Self-Driving Cars

Discussion in 'AK Polls' started by loopstick, Dec 5, 2016.

?

Would You Buy A Self-Driving Car?

  1. Yes

    36 vote(s)
    15.0%
  2. Maybe

    30 vote(s)
    12.5%
  3. No

    174 vote(s)
    72.5%
  1. loopstick

    loopstick AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,335
    Google has been testing self-driving cars - so has Ford - Delphi (former GM) - some Euro makes. These cars are equipped with sensors and control / navigation systems. They run the brakes, throttle, steering. They see obstacles and adjust accordingly. I have my own opinions on this but I'll wait until later on in the discussion.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. RamblinE

    RamblinE (╯°□°)╯彡┻━┻

    Voted no. I just like driving. This could change as I age. We'll see.
     
  3. Djcoolray

    Djcoolray Addicted Member

    Messages:
    6,284
    Location:
    A rocks throw from JBLM !!!!
    But, it would be great for when I get old and they take my drivers license away....

    I mean like, mobility is everything in this country !! The elderly are so over looked in this country that the ones that have money are moving to Costa Rica....
     
    ilusndweller likes this.
  4. nj pheonix

    nj pheonix AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,720
    Location:
    New Jersey
    At some point I don't think you'll have a choice. I think many of us would sleep better if our wives or kids weren't at the controls. I like driving . Every once in a while I thought it'd be nice to take a nap in the back if I could. The system would have to have redundancy in spades and be bulletproof . so far I haven't seen anything that approaches that level of complexity that is reliable enough to put society at large at risk. who among us hasn't had a blue screen on a computer or something lag or freeze . I think it's coming . I think at some point the insurance companies will demand it . Think about all the impaired ( be it alcohol /drugs or just fatigue) think of all the distracted people phone, texting, tweeting, children, passengers) Then the Ahole drivers, tailgating, passing on right, running lights (name your pet peeve). Heck it might be safer now (auto cars). I'm not ready to go there yet. Look at the price of cars today based on mandated safety features, airbags, abs, ( things like blind spot monitoring, back up cameras and automatic safety will be forced on us. Sorry about the rant. Somebody brought this up to me the other day . it's kind of been rattling around in my head:idea:
     
    roger2, ilusndweller and godcross like this.
  5. loopstick

    loopstick AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,335
    On that note IIRC there really wasn't much of a profit margin on vehicles with stripped down standard equipment. The profits came from all the extra goodies and "packages" that you ordered. Especially when electronics technology began to replace older mechanical / vacuum based technology. The more gee-whiz widgetry you could get the public to pay for the more profit $$$ you raked in. It's even worse today with all the "connected" shit and "smart" shit. When Old Betsy finally gets towed away to the boneyard I'm hoping that I can still buy something simple and stripped down.
     
    roger2, merlynski, nj pheonix and 2 others like this.
  6. rustycat

    rustycat 70s gear freak

    Messages:
    981
    Location:
    High in the Custerdome
    My biggest concern is that a hacker could get into the computer of a self-driving vehicle and turn it into a weapon of mayhem. Kind of like the Steven King movie "Maximum Overdrive." Otherwise, the driverless cars can't arrive soon enough for me. I get so tired of dealing with so many idiots on the road.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  7. mhardy6647

    mhardy6647 AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    52,318
    My read of the tea leaves, for what it is worth. Self-driving cars will evolve to on-demand public transportation. I.e., they'll be too sophisticated & too expensive for virtually all individual owners (there will be a small population of wealthy owners, akin to the current situation with, say, private jets).

    The model will evolve to something like the current Uber/Lyft, but with more flexibility and universality. You need to go somewhere, you hire a car and it comes and takes you where you want to go; fee-for-service. Kind of like the evolving model for entertainment. No more physical media; folks stream content ad lib from a virtually limitless resource -- and pay (monthly or per-use) for the privilege.

    I don't think a hybrid model of human-driven and AI-driven vehicles will ever be viable -- quite simply because human drivers, in aggregate, are nuts.
     
  8. bshorey

    bshorey Super Member

    Messages:
    3,749
    Location:
    Gilroy, CA, USA
    Spot on, imo. Most cars sit around doing nothing for 20-22 hours per day. I love driving as much as anybody (and I've got a dozen or more cars to prove it!), but I'd dump my commuter vehicle in a heartbeat if I could be met at the door, work during the commute, and get dropped off at the door. It can probably be done at a fraction of the cost of owning your own vehicle as well. If you're only using something 10% of the time, why not buy into a model where you only have to pay for 10% - 20% of it? No parking fees, maintenance and repairs are probably done by the entity you buy your shares from, what's not to love?

    bs
     
    Bridge likes this.
  9. loopstick

    loopstick AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,335
    The technology for one. Machine vision will probably never even come close to human vision. How can an algorithm discriminate between a guy pushing a lawn mower and a little boy chasing a ball towards the street? Sure the car will automatically try to stop when the boy is detected in front it. It will also automatically try to stop when a carjacker or robber steps in front of it.
     
    Bill Ferris, merlynski and Alobar like this.
  10. bshorey

    bshorey Super Member

    Messages:
    3,749
    Location:
    Gilroy, CA, USA
    We have satellites that can read license plates from outer space. Machine vision can already exceed human vision. That's not even new. The challenge is extracting useful information from what is seen, but even that is progressing rapidly. There is freeware augmented reality software code that comes with an amazing amount of functionality.

    As for the rest, it's a function of time and compute power. These systems are already pretty good, and will only get better.

    Regardless, for all of the cons, there are as many or more with owning your own car. Ever had it broken into while it's parked? Ever needed a pickup for an afternoon, but not necessarily for the daily commute? Ever needed a 6 passenger SUV to tote friends and family to dinner while they're visiting?

    Oh, and just think about a highway loaded with vehicles that don't rubberneck?

    bs
     
  11. mhardy6647

    mhardy6647 AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    52,318
    The biggest no brainer is reaction time. Human beings are hard-wired at about 0.1 second. Easy to cut that by an order of magnitude, and probably more, in machine-space.
    The only trick is "judgment" -- and that will be easier when the human element is eliminated as a variable in automobile piloting. The machines will (ahem, should) all play by the same rules.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  12. loopstick

    loopstick AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,335
    Wonderful - there's more to machine vision than optics. The amount of computing power and algorithmic sophistication required to process / pattern-recognize / interpret license plate text is minuscule compared to what goes on in the eye / brain of humans and other animals.
     
    Mark B and merlynski like this.
  13. loopstick

    loopstick AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,335
    Stupid irreversible decisions happen much faster in machine space.
    .
     
    Mark B likes this.
  14. wayne r

    wayne r New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Voted no.
    The technology is definitely not yet perfected.and makes me wonder how many accidents will occur until the bugs are worked out. Just because we can does not mean we should. Even if bugs are gone, how many more will be introduced with the next software update? An operating system crash or freeze on your desktop, laptop or smart phone is not nearly as critical as on your car.
     
  15. chicks

    chicks Lunatic Member

    Messages:
    17,620
    Location:
    The Big Valley, CA
    Absolutely. Current vehicle isn't self-driving, but I love all the new safety features, especially the blind-spot warning lights, and the forward-looking cameras that will apply the brakes to prevent collisions at up to 40mph speed differential. The cameras also enable adaptive speed control, which is fantastic!
     
    stish likes this.
  16. Andyman

    Andyman Scroungus Stereophilus Subscriber

    Messages:
    28,497
    Location:
    15 miles North of Canada
    Tell me who's liable in an accident, the owner or the manufacturer.
    I'm against it as I like driving and think more people need to pay attention while behind the wheel, not less. But there are a lot of lousy drivers out there that the self drivers would be an upgrade over, so I'm mixed.
     
    RUmad, Bill Ferris and noogies like this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  17. nj pheonix

    nj pheonix AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    9,720
    Location:
    New Jersey
    The other side of the coin is, it seems as if it'd have to be all or nothing . Everybody gets in their car, plugs in a destination and some kind of giant air traffic controller computer syncs everything. Theoretically , you wouldn't need traffic signals. If some are self driving and some are automatic it would screw up everything . Then cultural acceptance . Maybe it will happen in increments (in a way it already has ). I don't see it in the next 10 years (at least in passenger cars) 20 I can see it happening
     
  18. bshorey

    bshorey Super Member

    Messages:
    3,749
    Location:
    Gilroy, CA, USA
    I know - I've built machine vision inspection systems. It's not a trivial problem, no question. But the technology is advancing quickly.

    That was just an example. Now, consider machine vs human for a moment. A human can look in one direction at any one time, and can scan a reasonable amount over a short period of time. But there are blind spots, and always the chance of somebody creeping up on you in a blind spot while nobody is looking. And that's in good conditions, when you're alert, etc.

    In an automated car, you've got 360 degrees of coverage, fully alert in all directions all the time. Sorry, but no human can compete with that.

    The technology is already pretty good, and only going to get better.

    bs
     
    stish likes this.
  19. mhardy6647

    mhardy6647 AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    52,318
    Yup. It (the autonomous auto, that is) is inevitable.
     
  20. wayne r

    wayne r New Member

    Messages:
    3
    Let's consider it can be done and actually works. What happens when a lowly capacitor or IC fails in the PCM? To get around that you would need redundancy. This would add to cost. Also, just as we now have people that drive with the check engine light on all the time we would have people running the backup system until that also failed.

    The cameras, obstacle avoidance and self parking features are an assist but should not be a substitute for good judgement. The human brain will hopefully not become obsolete.
     

Share This Page