First Ground Up Driverless Vehicle To Be On Road in 2015

Your logic is backward. You might have better traction with a very few people get harmed because they wore seatbelts...

Yet even so, the question is really about human nature. AP relies on humans doing something beyond their normal capability. Such a feature would normally be disabled in any other endeavor.

Peace,
Tom

 

So your whole argument is the source is to be questioned?

Ok, let's go to the horse's mouth itself: http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/Mobileye+(MBLY)+Issues+Statement+on+Fatal+Tesla+(TSLA)+Model+S+Autopilot+Crash/11793789.html

The manufacturer of the sensor makes it clear--that technology can't see events that lead to Mr. Brown's death. (Thanks to the dailybeast for a citation to their source.)

Peace,
Tom

 

Mobileye updated that statement.

There are 12 different systems integrated into AP; one of which is Mobileye.

 

So, based on the folly of a few, keep the technology advances from everyone?

I don't understand your 'human capabilities that are not natural for many to most people'. Riding a bicycle is not natural to humans, but we put our kids on bikes to learn pretty much on their own. And many people continue to be killed every year riding bicycles.

Flying is not natural to humans, But with a couple of days of ground school and 40 hours of flight time, you too can risk your life (and others) in a plane. Hundreds of people are killed each year depending on the crew up front and an autopilot. And they have hours of training required every year.

Was the development of the airplane stopped with the Wright brothers first casualty? And hundreds of people continue to be killed every year.

Driving is not natural to humans. Yet we put our teenagers in a few hours of class, a few days behind the wheel and turn them loose on the roads. Some states require some additional things like daylight hours only or several months with an adult present but many don't. And many hundreds are killed and kill others on the roads every year.

And don't forget cellphones while driving . . . more technology that should have been abandoned, right?

And don't get me started on guns and gun owners. . .

It's been a busy week and I was amazed to see no negative posts in 3 days! But I did notice that Mercedes is advertising their auto driving - and they even use the word 'autonomous' - in the E Class 2017 sedans. So you guys will have another target to rail about.

I've always been on the cutting edge with technology and gadgets and with the right training and practice, no blood or injuries. (Edit: I have fallen on my bike a few times with a little blood - and most were my fault.)

 

Henry Ford would not have been able to get his tin Lizzie on the road with today's mentalities.


Ps I remember telling him so at that time.

 

Nope. That is not at all what I'm saying. (Nor is it "the folly of a few", unless you count Tesla as the few.)

Clearly I haven't explained my position to where you understand it.

Driving today, flying, bicycles, etc. are all examples of technologies that adapted themselves to human capabilities. No longer do cars have fixed seats and only hand controls--drivers (and pilots) adjust the seat to their capabilities as a human--arm length, height, ,etc. Some cars let you adjust the steering wheel to fit the driver. Some cars let you adjust the driver's seat up and down, as well as tilt, forward/back, etc.

As the driver you are not expected to do things beyond your human capability--they've added power steering, power brakes, etc. You don't have to be a muscleman to drive a car. You don't have to be right or left handed--anyone can drive.

Driving itself is not natural, yet it is within the realm of capabilities of the bulk of humans.


My point is "paying close attention" when someone or something else is driving is not with the capabilities of most humans. Most people can't sit and watch paint dry without zoning out. Perhaps you can watch attentively for long periods of time; I'm sure some people can. But my belief is most can't.

Even if I'm wrong on the most/many/lots scale, I contend there are many enough that can't pay attention (far more than a folly of few), that any safety system that relies on normal people to stay awake is itself a folly. Look at how many people can't pay attention when they are the one driving. Do you think more of them will be able to pay attention when they aren't driving?

I think you also have a wrong impression of where I stand on the technology as a promise. I'm very actively in favor of the autonomous driving technology. The bulk of my posts are highly in favor of what will come.

What I do not want are wide scale beta tests of preliminary technology. Can you imagine the Wright Brothers plane in the hands of all families? No; it was not ready.

Likewise semi-autonomous driving is not ready for beta testing for the many. Absolutely, keep developing it. Absolutely, make it able to be ready for most people. But don't put it in the hands of people until it is ready.

Peace,
Tom

 

This pains me but . . . if I can adjust my seat, get more comfortable, have power steering, it's a problem and causes me to pay less attention to my driving?

I've used cruise control since 1972 as a third party add on and I've never rear-ended a car because I haven't paid attention.

So 'paying close attention' becomes secondary? Maybe in your world but maybe your drivers need more training.

If you're not beta testing it, why worry about it? You have a better chance of slipping in the shower and dying.

 

TIn Lizzie's couldn't do 100 mph until they put in some basic safety features...

Besides, if you include me in that list of "today's mentalities", I think my overall posts, typically highly in favor of a well developed autonomous car speak for themselves.

Peace,
Tom

 

There is a big, big difference between comfort and safety. My wife might be able to drive a car set for my son. But she can't do it safely. She would be sliding down in the seat to reach the controls.

Each of us has a level of ability when it comes to paying attention. It is not an all or nothing thing, it is a scale including many shades of gray between black and white.

Maybe you personally have the ability to pay enough attention to a semi-autonomous car after 1,0000 miles, hundreds of trips. I suspect there are people like that. I can't. I want to read, watch TV, sleep, something. I can't watch paint dry; I can't pay attention when someone else is driving. I'm not a safety system for my car. It is a safety system for me.

My belief, based on poorly people drive today when they are forced to engage, is that given the opportunity to disengage because of a semi-autonomous driver, they won't pay attention. Google proved that in their experiments. Why can't you learn from their experiences?

As for "if I'm not beta testing it..." Isn't everyone on the road with Telsas part of the overall beta test? If they have an accident, is the driver the only one affected? Of course not. Tesla is negligent in their beta testing of something that isn't close to ready.

Peace,
Tom

 

Tom,

There have been many cars in the last 10 years that set the seat and controls to the individual driver. Teslas also do this. It's called driver profile.

I don't know why you have such a low expectation of drivers in general. You should be worried about duis and cell-phone distraction. It's a much bigger per-centage.

 

Of course cars can adjust to the driver. That is called adapting to the human capabilities for reach, height, etc. And is an example in a discussion.

Likewise, I don't see how you think people who are already distracted by phones, movies, etc. are going to be attentive when they don't even have to drive. Surely you don't think they will be more attentive.

Let's see how attentive you are after a couple thousand miles of AP.

Peace,
Tom

 

I try to avoid beta testing computer programs because of the possibility of the computer crashing.

Personally I will avoid beta testing "autonomous" cars for the same reason.

 

And so far the only person killed driving a Tesla in AP was because a truck diver failed to yield.

 

Ok well they should rip out all corvette engines and replace them with Honda Civic engines too then. That's the exact same argument. Stating what should happen because of what one person may have done but the vast majority probably don't.

A few people abusing a system is not a reason to yank it if it can help with safety overall.

 

Driving a car in general Isn't natural at all. It's a learned skill. Same goes for tesla auto Pilot.

 

I have a grandmother that absolutely refuses to wear a lap seat belt in the middle seat of a car. She says she's heard of way to many people that have gotten very severe I juries from them in an accident. Says she hates the regular ones too because of all the shoulder injuries they cause.

So evidently there are plenty of studies according to her.

Truth be told neither none of any of our arguments can be fully certain a nd covered by any real facts until these cars have been on the road for ten plus years and we can see some real longevity statistics .

Difference is some are afraid it's to early and others don't.

I think it's time. I also think they should maybe do a little marketing rewording about teaching buyers a little more simply because of the optics from the nay Sayers more than anything. I haven't bought one so I don't know what they do now. But someone here's about to get one so maybe he can give us a detailed explanation of what he's told when he picks up his car.

 

The concept of transition from autondrive to human drive has been around for ages. It's always been there for crises control.

I'd like to hear how the transition can work in a tesla.