Self-driving Cars???


#juan
#1
Do we really want these things? Can we even imagine getting into a car with no pedals, no steering wheel etc? I can't. Nissan thinks they will have them on the market in about seven years.



Self-driving cars: Have we really thought this through? - Blog Central, Scott Feschuk, Scott Feschuk - Macleans.ca
 
SLM
+1
#2  Top Rated Post
Given the way some people drive, is this necessarily a bad thing? Definitely there would be some benefits I would think, just off the top of my head, a reduction possibly even elimination in drunk drivers should we eventually move to all automated driving systems. I'm sure we'd be giving some things up as well, but I'd venture to guess it could possibly be an overall greater benefit. Potentially anyway.
 
petros
#3
Yes! Yes we do. Question is; can they drive on ice?
 
#juan
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

Given the way some people drive, is this necessarily a bad thing? Definitely there would be some benefits I would think, just off the top of my head, a reduction possibly even elimination in drunk drivers should we eventually move to all automated driving systems. I'm sure we'd be giving some things up as well, but I'd venture to guess it could possibly be an overall greater benefit. Potentially anyway.

I envision a trip through the Fraser Canyon where they have ditches that are five hundred feet deep. If I think the car is about to cause me death or serious injury, I want an over-ride to get me back in control or I would be a drooling, catatonic, mess before I went five miles.
 
SLM
+1
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

I envision a trip through the Fraser Canyon where they have ditches that are five hundred feet deep. If I think the car is about to cause me death or serious injury, I want an over-ride to get me back in control or I would be a drooling, catatonic, mess before I went five miles.

Sure, that's understandable. I'm sure there would be many legitimate reasons for wanting over-ride control and I'm sure there would be other kinks to work out as well. But if I'm envisioning all vehicles being fully automated, I'm still seeing it as an overall greater benefit. If we stop and think about it, what is the cause of the majority of accidents and fatalities on the roadways? Driver error mostly due to being over tired, not focusing properly, etc. While mistakes and errors can always still happen (there's probably no such thing as completely fool proof) I'd wager they'd happen with less frequency if all vehicles were fully automated.

I think the notion is very interesting and has a lot of promise.
 
Blackleaf
#6
Maybe these things could end the scourge of women drivers.
 
petros
+1
#7
In cities it makes 100% sense.

Vehicles have come a long way. I can't cut donuts with my truck unless I turn off the traction control. It feels the road the same way we do but doesn't make mistakes like we do.
 
SLM
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

In cities it makes 100% sense.

Vehicles have come a long way. I can't cut donuts with my truck unless I turn off the traction control. It feels the road the same way we do but doesn't make mistakes like we do.

There are pros and cons I'm sure. The article does make a good point about the reaction time of an automated system when it comes to pedestrians. Say a little kid running out into the street, would the sensors allow for the vehicle to stop in time? I don't know, there are times when a human driver can't stop in time either. And we can't really say, because there are no hard stats, on how many times driver's avoid hitting people, so perhaps the human element is a larger factor than is being considered.

But overall I'd say you're right, the use in cities makes complete sense although I'd say we may need to rethink how we plan our roadways.

Again, really promising I think.
 
petros
+1
#9
It removes the ego and the inability to merge. I like that.
 
#juan
#10
In the topic header link it mentions that people and little kids do not show up on radar. There is another aspect that needs mentioning and that is the complete unpredictability of kids. Does the computer controlled car screech to a stop because a lttle kid might run out on the street and thereby causing the following driver to rear end it? To my way of thinking, it might be difficult to have a mixture of self driving and conventional cars on the road.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#11
How would they drive? They would be 100% reliant on data of a GPS perhaps. And quite frankly I am loathe to take any directions as gospel from a GPS. I would be swimming in a lake on more than one occassion if I followed my GPS directions religiously.
 
Zipperfish
#12
Hey Jetsons, where's my frikkin robot maid???!!!
 
Tecumsehsbones
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by Zipperfish View Post

Hey Jetsons, where's my frikkin robot maid???!!!

On the market now. It's called the Roomba.
 
#juan
#14
Here is a link to a video of a self driving car.....interesting...

