Self driving cars

BattleCorp

defrule wrote: »

Would you ride one?

I'd ride anything.

Peregrinus

CruelCoin wrote: »

For me it depends on if the "shopping trolley dilemma" is legislated for.

Unavoidable accident. Car has 2 choices.
a - Kill you. b. mount the kerb and kill the two pedestrians.

Unless i had assurances that the car was programmed for choice b, then i'd never set foot in a car that could make a choice to kill me.

But unless you had assurances that the car was programmed for choice a, surely you would never set foot on a footpath?

Green Peter

How would they react to icey/snowy road conditions

BattleCorp

Never mind your self driving cars. This will be old tech very quickly.

Self driving drones that carry people are where it's heading. Onwards and upwards I say.

seamus

CruelCoin wrote: »

For me it depends on if the "shopping trolley dilemma" is legislated for.

This is a nonsense barrier that some have invented.

Cars (and people) at the moment are not programmed to solve this "dilemma". And in practical terms it occurs very infrequently anyway. And 99.999% of the time they occur because a human driver has messed up. Autonomous vehicles follow rules, consistently and without exception. Which makes the odds of them being in a place where they have to choose between killing you or another person are very long. Like one in a billion.

There is no right answer. That's why it's a debate. Therefore the car should pick randomly. Problem solved.

All of the "what if" scenarios that people posit as proof of the dangers of autonomous cars are absolutely meaningless.

AllGunsBlazing

Going back to the OP's question - since learning to drive I've a hard enough time sitting in the passenger seat when someone else is driving. Forever looking for the footbrake when you approach a red light. I know a lot of other people are the same. It's basically drilled into your subconscious.

I'd certainly take a spin if offered but not in the back seat while reading a book.


When we finally get cars that either fly or travel through time at 88mph - then I'm in 100%.

Tazio

Worth a read : http://moralmachine.mit.edu/

Zubeneschamali

A big problem will be when we have a mix of self-driving and human piloted cars. It will take humans about 10 seconds to figure out they can bully autonomous cars with 100% effect. Drive right at them and they'll give way every time.

The roads will be populated by herds of cowardly autonomous cars and the alpha humans tearing down the white lines. When two humans meet: big accidents.

BattleCorp

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

A big problem will be when we have a mix of self-driving and human piloted cars. It will take humans about 10 seconds to figure out they can bully autonomous cars with 100% effect. Drive right at them and they'll give way every time.

The roads will be populated by herds of cowardly autonomous cars and the alpha humans tearing down the white lines. When two humans meet: big accidents.

An easy fix to that problem is dashcams. Have the cars able to automatically send footage to the Gardaí when they record illegal behaviour.

Zubeneschamali

BattleCorp wrote: »

An easy fix to that problem is dashcams. Have the cars able to automatically send footage to the Gardaí when they record illegal behaviour.

But it won't be illegal. The self driving cars will get out of my way before it gets to the dangerous stage. They will give way. They won't have the "Up Yours!" reaction human drivers have.

Ubbquittious

I won't even get a car with an automatic gearbox. So no

whisky_galore

AllGunsBlazing wrote: »

Motorways and dual carriageways are one thing but most Irish roads weren't even constructed with human operated automobiles in mind much less autonomous ones.

Most Irish towns and cities were constructed with the horse and cart in mind.

BattleCorp

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But it won't be illegal. The self driving cars will get out of my way before it gets to the dangerous stage. They will give way. They won't have the "Up Yours!" reaction human drivers have.

Driving right at someone isn't illegal?

Wanderer78

BattleCorp wrote:

An easy fix to that problem is dashcams. Have the cars able to automatically send footage to the Gardaí when they record illegal behaviour.

Must get to work on hacking dashcam tech and related tech, to prevent data transmission and ultimate recording abilities! We ve got it covered!

CelticRambler

skinny90 wrote: »

One downside is the desision making each car would have to make in a head on collision.

Can't believe this argument is still doing the rounds. :rolleyes: Two autonomous will (as good as) never end up in such a situation. How many humans have you heard of that have ended up in a head-on collision where both of them were driving with due care and attention?

NIMAN wrote: »

I wonder what the insurance on these is going to be like?

The relevant question is not what the cost of insurance on autonomous vehicles will be, but the cost of insuring a vehicle with a human at the wheel, because that's what's going to drive the pace of adoption. We already know that humans cause a huge number of accidents every day, and computer-controlled vehicles are much safer. As soon as we get to this point:

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

a mix of self-driving and human piloted cars. It will take humans about 10 seconds to figure out they can bully autonomous cars with 100% effect. Drive right at them and they'll give way every time.

insurers will have all the hard data from real-world accidents necessary to justify a massive premium for people who want the thrill of driving themselves.

And in answer to the OP's question: I already travel in boats, planes and trains that are almost entirely computer-controlled, so what's the big deal?

seamus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But it won't be illegal. The self driving cars will get out of my way before it gets to the dangerous stage. They will give way. They won't have the "Up Yours!" reaction human drivers have.

It doesn't have to be dangerous to be illegal. You fail to yield and the autonomous car will yield to protect itself, but you'll still have broken the law. And the car will be equipped with recording equipment, and will probably automatically report all incidents to a control centre, who can choose to make a complaint to the Gardai - including footage of you breaking the law.

As noted above, as fewer humans drive, the cost of insurance will skyrocket for people who want to drive. But also the barriers to obtaining a licence will also increase. As it becomes less necessary for people to actually drive, the hoops you'll have to jump through to justify having a driving licence and driving a car manually will become more and more difficult.

defrule

I agree on the insurance point for people who drive themselves. Insurance will likely price people out of driving themselves.

There are other factors that might come into play. The thought is that self driving cars will start out as fleets of taxis. These taxis won't need parking because once it finishes your journey, it can go pick up someone else. It is likely parking spaces in the city will be repurposed as empty parking lots don't generated profit. So people who still drive themselves may find the cities less accommodating to their parking needs, they might find they have to park streets away from where they want to go.

There is thought that in the long term people might own self driving cars as well but I don't think that will happen. Insurance might price people out as their private cars get "old" (e.g. not have the latest sensors).

CelticRambler

I think there'll always be a market for private ownership, but having a second car in a typical family will be quickly disappear. When you think about how most typical two-parent families use their two cars these days, it's almost always because one of them goes one way to work and the other goes in the opposite direction, usually with a few deviations to schools and crèches and the shops. But for most of the day, both cars are parked up somewhere not being used by either parent. When you have one vehicle that can drive itself between different points of usage, and an on-demand service for extra journeys, the average family will opt to save the cost of owning a second car.

And yes, I think that city planners won't be slow to use the availability of autonomous (electric) cars as another reason to exclude private/human drivers from urban centres.

seamus

For the most part, people will just stop owning cars altogether. Sign up to subscriptions services that provide vehicles on demand.

You might say that for families they'll still need a car because of car seats and junk; but realistically the huge safety overhead for vehicles exists because people are terrible drivers.

Take away the human driver and the safety requirements of an autonomous vehicle become far less onerous; a seat belt may be mandatory for general safety's sake, but convoluted car seats will not be required.

suicide_circus

I mean, being able to read or sleep when in your own vehicle sounds great but I'm a bit of a fraidy cat and would be stressing out ready to grab the wheel

CelticRambler

suicide_circus wrote: »

I mean, being able to read or sleep when in your own vehicle sounds great but I'm a bit of a fraidy cat and would be stressing out ready to grab the wheel

There are too many drivers on the roads who already do the reading and sleeping thing. :mad: Fortunately, they're the ones who will be taken off the roads first, either by choice (who wants to drive when you can text and facebook instead?) or by force (over the speed/alcohol limit? - instant ban, you will never drive again, and no, you can't use "oh but I need my licence for for work" as an excuse any more, because there's an iCar app for that).

Peregrinus

defrule wrote: »

I agree on the insurance point for people who drive themselves. Insurance will likely price people out of driving themselves.

There are other factors that might come into play. The thought is that self driving cars will start out as fleets of taxis. These taxis won't need parking because once it finishes your journey, it can go pick up someone else. It is likely parking spaces in the city will be repurposed as empty parking lots don't generated profit . . .

This. Even privately-owned self-driving cars will have different parking needs, since once it has dropped you off at your destination your car can go and park somewhere some distance away. You can summon it back when you need it. Huge amounts of streetspace, currently devoted to providing storage for private cars while they are not being used, can be opened up to more useful purposes like extra bus lanes, extra cycle lanes, wider footpaths or even extra traffic lanes. Ofice blocks, shopping centres, etc will be designed with large drop off/pick up areas at the entrances because, increasingly, the norm will be people being dropped off and picked up; not driving around looking for an adjacent parking space and then walking the final stage of the journey to the destination.

A human-driven car, of course, would still need to be parked somewhere reasonably close to the destination of the human's journey, but human drivers can expect to pay more and more for the privilege.