First Ground Up Driverless Vehicle To Be On Road in 2015

Discussion in 'Tech Talk - Gadgets, Gizmos and Technology' started by Drucifer, Dec 23, 2014.

  1. Oct 18, 2015 #41 of 663
    Drucifer

    Drucifer Well-Known Member

    9,492
    248
    Feb 12, 2009
    NY Hudson...
    Well, I've been driving 50+ years. Had one accident when I had a drivers permit.

    I still prefer all the vehicles on the road to be computer driven. Because computers don't make forgetful mistakes.
     
  2. Oct 18, 2015 #42 of 663
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,983
    2,294
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    There are a lot of cars on the road I'd prefer to be computer driven. Most of them are barely being driven at all ... the driver seems to be doing something else. There have been many times where I've nearly been hit by someone not paying attention - and one time where nearly did not apply (I stopped for a line of traffic, he did not - no injuries other than his pride but over $1000 in damages). For people who are already not driving, let their car do a better job.

    As for me ... I'd rather drive, thank you very much. There are times where I would not mind turning over the wheel to the car - if the law allows that. Will there be laws against texting or cellphones or laptop use or television or sleeping when the car is driving? As long as I can't do anything else I might as well drive.

    Driverless cars are perfect for people who don't drive. Perhaps they will become the next Uber. A car you do not own takes you from where you are to where you want to go and then moves on to the next person.
     
  3. Oct 18, 2015 #43 of 663
    scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    7,177
    188
    Apr 22, 2002
    Kansas City KS
    The wife and me were discussing this - We're more of the mind that there are times it would be nice to put the car into "autopilot mode", especially on a long trip, but for day to day commutting - no way no how. Things change rapidly out there, and I'm not all that trusting of automation for life / mission critical things that may require judgement.
     
  4. Oct 18, 2015 #44 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    What "improvisation" could you possibly handle better than a system that has driven thousands of miles for every mile you've driven? You can only learn from your experiences, computer driven cars learn from each other. They would see the situation you would have to improvise before you saw it--they wouldn't need to improvise. :)

    They would track all the objects that are meaningful and none of the ones that aren't (like things in the car--phones, people, movies, radio, etc.)

    Yes, they limited to preventing read-enders. But the computers wouldn't rear end in the first place. :)

    You clearly are an exceptional driver. What will you do when your insurance company charges you more because you choose to drive rather than let the computer? Eventually--a lot more.

    Peace,
    Tom
     
  5. Oct 18, 2015 #45 of 663
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,498
    452
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    I might buy a car that could be set to an autopilot mode or not, whichever the owner chooses, rather than the "autonomous" car the Swedish guy from Volvo seemed to be talking about (whose first language is not English).
     
  6. Oct 18, 2015 #46 of 663
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,983
    2,294
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I can learn from the experience of others. That started decades ago in driver's ed watching horrible crash videos (along with videos of people doing it right). The in car training was done with three students in the car with each trainer ... the other two students could learn from the driver's mistakes when it was not their turn to drive. Not to mention the time between driver's ed and getting a regular license where I had to drive with a licensed adult. Not to mention every trip in a car since I was aware that cars were driven ... with the opportunity to watch my parents and other drivers. Not to mention YouTube and other social media sharing of videos and descriptions of people driving. (A lot of unmentionables.)

    If you are not learning from the experience of others then you are simply choosing to be ignorant.

    What a computer driven car learns is filtered by a human being. The scenarios that the computer has been trained to react to are based on the decisions of the programmer. If the programmer is wrong the car is wrong.

    This isn't chess where all the legal moves can be programmed then let the computer run through every possible game and then pattern match a victory based on all the winning end games from the current location of pieces on the board. Driving is a game where people cheat. They run red lights, they turn right on red when not permitted or without stopping. They pass on the right using right turn only lanes. They speed. They fail to yield. They make unsafe lane changes. They fail to signal. They drive on the wrong side of the road. Etc etc etc ... the list goes on.

    It is not good enough to say "Ah, the human cheated. The human was at fault. Don't blame the computer car." It doesn't matter who is at fault when you're dead or injured. You're still dead or injured.

