, Arizona early Monday, marking what appears to be the first pedestrian killed by an autonomous vehicle, reports The New York Times.

The Uber vehicle in question was in an autonomous driving mode with a human safety driver at the wheel, and the woman who was struck was crossing the street outside of a crosswalk, according to local police. No other details on the accident are available at this time.

Uber is cooperating with Tempe police and has suspended all of its self-driving vehicle tests in Tempe, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, and Toronto at the current time. Uber's autonomous vehicles have previously been involved in collisions, as have vehicles from other companies like Tesla, but this is the first pedestrian-related accident that has resulted in a fatality.

This incident will likely have wide-ranging implications for all companies who are testing autonomous vehicles, including Apple, and it could potentially result in more oversight and regulation.

Apple has been testing its autonomous vehicles on public roads in California near its Cupertino headquarters since last year. Apple vehicles, which include a series of Lexus RX450h SUVs equipped with a host of sensors and cameras, have not been involved in any known accidents to date.

To date, most autonomous vehicles in California and Arizona have been using safety drivers behind the wheel who are meant to take over in the event of an emergency, but California in February lifted that rule.

Starting on April 2, companies in California that are testing self-driving vehicles will be able to deploy cars that do not have a driver behind the wheel. Arizona also allows driverless cars to be tested in the state, and Waymo has been testing autonomous driverless minivans in Arizona since November.

Disclaimer: No amount of debate as to actual fault here will sway my opinion. Computers should not drive cars, period. Driverless tractors and other farm equipment, fine-- just keep them off public highways.

[Steve Peterson]

Think this is coming along at the right time for someone my age. There are a LOT of old people on the road, and having the ability to put an address into the car for your destination, and the car taking you there will be great for old people.

I think they would be great for young people as well. I have two young teenagers that will be driving in a few years. It would be great if the technology was good enough for cars to become essentially "crash-proof".

Unfortunately, the technology is still a long ways away. Maybe my future grandchildren will have proper self-driving cars.

[Lee DeRaud]

Disclaimer: No amount of debate as to actual fault here will sway my opinion. Computers should not drive cars, period. Driverless tractors and other farm equipment, fine-- just keep them off public highways.Yeah, because the human in the car at the time of the incident you cited did such a bang-up job of avoiding the pedestrian.

I think one of the more interesting aspects of this case is whether the human in the car will be found at least partially responsible for the fatality, given that the whole point of the "safety driver" is explicitly to prevent the type of accident that occurred. (It reminds me somewhat of the procedures for handling classified data/documents at my former military contractor employer: the rules seemed to be written not so much to protect the information, but to be able to assign blame when the information got lost/stolen/whatever.)

[Perry Hilbert Jr]

Allegedly a true story, a wealthy physician from overseas who routinely flew a jet plane but very rarely drove a motor vehicle, brought his family to see America., They rented a large motorhome and left Wshington DC after a few days seeing the sights next to the airport where they entered the US. As they proceeded down INTERSTATE 95, the physician felt nature calling, so he hit the button for cruise control and got up to walk back to the toilet. He wiped out the rented $150,000 motorhome, but no one seriously injured.

Frankly, if it keeps little arse wipes in their under powered zip cars from pulling out in front of semis and folks hauling trailers, I am all for it. Had to stand on the brakes too darn many times because of nit wits in three cylinder vehicles. I have that beeper in my car that tells me when i am close when backing up, or when some object is right along side. In my big f-250, that beeper is great and I have come to depend on it, instead of the mirrors. My in-laws have a back up camera on their SUV. That is a little weird but their both elderly and can't trn their heads like 20 yrs ago. There is a bit of a debate as to whether a bar patron can ride in such an autonomous vehicle with out being DUI. In many states just being drunk and the only person in a vehicle, except an rv, is enough for DUI

[Pat Barry]

Allegedly a true story, a wealthy physician from overseas who routinely flew a jet plane but very rarely drove a motor vehicle, brought his family to see America., They rented a large motorhome and left Wshington DC after a few days seeing the sights next to the airport where they entered the US. As they proceeded down INTERSTATE 95, the physician felt nature calling, so he hit the button for cruise control and got up to walk back to the toilet. He wiped out the rented $150,000 motorhome, but no one seriously injured.

Frankly, if it keeps little arse wipes in their under powered zip cars from pulling out in front of semis and folks hauling trailers, I am all for it. Had to stand on the brakes too darn many times because of nit wits in three cylinder vehicles. I have that beeper in my car that tells me when i am close when backing up, or when some object is right along side. In my big f-250, that beeper is great and I have come to depend on it, instead of the mirrors. My in-laws have a back up camera on their SUV. That is a little weird but their both elderly and can't trn their heads like 20 yrs ago. There is a bit of a debate as to whether a bar patron can ride in such an autonomous vehicle with out being DUI. In many states just being drunk and the only person in a vehicle, except an rv, is enough for DUI

I saw that same scene in a movie. Guess which one?

[Pat Barry]

I started this thread, time for me to update it:



Disclaimer: No amount of debate as to actual fault here will sway my opinion. Computers should not drive cars, period. Driverless tractors and other farm equipment, fine-- just keep them off public highways.
Actually I'd love to see self driving NASCAR. It would probably be way more entertaining than the current product.

[Lee DeRaud]

I saw that same scene in a movie. Guess which one?"National Lampoon's Vacation"? (or the recent remake, which I haven't seen...)

[Lee DeRaud]

Actually I'd love to see self driving NASCAR. It would probably be way more entertaining than the current product.There's a concept of autonomous cars communicating with each other and forming up drafting clumps on the freeway* that would look a lot like current NASCAR. But hopefully without all the intermittent multi-car "oopsies". :)

(*Can't remember what they call it, "platooning" maybe?)

[Larry Edgerton]

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/self-driving-uber-car-involved-fatal-accident-arizona-n857941

Todays news, self driving car kills pedestrian.
(https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/innovation/self-driving-uber-car-involved-fatal-accident-arizona-n857941)

[Carlos Alvarez]

Self-driving cars are the future, and easily out-drive humans. They are already safer than humans. It's so silly to think otherwise.

I do some work in the traffic management industry and have become very familiar with a lot of the technologies (and I work in tech) as well as the success reports and issues they've run into. The articles I've read don't tell us if the car was in fully self-driving mode or not, and what the pedestrian may have done to cause the accident. The area is also known for being a drinking town with a college problem, and having lots of entitled pedestrians doing stupid stuff.

Almost nobody has heard of the very cool successes with self-driving cars, such as saving one child's life. I got to watch the video and read the data on it. The child ran out between two cars, into the street. The car was in full braking before the kid was visible because its sensors could see him, where a human could not. When you have 26 cameras, LIDAR, FLIR, and other sensors on your head plus a brain that can read them all 1000 times per second, come tell me you're as good as a computer driving.

[Larry Edgerton]

I'm better than a computer. I've driven millions of miles and never killed anyone.

[Carlos Alvarez]

I'm better than a computer. I've driven millions of miles and never killed anyone.

The self-driving cars have driven millions of miles without killing someone, also. And we still don't know who was at fault and the details of how it happened. These cars have already saved lives that humans would have taken.

I can't even fathom how anyone thinks they have more abilities than a self-driving car. It must be how some people felt when the buggy whip makers were speaking against cars to start with.

[Bert Kemp]

True self driving cars are better then humans. The accident today here in Tempe a women was JAYwalking. Thet are not sure what happen for all we know she jump out in front of the car. They have been testing these cars for aqlmost 2 years now and very few accidents and most were cause by cars with a driver. The big Jumbo jets lamd them selfs as computers do it better then people. I my self would rather get in a driverless car then a taxi or uber with a person driving. You see cab wrecks all the timew out here.

[John Terefenko]

For every electronic device there is a hacker lurking. Just saying and you do the reading into.

[Lee DeRaud]

There were 40,100 traffic deaths last year. Will self-driving cars drop that number to zero? Obviously not, and the laws will need to catch up with liability issues and such. But it's highly unlikely that adding automation to the mix can make the situation any worse than it is now, with self-absorbed twits thinking it's more important to look at their Facebook status than what's in front of their car.

[Lee DeRaud]

For every electronic device there is a hacker lurking. Just saying and you do the reading into.You do realize that problem already exists with respect to cars, right?

[Bill Dufour]

I heard she was not jay walking she was jay riding. She road her bike out into the middle of the block from the sidewalk and got t-boned by the car. Nothing the car could have done to prevent the accident, if it was an accident.

I wonder if it was suicide and she knew it was a computer car so her relatives could collect the insurance money.
Bil l.

[Rod Sheridan]

Think about this scenario. You are riding along in your self driving Tesla sedan and a car pulls up behind you and starts tailgating. Your car will immediately slow down to try to maintain a safe distance for the speed. The car behind just keeps pushing towards your bumper. Your vehicle will slow down some more. This will continue until your mighty Tesla stops to let the other car go on by. If you were driving the car, you might speed up a little and change lanes to avoid the bully. There might be lots of other options in that particular situation that a rule following computer can't even imagine, much less execute.


Art, you're making the assumption that the auto will accept non safety related inputs from the operator.

Once you go to autonomous vehicles, they can manage their operation to optimize traffic flow, reduce fuel consumption, follow all the road regulations so there won't be any speeding or dawdling in the passing lane....Rod.

[Rod Sheridan]

I won't believe the driverless car hype until I see one drive in a Chicago winter.
6:00 am in January, still pitch dark, it's been snowing for 4 hours and the plows haven't been out yet. A two lane road with no shoulder covered in snow so you can barely make out the street from the ditch. Snow is freezing on all surfaces, you must keep the wipers on high, the inside blower on hot on the window to keep a small area open to see. Oncoming headlights illuminate the falling snow and create glare on your windshield. There is a glaze of ice under the snow in the tracks, but not in the untraveled areas so you get better traction off the centerline a bit.

When a "driverless" car can handle that and other similar weather events I see here year round (Raging downpours, fog, condensataion on the windows, low angle sun right in my face... etc.) only then will I believe it. As far as I hear, they are testing these in more fair weather states, not in really bad conditions.

Mike, you're making the poor assumption that autonomous vehicles will "see" in the visible spectrum only.

Once you can "see" outside of the visible spectrum you don't care if you can see in the visible spectrum as you have so many others to use as well..........Rod.

[Chris Parks]

I started this thread, time for me to update it:



Disclaimer: No amount of debate as to actual fault here will sway my opinion. Computers should not drive cars, period. Driverless tractors and other farm equipment, fine-- just keep them off public highways.

And cars were so dangerous when they were first used they had to be preceded by a man carrying a red flag. Your wishing it away won't change a thing so you will have to get used to it.

[Lee DeRaud]

Mike, you're making the poor assumption that autonomous vehicles will "see" in the visible spectrum only.

Once you can "see" outside of the visible spectrum you don't care if you can see in the visible spectrum as you have so many others to use as well..........Rod.The current issue seems to be one of keeping the sensors working with water/snow/dirt on them. It's a solvable problem, but eventually the cars will have to be designed around the sensors, rather than just sticking them wherever they'll fit.

[Tom Stenzel]

Just think of the time saving possibilities in the future.

You go on the 'net and put your order for lumber at the local Big Box. Then your driverless vehicle heads on over to pick it up. The automatic forklift, with a sensor that has a spider crawling across it, skewers the tailgate on your pickup. The spider has the sense to leave. Your vehicle doesn't.

Optical recognition senses the damages and sends copies to the claims division of the insurance companies.

The resulting investigation by the automatic claims system then works to find out which system was at fault, did the vehicle move, previous damage and all that. The computers start to squabble amongst themselves resulting in them DDOSing each other and stopping up the internet for my area and any adjoining continents.

I'm at home still waiting for my materials to arrive. When I try to check the order the 'system is down'.

I'll get the fine, rounded off to nearest $10,000, for violating the Computer Misuse Act. Automatically deducted from an account or added to a credit card of course. When the cyborg comes to arrest me I'll have my cyborg meet it at the door and let both happily wander off together.

Popcorn with butter and salt please. I'll pop it myself on a pot on a stove if that's still allowed.

-Tom

[Carlos Alvarez]

True self driving cars are better then humans. The accident today here in Tempe a women was JAYwalking. Thet are not sure what happen for all we know she jump out in front of the car. They have been testing these cars for aqlmost 2 years now and very few accidents and most were cause by cars with a driver. The big Jumbo jets lamd them selfs as computers do it better then people. I my self would rather get in a driverless car then a taxi or uber with a person driving. You see cab wrecks all the timew out here.

Seriously, if you think you're against self-driving cars, go spend a little time actually learning about how much data they can process and how many millions of miles they've done successfully. Your fear is only there due to ignorance; once you see how much they can sense that humans can't, you'll get it.

[Pat Barry]

I saw that same scene in a movie. Guess which one?

http://https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DLUEDVMOMY24&ved=0ahUKEwj7t5q9xPvZAhXl3YMKHXKPBhkQtwIIJTAA&usg=AOvVaw3v9tZkubnsF57SeS5SAWLX (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DLUEDVMOMY24&ved=0ahUKEwj7t5q9xPvZAhXl3YMKHXKPBhkQtwIIJTAA&usg=AOvVaw3v9tZkubnsF57SeS5SAWLX)

[Carlos Alvarez]

Just think of the time saving possibilities in the future.

with a sensor that has a spider crawling across it, skewers the tailgate on your pickup.

-Tom

While the whole thing was hilarious, the spider bit made my brain stick on that sentence. Which of the 27 sensors? All of them?

[Carlos Alvarez]

I just talked to one of my associates with a city's traffic management center. I was laughing about anti-self-driving car opinions with him, and he said something that really summed it up: "Yeah, and there are people who believe the earth is flat too." That's really what it is. We're all flabbergasted that people in 2018 don't realize this is the future, and how good it will be for all humans. From saving lives to just the outright societal cost of all of that wasted drive time now going into the country's productivity in some form. Just like I keep working when I'm on a plane, I'll be able to work while I'm in a car. I have a friend who sold his cars and uses only Uber/Lyft so he can make the time productive, and his numbers show it saves him cash. And yes, the Ubers are sometimes self-driving, as they are being heavily tested in our area.

[Lee DeRaud]

I just talked to one of my associates with a city's traffic management center. I was laughing about anti-self-driving car opinions with him, and he said something that really summed it up: "Yeah, and there are people who believe the earth is flat too." That's really what it is. We're all flabbergasted that people in 2018 don't realize this is the future, and how good it will be for all humans. From saving lives to just the outright societal cost of all of that wasted drive time now going into the country's productivity in some form.That too, but the thing that strikes me are people doom-and-glooming about potential issues that (1) already exist to a much larger extent with human-operated vehicles and (2) are a lot easier to solve using robotics than using driver training and/or social engineering.

[Mel Fulks]

they say this new one is much safer than the OLD cruise control

[andrew whicker]

Just think, people are designing self driving cars for the current roads instead of needing the roads to change for them! Remember when the tech giants were attempting magnets in the middle of roads or reflectors on the sides of roads?

I bet if the gov't let more private industry into the road business, we'd be seeing a lot more progress.

Edit: I didn't think it was legal to be totally hands off in a self driving car?

[Travis Porter]

Self-driving cars are the future, and easily out-drive humans. They are already safer than humans. It's so silly to think otherwise.

I do some work in the traffic management industry and have become very familiar with a lot of the technologies (and I work in tech) as well as the success reports and issues they've run into. The articles I've read don't tell us if the car was in fully self-driving mode or not, and what the pedestrian may have done to cause the accident. The area is also known for being a drinking town with a college problem, and having lots of entitled pedestrians doing stupid stuff.

Almost nobody has heard of the very cool successes with self-driving cars, such as saving one child's life. I got to watch the video and read the data on it. The child ran out between two cars, into the street. The car was in full braking before the kid was visible because its sensors could see him, where a human could not. When you have 26 cameras, LIDAR, FLIR, and other sensors on your head plus a brain that can read them all 1000 times per second, come tell me you're as good as a computer driving.


Your points make me wonder what was the things that did or didn't happen to kill that pedestrian. I would have thought that the car would have "known" the person was crossing the street. Seems like the car should have stopped, but to your point, we don't know what mode the car was in or the state of its operation (faulty sensor, driver mode) or if the pedestrian did something out of the ordinary. Even if the pedestrian did do something extreme, I would have thought the car should have prepared for it.....

[Edwin Santos]

Sometimes its sounds as though we hold technology to a much higher standard than we hold humans. The sheer number of motor vehicle accidents demonstrates the flaws of human drivers, not insignificant.
But if automated technology is anything less than perfect, it's unacceptable.

Also, the improvement curve in nearly all forms of technology is incredibly steep. If the launch point isn't impressive to you, it may not be very long before version 2.0, 3.0 or 4.0 will blow you away.

[Carlos Alvarez]

I bet if the gov't let more private industry into the road business, we'd be seeing a lot more progress.


They have, and I'm one of those people. And that's why we have such incredible progress now. But I think most people just don't know about it yet. We already do have V2V in some 2018 vehicles and V2I coming next year. (Vehicle to vehicle communication, and vehicle to infrastructure. Cars tell each other about what they are doing with V2V, and tell the transportation management system with V2I. The result is cars that slow for upcoming traffic issues and lights, or notify the city of a problem.)

It is legal for licensed companies to run totally unmanned vehicles. We have them in our area. I always mess with them when they are empty, just to see what they do. I wouldn't mess with them if a human is involved.

[Lee DeRaud]

Your points make me wonder what was the things that did or didn't happen to kill that pedestrian. I would have thought that the car would have "known" the person was crossing the street. Seems like the car should have stopped, but to your point, we don't know what mode the car was in or the state of its operation (faulty sensor, driver mode) or if the pedestrian did something out of the ordinary. Even if the pedestrian did do something extreme, I would have thought the car should have prepared for it.....Again, there are still going to be traffic fatalities even if all cars are self-driving, just as there are still (relatively infrequent) airline crashes. The question is, just how much better than human drivers do they have to be to become acceptable to the public? I'm guessing the public and/or vested interests will insist on a much higher level of safety from robotic cars than they do from human-driven cars, even if it pushes them further into the future than necessary. And yes, I for one think that would be unfortunate.

Digression: I'm wondering how many cyclists get fragged by people opening the doors of parked cars as they pass. Another bit of automation that could be easily added to current cars is to have the 'blind-spot' warning system lock the door(s) on that side when the car is stopped and it detects an oncoming vehicle.

[andrew whicker]

Yeah, we all go down the highway at 75 mph with only a few feet of space between us and some PhD, an ex racecar driver, some teenager sending texts, a meth addict and someone who had a few beers at the after work meetup.

Imagine if all those people were taken out of the equation...

[Lee DeRaud]

Yeah, we all go down the highway at 75 mph with only a few feet of space between us and some PhD, an ex racecar driver, some teenager sending texts, a meth addict and someone who had a few beers at the after work meetup.Well, there's your problem: you're not going fast enough. :)

[Carlos Alvarez]

Again, there are still going to be traffic fatalities even if all cars are self-driving, just as there are still (relatively infrequent) airline crashes. The question is, just how much better than human drivers do they have to be to become acceptable to the public? I'm guessing the public and/or vested interests will insist on a much higher level of safety from robotic cars than they do from human-driven cars, even if it pushes them further into the future than necessary. And yes, I for one think that would be unfortunate.


Yeah, there's this weird human trait where many people think it's better for ten people to drive to their own deaths than for one person to be driven to his death by a computer. Totally stupid, I wish I could understand it.

If every car were automated TODAY, we'd probably have 1/100th as many deaths. In 10-20 years the number would approach zero.

While people whine about gun-related deaths, terrorists, and other tiny numbers of deaths that are hard to solve, they ignore and/or are fine with 30k people a year dying in cars, and that's easy to solve. Not counting the astronomical societal cost of accidents and related issues.

[David Bassett]

Well, there's your problem: you're not going fast enough. :)

You added a smiley and he's in Utah, so he probably thinks you're joking.

My Mom, 70+ at the time, was rear ended when doing 70 in the slow (right) lane of the 22 freeway. Guy came around a bend, not paying attention and never imagining someone would be driving that slow. (But, yeah, self-driving cars are dangerous. :) )

[andrew whicker]

haha, our highway speed is 70 mph. As everyone knows, Utah is known for being a super dangerous place to live. Therefore, the police surely have more important things to do than to regulate speeding before and after work.... surely, right?

: )

[andrew whicker]

I live in the SLC area. Our digital highway billboards tell us how many traffic deaths have occurred over the year to try and keep us thinking safety first. I think it usually works out to one a day. One a day in the state of Utah. Not a very populace state for sure.

That's the minimum we need to shoot for. Anything safer than that is icing on the cake.

[Yonak Hawkins]

There were 5984 pedestrians killed in 2017 by drivers, and you believe a person behind the wheel is safer ?

[Malcolm McLeod]

Your points make me wonder what was the things that did or didn't happen to kill that pedestrian. I would have thought that the car would have "known" the person was crossing the street. Seems like the car should have stopped, but to your point, we don't know what mode the car was in or the state of its operation (faulty sensor, driver mode) or if the pedestrian did something out of the ordinary. Even if the pedestrian did do something extreme, I would have thought the car should have prepared for it.....

Condolences and all due respect to the victim and their family. I hate to reduce them to a science experiment... even if they made a mistake.

Even a computer can't suspend the laws of physics. Just speculating, but perhaps the cyclist came out from behind/between a screening object(s) (parked van/truck, with trash/mailbox/hydrant/etc at ground level) at 15mph, if auto-auto (is that a good description?) was doing the legal limit (say 35-40 mph), with 30ft to the cyclist, this isn't a sensor problem. It is a problem with braking and adhesion limits of the tires. Even the back-up driver would fail this test.

And then again, perhaps it IS a computer/sensor failure? Time will tell.

Also interesting that this 1 fatality will be national news for a few days (maybe). Compare that to the 80+ people we lose to traffic accidents every day in US, on average (using others 30k+/yr).

[Yonak Hawkins]

You are right. Think about when lanes merge. All the human-driven vehicles will pull in front of the autonomous cars and trucks, because of the way they are programmed and because there will be no driver to make angry, which will automatically let them in. This will become standard practice and leave the right lane stalled.

[Tom Stenzel]

While the whole thing was hilarious, the spider bit made my brain stick on that sentence. Which of the 27 sensors? All of them?

The other sensors were checking out the hot new data server at the end of the aisle.

We already have a road system with limited access points and controlled schedules. It's called the rail system. Congress mandated that it have electronic controls a decade ago with a completion date of 2015. Last I read they were about 30% done. I'd like to see that finished and working before we scurry around and try to control the roads with its myriad number of intersections and access points.

My daughter has a car that has computers that control everything. Without any prompting from me she named it Marvin.

-Tom

[Lee DeRaud]

My daughter has a car that has computers that control everything. Without any prompting from me she named it Marvin.Some years ago, a friend of mine bought a talking GPS widget, which of course she named Hal. When she added an iPhone somewhat later, the running joke was that she hated driving the car because Hal and Siri wouldn't stop arguing about the route.

[Carlos Alvarez]

My facts are straight, and it was just a general reply to people who think humans can drive more safely than cars. I was agreeing with you. Sorry I used "you" in a confusing way, it was meant generally.

[Yonak Hawkins]

The word, "ignorant" has gotten a bad rap. It doesn't mean, "stupid", or "uncaring", or "opposed to". It simply means "unaware of" or "not informed". Everyone's ignorant on some subjects.

[Greg Peterson]

Autonomous cars will revolutionize society in several ways.
1. Many will not own a car. You will subscribe to a service where a car arrives at your home at your departure time and takes you to your destination. When it is time to leave, another car will arrive and pick you up and return you to your home.
2. Traffic congestion will decrease if not be eliminated. Autonomous vehicles will not require traffic control signals or signs. They will negotiate intersections. Think computer aided round abouts.
3. There will be less cars in the general population, but the cars that remain will be in use virtually 24/7. Think about how much time your vehicle spends in park.

[andrew whicker]

I love your vision of the future, but..... Uber, Lyft, and every other (I think with the exception of one) company that has tried to make money with ride sharing has lost money. Uber has lost records amount of money and has yet to make a profit.

So, we'll see how it pans out.

article: https://www.forbes.com/sites/lensherman/2017/12/14/why-cant-uber-make-money/#5823df8410ec

Basically the gist of the one above is that taxi companies NEED subsidies / barriers to entry or the race to the bottom drives out the profit. As a pro free market guy, it's an interesting read.

[Lee DeRaud]

Traffic congestion will decrease if not be eliminated. Autonomous vehicles will not require traffic control signals or signs. They will negotiate intersections. Think computer aided round abouts.Ignoring the continued existence of pedestrians and bicycles, that assumes 100% market penetration, with zero manual-drive vehicles. That's not happening in any near term (i.e. most of our lifetimes) without extremely draconian regulatory action, like outlawing/confiscating a couple hundred million existing vehicles with substantial remaining value and operating life.

[andrew whicker]

There might also be retrofitting companies..

Who knows. Interesting times ahead. That's for sure.

[Lee DeRaud]

I love your vision of the future, but..... Uber, Lyft, and every other (I think with the exception of one) company that has tried to make money with ride sharing has lost money. Uber has lost records amount of money and has yet to make a profit.Their current business model depends on paying human drivers: there's a reason Uber et al are investing so heavily in autonomous vehicles.

(I've always wondered why people sign up to work for a company that is reinvesting pretty much every earned dollar to put them out of work, but so it goes.)

[Carlos Alvarez]

Ignoring the continued existence of pedestrians and bicycles, that assumes 100% market penetration, with zero manual-drive vehicles. That's not happening in any near term (i.e. most of our lifetimes) without extremely draconian regulatory action, like outlawing/confiscating a couple hundred million existing vehicles with substantial remaining value and operating life.

You don't need 100% penetration, or even 50%. When there are enough vehicles doing predictive maneuvers like slowing down to maintain proper flow, then the meatbag cars will have to flow with them. There will also be special self-driving lanes, like HOV but much more useful. The self-drivers can also get packed in there VERY tightly, and will never have the rubber band effect caused by humans being dumb. Remember that cars are already shipping with much of the communication and predictive stuff. Volvo has cars that advise you on the optimal speed ahead, for example.

[Carlos Alvarez]

The police are being careful about statements, but this sounds like confirmation that it was the pedestrian's fault:

"And as soon as she walked into the lane of traffic, she was struck by the vehicle."

[andrew whicker]

The article didn't read that way to me. I read it as a bad market to be in. Regardless of cost. Say you introduce autonomous vehicles first. You capture the market for short term. Then the next company comes and it's a race to the bottom again.

Not sure robots can fix that

[Greg Peterson]

Having had the recent experience of driving through Tacoma, WA on a Friday afternoon, I can only conclude that the roadways have unwittingly been designed to exploit humans worst instincts.
It tool an hour and a half to travel from Fife to Lacy, and we were in the HOV / left lane the entire time. Countless times traffic came to a complete stop. There were no accidents or construction. And this was five lanes wide in most areas.

Absolute madness and proof that more lanes is not the solution. My guess is there are too many exits and entrances.

