Driverless cars 'could lead to complacency'
Discussion
Driverless cars 'could lead to complacency'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39274411
Certain types of driverless vehicles may not be safe, peers have warned.
Over-reliance on technology could mean drivers react slowly to taking back control of a semi-autonomous vehicle in an emergency, they said.
However, the Lords Science and Technology Committee noted that some technology could reduce accidents caused by human error.
The Department for Transport said driverless cars "have the potential to transform the way we trave
Vehicles can be split into different levels of automation, according to industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).
Level 0 is a vehicle with no automation, while level 5 is fully automated.
There is a "very dangerous" problem that lies with vehicles on the midway point of this scale, peers on the Lords Science and Technology Committee said.
Vehicles at level 3 still need a driver, but can shift critical operations to the car, and back again.
The risk that the vehicle may need to hand back control to an unprepared driver in an emergency may be "too great to tolerate", the Lords Science and Technology Committee said.
Professor Neville Stanton of the University of Southampton told the committee: "As vehicles become fully autonomous, even the most observant human driver's attention will begin to wane.
"Their mind will wander… This is particularly true if they are engaging in other activities such as reading, answering emails, engaged in conversations with passengers, watching movies or surfing the internet."
In general, research suggested drivers of automated vehicles were not as effective at dealing with emergencies as drivers of manual cars.
For example, they had been found to take six times longer to respond to emergency braking by other vehicles.
Who would have thought that would happen?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39274411
Certain types of driverless vehicles may not be safe, peers have warned.
Over-reliance on technology could mean drivers react slowly to taking back control of a semi-autonomous vehicle in an emergency, they said.
However, the Lords Science and Technology Committee noted that some technology could reduce accidents caused by human error.
The Department for Transport said driverless cars "have the potential to transform the way we trave
Vehicles can be split into different levels of automation, according to industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).
Level 0 is a vehicle with no automation, while level 5 is fully automated.
There is a "very dangerous" problem that lies with vehicles on the midway point of this scale, peers on the Lords Science and Technology Committee said.
Vehicles at level 3 still need a driver, but can shift critical operations to the car, and back again.
The risk that the vehicle may need to hand back control to an unprepared driver in an emergency may be "too great to tolerate", the Lords Science and Technology Committee said.
Professor Neville Stanton of the University of Southampton told the committee: "As vehicles become fully autonomous, even the most observant human driver's attention will begin to wane.
"Their mind will wander… This is particularly true if they are engaging in other activities such as reading, answering emails, engaged in conversations with passengers, watching movies or surfing the internet."
In general, research suggested drivers of automated vehicles were not as effective at dealing with emergencies as drivers of manual cars.
For example, they had been found to take six times longer to respond to emergency braking by other vehicles.
Who would have thought that would happen?
saaby93 said:
are they going to roll back all the other stuff like
automatic headlights automatic wipers, those indicators where people turn but they dont seem to come on, automatic handbrakes
Alec Issigonis didnt like the idea of heaters in cars as he thought they made the driver too comfortable and not pay enough attention. Luckily he lost that particular argumentautomatic headlights automatic wipers, those indicators where people turn but they dont seem to come on, automatic handbrakes
saaby93 said:
are they going to roll back all the other stuff like
automatic headlights automatic wipers, those indicators where people turn but they dont seem to come on, automatic handbrakes
I wish they would. The number of people without headlights on in mist/fog is terrible because they no longer have to think about putting lights onautomatic headlights automatic wipers, those indicators where people turn but they dont seem to come on, automatic handbrakes
I have been saying that Level 3s are unsafe for the last few years.
Go watch ANY onboard footage of a Tesla Autopilot - they give back control to the driver with zero warning after the system has an issue knowing 'where' it is. If the driver is not already at 100% attention, they WILL crash.
Go watch ANY onboard footage of a Tesla Autopilot - they give back control to the driver with zero warning after the system has an issue knowing 'where' it is. If the driver is not already at 100% attention, they WILL crash.
Edited by GroundEffect on Wednesday 15th March 10:18
swisstoni said:
I thought the whole idea of an autonomous car was that there is no driver. I'm fully expecting to be able to sleep in the back!
If it's going to be that the case that you are required to pay attention to everything that's going on, then I'd rather just drive.
Agreed. Unless there is total autonomy I would rather not have it at all. I love the idea of being able to sleep in the back while my autonomobile drives me overnight to the Alps or the Med. Having to be alert and ready to take action yet not actually do anything would be worse than just driving yourself.If it's going to be that the case that you are required to pay attention to everything that's going on, then I'd rather just drive.
I think half the issue is referring to level-3 autonomous driving as "driverless". It's driver-assisted. The emphasis should always be on the fact that it assists the driver, but does not replace the driver.
I'm sure there is merit to the argument that these systems delay driver responses when the car requires a human input, but I don't think that it a reason to roll back the assistance systems which have been shown to reduce/avoid many other accidents. It is more a reason to develop the technology interface so that the driver is forced to remain aware, and that a better/earlier warning of requiring driving input is required.
It might be that a maximum of 15 minutes autnonomous driving is allowed at any time, with the driver forced to take over for a minimum of 5 minutes before the next autonomous stretch for example. And this type of experimentation/research will only go ahead if the systems are continued to be allowed.
I'm sure there is merit to the argument that these systems delay driver responses when the car requires a human input, but I don't think that it a reason to roll back the assistance systems which have been shown to reduce/avoid many other accidents. It is more a reason to develop the technology interface so that the driver is forced to remain aware, and that a better/earlier warning of requiring driving input is required.
It might be that a maximum of 15 minutes autnonomous driving is allowed at any time, with the driver forced to take over for a minimum of 5 minutes before the next autonomous stretch for example. And this type of experimentation/research will only go ahead if the systems are continued to be allowed.
Uber suspends self-driving cars after Arizona crash
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39397211
Uber has pulled its self-driving cars from the roads after an accident which left one of the vehicles on its side.
Pictures posted online showed the car on its right side on an Arizona street, next to another badly damaged vehicle.
The car - a Volvo SUV - was in self-driving mode at the time of the crash, on Friday, Uber said. No one was hurt.
A spokeswoman for the police in Tempe, Arizona said the accident occurred when another vehicle "failed to yield" to the Uber car at a left turn.
"There was a person behind the wheel. It is uncertain at this time if they were controlling the vehicle at the time of the collision," spokeswoman Josie Montenegro said.
Uber's self-driving cars always have a human in the driving seat who can take over the controls.
The company pulled its self-driving vehicles off the road in Arizona at first, followed by test sites in Pennsylvania and California - all three states where it operated the vehicles.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39397211
Uber has pulled its self-driving cars from the roads after an accident which left one of the vehicles on its side.
Pictures posted online showed the car on its right side on an Arizona street, next to another badly damaged vehicle.
The car - a Volvo SUV - was in self-driving mode at the time of the crash, on Friday, Uber said. No one was hurt.
A spokeswoman for the police in Tempe, Arizona said the accident occurred when another vehicle "failed to yield" to the Uber car at a left turn.
"There was a person behind the wheel. It is uncertain at this time if they were controlling the vehicle at the time of the collision," spokeswoman Josie Montenegro said.
Uber's self-driving cars always have a human in the driving seat who can take over the controls.
The company pulled its self-driving vehicles off the road in Arizona at first, followed by test sites in Pennsylvania and California - all three states where it operated the vehicles.
robinessex said:
Uber suspends self-driving cars after Arizona crash
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39397211
Uber has pulled its self-driving cars from the roads after an accident which left one of the vehicles on its side.
Pictures posted online showed the car on its right side on an Arizona street, next to another badly damaged vehicle.
The car - a Volvo SUV - was in self-driving mode at the time of the crash, on Friday, Uber said. No one was hurt.
A spokeswoman for the police in Tempe, Arizona said the accident occurred when another vehicle "failed to yield" to the Uber car at a left turn.
"There was a person behind the wheel. It is uncertain at this time if they were controlling the vehicle at the time of the collision," spokeswoman Josie Montenegro said.
Uber's self-driving cars always have a human in the driving seat who can take over the controls.
The company pulled its self-driving vehicles off the road in Arizona at first, followed by test sites in Pennsylvania and California - all three states where it operated the vehicles.
So a human driver made a mistake, pulled out in front of the self driving car and it didn't manage to avoid them. Question is; would a human driver have done any better? Once the footage is reviewed, I suspect the answer will be no.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39397211
Uber has pulled its self-driving cars from the roads after an accident which left one of the vehicles on its side.
Pictures posted online showed the car on its right side on an Arizona street, next to another badly damaged vehicle.
The car - a Volvo SUV - was in self-driving mode at the time of the crash, on Friday, Uber said. No one was hurt.
A spokeswoman for the police in Tempe, Arizona said the accident occurred when another vehicle "failed to yield" to the Uber car at a left turn.
"There was a person behind the wheel. It is uncertain at this time if they were controlling the vehicle at the time of the collision," spokeswoman Josie Montenegro said.
Uber's self-driving cars always have a human in the driving seat who can take over the controls.
The company pulled its self-driving vehicles off the road in Arizona at first, followed by test sites in Pennsylvania and California - all three states where it operated the vehicles.
Mr Will said:
So a human driver made a mistake, pulled out in front of the self driving car and it didn't manage to avoid them. Question is; would a human driver have done any better? Once the footage is reviewed, I suspect the answer will be no.
Exactly. Logically this is an argument for more self driving cars, not less. robinessex said:
Unless a human may have sensed the other driver wasn't stopping, I've done that on a few occasions, prevented a collision.
That's a pretty big assumption there. Driverless cars are capable of doing exactly the same thing, with much greater accuracy and faster reactions than a human driver.Perhaps something went wrong in this case. Perhaps the car that pulled out simply was unavoidable. Time will tell.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff