OT - self driving cars in 2017

[Nitwit]

So I'm reading that several car companies (Mercedes, BMW, and others) will be coming out with a version of self drive next year. As I understand it, it won't be completely self drive - delivering you to your destination, but a combination of adaptive cruise control and lane departure systems, so that on the highway, it will basically stay in your lane, a safe distance from the car in front of you. It might make those drives on Rt. 80 to the games much more relaxing. Although I can see the advantage of something like this, i would personally be inclined to wait a few more years until they add in the navigation and self park technologies as well.

This could really be a game changer for the elderly, who heretofore may have been unsafe drivers, or even housebound, allowing them to live where they choose, rather than where they "need to". As the baby boomers age, this could have a big impact on the lives of many people, and the economy and society in general. It's quite amazing to think how much things could change. Your thoughts?

 

[Peetz Pool Boy]

My biggest fear of self-driving cars is that they may easily become the "weapons of choice" for unhinged or other terrorist people. Who needs guns when you can pack a SDC with explosives and program it to drive into a crowd?

 

[Nitwit]

My biggest fear of self-driving cars is that they may easily become the "weapons of choice" for unhinged or other terrorist people. Who needs guns when you can pack a SDC with explosives and program it to drive into a crowd?

True, although a suicide bomber could do the same thing, and there doesn't seem to be a shortage of them. And look how easy it was for the Boston Marathon bomber to leave a backpack. Or I guess they could just buy a drone on Amazon, and deliver whatever that would carry. Terrorists can always find a way, but you can't stop technological progress out of fear of that.

 

[Op2]

While there will be bugs to be ironed out I think the notion of self-driving cars is fantastic and not just because I'm getting older and I have lousy eyesight.

A good way to determine if a new technology competing with an old one is a good idea is to imagine both the technologies were new. Suppose cars didn't exist at all. And suppose invented simultaneously were regular cars and self-driving cars. How many people would choose to drive themselves? Not many.

Yes, as self-driving cars become perfected the art of driving so widely known now will start to fade away but then again not many people know how to ride a horse anymore either.

May people that are accustomed to driving aren't going to want to give it up but the interesting thing is going to be eventually when the self-driving cars get so good they drive better than people. And I assume at that point the people that don't want to give up driving themselves are going to have to pay extra in the form of higher insurance rates to drive. their car. That is a ways away yet though.

In addition to these being useful for old people or people that can't see well, how about people that want to work while they travel? Or read for pleasure? Or nap? How about instead of getting up Tuesday morning and driving all day to get to your destination, you go to bed (in your self-driving car) Monday night and you get up Tuesday morning and you're at your destination?

 

[Lion78]

I drive a car with those features today (auto steer, adaptive cruise control, self-park, summon) I find I use them on longer trips where interstates are involved and during rush hour bumper to bumper traffic. Not perfect by any means, but work pretty well. I still have to pay attention (my own lack of confidence is the biggest reason). Over the past year I've probably done 5K miles without touching the steering wheel or peddles.

It will get better over time, but there will come a time when it kills someone. The technology will probably always be ahead of the regulators.

Unfortunately, it will by 30 years before the people who could really benefit (older) will be comfortable using it and that will only be because they used it at an earlier age.

May you live in interesting times.

 

[Grant Green]

It's just a matter of time. There is just so much upside to driverless cars. I hope to see the day when they are standard.

 

[Op2]

It will get better over time, but there will come a time when it kills someone. The technology will probably always be ahead of the regulators.

Yes, but the time when regular cars kills someone has been with us for over 100 years. The bar for self-driving cars to clear isn't that it doesn't kill anyone but rather that it is safer than self-driven cars.

 

[ForesterGump]

My daughter has seizure disorder and can't get a driver's license. That means she needs someone to take her everywhere. Driverless cars would give her more freedom to go places that she can't go now. Lots of things will change when this technology matures. The need for truck drivers will go away, along with a lot of driving jobs. Cab drivers and Uber will no longer be needed. Families will have fewer cars, as you will be able to program your car to be available for other riders, instead of sitting on a parking lot. Interesting times.