[Carlos Alvarez]

Absolute madness and proof that more lanes is not the solution. My guess is there are too many exits and entrances.

It's always a balance. Get rid of all of "X" and the roads become great, but X is always important. Limited-access highways obviously prove that limiting access means moving faster most of the time. But at what cost? When have we limited it so much that things become useless.

In tech, I like to say that computers would be great if humans didn't use them. Servers, for example, run "forever" while end user machines are constantly a mess. So it's always a baby and bathwater problem.

[Dave Zellers]

Also regarding this magical future where people opt to not own a car anymore but simply pull out their personal communication device and order a vehicle to pick them up, how exactly is that different from calling a taxi in today's world? How long has that vehicle been in service? How many thousands of people have sat in those seats? A vehicle is a personal possession and most of us don't want to share it with hundreds or thousands of others. Period. When you get in your car, you want your stuff to be right where you left it. And you want it to smell the same as it always does.

Whether it is self driving or not is a completely different issue.

[Dave Zellers]

OOOOHHHH!!!! How about this!?!?!?

You go to an event of whatever sort, upon arrival, you exit your pod, it parks itself, after the event, you press a button on your PCD, and your pod enters the queue of other pick up pods, a few minutes later you step in and are driven home while you make out in the back seat with your sweetie.

Works for me.

[Frederick Skelly]

OOOOHHHH!!!! How about this!?!?!?

You go to an event of whatever sort, upon arrival, you exit your pod, it parks itself, after the event, you press a button on your PCD, and your pod enters the queue of other pick up pods, a few minutes later you step in and are driven home while you make out in the back seat with your sweetie.

Works for me.

I`m in. More making-out is a good benefit!

[Edwin Santos]

Also regarding this magical future where people opt to not own a car anymore but simply pull out their personal communication device and order a vehicle to pick them up, how exactly is that different from calling a taxi in today's world?

Hi Dave,
As a parent of small kids, it would be an amazing thing to be able to call up an autonomous vehicle and send them to Grandma's house, and then have her send them back the same way. Same with other events. Sometimes parents are in a bind when one kid is sick and the other needs to go somewhere and there's only one Mom available. I don't know too many people that would trust kids with a strange taxi driver. But an autonomous vehicle loaded with sensors and safety technology is not going to present any harm, or at least way less harm.

This is not to say I'd give up my own vehicle, but I don't think it's an either/or proposition. What if you used autonomous transport for commuting during the week, and kept your vehicle for evenings, weekends, hauling lumber, and fun stuff?

I think all this technology is amazing. This past year I spent some time in Paris. I know the inner city and metro (underground) system pretty well, but using the immediacy and point to point precision of Uber was a total game changer. Less expensive than the metro too.
Edwin

[Edwin Santos]

I love your vision of the future, but..... Uber, Lyft, and every other (I think with the exception of one) company that has tried to make money with ride sharing has lost money. Uber has lost records amount of money and has yet to make a profit.


Andrew,
A few years ago I would have shared your perspective. But now I can't help but recall a time not that long ago, when nearly everyone was saying the same exact thing about......... Amazon.
Edwin

[Dave Zellers]

Hi Dave,....I don't know too many people that would trust kids with a strange taxi driver. But an autonomous vehicle loaded with sensors and safety technology is not going to present any harm, or at least way less harm.

I can certainly appreciate that. While I have no idea what will actually happen, I do believe it will be a very long time before government allows self driving cars without a "watcher" or whatever they will be called sitting in the drivers seat ready to take control in the case of a technology failure. If that is actually the case, then it is no different from trusting the children to the care of a taxi driver. I would be interested in learning the statistics of taxi drivers as the cause of any kind of problems at all. I would expect it to be insanely low. Like statistically non existent.

Man, it will be a major culture change when we conclude we can't trust anyone anymore.

[andrew whicker]

Probably way more dangerous to be the driver than the passenger.

Well, that's a depressing thought about trusting people. Hmmm.

Well, selfishly at least, the more boring crap (grocery shopping, picking up screws at BORG, etc) that I rid my life of, the better. But, I'm not a clerk, so what do I know?

[andrew whicker]

I'm betting big groups like truck drivers will lobby hard for required drivers even if they aren't needed. Although that'd be a boring as .... job.

What do rail engineers do? Why do we need them? Is that a computer trust issue? Sounds like the most boring job ever.

[Dave Zellers]

Well, selfishly at least, the more boring crap (grocery shopping, picking up screws at BORG, etc) that I rid my life of, the better. But, I'm not a clerk, so what do I know?

Jeff Bezos is all over that. Rest assured.

[Dave Zellers]

I'm betting big groups like truck drivers will lobby hard for required drivers even if they aren't needed. Although that'd be a boring as .... job.

What do rail engineers do? Why do we need them? Is that a computer trust issue? Sounds like the most boring job ever.

SPOT. ON.

Someone with skin in the game (Taxi Driver) is someone I would trust so much more than a "Monitor". A rail engineer is the PERFECT example.

[Dave Zellers]

But to get back on point- Kiss Kiss, Squeeze, Squeeze.

MMMmmmmmmm.:):):p

[Carlos Alvarez]

How does this magical future work? Many people, myself included, already use Uber and Lyft for a lot of reasons. Both are always better than a taxi. My worst Lyft experience was with...a taxi driver doing something on the side. I'm not allowed to say what his car smelled like, but I hope I can say that he drove like an idiot. The regular everyday Uber/Lyft drivers have skin in the game; they know they need to maintain their car, because they won't just be given another from the pool. They know that their service reflects on them, while a taxi driver just reflect on his brand of taxi. Uber/Lyft drivers are held to a much higher standard, and it shows every time I get into one (except that one time). Taxi drivers have no reason to do anything right because they just go find a job at another taxi company. And most of the companies clearly don't even care what their drivers do.

I have a friend/business associate who sold his cars and uses ONLY ride-share service to get around. He's in finance; he can do math, and reports he's saving a lot of money. And not dealing with a car's issues at all. We ourselves were SOOO close to getting a Waymo self-driving van, but they decided we were two miles too far outside their desired support area.

[Matt Meiser]

The most enlightening thing in this thread is that there are people who genuinely believe their personal opinion is THE deciding factor in the matter.

[daryl moses]

The most enlightening thing in this thread is that there are people who genuinely believe their personal opinion is THE deciding factor in the matter.
Where's the "like button" when you need it?

[Lee DeRaud]

The most enlightening thing in this thread is that there are people who genuinely believe their personal opinion is THE deciding factor in the matter.That, and people who define "fallacy" as "anything they disagree with".

[Myk Rian]

My concern with self driving cars is how they perform in the winter with snow and ice on the roads.
How do they know where the lanes are? I know GPS is a big factor, but that's only good for a few feet or so.

[Lee DeRaud]

My concern with self driving cars is how they perform in the winter with snow and ice on the roads.
How do they know where the lanes are? I know GPS is a big factor, but that's only good for a few feet or so.How do you know where the lanes are? Start there and work forward...
But one real problem is keeping snow/water/dirt/salt/bugs/etc off the sensors when there isn't a captive human cleaning slave along for the ride.

[Kev Williams]

Like I got time to read all this :)

Speaking of GPS-- from what I gather, all SDC's need GPS. Ok, so there's a guy here in our town who's developing new electric generating (among other things) technology, has a radio show on the weekend, and recently he asked an interesting question: What if while we're all worried about N Korea nuking us, what if all the testing is actually for something else, like say, a way at lobbing an EMP at a few communication satellites?

And really, the GPS in my Mustang quits working about 30% time I drive the thing.

So all you guys, go ahead and 'embrace the future'... Do I expect to change it? Nope, but doesn't mean I have to like it, OR embrace it. I'll just treat SDC's the same way I've treated laptop cameras, "smart" phones, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, instagram, snapchat, Alexa, Suri and anything else Apple, Windows, 8, 10, 11, 12, grocery store data-mining 'discount' cards-- Not having any of it.

And when I'm a few years older sitting in my rocker watching the news, laughing at the worldwide traffic jam caused by SDC's- and their passengers- not knowing what to do because the GPS system's cheese slid off it's cracker... I'll be back to say "told ya!" And if not, no big deal to me. Because regardless of the future, rest assured that I'LL be driving my cars, boats, motorcycles, ATV's and even my lawnmower, and NOT some Dell wannabee...
:)

[Larry Edgerton]

My concern with self driving cars is how they perform in the winter with snow and ice on the roads.
How do they know where the lanes are? I know GPS is a big factor, but that's only good for a few feet or so.

My concern is that auto manufacturers by and large build cars for metropolitan areas as it is, but I live in the Pigeon River State Forest and the existing nanny systems like anti skid and traction control do not work in the woods now, so more of the same will only be worse. I am a contractor as well and often driving in uncharted areas, no roads at all, as well as being a sportsman who spends as much time getting away from "civilization" as I possibly can. For me less is more........

[Pat Barry]

How do you know where the lanes are? Start there and work forward...
But one real problem is keeping snow/water/dirt/salt/bugs/etc off the sensors when there isn't a captive human cleaning slave along for the ride.
Sensor wipers? Self cleaning sensors? Lots of possibilities. I'm sure they'll figure it out.

[Pat Barry]

.... Because regardless of the future, rest assured that I'LL be driving my cars, boats, motorcycles, ATV's and even my lawnmower, and NOT some Dell wannabee...
:)
I agree with this 100%

[Lee DeRaud]

My concern is that auto manufacturers by and large build cars for metropolitan areas as it is, but I live in the Pigeon River State Forest and the existing nanny systems like anti skid and traction control do not work in the woods now, so more of the same will only be worse. I am a contractor as well and often driving in uncharted areas, no roads at all, as well as being a sportsman who spends as much time getting away from "civilization" as I possibly can. For me less is more........I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that manually-driven vehicles will completely disappear.
But at some point it may become much more difficult to get a driver's license. :(

[Carlos Alvarez]

The most enlightening thing in this thread is that there are people who genuinely believe their personal opinion is THE deciding factor in the matter.

No kidding. The evidence is easy to research. It's like the anti-gun arguments that all fall apart when you look at the technical aspects. That's why I try to keep opinion out of the posts and focus on the facts and what I've personally seen in the industry.

[Carlos Alvarez]

I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that manually-driven vehicles will completely disappear.
But at some point it may become much more difficult to get a driver's license. :(

Both are probably true. It will be a very long time before nothing can be driven manually. Will it eventually happen? Dunno, would Henry Ford think we would "ever" have his invention drive itself at 100 MPH? Probably not.

The idea that non-self-driving car licenses would become harder to get has already been discussed. People will need better training to be the one in 50 cars that has a human driver. There have been a few papers written on it, and I think I can get permission to share one of them.

[Chase Mueller]

There were 5984 pedestrians killed in 2017 by drivers, and you believe a person behind the wheel is safer ?


Kinda playing devil's advocate here. While I completely see where you are coming from, it's not quite a viable argument. We don't have anywhere near an adequate sample size to say self-driving vehicles are safer. Give it several long years for the sample size to increase, then I would be very interested to see if they are in fact safer or not.

[Chase Mueller]

No kidding. The evidence is easy to research. It's like the anti-gun arguments that all fall apart when you look at the technical aspects. That's why I try to keep opinion out of the posts and focus on the facts and what I've personally seen in the industry.

That, good sir, is a solid approach. Wish more people had that mentality these days.

[Greg Peterson]

There was a time in the not to distant past when the thought of an unmanned elevator was frightening to the general public. How could elevators know what floor to go to and when to stop.

One day in the not to distant future, our descendants will remember us in a similar light.

[Pat Barry]

There was a time in the not to distant past when the thought of an unmanned elevator was frightening to the general public. How could elevators know what floor to go to and when to stop.

One day in the not to distant future, our descendants will remember us in a similar light.

Good thinking

[Doug Garson]

Do I think that sometime in our lifetime all cars will be self driving? Not likely, there are still people driving the predecessor of the automobile (horse with or without buggy and there are places where horses can go that cars can't). I can see a time when only self driving cars may be allowed in some congested city downtown areas eliminating the need for parking spaces and making traffic flow more efficient. On the other hand it's less likely there will be any self driving cars in some remote areas with sparse population. If you are concerned about how a self driving car can handle difficult driving situations many human drivers struggle with ordinary driving conditions and self driving cars don't drink, fall asleep, text, or suffer from road rage. The next generation of self driving cars will be substantially better than the current generation, the next generation of human drivers, not so much. They will be less dependent on driving skills and more dependent on technology (auto braking systems, blind side detectors, traction control, etc.)
I think the real issue will be liability issues when there are accidents (even though accidents will become less frequent). Who will be liable if a first generation self driving car has an accident that later generation cars have learned to avoid? Is it the car owner or the designer?

[Carlos Alvarez]

There was a time in the not to distant past when the thought of an unmanned elevator was frightening to the general public. How could elevators know what floor to go to and when to stop.

One day in the not to distant future, our descendants will remember us in a similar light.

As someone else pointed out, for a while cars were considered so dangerous they had to have flag men. And then there were the anti-car nuts that introduced a bill requiring the operator to DISASSEMBLE AND HIDE THE PARTS of the car if it came upon farm animals, until the animals were no longer in sight.


The most infamous of the Red Flag Laws was enacted in Pennsylvania (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania) circa 1896, when legislators unanimously passed a bill through both houses of the state legislature (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania_General_Assembly), which would require all motorists piloting their "horseless carriages", upon chance encounters with cattle or livestock to (1) immediately stop the vehicle, (2) "immediately and as rapidly as possible ... disassemble the automobile", and (3) "conceal the various components out of sight, behind nearby bushes" until equestrian or livestock is sufficiently pacified.

We as humans never learn from what our silly ancestors reacted to emotionally. Every generation has their couple of hyped-up fears. Every generation is also the last good one. Tomorrow will come, the next gen will be fine.

[Dave Zellers]

Every generation is also the last good one. Tomorrow will come, the next gen will be fine.


Too True.

Credit to: Thor the Elder, 8512BC.

[Bob Turkovich]

Per NHTSA, in 2016 there were 1.18 vehicle related deaths per 100 million vehicle miles (or 1 death per 84.7 million miles). For the record, there were 3.22 trillion miles accrued in the US that year.

We’ve now had one death in the past 365 days on a self-driving car (possibly 2 – the jury is still out on last week’s Tesla incident). I highly doubt there have been close to 84.7 million miles put on self-driving cars on public roads. The reliability/success of the current self-driving systems have not been adequately proven.

Yesterday, the head of Toyota NA admitted there will be hundreds, up to a thousand, of deaths while the public road testing continues (of which Toyota has temporarily suspended.) He still thinks that self-driving is the way of the future as it will eventually save lives. My concern is the rush to dive into high volume production.

I’ve been an automotive engineer for the past 45+ years (semi-retired the last 10). During that time, I had responsibility for multiple safety-related components and systems. I am fully aware of the methodology and rigors required to fully prove out the hardware as well as the interface with the electrical controlling systems of some of that hardware. I have a pretty good idea of what can happen if the control system tells the hardware the wrong thing to do.

What I don’t have is the experience of multiple electronic control systems talking to each other and that is what you have with self-driving cars.
In this case, you have four control systems that need to talk to each other and know what each other is doing – throttle, braking, steering and mapping. Each system has multiple suppliers – each with their own unique hardware designs and software requirements. (If you don’t think that’s important, please remember that some OEM’s had problems with launching electronic throttle control (ETC), some didn’t.) Taking that into account (e.g., I can think of at least 6 major ETC players) the total number of combinations that require validation is not trivial.

While I think that self-driving cars (as part of the vehicle fleet but not the whole fleet) will eventually happen, I think that the push to rush into high-volume production is irresponsible and the practice of ridiculing those of us who are advising prudence and caution is juvenile.

[Chase Mueller]

I think the real issue will be liability issues when there are accidents (even though accidents will become less frequent). Who will be liable if a first generation self driving car has an accident that later generation cars have learned to avoid? Is it the car owner or the designer?

I would imagine when the next generations of autonomous cars are out and about, there will be some modifications to insurance and added safety measures, possibly even some sort of sensor or front facing camera that would give police and insurance agents a way to determine what is at fault. Or who, cause I'm sure it will be several generations before the vehicles are completely self-driven with no way to switch to human controls. Although, I hope that never happens. There should always be a human option in case something goes wrong.

[Carlos Alvarez]

the jury is still out on last week’s Tesla incident

I'm not aware of any self-driving Teslas. They have some driver assist features and require you to actively have your hands on the wheel. It's just one of the many forms of intelligent cruise and assist. I don't follow Tesla closely though and last time I researched their system was over a year ago.

I'm not aware of anyone pushing high volume production any time soon.

[Chase Mueller]

Bob is probably referencing the autopilot feature. Hands on the wheel at all time, and if you doze off, the car will slow down safely and come to a stop.

I'd be much more concerned about what happens when these bad boys catch on fire. That's rough stuff there

[Carlos Alvarez]

I would imagine when the next generations of autonomous cars are out and about, there will be some modifications to insurance and added safety measures, possibly even some sort of sensor or front facing camera that would give police and insurance agents a way to determine what is at fault. Or who, cause I'm sure it will be several generations before the vehicles are completely self-driven with no way to switch to human controls. Although, I hope that never happens. There should always be a human option in case something goes wrong.

Liabilities are fluid and subject to legal changes. There's already a lot of discussion on the topic, and solutions in the works. The most logical model is basically no-fault, and insurance companies will fight out the details in the background. There will no longer be a reason for drivers to be tracked and assigned a risk factor.

It connects with some unintended consequences, and this is driving part of the anti-self-driving car hysteria. Ticket and insurance revenue will go down a LOT. Well tickets should be really gone. And no more DWI cash cow, which makes millions in profits for municipalities all over the country. Gone. We can't have this. Oh yeah, and driver's licenses are such a great way for government to track us...gone...

[Chase Mueller]

Liabilities are fluid and subject to legal changes. There's already a lot of discussion on the topic, and solutions in the works. The most logical model is basically no-fault, and insurance companies will fight out the details in the background. There will no longer be a reason for drivers to be tracked and assigned a risk factor.

It connects with some unintended consequences, and this is driving part of the anti-self-driving car hysteria. Ticket and insurance revenue will go down a LOT. Well tickets should be really gone. And no more DWI cash cow, which makes millions in profits for municipalities all over the country. Gone. We can't have this. Oh yeah, and driver's licenses are such a great way for government to track us...gone...

There's the tin hat! :p
In all seriousness the no-fault makes sense, insurance is gonna hate it I'm sure, probably see a spike in lawsuits against insurance companies not wanting to cover it. I wasn't aware there was already a model in talks.
I don't think DWI will get taken out of the equation, I think it'll get updated to include no operating if you're over the legal limit. Even though you won't really be operating.
But you're spot on about the gov probably not being too thrilled over this, never thought about how much cash flow could potentially be affected, government job loss from it, very intriguing stuff.

[Carlos Alvarez]

There's the tin hat! :p
In all seriousness the no-fault makes sense, insurance is gonna hate it I'm sure, probably see a spike in lawsuits against insurance companies not wanting to cover it. I wasn't aware there was already a model in talks.
I don't think DWI will get taken out of the equation, I think it'll get updated to include no operating if you're over the legal limit. Even though you won't really be operating.
But you're spot on about the gov probably not being too thrilled over this, never thought about how much cash flow could potentially be affected, government job loss from it, very intriguing stuff.

A lot of "operating" rules are already causing major arguments like this. The car and traffic people want to remove DWI from the equation because (DUH) that's a major benefit of self driving cars. If we make that a benefit, among the others, people are more likely to get them. I already use Uber if I want to go somewhere and know drinking will be done. If I call a self-driving Uber am I the "operator?" That would be silly.

I'm aware of a lot of this because one of the two companies I run is in traffic management software. I go to the trade shows. When you see the director of self driving cars for Google and the CEO of Uber drinking together, well you buy another round and ask questions.

[Malcolm McLeod]

.... and the practice of ridiculing those of us who are advising prudence and caution is juvenile.

Not sure I've seen much in the way of ridicule...?? Maybe I missed something? I'm sure I read things into other's posts that aren't there, and I'm guessing there is a lot of that going on.

Back to the topic, people can be incredibly myopic about change - whether their method of sharpening, the weather, or driving cars. And especially about the rate of change in the world around us!

Moore's 'Law' (aka 'observation') says basically that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every 18-24 months. Those chips are so pervasive, they now impact our daily lives to the point that most people can barely keep up. A Cray super-computer that cost $36M is now out-performed by the iPad 2. The iPad has cameras, speakers, mics, and is mobile; the Cray is/was deaf, dumb, blind, and paralyzed! Your 2010 Chevy Malibu has more CPUs and way more flops than the Apollo Command Modules. In the 60's the average time to reach $1B in market cap was >20yrs; today's tech darlings can do it in 18mos. Facebook hit 50,000,000 users in ~3 yrs ; Pokemon-Go did it in ~18days (not positive about the latter numbers, but the relative difference is what matters).

Anybody bought Kodak recently? They were once the 5th largest company with 150,000-ish employees, and they OWNED the global market for film. They invented (as I understand it) the digital camera. But they failed to recognize the impact of the technology, or more particularly the pace of adoption, and so use it to their advantage.

Analog TV lasted maybe 60yrs; now gone. Who's got a VHS player; it lasted 15yrs, or so? DVDs; lasted maybe 8 yrs? Streaming service is today's baby. So what will replace it? ...And how soon?

(Personal note: :DI just bought a $8 plug-in timer that is probably smarter than my first PC.:confused:)

And the rate of change just keeps accelerating. How many of SMC retirees, retired doing the same job they started at? Compare that to the number of technology driven 'job changes' a 30yo has already experienced. And how many more they WILL experience before they retire. If someone can verbalize, or otherwise describe a problem, one of these 'babies' running around the world will probably find a solution. Quickly too. If you can find a bug in the concept of auto-autos:), they're probably smart enough to anticipate a work-around.

Self-driving cars are babies too, but will grow up so much faster than what we have experienced in the past. I am betting it will be mature (and replaced) long before someone pats me in the face with a shovel. Don't get 'stuck in the mud', and enjoy the ride.:cool:

[Chase Mueller]

A lot of "operating" rules are already causing major arguments like this. The car and traffic people want to remove DWI from the equation because (DUH) that's a major benefit of self driving cars. If we make that a benefit, among the others, people are more likely to get them. I already use Uber if I want to go somewhere and know drinking will be done. If I call a self-driving Uber am I the "operator?" That would be silly.

I'm aware of a lot of this because one of the two companies I run is in traffic management software. I go to the trade shows. When you see the director of self driving cars for Google and the CEO of Uber drinking together, well you buy another round and ask questions.


Man that would be one helluva interesting conversation to be a part of.

That makes sense to ME, totally not arguing that. My issue is what makes sense to me, usually doesn't make sense to the government, for whatever reason. I just can't see them taking it out of the equation, too much money would be lost, even though it would be potentially safer.

[Malcolm McLeod]

There's the tin hat! :p
In all seriousness the no-fault makes sense, insurance is gonna hate it I'm sure, probably see a spike in lawsuits against insurance companies not wanting to cover it. I wasn't aware there was already a model in talks.
I don't think DWI will get taken out of the equation, I think it'll get updated to include no operating if you're over the legal limit. Even though you won't really be operating.
But you're spot on about the gov probably not being too thrilled over this, never thought about how much cash flow could potentially be affected, government job loss from it, very intriguing stuff.

The government will just pull out their automatic zapper of automatically driven automobiles (aka the auto-auto-auto zapper), just like in MIB (except it's for cars). Stop you. Drag your passed-out self out of the back seat. Smell you. And write the same $-amount of tickets for you being drunk in public ... even tho' you didn't want to be 'in public'.

Revenue stream is safe. Lawyers are safe. Prisons are safe.

Problem solved. (See how EASY that was..:D)

[Carlos Alvarez]

Man that would be one helluva interesting conversation to be a part of.

That makes sense to ME, totally not arguing that. My issue is what makes sense to me, usually doesn't make sense to the government, for whatever reason. I just can't see them taking it out of the equation, too much money would be lost, even though it would be potentially safer.

I agree, but the glimmer of hope remaining is the fact that government is too incompetent and slow. If we get the cars out there quickly and with enough push by users, they won't react in time to screw us.

I've always wondered this... What if multiple people are in a vehicle with tinted-out windows, and get pulled over. All occupants jump in the back seat and refuse to talk. What can the police do? If you can't identify the driver, you can't just punish everyone. A self-driving car would be similar.

[Chase Mueller]

The government will just pull out their automatic zapper of automatically driven automobiles (aka the auto-auto-auto zapper), just like in MIB (except it's for cars). Stop you. Drag your passed-out self out of the back seat. Smell you. And write the same $-amount of tickets for you being drunk in public ... even tho' you didn't want to be 'in public'.

Revenue stream is safe. Lawyers are safe. Prisons are safe.

Problem solved. (See how EASY that was..:D)


Reminds me of a Ron White skit from his days doing the Blu Collar Comedy Tour. Classic.

[Chase Mueller]

I agree, but the glimmer of hope remaining is the fact that government is too incompetent and slow. If we get the cars out there quickly and with enough push by users, they won't react in time to screw us.

I've always wondered this... What if multiple people are in a vehicle with tinted-out windows, and get pulled over. All occupants jump in the back seat and refuse to talk. What can the police do? If you can't identify the driver, you can't just punish everyone. A self-driving car would be similar.


Now that I have never even stopped to consider. If no one owns up to anything, maybe they all get to go on a field trip to a 12x12 community gathering of the finest folks the night had to offer :D

[Carlos Alvarez]

maybe they all get to go on a field trip to a 12x12 community gathering of the finest folks the night had to offer :D

Hah, well, on what charge though? I just can't find anything that allows one to be charged unless there's knowledge that he was the operator. I've asked a couple of officers and they laughed, then got wide-eyed, and said they didn't know. They said they wouldn't just walk away, but didn't know what they could charge anyone with. "I'd call the commander out and let him deal with it."

If there's one person in a vehicle that can't be operated manually, how do you cite the "operator?"

[Chase Mueller]

Hah, well, on what charge though? I just can't find anything that allows one to be charged unless there's knowledge that he was the operator. I've asked a couple of officers and they laughed, then got wide-eyed, and said they didn't know. They said they wouldn't just walk away, but didn't know what they could charge anyone with. "I'd call the commander out and let him deal with it."

If there's one person in a vehicle that can't be operated manually, how do you cite the "operator?"

OOOOOOHHHHHHHH good question. Can't charge em with perjury, can't legally charge with DUI if unable to positively identify the driver.. this is a hard one. At what point could it become a criminal investigation? Then if no one fesses up perjury comes into play in court, but outside of that? Lying to a cop surely isn't illegal right? Man I'm curious now.


I guess a better question would be when this becomes relevant, is there an override to manually operate? Gotta be. If so, no rides while drunk. How in the world it would differ from say, a self-driving uber, no clue. I'm definitely gonna ask some cop buddies about it though cause my curiosity has officially peaked.

[Malcolm McLeod]

Hah, well, on what charge though?...

Hindering. (Nothing shall impede the speedy and efficient generation of revenue!);)

[Yonak Hawkins]

...millions in profits for municipalities....

This may simply be a casual statement but, I don't think there's a municipality in the US that is making a profit. If there is it should be investigated (Who's making the profit ?).

They are all looking for ways to provide the services their constituents demand while succumbing to their counter demands to pay less tax.

[Carlos Alvarez]

This may simply be a casual statement but, I don't think there's a municipality in the US that is making a profit. If there is it should be investigated (Who's making the profit ?).

They are all looking for ways to provide the services their constituents demand while succumbing to their counter demands to pay less tax.

I guess you can play semantics games all day, but what I mean is that DUI is bringing piles of cash to the cities and they can choose to waste or "profit" how they see fit. My city has a huge surplus and still collects taxes and fines. Profit?

And if you're saying the cities are at a deficit, then losing the DUI income will make it worse.

Not to mention the lawyers who only specialize in trying to minimize the rape that the system has for people who get caught.

[Lee DeRaud]

I guess a better question would be when this becomes relevant, is there an override to manually operate? Gotta be. If so, no rides while drunk.Nah, that one's easy: police have burden of proof to show the manual override was in use.
And there's no way the car itself won't keep track of that in its black-box memory.

[Chase Mueller]

Nah, that one's easy: police have burden of proof to show the manual override was in use.
And there's no way the car itself won't keep track of that in its black-box memory.

Sure, but unless its as easy as an OBD2 diagnostics reader, I don't see that being very pragmatic. Guess all they need to read it is "probable cause", cause that's not a current issue in the U.S or anything

[Lee DeRaud]

Sure, but unless its as easy as an OBD2 diagnostics reader, I don't see that being very pragmatic. Guess all they need to read it is "probable cause", cause that's not a current issue in the U.S or anythingTreat it as "implied consent", just like obtaining BAC from arrested drivers. In any case the (non-)operator will have incentive to give permission if in fact the manual controls were not in use.

[Chase Mueller]

Treat it as "implied consent", just like obtaining BAC from arrested drivers. In any case the (non-)operator will have incentive to give permission if in fact the manual controls were not in use.


Not that I'm encouraging a possible DWI/DUI, but if a lawyer could buy one when they're available I'd love for he/she to put that to test. I'd do it myself, but I'm not rich enough, nor smart enough.

[Lee DeRaud]

Not that I'm encouraging a possible DWI/DUI, but if a lawyer could buy one when they're available I'd love for he/she to put that to test.On what grounds? Worst case, they have to get a formal search warrant to read out the memory, and I don't see that being much of a hindrance.

(With regard to your previous post, yeah, I'd expect that memory to be readable over the OBD port, although it may take more than a $50 Harbor Freight widget. Writing to that memory OTOH should be a lot more difficult.)

[Carlos Alvarez]

This will freak some people out, but these cars already tell each other if they are in manual mode. And as V2I (Vehicle to Infrastructure) communication rolls out, the entire highway network will know. How we will protect privacy on that is yet another discussion point.

[Chris Parks]

I'll tell you what would happen in Australia, the registered owner would get a huge fine, I am talking tens of thousands of dollars and the car would be either impounded until someone coughs up the information or have the registration to drive it removed. if a car is caught on a speed camera here and no one wants to own up to driving it there is hell to pay.

[Pat Barry]

I'll tell you what would happen in Australia, the registered owner would get a huge fine, I am talking tens of thousands of dollars and the car would be either impounded until someone coughs up the information or have the registration to drive it removed. if a car is caught on a speed camera here and no one wants to own up to driving it there is hell to pay.

Collect fingerprints from the steering wheel and take everyone to the station while the fingerprints are processed

[Yonak Hawkins]

My city has a huge surplus and still collects taxes and fines.

Really ? What city is that that's rolling in dough ?

[Carlos Alvarez]

I'll tell you what would happen in Australia, the registered owner would get a huge fine, I am talking tens of thousands of dollars and the car would be either impounded until someone coughs up the information or have the registration to drive it removed. if a car is caught on a speed camera here and no one wants to own up to driving it there is hell to pay.

Sure, but I meant in the US where individuals have rights and a presumption of innocence.

[Carlos Alvarez]

Really ? What city is that that's rolling in dough ?

Peoria, AZ. Last time I looked we had several million in surplus. I haven't checked the budget or the cash situation in a few years, but it was part of my research when deciding whether to move here. Also our neighborhood has privately funded roads and parks, so I assume that others do also, and that helps with the city spending. The private roads and parks are much nicer than the city ones, obviously.

[Chase Mueller]

Sure, but I meant in the US where individuals have rights and a presumption of innocence.


You know, cause Australia isn't a country built from criminals or anything :D

[Myk Rian]

I would imagine when the next generations of autonomous cars are out and about, there will be some modifications to insurance and added safety measures, possibly even some sort of sensor or front facing camera that would give police and insurance agents a way to determine what is at fault.
Umm. They already do that.

[Carlos Alvarez]

Umm. They already do that.

It's almost like people don't know that they are covered in cameras.

[Chase Mueller]

It's almost like people don't know that they are covered in cameras.


I moreso meant cameras already coming on autonomous cars as a standard option. Constantly recording. If that's already a thing, please provide a source.

[Carlos Alvarez]

I moreso meant cameras already coming on autonomous cars as a standard option. Constantly recording. If that's already a thing, please provide a source.

So you believe they are just discarding all that data all the time? And that these companies that depend on finding all the faults of self-driving cars would rather just toss it instead of spending $50 for storage? I've watched video from a Google car at several of the traffic trade shows I've attended, and I've seen the way they analyze them to learn.

Fun one:

Google car stops at an intersection with four-way stop signs. There's a guy on a one-speed bike at the crossing corner. Many people on one-speeds will balance at a stop by moving back and forth a few inches. The car starts to go, but the guy moves forward as part of his balance motion. Car stops. Guy moves back to keep balanced, car goes. Guy moves forward, car stops. Back, car goes. This went on for a bit as the engineers figured this out and started laughing. The bike guy noticed it too and he's laughing. Issue noted, video analyzed, etc.

[Chase Mueller]

So you believe they are just discarding all that data all the time? And that these companies that depend on finding all the faults of self-driving cars would rather just toss it instead of spending $50 for storage? I've watched video from a Google car at several of the traffic trade shows I've attended, and I've seen the way they analyze them to learn.

Fun one:

Google car stops at an intersection with four-way stop signs. There's a guy on a one-speed bike at the crossing corner. Many people on one-speeds will balance at a stop by moving back and forth a few inches. The car starts to go, but the guy moves forward as part of his balance motion. Car stops. Guy moves back to keep balanced, car goes. Guy moves forward, car stops. Back, car goes. This went on for a bit as the engineers figured this out and started laughing. The bike guy noticed it too and he's laughing. Issue noted, video analyzed, etc.


Honestly, that is absolutely hilarious. I hope I see a Google car so I can watch it interact with drivers. Seems like a fun spectacle lol

[Carlos Alvarez]

Honestly, that is absolutely hilarious. I hope I see a Google car so I can watch it interact with drivers. Seems like a fun spectacle lol

If I see one without any people inside when I'm driving, I will always do something wrong to see how it reacts. I wouldn't mess around with people in it, but a computer doesn't get scared or upset.

It's interesting to see a string of Ubers leaving together and running in what looks like a train, very coordinated.

[Chase Mueller]

If I see one without any people inside when I'm driving, I will always do something wrong to see how it reacts. I wouldn't mess around with people in it, but a computer doesn't get scared or upset.

It's interesting to see a string of Ubers leaving together and running in what looks like a train, very coordinated.


I wonder when that stuff will reach Georgia... Most cities are laid out in a grid format, as I'm sure you know. However, Atlanta is allllll muffed up, cause apparently, we don't care if you get lost lol. Wonder how the car would do there with no people?
Also, do you know if google cars can be operated manually? I would assume they can, right?

[Carlos Alvarez]

I wonder when that stuff will reach Georgia... Most cities are laid out in a grid format, as I'm sure you know. However, Atlanta is allllll muffed up, cause apparently, we don't care if you get lost lol. Wonder how the car would do there with no people?
Also, do you know if google cars can be operated manually? I would assume they can, right?

The current testing cars can be driven by a human. Self-driving cars will do far better than humans in the situation you describe where roads are confusing. The computers aren't confused, don't get anxious about it like humans do, and don't get distracted like humans do. ATL is very well mapped and the cars have no problem following the maps. It's really a non-issue.

[Chase Mueller]

The current testing cars can be driven by a human. Self-driving cars will do far better than humans in the situation you describe where roads are confusing. The computers aren't confused, don't get anxious about it like humans do, and don't get distracted like humans do. ATL is very well mapped and the cars have no problem following the maps. It's really a non-issue.



Gotcha. I may have worded that poorly though. I moreso meant that I was wondering how the car would react in ATL with other drivers. I don't know if you've ever driven here, but people here cannot drive to save their lives. We actually are rated to have the worst drivers in the country. Made it on channel 2 news for it

[Carlos Alvarez]

Gotcha. I may have worded that poorly though. I moreso meant that I was wondering how the car would react in ATL with other drivers. I don't know if you've ever driven here, but people here cannot drive to save their lives. We actually are rated to have the worst drivers in the country. Made it on channel 2 news for it

I have. Two of my developers are in Athens now, and used to be in ATL. It sucks, but it's not impossible. Self-driving cars will do far better than humans at dealing with bad drivers because they can't get road rage, don't get afraid, and react purely on optimized solutions to problems. As you get enough of them, they have a calming effect on other traffic because they are moving very predictably.

And "be predictable" is the mantra of traffic engineering.

[Chase Mueller]

Very interesting. Thanks for shedding some light on the subject. Always enjoy conversating with people much more intelligent than myself on virtually any topic.

[Lee DeRaud]

Self-driving cars will do far better than humans in the situation you describe where roads are confusing. The computers aren't confused, don't get anxious about it like humans do, and don't get distracted like humans do. ATL is very well mapped and the cars have no problem following the maps.One thing I've wondered about is how self-driving cars will deal with unmapped transient conditions like variable-lane bridges (where certain lanes can run different directions at different times of day), detours, and even simple things like flagmen in construction zones.

[Mike Henderson]

One thing I've wondered about is how self-driving cars will deal with unmapped transient conditions like variable-lane bridges (where certain lanes can run different directions at different times of day), detours, and even simple things like flagmen in construction zones.

Those are the challenges of self driving cars. And that's what makes it so difficult. If it was just following a map via GPS it would be easy.

Mike

[Chase Mueller]

And that's why it's innovative. Innovation generally doesn't come easy or without its struggles. I'm sure solutions to this will come very soon if it does pose a problem.

[Carlos Alvarez]

One thing I've wondered about is how self-driving cars will deal with unmapped transient conditions like variable-lane bridges (where certain lanes can run different directions at different times of day), detours, and even simple things like flagmen in construction zones.

Better than humans do, since they can see everything we do PLUS much more. They can see the signs via various wavelengths both human-visible and not. They can also use the V2I communications to know ahead of time when the lanes will change, down to the millisecond. These types of things are where automation really shine. Humans screw up our variable lanes terribly. When I lived in Tucson I just stayed out of them, idiots were having head-ons once a week.

[Chase Mueller]

idiots were having head-ons once a week.


I detest roundabouts for that very reason

[Mike Henderson]

I detest roundabouts for that very reason

We have some traffic circles around here and I've never heard of a head-on collision in any of the circles. Why would you think they would cause head-on collisions? I can see an American driver in England having a problem:), but not for local drivers.

Mike

[Chase Mueller]

I see it first hand. The whole reason they work is cause drivers yield when they're supposed to, only problem is, Johnny Jr. over here in his 94 F-150 with 97" tires and 8 foot of lift don't think he needs to yield for them foreign cars. I'm exaggerating of course, but you get the point. I'm not saying that's how it is everwhere, it just is where I live. I'd say conservatively speaking, 80% of roundabout accidents in my area involve either trucks, or distracted drivers, most of whom simply don't yield.

[Lee DeRaud]

Better than humans do, since they can see everything we do PLUS much more. They can see the signs via various wavelengths both human-visible and not. They can also use the V2I communications to know ahead of time when the lanes will change, down to the millisecond."See" is not the same thing as "interpret". I keep getting this vision of a self-driver waiting patiently for the light to change from red to green at a closed parking lot entrance lane.

The V2I thing will certainly help in more-or-less fixed situations...I suppose flagmen and such can to be equipped with some sort of transponder widget. But that whole thing depends on the establishment of standards (and local governments willing to pay for them) before large-scale deployment takes place.

[Carlos Alvarez]

"See" is not the same thing as "interpret". I keep getting this vision of a self-driver waiting patiently for the light to change from red to green at a closed parking lot entrance lane.

The V2I thing will certainly help in more-or-less fixed situations...I suppose flagmen and such can to be equipped with some sort of transponder widget. But that whole thing depends on the establishment of standards (and local governments willing to pay for them) before large-scale deployment takes place.

It's frustrating that people assume none of this is being considered or already done. The cars "see" all of this AND interpret it AND act upon it. In fact one learning lesson came from a car obeying a flagman and being hit by a bus which was being driven illegally. The bus driver was cited, but it was still a learning experience on dealing with things that are outside the expectations. Which is exactly what humans suck at. V2I standards are established and are mandated and supported by the feds, it's being done right now. There's no reason for humans to carry a "transponder widget" since the car can see them (in more ways than a human can). We already have such widgets installed at many high-risk places and they have been for a very long time. I started getting warnings for crossings and construction via my RADAR detector over 10 years ago.

The tech going into your car is already planned out MANY years ahead.

[Lee DeRaud]

It's also frustrating when people in an emerging tech segment claim that, because someone is actively working on problem X, it's a done deal, nothing to see here, move along, full stop. AKA "hand-waving".

[Chris Parks]

Cars will or have begun to talk to traffic lights to smooth out the traffic flow and stop needless idling and lost time. Car emissions can be better controlled if the vehicle does not stop and less accidents occur if stop/start is avoided. Jaguar and Lucas began trialling autonomous cars back in 1994 but research must have begun in the late 80's to early 90's which is a lot further back than I would have thought.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlVx4Dhglkg


https://www.wired.com/2012/10/v2v-germany/

http://fortune.com/2016/12/06/audi-traffic-lights-vegas/

[Myk Rian]

We have some traffic circles around here and I've never heard of a head-on collision in any of the circles. Why would you think they would cause head-on collisions? I can see an American driver in England having a problem:), but not for local drivers.

Mike
You have no idea. Here's a roundabout 10 miles south of us.
Accidents of all types every week. This is half of the roundabout/s we were gifted with. There are 2 more on the other side of the freeway US-23
383501

[Pat Barry]

You have no idea. Here's a roundabout 10 miles south of us.
Accidents of all types every week. This is half of the roundabout/s we were gifted with. There are 2 more on the other side of the freeway US-23
383501
That is bizarre!

[Carlos Alvarez]

You have no idea. Here's a roundabout 10 miles south of us.
Accidents of all types every week. This is half of the roundabout/s we were gifted with. There are 2 more on the other side of the freeway US-23
383501

We have a similar one about the same distance away. I've yet to hear about a wreck there, but I have watched people do some really stupid things. Like run right across the middle, or spin out by driving too fast in the rain and bouncing off the curb, etc.

383502

[Larry Edgerton]

You have no idea. Here's a roundabout 10 miles south of us.
Accidents of all types every week. This is half of the roundabout/s we were gifted with. There are 2 more on the other side of the freeway US-23
383501

There is one like that at Traverse as well, PITA. Michigan's are all too small a radius. I have been in a lot of them around the country that feel natural and they are all a large enough radius that you can easily make the turns at 35mph in a dump truck, and with the larger radius comes enough room that you can maneuver to where you want out of the circle. The one at Five Corners in Lubbock TX. was actually fun.

If the one you pictured was actually one large circle, it would still be about 20% too small, but it would be much easier to navigate.

[Brian Elfert]

You have no idea. Here's a roundabout 10 miles south of us.
Accidents of all types every week. This is half of the roundabout/s we were gifted with. There are 2 more on the other side of the freeway US-23
383501

Those are just standard roundabouts back to back. I can see having crashes, but I don't understand how you have a head on crash unless someone turns right onto the feeder road at the top right of the photo. That road really should have a median to stop vehicles turning right.

Most roundabouts in Minnesota are signed at 15 MPH. It would be hard to go 35 MPH through most of them. They really make sense if drivers actually understood how to use them. I don't even really understand how to navigate them. I think you are supposed to signal when leaving a roundabout, but I never do because nobody else does. The lack of signaling causes issues because you never know if somebody is leaving the roundabout, or if they are crossing in front of you.

[Chris Parks]

It works but don't ask me how....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OGvj7GZSIo

[Carlos Alvarez]

Spent 12-13 hours driving to CA and back this weekend. The sheer number of idiots who refuse to use the cruise control reminded me of this thread, and how I can't wait for self-driving cars where people can't choose to not use the provided safety systems. Most of the time the only stress and annoyance on the open road is the people who don't hold a steady speed.

Of course, if my car were self driving, I wouldn't care and would be doing something useful, or napping.

[Chris Parks]

It is a problem I can never understand and a lot who do not use it increase speed when being overtaken and then fall back to the speed they were doing after I have to accelerate to clear them so others may get past.

[Brian Elfert]

Spent 12-13 hours driving to CA and back this weekend. The sheer number of idiots who refuse to use the cruise control reminded me of this thread, and how I can't wait for self-driving cars where people can't choose to not use the provided safety systems. Most of the time the only stress and annoyance on the open road is the people who don't hold a steady speed.


Cruise control is not a safety system. In fact, it can be less safe because cruise control users sometimes don't realize how fast they are approaching a slower car. Some will do ridiculous passing maneuvers to avoid turning off cruise control. Cruise control was designed to reduce drive fatigue.

I use cruise control whenever possible. I was really upset when I realized the rental car I got about a decade ago had no cruise and I had to drive five hours round trip.