    For success the car needs to be sentient. It needs to have a sixth sense about the billions of possibilities and avoid every problem that it can. We're not to that level of technology. We don't even have computer doors that work properly 100% of the time. Siri and other helpers on our phones can't even translate audio correctly (when I say "thank you" as clear as possible then see "f*** you" appear on the screen it is time to turn off the automation).

    Yes, I am setting a high bar. But I am talking about human lives. Humans should not be killed by their machines.
     
  7. Oct 18, 2015 #47 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    My point is you are still learning via your experiences even if they are via means other than driving. Not everyone will see the same videos you did. Or have the same training experiences your group had. It's still your experiences.

    All google cars can learn from all other google cars.

    Actually the filters are not human. They are self-learning systems that do their own filtering. The overall meta-level guidance is human--"keep the car from crashing." :)

    And the options for each set of circumstances are not totally limitless. Physics does still rule the movements of objects. :)

    So the systems are able to recognize objects, know how they can behave, how they likely will behave, and how to tell if they are "cheating" as you put it. Cheating is merely another set of possibilities--which the computer will recognize faster than a human would.

    Doors are easy--if you program your destination into the system. Since cars will have the knowledge of your destination, the correct doors can open.

    I'm not really ignoring your Star Trek door example. Yet I am saying the door example requires the same inputs for driving a car--namely destination. Though doors could do a lot with your direction of travel. If you aren't headed directly at the door, you likely aren't trying to cross that threshold. :) (The who can enter without knocking is a simple access control list, by the way.)

    Peace,
    Tom
     
  8. Oct 18, 2015 #48 of 663
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,983
    2,294
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I'm sorry. I cannot take you seriously when your posts are peppered with similes.

    If you want to put your life in the hands of an autonomous machine have at it ... just stay away from me.
     
  9. Oct 18, 2015 #49 of 663
    yosoyellobo

    yosoyellobo Icon

    2,963
    226
    Nov 1, 2006
    Jacksonville Fl
    i be perfectly happy to drive in autopilot mode and let manufacturer handle the liability. Giving the driver the ability to turn off autopilot opens up a can of worms for the manufactures and frankly would not make sense for them.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. Oct 18, 2015 #50 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    We put our lives in the "hands" of technology all the time. If you want, you can go back to stone knives and bearskins. Doesn't sound like fun to me. :)

    As for driving near you... you'll be driving near many autonomous cars fairly soon. They will be safer than the human driving cars--already are, actually. So you also get to choose if you wish to be on the roads or not.

    Peace,
    Tom

    Oh crap. I used another smilie. I guess I don't want to be grumpy tonight.
     
  11. Oct 18, 2015 #51 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    Me too. :)

    Right now, the hardest problems are snow covered roads and some gravel roads, as I understand it. There will be times when manual drive will be required.

    So the insurance industry will have an interesting time developing products what account for how often you drive in manual vs. let the computer drive. And insurance companies will utilize more data from the computer systems to determine "fault" and "liability" from accidents. At some point, and I suspect it could come pretty soon, it will be relatively expensive to insure a manual only car or a car that is frequently driving in manual mode.

    Peace,
    Tom
     
  12. Oct 18, 2015 #52 of 663
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,983
    2,294
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Human guided technology ... typically with the humans present and often with the humans sharing the danger.


    No, I won't. Only one state near me has made autonomous cars explicitly legal - and only for testing. (The argument that autonomous cars have not been ruled illegal therefore they are legal everywhere has not been tested.) There will not be enough of them on the road "fairly soon" to notice. My best chance of seeing one would be on a trip to Chicago. I'd like to see how one of those cars handles the imperfections of Chicago traffic ... especially when limited to zero violations of any traffic law. Autonomous cars jamming up traffic ... that will be the headline.

    I am seeing more places where flex-fuel vehicle drivers can buy something more than normal unleaded gasoline. And I have seen electric car charging stations (other than on the Internet or TV). Adopting new technology takes time ... and money. "Many autonomous cars fairly soon"? No.

    There is a better chance that AT&T will shut down uverse and try to force all of their subs to get DirecTV (or vice versa) than "many autonomous cars fairly soon" where I drive. Your experience may vary.


    I do not agree with your fear uncertainty and doubt about insurance rates going up for non-autonomous vehicles (more than the expected increases the industry would foist on us in any case). My insurance company does offer discounts for features that lower claims and save them money: airbags, theft deterrents, anti-lock brakes, safe driving, choice of vehicle (popularity to be stolen or expense of repair), age of drivers, marital status and other statistics all affect insurance rates. There is not enough data for autonomous vehicles to offer a discount.
     
  13. Oct 19, 2015 #53 of 663
    dennisj00

    dennisj00 Hall Of Fame

    9,690
    196
    Sep 27, 2007
    Lake Norman, NC
    You can buy a Tesla today (at least order one) that drives itself at cruise control speeds so I don't think the state by state legality issue is valid. It does take input from you - flick the turn signal - to change lanes. And it will park itself in your garage or a public parking space.

    I'm lusting after one.

    Some of these posts remind me of my grandfathers stories that people didn't trust automobiles and would rather keep their horses and buggy whips.

    I'm an early adopter for many things and I think we won't worry about our cars driving themselves in 5 to 10 years.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. Oct 20, 2015 #54 of 663
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,650
    401
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Sure they do... We have a Web site here partially devoted to computer mistakes (Dish and DirecTV receivers)!

    Computers are built and programmed by people. Those people have flaws. Airplanes can have autopilots because by and large there isn't much up there at any given time to run into... so the plane can pretty much go in a straight line or a pre-defined curve without worry of collision or "running of the road." Cars have a lot more obstacles... and while people aren't perfect, neither are the computers they create.

    A computer might be able to ensure the mistakes are consistent ones... unless there are bugs in the programming. There are always bugs that produce unexpected results.

    That's part of the rub. IF I'm in a computer-driven car I shouldn't be required to have insurance in the first place! I don't need insurance to ride in a taxi or on a bus... the driver of that vehicle has insurance. IF I'm in an autonomous car that I can't drive, I better not be held liable and I better not be required to have insurance for it. So it shouldn't be a choice of paying more or less for insurance, it should be a choice of driving and having insurance OR riding and not having any.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. Oct 20, 2015 #55 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    These are great questions. One model would be a autonomous taxi system, where you wouldn't insure because you wouldn't own a car at all.

    If you do own, you might not have to have liability but you still would be required to have comprehensive and uninsured motorist insurances. At least if you borrow money against it, the bank will require those insurances.

    Peace,
    Tom
     
  16. Oct 20, 2015 #56 of 663
    phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,498
    452
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    [​IMG]

    If the car has enough sonar and radar to make decisions about these kind of situations, then I'll be interested. As it is, apparently the muddy flow in the foreground was ok to drive through, but the flow in the background was problematic. Drivers make mistakes. But that "autonomous" vehicle would likely not drive through any such flow and if you couldn't shut off the autonomy, in my part of the world there would be many people who wouldn't get home many nights in the year. Add a waddling skunk to that picture and you're asking for trouble.
     
  17. Oct 20, 2015 #57 of 663
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,065
    1,578
    Nov 13, 2006
    Except people have no Guinness driving trough a mud flow when they have no way of even knowing if the road is washed out. I don't get how that is even a question really.

    Personally I think these cars should all still have regular controls so you can take over if you want to at any time. Then you have the best of both worlds IMHO in the long run.
     
  18. Oct 20, 2015 #58 of 663
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator

    50,983
    2,294
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Good luck "autonomous car":

    winter1.png winter2.png

    These photos were taken on a four lane divided highway. I suspect the autonomous car would shut down and say "I'm not driving in this weather" leaving it to the human to drive. The car company not wanting to be liable for the outcome.

    Imagine being in a cab and having the driver say "you drive".

    Will the car company accept responsibility in all weather? Or will manual override become so common that "autonomous" cars will be a joke?
     
  19. Oct 20, 2015 #59 of 663
    inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    25,065
    1,578
    Nov 13, 2006
    Why? A car can tell speed differences in wheels and so forth better than humans. What I don't know is how it determines location in that kind of weather not safety of speed and going forward.
     
  20. Oct 20, 2015 #60 of 663
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    248
    Nov 15, 2005
    From what I've read, snow covered (and some gravel) roads are a problem. Only in identifying lanes and edge of road. Eventually they'll solve that one too. Probably better than humans will be able to tell...

    As for the driving, inkahauts is right. With proper sensors the cars will be safer with computers than humans. That said--good sensors will help humans too. :)

    Peace,
    Tom
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements