PDA

View Full Version : Self driving cars



overpowered
September 2nd, 2015, 09:34 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/technology/personaltech/google-says-its-not-the-driverless-cars-fault-its-other-drivers.html

Random
September 3rd, 2015, 08:13 AM
Dmitri Dolgov, head of software for Google’s Self-Driving Car Project, said that one thing he had learned from the project was that human drivers needed to be “less idiotic.”


:lol:

overpowered
September 11th, 2015, 06:23 PM
Last month, as one of Google’s self-driving cars approached a crosswalk, it did what it was supposed to do when it slowed to allow a pedestrian to cross, prompting its “safety driver” to apply the brakes. The pedestrian was fine, but not so much Google’s car, which was hit from behind by a human-driven sedan.I do find it amazing that most drivers will not yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk unless they themselves have a red light or stop sign. Even when you have a walk signal, the chances are very low that someone who has a green and wants to turn right at the same corner you are crossing from will actually yield to you. I'd guess it's maybe 25-30%.

On a freeway ramp crosswalk or a mid block crosswalk, it's maybe 5%. Unmarked crosswalk, 0.1%.

overpowered
November 12th, 2015, 09:47 PM
This Google Self-Driving Car Just Got Pulled Over By The Cops For Driving Too Slow

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/106304/20151113/this-google-self-driving-car-just-got-pulled-over-by-the-cops-for-driving-too-slow.htm

25mph in a 35mph zone. The horror. :rolleyes:

novicius
November 13th, 2015, 05:10 AM
"But officer, it's the vehicle's TOP SPEED!!" :lol:

21Kid
November 13th, 2015, 05:22 AM
1.2 million miles & 0 tickets? Sounds like it's working pretty good. :)

overpowered
November 13th, 2015, 06:59 AM
Minimum speed laws are generally not well written and don't properly take into account that some vehicles need to go slow for any number of reasons. From what I can tell, most cops realize that some vehicles have to go slow and don't write them up for minimum speed violations unless they're outside the slow lane and not preparing for a left turn.

I think this particular cop just wanted to check out the funky car and used minimum speed as an excuse.

It should also be noted that no collisions have yet been blamed on one of Google self driving cars. They've had some collisions but all have been the fault of the other driver.

overpowered
November 13th, 2015, 09:22 AM
1.2 million miles & 0 tickets? Sounds like it's working pretty good. :)Funny how when you obey the law you tend to not get tickets.

21Kid
November 13th, 2015, 09:46 AM
I can't wait... I hope it gets here sooner. :)
I wonder how much it'll clear up traffic jams when people aren't driving like A-holes. I've read it can be up to 30%, but I wonder what it would be in reality.

overpowered
November 13th, 2015, 10:58 AM
Apparently those little Google cars like the one from the article are legally "Neighborhood Electric Vehicles" (NEV's) which in California means that they are not allowed to have a top speed higher than 25mph and they are prohibited from driving on roads with speed limits higher than 35mph. They are custom made for Google.

That means that the minimum speed law cannot be applied. The law clearly limits them to 25mph and clearly allows them to go on roads with speed limits up to 35mph.

Google also uses other regular cars that aren't NEV's with the navigation/control equipment retrofitted. I don't know if those are so speed limited.

overpowered
November 13th, 2015, 10:59 AM
I can't wait... I hope it gets here sooner. :)
I wonder how much it'll clear up traffic jams when people aren't driving like A-holes. I've read it can be up to 30%, but I wonder what it would be in reality.Yeah. People don't realize how much their impatient driving actually makes traffic flow more difficult.

overpowered
February 29th, 2016, 10:30 PM
Google's self-driving car at fault in accident

http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/29/autos/google-self-driving-car-accident/index.html

OK., not really primary fault but still, not 100% perfect, yet.

overpowered
May 19th, 2016, 10:44 AM
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/google-cars-will-stick-it-man.html

:twitch:

thesameguy
May 19th, 2016, 12:59 PM
And you thought matte finishes were a bitch to care for. Wait until you have to wash tree sap off your flypaper paint.

Drachen596
May 19th, 2016, 04:03 PM
so the pedestrian will then be stuck to the car, then mashed into a fine paste between the car and whatever it hits next.

Yw-slayer
May 20th, 2016, 12:01 AM
A bit better than getting Joe Blacked?

overpowered
June 7th, 2016, 05:39 AM
Google cars going to go crazy today?

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/GPS-Interference-NOTAM-For-Southwest-226365-1.html

Kchrpm
June 7th, 2016, 06:20 AM
The article says anything below 50 feet (from the source, presumably) should be fine. Still, they're intentionally screwing up GPS for planes around LAX? Perhaps a test of pilots/procedures in case this exact thing happens as an attack?

Fogelhund
September 23rd, 2016, 09:17 AM
As it seems likely, if Self-Driving cars become the future, will there still be demand for performance orientated self-driving cars? In reality, they will mostly be required to drive at speed limits, and obey signs, so what is the purpose of being anything other than economical energy wise? I can see adding in luxury items, for people who want to be seen texting, reading, or watching movies in something fancy... but overall, isn't this likely to decrease the average price of transportation over time?

Kchrpm
September 23rd, 2016, 09:31 AM
They will most likely be like many other consumer products: the average person seems them as just appliances, those with the means buying for luxurious items perhaps more as a status symbol than to fill a need, and then there will be enthusiasts who still appreciate the manual, hands-on approach that will buy very old or very expensive examples that provide that experience.

thesameguy
September 23rd, 2016, 09:39 AM
I often wonder about this. I think the nature of where this goes depends on a lot of things, including technology, society, and regulation. I think from an ability standpoint, we're pretty near the point where "driving because you have to" can go for a huge swath of people. Society isn't quite there yet, but going places to work and going places to buy things kinda doesn't need to happen anymore. I'm only semi-joking when I say I see a future where the landscape is covered with homes, entertainment, and Amazon.com warehouses. I only leave the house to have specific kinds of fun - I work from home and Amazon.com robots deliver everything I need.

IMOA
September 23rd, 2016, 10:32 AM
Spent the last couple of days in Avignon on our annual management pissup and spent a bit of time talking about the impacts of emerging technologies on our industry. Things like self driving cars combined with ride sharing like uber combined with car sharing will result in a significant shift away from car ownership to a usage based model. Why would anyone who doesn't care about driving bother owning a car when they can just call up the appropriate type of car they need at that moment to get them somewhere. This sort of thing is much closer than people realize.

What was really interesting was the impacts of ai in this space. It might start with simple stuff like a car booking itself in for maintenance and getting itself to the workshop but that continues to things like becoming more self aware to the point where cars start owning themselves. Do the uber thing for a while then when it's no longer economic trade yourself in on a new model. We're going to see some wild stuff well before we shuffle off our lives.

Fogelhund
September 23rd, 2016, 10:52 AM
Spent the last couple of days in Avignon on our annual management pissup and spent a bit of time talking about the impacts of emerging technologies on our industry. Things like self driving cars combined with ride sharing like uber combined with car sharing will result in a significant shift away from car ownership to a usage based model. Why would anyone who doesn't care about driving bother owning a car when they can just call up the appropriate type of car they need at that moment to get them somewhere. This sort of thing is much closer than people realize.

What was really interesting was the impacts of ai in this space. It might start with simple stuff like a car booking itself in for maintenance and getting itself to the workshop but that continues to things like becoming more self aware to the point where cars start owning themselves. Do the uber thing for a while then when it's no longer economic trade yourself in on a new model. We're going to see some wild stuff well before we shuffle off our lives.

I've talked with others about this as well, going to a usage based model, instead of ownership. I have to wonder who owns the cars then, and what the costs are for usage, and what the profits become. You would have to assume that usage would be cheaper than ownership, and that this works in urban areas far better than rural.

I can only imagine what could happen with all these self driving cars, if the servers go down... everyone gets stuck in gridlock, and nobody knows how to drive manually anymore.

Kchrpm
September 23rd, 2016, 10:59 AM
Self-driving cars don't require a connection to an external network to navigate AFAIK. I'm sure they go out to update their maps, but they also have them stored locally (just like your standalone GPS unit does and Google Maps can do). But that's the easy part. The hard part is the sensor array and the interpretation of the information coming from all the different types of sensors in it. That has to be done locally.

Fogelhund
September 23rd, 2016, 11:02 AM
But if you are using your smartphone to order a car, that has to be centrally located, to send the closest available ride to pick you up. If that goes down....

thesameguy
September 23rd, 2016, 11:20 AM
We've had a cell network for a really long time. They really don't go down.

IMOA
September 23rd, 2016, 11:42 AM
I've talked with others about this as well, going to a usage based model, instead of ownership. I have to wonder who owns the cars then, and what the costs are for usage, and what the profits become. You would have to assume that usage would be cheaper than ownership, and that this works in urban areas far better than rural..

Atm it's car sharing companies but this could also be individuals, communities, co-ops etc. I have a car sharing membership because the gt4 isn't the most practical thing about. Within 5 minutes walk of my front door there's 3 or 4 Yaris/corollas, an A1, i30 station wagen, big 8 seater people mover thing and a hiace van. Book the cars by the half hour on my phone and use a swipe card to get into them. As someone who could very easily take the subway to work if I wasn't a driving enthusiast I'd be an idiot to own a car, there's just no point. Then you roll in the self driving into this and where quickly at a point where I could have a fleet of chauffeur driven cars for less than the cost of buying a new mid level car every 3-4 years.

Kchrpm
September 23rd, 2016, 11:47 AM
But if you are using your smartphone to order a car, that has to be centrally located, to send the closest available ride to pick you up. If that goes down....

That's a different issue than causing gridlock :) It's a genuine risk, everything goes down sometime, but based on the importance of cellular networks now and in the future I'm picturing a high level of redundancy and expediency of repairs, I'm guessing things will be fixed relatively quickly.

Crazed_Insanity
September 23rd, 2016, 02:38 PM
We've had a cell network for a really long time. They really don't go down.
I'm sure we've all experienced our wifi router, cable modem and cellular signal go down intermittently... So they do go down.

However, I'm sure self driving cars won't be so heavily dependent on internet connection to remain operational.

So in the future, when Skynet is awake, remember to turn your car's airplane mode on so that skynet won't have access to your self driving car! :D

Yw-slayer
September 23rd, 2016, 04:33 PM
Given the average standard of driving in town, I can't wait for self-driving cars to take over 99% of daily driving.

21Kid
September 23rd, 2016, 07:05 PM
agreed

KillerB
September 25th, 2016, 01:27 PM
I don't really see self-driving cars take off for individual ownership. I think the liability issues are too great. The manufacturers won't take on the liability, and the first time someone's insurance company gets tagged with a really large bill from an accident where the self-driving car is deemed at least partially at fault, they'll sue the manufacturer.

I *do* see it being more feasible for someone like Uber, but even then, I have to think that at some point there's going to be a really ugly fight in court when a driverless car causes some serious damage (or injures someone with deep pockets).

21Kid
September 26th, 2016, 05:59 AM
Everything evolves, I'm sure it will all get worked out.

:cool:

thesameguy
September 26th, 2016, 08:37 AM
It's getting worked out - though maybe not the way everyone would hope. Some of the legislation out there is a little bit scary. honestly.

Crazed_Insanity
September 26th, 2016, 09:48 AM
I tend to agree with KB..., why would anyone actually want to own a self driving car and park it in the garage if we can just pick up our phone and get somebody like uber to send us a car to pick us up?

However, I suspect things will work out like commercial aviation, except now it's on the ground level. There will be accidents and legal compensations, but overall, it will still dramatically increase safety on the road to make it worthwhile.

Insurance industry probably will end up making the non-self driving car owners pay more because they'll be causing more accidents. It'll become way more expensive to actual own a manual vehicle I bet...

thesameguy
September 26th, 2016, 10:13 AM
People are still possessive. People generally prefer to own things rather than rent things. It's your mess, your stuff, your germs in your car. Certainly not true for everyone, but true for a lot of people. There is also a timing issue - there just isn't a place where you store 500,000 cars that you send out at 7:30am and 4:30pm every day for everyone's commute. Either people will end up storing cars they don't own, or mass transit will get a boost in this process. Perhaps more people will take cues from bay area tech companies, where your employer sends a self-driving bus to collect its employees every morning. With this type of technology, even smaller companies could afford to do this.

That doesn't entirely fix the timing issue, though - a lot of families need every minute they can get before and after work, and throwing away 15-30 minutes waiting for your leased ride to fetch you would be a difficulty. I suspect the first thing self-driving cars win is owners letting their vehicle pay for itself with rentals while the owner is at work... Just let your self-driving car Uber for other people while you're in the office. That would make car ownership even more economical for some, and further widen the have and have not gap which, as you know, is highly desirable.

I think there are a lot of pieces that need to shift into place for "non car ownership" to be a wide-spread thing. Car sharing services already exist and do well in some areas, but really only denser areas. The economies involved in car sharing in suburban areas for all citizens really don't work out. You need more delivery services, more telecommuting, and more people amiable to ride sharing before we can get there. Just have self-driving technology is not enough.

21Kid
September 26th, 2016, 10:35 AM
I suspect the first thing self-driving cars win is owners letting their vehicle pay for itself with rentals while the owner is at work... Just let your self-driving car Uber for other people while you're in the office. That would make car ownership even more economical for some, and further widen the have and have not gap which, as you know, is highly desirable.That's a great idea.

I think people would still want to own them. It would be like having your own personal chauffeur. :baller: