Why driverless car's are a LONG way off.
Discussion
Mr Snrub said:
poing said:
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.
In fairness a car powered by a ZX Spectrum would do a better job at parking than most school run parentstechnodup said:
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-...
DaveCWK said:
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. Gary C said:
Dead simple to create driverless cars, just remove all the other traffic from the roads 
Actually the recent Google project report showed that the accidents that have occurred, they were all caused by other road users, and that the harm was reduced by the actions taken by the driverless cars.
So basically, they already exist, and they work.
Getting them past legislators and public opinion, that might be harder.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/09/google-self-driving-car-crash-video-accident-busActually the recent Google project report showed that the accidents that have occurred, they were all caused by other road users, and that the harm was reduced by the actions taken by the driverless cars.
So basically, they already exist, and they work.
Getting them past legislators and public opinion, that might be harder.
GTIAlex said:
Gary C said:
Dead simple to create driverless cars, just remove all the other traffic from the roads
Actually the recent Google project report showed that the accidents that have occurred, they were all caused by other road users, and that the harm was reduced by the actions taken by the driverless cars.
So basically, they already exist, and they work.
Getting them past legislators and public opinion, that might be harder.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/mar/09/google-self-driving-car-crash-video-accident-busActually the recent Google project report showed that the accidents that have occurred, they were all caused by other road users, and that the harm was reduced by the actions taken by the driverless cars.
So basically, they already exist, and they work.
Getting them past legislators and public opinion, that might be harder.
I recall a recent article about an passenger on a flight who hacked into the Plane's controls via the onboard entertainment system. He managed to change the altitude and direction of the plane on more than one occasion.
What's to stop terrorists hacking into our cars, locking us in and taking us on a wild journey to a destination of their choosing? It's already common for hackers to access cars with keyless entry, the thought of them remotely driving your car is frightening.
What's to stop terrorists hacking into our cars, locking us in and taking us on a wild journey to a destination of their choosing? It's already common for hackers to access cars with keyless entry, the thought of them remotely driving your car is frightening.
topless360 said:
What's to stop terrorists hacking into our cars, locking us in and taking us on a wild journey to a destination of their choosing? It's already common for hackers to access cars with keyless entry, the thought of them remotely driving your car is frightening.
It's already possible if your car is internet connected and has a DBW throttle and EPAS. Hackers wouldn't want to use the automation software to control the car, it'd be easier to access the control systems directly. It's already been demonstrated with several modern cars that they can be "hijacked" relatively easily.
Mr Snrub said:
Not to mention the control they'd have over people. Motorway busy or pollution limit reached for the city centre? Invalid destination, please proceed to the nearest bus stop. No government would turn that down.
Agreed, but by the time they are ready I'd imagine they'll all be electric/hybrid one way or the other, so maybe not such an issue.But government is very much in favour. It seems it's only the PH Luddites digging their heels in against all the available evidence.
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.
But that wont happen, neither will you be able to pop your feet up and read the paper on the way to work.Youl more than likely still be sat there, with your foot on some sort of pressure switch like a train driver, with internal cameras pointing at you, fed to some central hub for evidence based shafting if there was to be an incident.
I think motorways are the place where the technology would be best used. Joining the network and every car 'latching' itself via GPS, automatically following the car in front at a set distance, at the correct speed keeping the flow at its optimum.
GTIAlex said:
But that wont happen, neither will you be able to pop your feet up and read the paper on the way to work.
That's certainly a necessary steeping stone to proper automation but ultimately I think it's inevitable that it will be demonstrated that it's safer not to let humans over-ride the systems. Gary C said:
DaveCWK said:
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. I've test drove the Tesla Model S and used auto pilot and it's phenomenal. Definitely the way forward.
technodup said:
Mr Snrub said:
Not to mention the control they'd have over people. Motorway busy or pollution limit reached for the city centre? Invalid destination, please proceed to the nearest bus stop. No government would turn that down.
Agreed, but by the time they are ready I'd imagine they'll all be electric/hybrid one way or the other, so maybe not such an issue.But government is very much in favour. It seems it's only the PH Luddites digging their heels in against all the available evidence.
I was the passenger in a brand new uncrashable XC90 that crashed into an Audi. The crash sensor failed as it was dirty, though the car had been cleaned a couple of days earlier. If the sensor had not failed the car could have taken over and stopped.
We are definitely a long way off being able to trust a self driving vehicle.
We are definitely a long way off being able to trust a self driving vehicle.
Emeye said:
We are definitely a long way off being able to trust a self driving vehicle.
