Why driverless car's are a LONG way off.
Discussion
Megaflow said:
Wills2 said:
I think the biggest disappointment will be (for those that want this) you'll still be held to be in charge of the vehicle, there will be no texting/being picked up drunk from the pub/facebook/twitter etc...
Someone will have to be held responsible and it isn't going to be Google/Tesla or the CPU etc...it will be you.
What he said. Legislation will be the biggest problem to autonomous cars. If the driver is still responsible for the vehicle, even if the vehicle does have an accident, then as Wills2 said, it won't be possible to go to the pub get rat arsed and have the car take you home, or work whilst she commuting, etc. If that happens to be the case, what is the point of them, you haven't freed the driver of responsibility, therefore they have to be paying attention and prepared to react, in which case they may as well be driving.Someone will have to be held responsible and it isn't going to be Google/Tesla or the CPU etc...it will be you.
Someone is responsible and it sure as hell won't be the manufacturer, so it'll be the driver.
Which means the driver will have to be qualified, medically fit, sober and paying attention before being legally allowed to be driven by their car.
I just can't see the law letting it be any other way.
I can see it working on a busy motorway if all cars are driverless and communicate with each. If the ultimate aim is to get x vehicles quickly through a difficult junction then I think that a group mind-set of cooperation and the 'greater good' mentality is the best one. It avoids the human frailties of selfishness and a need to singularly dominate others (which are all to easy to witness on the roads) which normally knackers things for the group.
It also avoids the delayed reactions of humans. If a car in lane 3 brakes gently, the car behind has to wait to see the brake lights, move foot and apply the brake, and as such needs to brake slightly harder to maintain a safe gap. Multiply this by 30 cars and at best you get the accelerate / brake concertina effect, at worse a motorway shunt. If all the minds are linked then as the lead car decides if needs to brake, all 30 cars following could run in a train formation and brake by the same amount at the same time. I actually think that the computing prowess easily exists to get many cars from a to b very quickly if all linked.
The issue will be mixing autonomous and human drivers. That'll be hell of a thing to manage. And older cars will never be able to be retro fitted to be autonomous.
I can see a day where our motorways have autonomous lanes you can only join if you give over control. And these lanes will be faster and more efficient ways of getting from a to b. That is what will encourage the switch.
But have hope that it could be a win-win! I predict it will get to the point where motorways are autonomous only and the commute will be a chance to work or sleep, which is great, because m25 commuting sucks. And my weekend caterham will be relagated by law to only ever use some sort of forgotten, empty, 'slow' B road network. And I'll be sharing these empty roads with other oddball drivers using their weird internal combustion engines, choosing to change gears themselves, having to make all of their own decisions, getting from a to b much slower and more expensively than all those clever clogs iCars. Potentially, lovely!
It also avoids the delayed reactions of humans. If a car in lane 3 brakes gently, the car behind has to wait to see the brake lights, move foot and apply the brake, and as such needs to brake slightly harder to maintain a safe gap. Multiply this by 30 cars and at best you get the accelerate / brake concertina effect, at worse a motorway shunt. If all the minds are linked then as the lead car decides if needs to brake, all 30 cars following could run in a train formation and brake by the same amount at the same time. I actually think that the computing prowess easily exists to get many cars from a to b very quickly if all linked.
The issue will be mixing autonomous and human drivers. That'll be hell of a thing to manage. And older cars will never be able to be retro fitted to be autonomous.
I can see a day where our motorways have autonomous lanes you can only join if you give over control. And these lanes will be faster and more efficient ways of getting from a to b. That is what will encourage the switch.
But have hope that it could be a win-win! I predict it will get to the point where motorways are autonomous only and the commute will be a chance to work or sleep, which is great, because m25 commuting sucks. And my weekend caterham will be relagated by law to only ever use some sort of forgotten, empty, 'slow' B road network. And I'll be sharing these empty roads with other oddball drivers using their weird internal combustion engines, choosing to change gears themselves, having to make all of their own decisions, getting from a to b much slower and more expensively than all those clever clogs iCars. Potentially, lovely!
Bit of a false premise in the OP isn't it? I spend a bit more time than I should on the PH forums and I don't remember anyone saying that the demise of the good old human-driven car is imminent, or that they'll be banned soon. With the pace at which the technology is advancing I'd be amazed if there isn't a fully fledged self driving car that's orders of magnitude safer than human driven vehicles within the decade, but I'd be surprised if human-controlled cars are actually banned within my lifetime.
Mr Snrub said:
Wills2 said:
Halmyre said:
Megaflow said:
Wills2 said:
I think the biggest disappointment will be (for those that want this) you'll still be held to be in charge of the vehicle, there will be no texting/being picked up drunk from the pub/facebook/twitter etc...
Someone will have to be held responsible and it isn't going to be Google/Tesla or the CPU etc...it will be you.
What he said. Legislation will be the biggest problem to autonomous cars. If the driver is still responsible for the vehicle, even if the vehicle does have an accident, then as Wills2 said, it won't be possible to go to the pub get rat arsed and have the car take you home, or work whilst she commuting, etc. If that happens to be the case, what is the point of them, you haven't freed the driver of responsibility, therefore they have to be paying attention and prepared to react, in which case they may as well be driving.Someone will have to be held responsible and it isn't going to be Google/Tesla or the CPU etc...it will be you.
My arse!
TheInternet said:
It was pointed out to me that once they arrive a child could potentially use them much as anyone else. I like the idea of the 11 year old boy and his/her mates going out for cruise in the pod.
