Self Driving cars (Split from Ring Road Thread)

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by polak

I'm geniunely curious, how do todays self driven cars account for the unpredictable action of a human driving in another car that is say, out of control and braking is not an option? I know I would much rather trust myself in that situation then a computer.

The first major accident with a self driven car will probably spell the end of the whole idea. Just think of all the liability that will come with it, ESPECIALLY if the self driven car was somehow at fault.

How many accidents are caused from a "car out of control"? Infinitesimally small compared to human error. That's like saying you won't wear a seatbelt because it may trap you in your car.

As for the liability, the overall claims will be much lower, so I don't see that as a barrier at all

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by polak

I'm geniunely curious, how do todays self driven cars account for the unpredictable action of a human driving in another car that is say, out of control and braking is not an option? I know I would much rather trust myself in that situation then a computer.

The first major accident with a self driven car will probably spell the end of the whole idea. Just think of all the liability that will come with it, ESPECIALLY if the self driven car was somehow at fault.

So what you're saying is you don't trust the technology because you don't understand it.

Look how increased automation has made the airline industry the safest form of mass transit in the world. What you're saying is essentially you wish they went back to the days of almost no automation even though it's proven not to be as safe because you just don't trust technology.

The reality is humans suck at doing most things compared to computers, are way more prone to distraction, error, and stupidity.

As for a accident, you would still need insurance on your vehicle, the liabilities for accidents are no different. What would the problem be other then the fact your insurance premiums are likely to be a hell of a lot lower because automated cars are likely to be way less accident prone.

[polak]

A) Planes don't have to usually deal with other planes losing control or making other unpredictable decisions. When they do, I believe we usually hear about 100-300 people losing their lives...

B) Planes have millions of people employed to make sure that they don't collide with one another. Literally a massive, massive network probably worth billions of dollars.

C) Planes (pilots) can talk to each other.

D) Planes aren't fully selfcontrolled. They still have a highly trained pilot at the controls. Guess what happens when literally ANYTHING goes wrong in a plane? The pilot takes over control.

Seriously man, you couldn't have come up with a worse example.

As for the liability, what happens when there is one little fault in a car that causes an accident these days? Massive recalls, and billions of dollars in lawsuits right? Well now imagine if every single accident that happens in the world is the fault of the manufacturer. Yeah.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by polak

As for the liability, what happens when there is one little fault in a car that causes an accident these days? Massive recalls, and billions of dollars in lawsuits right? Well now imagine if every single accident that happens in the world is the fault of the manufacturer. Yeah.

I think the way car insurance works would change. In effect the manufacturer would be the one with insurance since the fault would lie with the car, not the driver. This insurance cost would then be passed on to the owner, possibly as part of the purchase price or else as a monthly/yearly payment. If the cars live up to expectations those premiums should be pretty low making it more feasible to just include it as part of the cost of the vehicle.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by polak

A) Planes don't have to usually deal with other planes losing control or making other unpredictable decisions. When they do, I believe we usually hear about 100-300 people losing their lives...

B) Planes have millions of people employed to make sure that they don't collide with one another. Literally a massive, massive network probably worth billions of dollars.

C) Planes (pilots) can talk to each other.

D) Planes aren't fully selfcontrolled. They still have a highly trained pilot at the controls. Guess what happens when literally ANYTHING goes wrong in a plane? The pilot takes over control.

Seriously man, you couldn't have come up with a worse example.

As for the liability, what happens when there is one little fault in a car that causes an accident these days? Massive recalls, and billions of dollars in lawsuits right? Well now imagine if every single accident that happens in the world is the fault of the manufacturer. Yeah.

The answer is to all your questions is Better than a human. If a human swerves right in front of the computer car it does the same thing a human does, brakes, looks for available space to move into to get out of the way. Only the computer drives it faster.

From a liability standpoint insurance would cover the accidents, wether that is built into the price of the vehicle and covered by the manufacturuer or by the individual paying the premium. Either way these are easy barriers to legislate your way out of.

[psicodude]

I sort of agree with Polak here. The issue for me is that it is quite rare for technology to work perfectly 100% of the time. There are always hidden bugs in code, things overheat and fail, etc. This happens in things as simple as a blender and as complex as a nuclear reactor. The challenge is that, to make autonomous vehicles safe enough for mass use, the level of engineering and redundancy required would be in the same neighborhood as the power grid or the stock exchange....they just HAVE to work as close to perfect as possible. If the technology isn't perfect, the general population won't trust it and won't purchase it. How expensive would that be anytime in the next 25 years?

I can't even count on my smartphone to work perfectly. How am I to trust a car carrying my family?

[Dan02]

I think what you and polak are both missing out on is while yes technology can malfunction and not perform as intended, it is orders of magnitude better and more reliable then the system it is going to replace(humans)

With how often you screw up how can you trust yourself carrying your family?

Denying that overall a higher level of automation would be safer then continuing to let people drive is just sticking your head in the sand because you don't want to give up control.

If that's you're argument that you're not comfortable giving up control that's fine I think that's a valid criticism. But to suggest automated cars would be less safe is patently absurd.

Speeding, blown stop signs, tailgating, road rage, not seeing cars in your blind spots, drunk driving, distracted driving, running red lights, etc etc. All things that happen a incalculable number of times on our roads daily would also be things that are all but completely eliminated by autonomous cars. Basically the WRGMG thread would cease to exist.

[V]

Can't we just skip forward to transporter beams?

[4X4]

Can't you guys go talk about your bluetooth cars in the tech forum? This thread is about that awesomely wicked road that they're about to build for me.

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by Dan02

I think what you and polak are both missing out on is while yes technology can malfunction and not perform as intended, it is orders of magnitude better and more reliable then the system it is going to replace(humans)

With how often you screw up how can you trust yourself carrying your family?

Denying that overall a higher level of automation would be safer then continuing to let people drive is just sticking your head in the sand because you don't want to give up control.

If that's you're argument that you're not comfortable giving up control that's fine I think that's a valid criticism. But to suggest automated cars would be less safe is patently absurd.

Speeding, blown stop signs, tailgating, road rage, not seeing cars in your blind spots, drunk driving, distracted driving, running red lights, etc etc. All things that happen a incalculable number of times on our roads daily would also be things that are all but completely eliminated by autonomous cars. Basically the WRGMG thread would cease to exist.

All valid points, but it then comes back to a question of liability. When I do any of those things I (and my insurance company) am solely responsible. Are the car manufacturers prepared for that level of liability?

I completely agree that self-driving cars are not a question of if, but when. I just believe that the number of issues that need to be figured out go way beyond the technology, and that it will take decades to do so. I hope I am proven wrong though.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by psicodude

All valid points, but it then comes back to a question of liability. When I do any of those things I (and my insurance company) am solely responsible. Are the car manufacturers prepared for that level of liability?

I completely agree that self-driving cars are not a question of if, but when. I just believe that the number of issues that need to be figured out go way beyond the technology, and that it will take decades to do so. I hope I am proven wrong though.

You are thinking about self-driving car insurance as being the same thing as current insurance, and there is almost no way that they will be the same. There will be insurance, likely something where everyone who has a self-driving car pays into it and it just pays for accidents as no fault.

In fact, it might even be built into the cost of the car for the first couple generations.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Dan02

I think what you and polak are both missing out on is while yes technology can malfunction and not perform as intended, it is orders of magnitude better and more reliable then the system it is going to replace(humans)

With how often you screw up how can you trust yourself carrying your family?

Denying that overall a higher level of automation would be safer then continuing to let people drive is just sticking your head in the sand because you don't want to give up control.

If that's you're argument that you're not comfortable giving up control that's fine I think that's a valid criticism. But to suggest automated cars would be less safe is patently absurd.

Speeding, blown stop signs, tailgating, road rage, not seeing cars in your blind spots, drunk driving, distracted driving, running red lights, etc etc. All things that happen a incalculable number of times on our roads daily would also be things that are all but completely eliminated by autonomous cars. Basically the WRGMG thread would cease to exist.

All of these points are great, if every car is self driving. I would 100% get into a car that drives itself if every car drove itself and they talked to one another. It's combining humans with self driving cars on the same roads that I don't think will work. Hesitation, behavioral cues, common courtesy, all of these things are things I'm doubtful that a self driven car can understand at the level of a human being.

Hell, what happens when you get to a 4 way stop and the self driving car gets there at the same time as a human and the human believes they were there first? Self driving cars will always wait? That won't get annoying. What happens when the weather is crap and the self driven car, which will most likely be programmed to drive more cautiously, is going 30 when confident human drivers are going 60? Cause now we have a bunch of cars that don't speak the same language or behave the same way going significantly different speeds? What happens when someone decides to wave someone in or does something that the self driving car doesn't understand? Is it just going to sit there confused, until the person gives up and goes? What happens in construction areas, places with unpainted lanes, places that place the self driving car in extremely unique situations that it'll never see on a normal basis, where human intervention will be needed? Construction worker is holding some sort of sign or does some sort of gesture that the car doesn't understand? Maybe there is an accident and the police is telling cars to drive around on the grass?

I don't know, maybe I'm out to lunch and computers can now calculate all these actions of human beings in the speeds required for human driven cars and self driving cars to share the road, but I have a hard time believing it.

What I think you will see, maybe within 20 years, are self driving car lanes where only self driving cars are allowed and they talk to one another, but once you drive off of that lane, the human driver has to take over control. Which is kind of pointless outside of the highway, and we can't even afford to light up our highways so....

[#-3]

I think self driving cars will realistically widen the mean gap between cars. Allot of people drive too close. I think what they hopefully can also do with the right programming is reduce traffic waves.

I also don't see people using a self driving car on small city roads in the near future. I think most people will view it as a cruise control options for the first 10-15 years, using it only on long drives.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by polak

All of these points are great, if every car is self driving. I would 100% get into a car that drives itself if every car drove itself and they talked to one another. It's combining humans with self driving cars on the same roads that I don't think will work. Hesitation, behavioral cues, common courtesy, all of these things are things I'm doubtful that a self driven car can understand at the level of a human being.

Hell, what happens when you get to a 4 way stop and the self driving car gets there at the same time as a human and the human believes they were there first? Self driving cars will always wait? That won't get annoying. What happens when the weather is crap and the self driven car, which will most likely be programmed to drive more cautiously, is going 30 when confident human drivers are going 60? Cause now we have a bunch of cars that don't speak the same language or behave the same way going significantly different speeds? What happens when someone decides to wave someone in or does something that the self driving car doesn't understand? Is it just going to sit there confused, until the person gives up and goes?

I don't know, maybe I'm out to lunch and computers can now calculate all these actions of human beings in the speeds required for human driven cars and self driving cars to share the road, but I have a hard time believing it.

What I think you will see, maybe within 20 years, are self driving car lanes where only self driving cars are allowed and they talk to one another, but once you drive off of that lane, the human driver has to take over control. Which is kind of pointless outside of the highway, and we can't even afford to light up our highways so....

The do the speed limit and maintain a set distance from other cars on the road. They come equipped with light radar and a range finder to develop an accurate 3D model of it's surroundings. It also uses a system of sensors to keep a distance from other vehicles on the road.

I saw a video while I was in San Francisco about them and it was pretty neat. So far they have driven over 1 million kilometers with only one incident and that involved the vehicle being rear ended while stopped at a red light.

They still need a driver so you would tap the brakes, just like you do for cruise control, and take over the control of the vehicle. Problem is all the radar equipment, sensors, computers, etc. cost about a half million dollars.

[polak]

Oh okay well then we're not talking exclusively self driving cars. That's a whole different thing then.

It will ultimately become used like cruise control. All of the issues that exist today will still exist and highway capacity ultimately won't change.

Guess I can forget about getting slammed and telling Genie the Genesis to drive my sloppy ass home...

[Canehdianman]

I find it strange that so many people think that self-driving cars will never happen.

I think it's inevitable and will be one of the biggest leaps forward as far as giving people more time for other activities.

Eventually, driving will be no different than sitting in your office or on your couch. You can read the paper, play candy crush or have sex with your wife. Maybe even poop.

Arguing that a person can respond better than a computer (or even better, a network of computers involving all other cars around you) is so ridiculous as to not be worthy of a reply.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

Arguing that a person can respond better than a computer (or even better, a network of computers involving all other cars around you) is so ridiculous as to not be worthy of a reply.

No one is saying it will never happen. We're saying a) self driving cars and humans behind the wheel are a bad mix and b) it won't happen in 20 years.

[Russic]

There will be a time when people look back on human controlled cars in absolute disbelief. The number of lives saved will be incredible. My prediction is they will be on the road in small numbers within 20 years (similar to electric cars).

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by polak

No one is saying it will never happen. We're saying a) self driving cars and humans behind the wheel are a bad mix and b) it won't happen in 20 years.

Yes, I understand. I still think it would be safer to have 999 human and one computer-driven car on the road than 1000 humans.

I'll see you in 20 years for my beer

[polak]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

Yes, I understand. I still think it would be safer to have 999 human and one computer-driven car on the road than 1000 humans.

I'll see you in 20 years for my beer

Double or nothing if that beer is served by robot with boobs?