 

[artsandletters]

I don't even trust cruise control. Never use it.

 

[KnightSlayer]

I don't even trust cruise control. Never use it.

That sounds like a you problem.

 

[artsandletters]

That sounds like a you problem.

Yes, but it's not a problem.

 

[Nitt1300]

I see a lot of driverless cars now. There are people in the drivers seat, but they are texting or eating breakfast or putting on makeup.

 

[artsandletters]

I see a lot of driverless cars now. There are people in the drivers seat, but they are texting or eating breakfast or putting on makeup.

Apparently some people have cars that won't start unless they are on a phone call. I would really like to know what is so important that it needs immediate attention, but 30 years ago could wait until later or never.

 

[Woodpecker]

While there will be bugs to be ironed out I think the notion of self-driving cars is fantastic and not just because I'm getting older and I have lousy eyesight.

A good way to determine if a new technology competing with an old one is a good idea is to imagine both the technologies were new. Suppose cars didn't exist at all. And suppose invented simultaneously were regular cars and self-driving cars. How many people would choose to drive themselves? Not many.

Yes, as self-driving cars become perfected the art of driving so widely known now will start to fade away but then again not many people know how to ride a horse anymore either.

May people that are accustomed to driving aren't going to want to give it up but the interesting thing is going to be eventually when the self-driving cars get so good they drive better than people. And I assume at that point the people that don't want to give up driving themselves are going to have to pay extra in the form of higher insurance rates to drive. their car. That is a ways away yet though.

In addition to these being useful for old people or people that can't see well, how about people that want to work while they travel? Or read for pleasure? Or nap? How about instead of getting up Tuesday morning and driving all day to get to your destination, you go to bed (in your self-driving car) Monday night and you get up Tuesday morning and you're at your destination?

The concept is great. But I only see it if EVERYONE buys in and the entire system is driverless. In theory, no more accidents, all travel via the (continuously updated) most efficient route, no traffic lights or signs, all vehicles aware of the others and their plans. Need a ride? Summon a car with what you need (bed, exercise equipment, big screen UHD display, hot and cold running "hostesses, full bar, whatever you want. With a "mixed" grid of driverless and driven vehicles, I only see confusion on both sides with neither knowing or understanding what the others might do next. None of this will happen in my lifetime.

 

[BlueBand]

The concept is great. But I only see it if EVERYONE buys in and the entire system is driverless. In theory, no more accidents, all travel via the (continuously updated) most efficient route, no traffic lights or signs, all vehicles aware of the others and their plans. Need a ride? Summon a car with what you need (bed, exercise equipment, big screen UHD display, hot and cold running "hostesses, full bar, whatever you want. With a "mixed" grid of driverless and driven vehicles, I only see confusion on both sides with neither knowing or understanding what the others might do next. None of this will happen in my lifetime.

Either you aren't planning on living long or you underestimate how far along the car Google has been developing is at this stage.

 

[Woodpecker]

Either you aren't planning on living long or you underestimate how far along the car Google has been developing is at this stage.

I guess I'm not looking at it's eventual implementation as having to overcome technological hurdles but rather more challenging social hurdles. When do you think people will be willing to do this? But you are correct in that I do not expect to live very long - another 20 or so should do it.

 

[BlueBand]

I guess I'm not looking at it's eventual implementation as having to overcome technological hurdles but rather more challenging social hurdles. When do you think people will be willing to do this? But you are correct in that I do not expect to live very long - another 20 or so should do it.

I'd do it now, but that's me.

Many Americans have a bit of control freak in them. They're the ones who can't stand flying because they're not in the cockpit. Whomever brings the cars to the market is going to need to do a lot of demos. But I think once people experience it, there will be a lot of converts. Especially commuters.

 

[Woodpecker]

I'd do it now, but that's me.

Many Americans have a bit of control freak in them. They're the ones who can't stand flying because they're not in the cockpit. Whomever brings the cars to the market is going to need to do a lot of demos. But I think once people experience it, there will be a lot of converts. Especially commuters.

Yeah, I'd do it now as well (75 minute commute each way) but, as I said, I think you need EVERYONE on board for it to be what it should be. The roads with 50% self-drivers and 50% cowboys will be almost as bad as they are now. But it's nice to dream about. I hope you see the time come.

 

[Op2]

Apparently some people have cars that won't start unless they are on a phone call. I would really like to know what is so important that it needs immediate attention, but 30 years ago could wait until later or never.

Here's what's going to happen eventually with at least a few people. Self-driving cars will be perfected so that nobody needs to drive. Some people will insist on driving themselves. And then some of those people will STILL talk or text while driving themselves and get in an accident and kill someone.

 

[gogolion]

A few comments. FIrst, to those concerned about the safety of self-driving cars, these cars are MUCH safer than those with human drivers. Earlier this year Google's self-driving car caused its first accident (a very minor fender bender). The car had logged 1.3 MILLION miles before that happened. It had previously been in 17 other accidents, all of which were human error by drivers in other cars.

Also, to those worried about the car being programmed to drive a bomb into a building or something. The cars are designed NOT to drive INTO things. A terrorist could easily put a remote control device onto some sort of vehicle today. This is simply a stupid concern.

I can see automakers designing a vehicle equipped with beds. You get in the vehicle at 11pm in Chicago, go to sleep and wake up in Nashville. Maybe this starts competing with air travel.

 

[BBG65]

I just don't see how the computer and camera system can anticipate situations reliably enough. I won't trust it, but I can see big benefits for the elderly and other people with health issues preventing them from being safe drivers.

 

[Op2]

My daughter has seizure disorder and can't get a driver's license. That means she needs someone to take her everywhere. Driverless cars would give her more freedom to go places that she can't go now. Lots of things will change when this technology matures. The need for truck drivers will go away, along with a lot of driving jobs. Cab drivers and Uber will no longer be needed. Families will have fewer cars, as you will be able to program your car to be available for other riders, instead of sitting on a parking lot. Interesting times.

I can't tell you how much is warms my heart to read that. I can get a license but I have to jump through hoops and it's restricted because I have lousy eyesight and the possibility of not being able to get a license someday looms (even though I'm a safer drive that most that see well because driving is about much more than being able to read letters on an eye chart, but that's another story).

As a result I, unlike most people, have to actively consider what life would be like without a drivers license. And when you seriously consider it you realize just how dependent we are on driving, even if we don't drive that much. If you can't drive at all then you either have to have family and friends drive you everywhere you go, which is a big imposition, or you have pay someone to drive you everywhere you go, which is a big cost. It's hard for people that can easily read letters on an eye chart to fully comprehend this.

In addition to sefl-driving cars improving the lives of old people, they are going to make a massive difference in the lives of other people like your daughter that can't drive for whatever reason. I can't wait until they get here.

 

[Nitwit]

Cars are becoming more like computers (they are already run by computers apparently). The engines and drive trains last well over 100 k miles but the technology becomes obsolete after just a few years. My 5 year old Mercedes is a great car but it doesn't even have a back up camera. I'm interested in taking advantage of the self drive features which will be available in 2017, but I know if I wait another year or two after that the tech enhancements will be even better. I guess at some point you just go ahead and buy what you want and then try to keep more or less up to date after that.

 

[Lion78]

There have been over 100 million miles driven using autonomous technologies and the designers still only consider the technology at level 2 out of 4 possible levels of autonomous driving. In the very near future systems will improve to include stop lights and routing. It's most certainly coming.

There will be a very long period where both drivers and autonomous vehicles will share the road. The vast majority of accidents will be from the human drivers.

 

[artsandletters]

There have been over 100 million miles driven using autonomous technologies and the designers still only consider the technology at level 2 out of 4 possible levels of autonomous driving. In the very near future systems will improve to include stop lights and routing. It's most certainly coming.

There will be a very long period where both drivers and autonomous vehicles will share the road. The vast majority of accidents will be from the human drivers.

How will those cars know how to move over a lane on an interstate to let cars on to the highway? Aren't there nuances of driving that can't be programmed? Finally, where's the satisfaction in giving the finger to software? Very disconcerting.

 

[Nitt1300]

Mercedes for years refused to put cup holders in their cars, because they thought that drivers should drive. They were right, but that didn't matter in the end.

 

[artsandletters]

Mercedes for years refused to put cup holders in their cars, because they thought that drivers should drive. They were right, but that didn't matter in the end.

Jim Morrison agreed. 'Keep you eyes on the and your hands upon the wheel.'

 

[Cletus11]

THere is a lot to work out legally and politically for self driving cars, I still think that they are at least 5 years away from happening. But when they do, huge gamechanger. As now Uber/Lyft etc...can you have vehicles driving 23 hours per day (assuming one hour to recharge). These vehicles will be significantly drive down pricing of Uber/Lyft type services as won't have to pay a driver and have a car on road 23 hours per day instead of 8 hour, to the point where I think it will be common for families to have only one car. Elderly people no longer need cars. I could easily see ride sharing/carpool type Uber services for getting to and from work that are like bus services but pick you up at your house along with some other people locally and take you to your destination so the cost is split between passengers.

 

[Op2]

Although I like the idea of self-driving cars and other new labor saving technology, a problem that creates in the long run is that there is less and less things for people to do for a living. Technology is getting so good that it can do more and more stuff that formerly only people could do. People will still need something do and a source of money to buy things though.

 

[KnightSlayer]

Although I like the idea of self-driving cars and other new labor saving technology, a problem that creates in the long run is that there is less and less things for people to do for a living. Technology is getting so good that it can do more and more stuff that formerly only people could do. People will still need something do and a source of money to buy things though.

What did Socrates do for a living?

We appear to be entering a transitional time period for humans. Think about what the world could be like in 50 or 100 years. What if technology advances to the point that most jobs are done by computers. A handheld device that is smarter than all the human doctors in the world and could diagnose any ailment. Medical breakthroughs that can repair all sorts of mental illness. Every accountant and financial job done by machines. Artificial Intelligence that can do the work of any engineer on the planet. Robots that build any structure we need. Solar and battery storage so advanced that every person has all the energy they could ever use for free. A machine that simply needs just DNA or a stem cell to create any food you need. Robots that repair robots. A system of justice that is truly fair and unbiased.

Maybe we share jobs. 12 people doing the same job each just working one month per year or 50 people working just one week per year. Maybe just a small initial investment would let many people live completely self sufficient lives with no need to work an actual paying job. Maybe you earn money by doing anything that helps the planet and your fellow earthlings.

Or, maybe we just fight and kill until someone develops the ultimate weapon and we all die. It could go either way.

 

[Lion78]

How will those cars know how to move over a lane on an interstate to let cars on to the highway? Aren't there nuances of driving that can't be programmed? Finally, where's the satisfaction in giving the finger to software? Very disconcerting.

They will learn how and when to move over. Today I put my turn signal on and the car changes lanes. By doing this millions of times, AI will begin to understand why and adapt.

as for you finger, can't help you there, other than for the next 10 years there will always be somone sitting in the drivers seat you can blame.

 

[Woodpecker]

What did Socrates do for a living?

We appear to be entering a transitional time period for humans. Think about what the world could be like in 50 or 100 years. What if technology advances to the point that most jobs are done by computers. A handheld device that is smarter than all the human doctors in the world and could diagnose any ailment. Medical breakthroughs that can repair all sorts of mental illness. Every accountant and financial job done by machines. Artificial Intelligence that can do the work of any engineer on the planet. Robots that build any structure we need. Solar and battery storage so advanced that every person has all the energy they could ever use for free. A machine that simply needs just DNA or a stem cell to create any food you need. Robots that repair robots. A system of justice that is truly fair and unbiased.

Maybe we share jobs. 12 people doing the same job each just working one month per year or 50 people working just one week per year. Maybe just a small initial investment would let many people live completely self sufficient lives with no need to work an actual paying job. Maybe you earn money by doing anything that helps the planet and your fellow earthlings.

Or, maybe we just fight and kill until someone develops the ultimate weapon and we all die. It could go either way.

Socrates might have been ...

But seriously, someone is going to have to design, build, and maintain those machines you mention. Then there is food: farmers aren't going to work their asses off for nothing or someone is going to have to make sure the Soylent Green factory keeps running. There will be plenty of work to do.

 

[AWS1022]

Either you aren't planning on living long or you underestimate how far along the car Google has been developing is at this stage.

I just listened to a presenter yesterday that talked in great detail about driverless cars. The problem with Google is they can't mass produce these cars. It will only grow to the point of a national market when the car companies start producing them and they're not looking at doing that any time soon. And even when they do start, it will be a few years before they get it rolling. So according to this guy we're looking at at least 10 years but probably closer to 20 before we see widespread usage.

 

[AWS1022]

How will those cars know how to move over a lane on an interstate to let cars on to the highway? Aren't there nuances of driving that can't be programmed? Finally, where's the satisfaction in giving the finger to software? Very disconcerting.

The cars will be able to communicate with each other, so they will get signals letting them know what the other cars are doing. The roughest transition will be when the older cars are still on the road and don't have that capability. Once all cars have this technology, they will all know what the others are doing. But again, that's a pretty good ways into the future. The car industry does not move at a very fast rate in general.

 

[Nitt1300]

What did Socrates do for a living?

We appear to be entering a transitional time period for humans. Think about what the world could be like in 50 or 100 years. What if technology advances to the point that most jobs are done by computers. A handheld device that is smarter than all the human doctors in the world and could diagnose any ailment. Medical breakthroughs that can repair all sorts of mental illness. Every accountant and financial job done by machines. Artificial Intelligence that can do the work of any engineer on the planet. Robots that build any structure we need. Solar and battery storage so advanced that every person has all the energy they could ever use for free. A machine that simply needs just DNA or a stem cell to create any food you need. Robots that repair robots. A system of justice that is truly fair and unbiased.

Maybe we share jobs. 12 people doing the same job each just working one month per year or 50 people working just one week per year. Maybe just a small initial investment would let many people live completely self sufficient lives with no need to work an actual paying job. Maybe you earn money by doing anything that helps the planet and your fellow earthlings.

Or, maybe we just fight and kill until someone develops the ultimate weapon and we all die. It could go either way.

 

[PSUSignore]

Yes, but the time when regular cars kills someone has been with us for over 100 years. The bar for self-driving cars to clear isn't that it doesn't kill anyone but rather that it is safer than self-driven cars.

The legal ramification are bigger with self-driving cars though. If a driver hits you today, you might choose to sue that driver for damages. If a self-driving car hits you, you (or your lawyer) might choose to go after Google, a company worth billions. Lawmakers might use a fatality as a proof point that self driving should be eliminated. If the technology fails and kills someone, the ramifications would be big and costly for the entire industry, so they have to do a ton of testing and will be held to a higher standard, fair or not. And companies like Google are incentivized to meet higher standards because of the ramifications to their company if they should fail.

I just don't see how the computer and camera system can anticipate situations reliably enough. I won't trust it, but I can see big benefits for the elderly and other people with health issues preventing them from being safe drivers.

I find the technology remarkable. Watch this video that shows how the car sees the road and some of the scenarios they've encountered during testing. As another poster mentioned, the fact that they've only had 1 accident caused by a self-driving car during testing is quite an achievement.

Cars are becoming more like computers (they are already run by computers apparently). The engines and drive trains last well over 100 k miles but the technology becomes obsolete after just a few years. My 5 year old Mercedes is a great car but it doesn't even have a back up camera. I'm interested in taking advantage of the self drive features which will be available in 2017, but I know if I wait another year or two after that the tech enhancements will be even better. I guess at some point you just go ahead and buy what you want and then try to keep more or less up to date after that.

While I love technology, I don't have a backup camera either and I really don't miss it. I have 2 functional backup cameras in the front of my skull. But more to your point, I think the future state of cars will include system updates via software, to help keep cars updated with features. It will likely be less of an issue going forward, although some features will obviously still require more significant work or a new purchase.

How will those cars know how to move over a lane on an interstate to let cars on to the highway? Aren't there nuances of driving that can't be programmed? Finally, where's the satisfaction in giving the finger to software? Very disconcerting.

Testing, testing, testing. Of course all drivers will periodically encounter scenarios they've never seen before. Watch the video I posted above. They ran across a woman on a mobility scooter chasing a duck in the road. Of course that exact scenario wasn't programmed, but the programming was sufficient that the car knew what to do in order to safely navigate the situation. Also with technology each car can be programmed based on the experiences of every other car on the road. The cars will talk to one another. So while a human's "programming" might be based only on what that one individual experiences on the roads, the driverless car's programming will be based on the experience of thousands of other cars sharing information, making it much more "experienced" than any human driver could possibly become.

 

[KnightSlayer]

Socrates might have been ...

View embedded media

But seriously, someone is going to have to design, build, and maintain those machines you mention. Then there is food: farmers aren't going to work their asses off for nothing or someone is going to have to make sure the Soylent Green factory keeps running. There will be plenty of work to do.

They are already starting to grow meat in labs from stem cells. With the basic building blocks and unlimited energy from the Sun, farmers can kick back and write poetry.

 

[Woodpecker]

They are already starting to grow meat in labs from stem cells. With the basic building blocks and unlimited energy from the Sun, farmers can kick back and write poetry.

 

[Op2]

They are already starting to grow meat in labs from stem cells. With the basic building blocks and unlimited energy from the Sun, farmers can kick back and write poetry.

Here is the worlds first lab grown meatball from a few months ago. They're aiming to have this on the market in five years.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y027yLT2QY0
There is an indoor lettuce factory in Japan that is half the size of a football field that produces 10,000 heads of lettuce per day. It uses 1% as much water per head as regular lettuce farming and it's unaffected by weather (assuming it has a supply of electricity). There's no need to use pesticides because there are no pests in the sterile indoor environment they use. The lettuce doesn't need cleaned because it has never been dirty.

Technology is starting to be able to do some amazing things with food. And the reaction to it is interesting because some people are like "Yeah, apply technology to food, that's good" while others are like "No, this is not natural, it's bad."

 

[Cletus11]

I just listened to a presenter yesterday that talked in great detail about driverless cars. The problem with Google is they can't mass produce these cars. It will only grow to the point of a national market when the car companies start producing them and they're not looking at doing that any time soon. And even when they do start, it will be a few years before they get it rolling. So according to this guy we're looking at at least 10 years but probably closer to 20 before we see widespread usage.

Driverless cars won't be owned by people to start, they will be owned by Uber, Lyft, Apple, Google, etc...huge companies that use them as ride sharing services. Look at the way Uber has already changed driving habits and multiple that times 100 because driverless will drive down cost so more people will use so drive down cost more, etc...you will take out your phone, order up an Uber (or their competitors) and within 5 minutes a driveless car will be at your door. You can choose whether it is just you or you want to share it with someone so the ride would be less money. A master computer will optimize the routes of the cars to be able to pick up multiple passengers and shortest routes, etc...Uber has already driven down the cost of a cab by about 50% and driverless will take that number down another 50% so that it starts to become affordable to everybody.