Self-Driving Car Test: Steve Mahan - YouTube
 
petros
+1
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

In the topic header link it mentions that people and little kids do not show up on radar. There is another aspect that needs mentioning and that is the complete unpredictability of kids. Does the computer controlled car screech to a stop because a lttle kid might run out on the street and thereby causing the following driver to rear end it? To my way of thinking, it might be difficult to have a mixture of self driving and conventional cars on the road.

A autonomous car following wouldn't rear end.
 
karrie
+1
#16
I think they'll be brilliant once all the proximity detectors are figured out properly, and car to car communication can simply line you all up in a row, synch your speeds, and zip you along the highway to your destination. I've lost too many people to driver error. While there are a few scenarios I can imagine an automated car losing control in, I highly doubt it would happen anywhere near as often as it happens with people. Plus, I've driven to Saskatchewan enough times to really wish I could just leave at night, curl up for a sleep, and wake up at my sister's house.
 
Zipperfish
+1
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by karrie View Post

Plus, I've driven to Saskatchewan enough times to really wish I could just leave at night, curl up for a sleep, and wake up at my sister's house.

In Saskatchewan, you can.
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#18
As an attorney, I have to strongly oppose this idea. If people aren't allowed to act like flaming idiots and then pay big bucks to avoide the consequences of their actions, our livelihoods will be threatened.
 
petros
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by IdRatherBeSkiing View Post

How would they drive? They would be 100% reliant on data of a GPS perhaps. And quite frankly I am loathe to take any directions as gospel from a GPS. I would be swimming in a lake on more than one occassion if I followed my GPS directions religiously.

GPS is pretty damn accurate. To within an mm with some gear. Check out agricultural seeding systems that use GPS and radar. It's more than just perfect rows. Seed and fertilizer are set to the mm in depth and spacing going over rough land and contours on a 60-80ft seeding system going 25km/h. I don't drive a tractor I monitor systems and go along for the ride. It won't be long before it's all done from a desk.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

GPS is pretty damn accurate. To within an mm with some gear. Check out agricultural seeding systems that use GPS and radar. It's more than just perfect rows. Seed and fertilizer are set to the mm in depth and spacing going over rough land and contours on a 60-80ft seeding system going 25km/h. I don't drive a tractor I monitor systems and go along for the ride. It won't be long before it's all done from a desk.

I don't think the actual positioning was the issue with the GPS. It was the accuracy of the map it was using. In a field with a tractor, you are only using the positioning part which I agree is pretty accurate. But the maps leave much to be desired.

Another thought. If you were in this type of car, there would be no reason for you to follow a speed limit at all. You just have to go no faster than the reaction time required of the software. Stated reasons for not speeding (driver safety) no longer would apply.
 
Zipperfish
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

As an attorney, I have to strongly oppose this idea. If people aren't allowed to act like flaming idiots and then pay big bucks to avoide the consequences of their actions, our livelihoods will be threatened.

I wonder when we'll get computer judges. Frankly, a large part of the effort in trials right now is all about attorneys playing to human psychological foibles in order to influence the decisions of judges and juries. Judegs are given wide latitude because of their expertise, there is a large and growing body of evidence showing that expertise tends to be quite overrated (especially by those who claim to have it). There's also a lot of evidence that bad judgments are more frequent than we would like to expect (for instacne the realization, with the advent of DNA technology, that eye-witness testimony is quite unreliable).

Read, for example, Thinking Fast and Slow, The Signal and the Noise and The Black Swan.
 
petros
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by IdRatherBeSkiing View Post

I don't think the actual positioning was the issue with the GPS. It was the accuracy of the map it was using. In a field with a tractor, you are only using the positioning part which I agree is pretty accurate. But the maps leave much to be desired.

Another thought. If you were in this type of car, there would be no reason for you to follow a speed limit at all. You just have to go no faster than the reaction time required of the software. Stated reasons for not speeding (driver safety) no longer would apply.

It's more than just positioning. The contour of the land is known better and better with every pass. The transponder is running lead of the seeding equipment just milliseconds behind comparing to the database and real time. Every year it its more and more accurate with more and more databases and being integrated like radar data, soil temperature and moisture t data beamed from space for even better seed placement.

Road conditions don't need years to make leaps like grain production.

With every car that drives a road the more data that is collected. The second car will update the first the third the first the second and current. Within minutes a slippery spot and pothole will be well known about.

If a route has thousands of vehicle a day conditions can be updated real time. It's far more the GPS going on, it's an integration of data sources.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

It's more than just positioning. The contour of the land is known better and better with every pass. The transponder is running lead of the seeding equipment just milliseconds behind comparing to the database and real time. Every year it its more and more accurate with more and more databases and being integrated like radar data, soil temperature and moisture t data beamed from space for even better seed placement.

Road conditions don't need years to make leaps like grain production.

With every car that drives a road the more data that is collected. The second car will update the first the third the first the second and current. Within minutes a slippery spot and pothole will be well known about.

If a route has thousands of vehicle a day conditions can be updated real time. It's far more the GPS going on, it's an integration of data sources.

These would be GPSs of the future. My current GPS requires me to periodically purchase a new map and download it while attached to a computer. Those maps are not accurate in all instances. If you stick on the beaten path, they certainly are adaquate. But I would never trust my life to them in their current state. I will be curious at how Nissan handles this and whether it will require some sort of data connection in order to run which could also be an issue driving in certain areas without any type of 3G reception.
 
petros
#24
A directional GPS in your car is a joke compared to what is used in industry and has been around for quite some time.

Shop around a little and browse the GNSS technology.

For example, the last few seconds of every landing in a commercial jet is done by computer and this isn't new. So far so good.
 
#juan
#25
Secondary judgement and action: How many times have we been waiting at a stop sign watching a car approach with the signal light blinking indicating that he will turn down the street you are waiting at. You start to turn accross and the stupid sh it doesn't turn. Be interesting to see how a self driving vehicle would handle this. Maybe we should install a fifteen hundred watt sound system and some carefully selected swear words for those situations.
 
petros
#26
They get to talk to each other. They'd know what the other is going to do.
 
#juan
+1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

They get to talk to each other. They'd know what the other is going to do.

You're assuming that all cars will be self driving. One day they will be, but not for a long time. Nissan wants to start selling these vehicles in 7 years but they are not going to be cheap, and not everyone will want them.



What an elephant looks like to a self driving car.

What An Elephant Looks Like To Google's Self-Driving Car
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

They get to talk to each other. They'd know what the other is going to do.

So all existing cars are going to be simutaneously replaced? The other car may not have this technology. And this may be a luxury add on like heated leather seats. It may not be common place unless mandated. And nobody is going to mandate forced abandonment of ones car to replace with a new model with this system.

So same question. Other car is not an upgraded model.
 
petros
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by #juan View Post

You're assuming that all cars will be self driving. One day they will be, but not for a long time. Nissan wants to start selling these vehicles in 7 years but they are not going to be cheap, and not everyone will want them.



What an elephant looks like to a self driving car.

What An Elephant Looks Like To Google's Self-Driving Car

What does an elephant look like to you in the dark?

Quote: Originally Posted by IdRatherBeSkiing View Post

So all existing cars are going to be simutaneously replaced? The other car may not have this technology. And this may be a luxury add on like heated leather seats. It may not be common place unless mandated. And nobody is going to mandate forced abandonment of ones car to replace with a new model with this system.

So same question. Other car is not an upgraded model.

They don't need to be replaced or forced. Ships can be docked in busy harbours without other boats being part of any system. Even with man on steering, man would rely on the sonar, radar, and other real time satellite current data/tide data too.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

They don't need to be replaced or forced. Ships can be docked in busy harbours without other boats being part of any system. Even with man on steering, man would rely on the sonar, radar, and other real time satellite current data/tide data too.

So how would it react to somebody running a red light or suddenly making a left turn across its path? A human may be able to avoid this a certain percentage of the time. This automated system would have to match that percentage or improve on it. I am not convinced it can.

This also assumes one trusts computers completely.
 

Similar Threads

0
Cars 2
by cranky | Jun 25th, 2011