That's actually a very point that I hadn't even thought of. This is going towards driving pods, rather than anything actually car shaped. A bit science fiction but I'm not sure why the cars would need to be car shaped any more, no need for a steering wheel or pedals and electric cars are already changing the basic shape.The school run would be quite different and I guess the self driving cars wouldn't park like moronic muppets either so that would be a vast improvement.
The next question, would you actually own the car? I can't see why you'd bother, you'd just pay a monthly fee to give you a monthly milage allowance and book the car when you need it, basically a personal taxi.
EnglishTony said:
I think the major stumbling block is going to be customer resistance. Why would anybody want one?
Ye gods, have you seen the cars some people buy? (Renault Modus, Citroen Picasso, Honda Jazz et al) There are many people out there who buy a car purely to get from A to B with as little input from them as possible. These are the people who will drive this.There are many big challenges for self-driving cars, but Google have overcome arguably the biggest hurdle by demonstrating it is technically possible, and further they are actually using self-driving cars on public roads. https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/
There seems to be a lot of goodwill from governments. The Manx government are proposing the Isle of Man becomes a testbed for self-driving cars. The Dutch have also trialled self-driving cars and busses. And in the UK they are going to trial self-driving lorries on the M6 toll.
Self-driving vehicles are 'happening' today. Nobody knows when they will become widespread on our roads, but that may occur within the EU first because of Brussels' ability to push through the necessary legal changes amongst its member states.
There seems to be a lot of goodwill from governments. The Manx government are proposing the Isle of Man becomes a testbed for self-driving cars. The Dutch have also trialled self-driving cars and busses. And in the UK they are going to trial self-driving lorries on the M6 toll.
Self-driving vehicles are 'happening' today. Nobody knows when they will become widespread on our roads, but that may occur within the EU first because of Brussels' ability to push through the necessary legal changes amongst its member states.
Jader1973 said:
I read an article a couple of months ago about a test in the US: the self driving car had to join a freeway from a slip road, cross 4 lanes of traffic to exit from another slip road on the other side a few hundred metres further on.
It couldn't do it because all the cameras, sensors etc were picking up enough traffic for it to decide it wasn't safe. A human would just have stuck the indicator on and gone for it.
Perfect example of the difficulty of having normal and self driving cars that can't communicate with each other on the roads, and one reason why it is years away, if it ever happens at all.
Bit of a loaded question for the automated car - presumably if given control for the full route, rather than just that small part, it would have chosen a route that allowed it to safely get to the destination. You seem to be arguing that the computer considering a manoeuvre too dangerous to attempt is worse than a human just having a go anyway!It couldn't do it because all the cameras, sensors etc were picking up enough traffic for it to decide it wasn't safe. A human would just have stuck the indicator on and gone for it.
Perfect example of the difficulty of having normal and self driving cars that can't communicate with each other on the roads, and one reason why it is years away, if it ever happens at all.
DaveCWK said:
We don't even have driverless automated trains, which technically should be child's play. True driverless cars are a long long way off IMO.
Really?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_ur...
smn159 said:
They represent change and for that reason alone some people will feel uncomfortable with them. Personally I'd have one in a shot if I could put my feet up and watch the telly during my commute.
me 2an extra 3 hours sleep a day, or with electrochromic glass and extra 3 hours of gentlemans special intrest videos a day
lostkiwi said:
Well ok there are a couple of examples but they aren't exactly widespread and numerous are they. When I say 'we' I meant the UK. Driverless trains have been technically possible for decades, yet mass adoption hasn't taken place. Driverless cars have only just become technically feasible. Mass adoption in my lifetime? I don't see it.DaveCWK said:
Well ok there are a couple of examples but they aren't exactly widespread and numerous are they. When I say 'we' I meant the UK. Driverless trains have been technically possible for decades, yet mass adoption hasn't taken place. Driverless cars have only just become technically feasible. Mass adoption in my lifetime? I don't see it.
It's interesting 'cos of the few rail incidents I read of, human error always seems to play a part.Would a driverless train do a SPAD, or disconnect/disregard on board safety warnings?
DaveCWK said:
When I say 'we' I meant the UK. Driverless trains have been technically possible for decades, yet mass adoption hasn't taken place.
I think that's down to the unions as much as anything else, plus the huge infrastructure changes required.Car drivers don't have unions. And the cars work on existing roads.
I don't know about mass adoption but they'll be on the roads sooner than you think.
Dave Hedgehog said:
smn159 said:
They represent change and for that reason alone some people will feel uncomfortable with them. Personally I'd have one in a shot if I could put my feet up and watch the telly during my commute.
me 2an extra 3 hours sleep a day, or with electrochromic glass and extra 3 hours of gentlemans special intrest videos a day
MG CHRIS said:
which makes them pointless.
Apart from the improved safety, increased productivity and lower costs obviously, not to mention the new jobs and industries they will create.Do you think that maybe Google, the car makers, governments and insurance companies might have had a chat about this at some point? Or are they just winging it, investing billions in a tech that is pointless because PH doesn't understand how it will work in practice?
"A stepping stone to full autonomy."
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c253b2b2-e76f-11e5-bc31-...
MG CHRIS said:
Which wont happen because you will have to be in charge if things go wrong which makes them pointless.
In the short term (as in the next twenty years) yes, but if we can get to the point where we can get statistically significant data to show that they're safer than human drivers, that will change. They will never be perfect but they have the potential to be vastly safer than the average human driver. The difficulties that need to be overcome are political and sociological, not technological. There is a huge political motivation for adopting them - they can massively increase effective road capacity at zero cost to the state; the question is how long it will take for the public to accept them.
Edited by kambites on Tuesday 31st May 22:01
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff