A little optimistic there.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
U.S. Senate panel puts self-driving cars in fast lane
- Thread starter ChouGoku
- Start date
Bitch Pudding
Member
In a couple of decades humans probably won't even be allowed to drive cars themselves.
RastaMentality
Banned
I have no interest in ever driving a car again in my life. I know others dont share the same sentiment but all of the things i enjoy about driving (blasting music and driving on the highways at night) will stay the same in a self driving cars.
Hickbilly Deluxe
Banned
As a semi-retired truck driver, I also agree with this. There is something absolutely amazing about having 13 speeds to play with and 500 horse to get the job done.
GravityInsanity
Member
Did Logan teach us nothing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg-yaqUQsxc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg-yaqUQsxc
You know how movies now-a-days have to have some dumb reason for why a character can't use their phone? I can't wait to see how they figure out why a characters is able to manually drive their own car.Sooner than we expect
There exists computers with duplicate, redundant systems with instant failsafe failover where you can't even tell the computer just did it.
It's just that nobody is willing to pay for them for regular home computing.
Self driving cars are guaranteed to have redundant computers and failsafes.
SciencePilot
Member
I guess I'm kind of surprised that there is bipartisan support for this. I feel like tech companies are very easy scapegoats for lost jobs, etc, so I don't know why politicians don't turn on them. I guess tech companies are successful at lobbying?
Elfotografoalocado
Banned
So, a 10000$ increase in the price of every car.
Also, cue Minority Report?
What choice does a self-driving car currently make when presented with two options - one of which kills a pedestrian or hits another car and the other of which kills the self-driving car's occupant? Does it always look towards self-preservation first as a human driver would? Lotta ethical questions here, really.
This is not even to get into the fact that there is no way the tech will be viable in a place like NY for a very, very long time.
This is not even to get into the fact that there is no way the tech will be viable in a place like NY for a very, very long time.
AcceptableGhost
Member
There is insane money to be made from self driving automobiles.
Just read this. Hopefully it'll change as more people are exposed to self driving cars.
https://www.recode.net/2017/10/4/16...ing-autonomous-50-years-perception-survey-pew
QuantumZebra
Member
That's what I thought, as well.
BUT they can have my 2005 Honda Accord 5-Speed V-Tec when you pry my cold dead ass from it.
Skellig Gra
Member
Who knows? What I'm more interested in from an ethics perspective is who is liable if your car kills someone. Are you? Is Google/Tesla/Whoever? No one?
RumblingRosco
Member
This isn't a realistic goal, nor is it a good idea to spread this misinformation. Accidents happen in all sorts of robotic-controlled environments, driving or otherwise. I absolutely believe the rate of accidents will go down dramatically with self-driving cars, but "there will be zero accidents" isn't realistic.
Or if your driverless car rear ends something. Whos liable? This will be even more complex when the cars communicate to each other.
I assume that there will be some sort of emergency override brake pedal that the driver is responsible to press to avoid accidents, primarily as a way for companies to erase liability, even if it makes the overall system less safe.
But that will also be quickly seen as the sham it is, because nobody will pay attention to driving when they are not driving. The idea that anyone would is silly on its face.
Theres a whole lot of stuff unanswered questions about driverless vehicles, and Im not nearly as gung ho as most of of GAF on it.
Im sure it will happen, eventually, but the logistical, policy, and technical hurdles are frequently underestimated here, IMO.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Can't stop technological progress.
Love this, but I still have some big concerns about driverless cars and how they will interact with everyone in a world with crazy ass drivers.
How will they know when to merge on a busy highway / street? Sometimes you just have to jump out there because there isn't a perfect opening. Will they wait for 10 minutes before merging?
How will they know when to merge on a busy highway / street? Sometimes you just have to jump out there because there isn't a perfect opening. Will they wait for 10 minutes before merging?
demosthenes
Member
You underestimate how far away that is.
Friend who works in one of the largest cities in the country recently got a demo of this in her city and she said it was horrible. Wouldn't go at green lights, was confused at construction zones, etc. She's involved in city planning to some degrees and her best way to describe it is the whole process is like A to M. We're at B or C right now and they know what M looks like but they want to skip D, E, F, G, etc in getting there.
Skellig Gra
Member
You can slow it significantly though.
Neuromancer
Member
I trust a self driving car as much as the average person driving car, maybe more. I'm not overly concerned.
Answer the question as to your decision as a human driver first
PeskyToaster
Member
Can't wait. It'll be a game changer for sure. Lots of things to think about. Will police have a override to command a car to pull over and shut off? Also who pays for accidents? Insurance? Driver? Software company? Manufacturer?
Fenderputty
Banned
More like "now watch everyone freak out over one self driving car accident even though accidents have decreased 10 fold."
PeskyToaster
Member
"Wow I can't believe those unsafe self-driving cars" while eating a hamburger, reading, and clipping toenails and driving.
Millions of drivers in the transportation industry are going to be out of jobs in 5 - 10 years. Nothing is being done to prepare them for the transition either. Driverless vehicles are a huge step forward for public safety once they hit mass saturation, but the human cost in lost jobs is going to be brutal.
This is actually a question that doesnt need to be answered because we are all human and accept that you cannot always predict how you would react in a tense split-second situation, nor be expected to act perfectly rationally, nor weigh all of the potential outcomes against each other. What a human driver would do in that situation is irrelevant, because if you took 100 different humans none of them would do exactly the same thing with the same stimulus.
The self-driving car manufacturers have an obligation to program the car in a moral way because they have the benefit of having infinite time to think about the situation before it happens, and guarantee their product will act in the manner they think is most appropriate.
My one thought about creating a system where the driver can take over would be that the problem is solved if you only allow the automated driver to be disengaged when the car has come to a complete stop somewhere off the road/highway. That would prevent knee jerk drivers from taking over when they think they need to. Presumably you could sell those cars for a higher markup compared to fully automated ones as well.
TyMiles2012
Member
Blasting music and highway driving at night is definitely my favorite thing about driving. I also love driving the back roads. I live in the middle of nowhere so it's nice to cruise on a middle of nowhere road.... At least when there's no deer. Self driving cars definitely won't stop those assholes unless self-drive compatible roads had tall fences with grassy nature bridges for animals to cross. I think the Netherlands have them, or at least one of the nearby countries there. I think self-driving vehicles should definitely be applied to city and highway, but country backroads should have a choice. If you've ever driven in downtown Columbus Ohio, especially in the morning, it's absolute hell because people are awful drivers there, so I'd love to have self-driving vehicles there.
Skellig Gra
Member
They'll just be turned in to security guards for the cargo. Probably take a pay cut but I doubt the overall employment numbers will dip significantly.
I wonder what this means for drunk drivers. Not entirely familiar with how self-driving cars work, but I'm guessing you punch in an address? If someone is drunk in the "drivers" seat of a self-driving car but punches in an address, are they drunk driving or is it essentially a self-driving taxi? I mean they aren't actually driving but in a way they are operating the vehicle.
demosthenes
Member
Not happening that fast per my above post based on what I've been told.
Sectorseven
Member
AFAIK, legally speaking, the car is driving and not the drunk guy.
The amount of reclaimed leisure time is going to be incredible. Watch half a movie in the way to work, the other half on your way home. Or if it's busy season, get a jump on your work emails and other work in the car, adding crazy productivity.
That's to say nothing of the safety angle, which is the most important part.
Can't wait.
That's to say nothing of the safety angle, which is the most important part.
Can't wait.
plagiarize
Banned
Bring it on. I'll take my chances. I'm hoping to be buying a self driving car in three or four years.
entremet
Member
What's gonna kill human driving is insurance rates. They will plummet for self-driving users over human drivers. Economics will win like it always does. I don't expect soon but in a generation or two.
Car enthusiasts will always be around, but they will pay higher insurance rates.
Car enthusiasts will always be around, but they will pay higher insurance rates.
plagiarize
Banned
I'm almost certainly always going to need manual override. I have to regularly drive onto an army base, and I don't fancy letting the car handle getting through an armed security checkpoint by itself.
gutterboy44
Member
This can't come soon enough. The fatality rates and the general lack of awareness and competence of the average American driver is a never ending health and public safety crisis. Because so much of the country relies on cars and not public transportation, we just suck it up and accept it. Even the earliest forms of self driving cars are substantially safer and more capable than the average driver. Once we start hitting the saturation point where self driving cars can communicate basic parameters to other self driving cars, we will hit a transportation revolution. Our interstate system will transform into a pseudo "rail" network practically over night. Cars aligning in packs based on shared destinations, utilizing drafting packs at distances perfectly safe for networked self driving cars but too dangerous for humans to reliably drive. Cars merging perfectly at bottle necks preventing the classic backups that can extend miles back from the congestion point. This will be on the level of the internet revolution in terms of wide spread impact. Cars with driver assist should be mandatory much sooner than later. As for the, "but my classic cars!" people quickly retrofitted disc brakes on older cars that used the inferior drum brakes. Moreover, sensors and computers are small, so there could be some compromise of a few systems well short of auto pilot that must be installed to make your car road legal in the years to come.
I think first we need to establish what the scenario actually is that would put the car in this situation. Just saying it can only choose between the death of the pedestrian or the passenger is not realistic.
Living the Dream
Member
Love my S P100D