You presumably trust humans; the wife for example? And even if you don't trust her to drive you, if you drive anywhere you're trusting ones you don't even know not to crash into you. Some of them will be drunk. Some will be borderline blind. Some will be reading a tablet or applying make-up. Some will be half asleep and some will simply be poor drivers.
I'm pretty sure I'd trust a billions pound computer system than take pot luck with the general public but it might just be me. (I know it's not just me).
kambites said:
GTIAlex said:
But that wont happen, neither will you be able to pop your feet up and read the paper on the way to work.
That's certainly a necessary steeping stone to proper automation but ultimately I think it's inevitable that it will be demonstrated that it's safer not to let humans over-ride the systems. One little jonny death by a automated car could see its end, especially in the current media/social media outcry society we live in.
topless360 said:
I recall a recent article about an passenger on a flight who hacked into the Plane's controls via the onboard entertainment system. He managed to change the altitude and direction of the plane on more than one occasion.
What's to stop terrorists hacking into our cars, locking us in and taking us on a wild journey to a destination of their choosing? It's already common for hackers to access cars with keyless entry, the thought of them remotely driving your car is frightening.
Hi pal What's to stop terrorists hacking into our cars, locking us in and taking us on a wild journey to a destination of their choosing? It's already common for hackers to access cars with keyless entry, the thought of them remotely driving your car is frightening.
I read an article related to your terrorist theory about Ford's OnStar system (in the USA). Can't find the article in question but this one is pretty similar in terms of results:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/07/...
It's gone midnight so I'll save writing my thoughts for a more decent hour in the day, but I do see a benefit of driverless cars. While they're somewhat imperfect technology at the moment, the multitude of driver aids in cars like the Tesla particularly, are bound to be a stepping stone towards much more autonomous cars.
Can I see cars being allowed to be fully autonomous? No. Can I see fully autonomous cars with a driver simply there to take over if something goes wrong? Yes. I would imagine within the next couple of decades that most cars will be able to handle themselves for 90% of driving situations, but will require someone behind a wheel of sorts ready to take over should the car experience a dilemma or for any type of failure. Humans accept other humans crashing into things, yet even if there's one autonomous accident in the collective worldwide spectrum in a single year, that'll be all over the media.
I get a bit edgy when governments and big business start getting into bed together to ostensibly make the world a better place. My immediate thought is, someone's out to make a pile of cash. And then there's the social implications. Do you really want the government, Google, insurance companies, any Tom, Dick or Harry with a vested interest to have that level of control over your life and tracking your every move?
technodup said:
ou presumably trust humans; the wife for example? And even if you don't trust her to drive you, if you drive anywhere you're trusting ones you don't even know not to crash into you.
Some of them will be drunk. Some will be borderline blind. Some will be reading a tablet or applying make-up. Some will be half asleep and some will simply be poor drivers.
I'm pretty sure I'd trust a billions pound computer system than take pot luck with the general public but it might just be me. (I know it's not just me).
Computers are dumb and incapable of reasoning.Some of them will be drunk. Some will be borderline blind. Some will be reading a tablet or applying make-up. Some will be half asleep and some will simply be poor drivers.
I'm pretty sure I'd trust a billions pound computer system than take pot luck with the general public but it might just be me. (I know it's not just me).
Currently drive-less car's have an accident rate more than double that of humans, despite them operating in heavily controlled circumstances and at low speeds.
Of course this can get better as technology improves, but it's a enormously difficult task to create a vehicle that can operate as safely as humans can.
skyrover said:
technodup said:
ou presumably trust humans; the wife for example? And even if you don't trust her to drive you, if you drive anywhere you're trusting ones you don't even know not to crash into you.
Some of them will be drunk. Some will be borderline blind. Some will be reading a tablet or applying make-up. Some will be half asleep and some will simply be poor drivers.
I'm pretty sure I'd trust a billions pound computer system than take pot luck with the general public but it might just be me. (I know it's not just me).
Computers are dumb and incapable of reasoning.Some of them will be drunk. Some will be borderline blind. Some will be reading a tablet or applying make-up. Some will be half asleep and some will simply be poor drivers.
I'm pretty sure I'd trust a billions pound computer system than take pot luck with the general public but it might just be me. (I know it's not just me).
Currently drive-less car's have an accident rate more than double that of humans, despite them operating in heavily controlled circumstances and at low speeds.
Of course this can get better as technology improves, but it's a enormously difficult task to create a vehicle that can operate as safely as humans can.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff