For better or worse, the future is here.

Waymo is opening its fully driverless service to the general public in Phoenix

https://blog.waymo.com/2020/10/waymo...riverless.html

 

I think we need a betting pool on first wreck and first lawsuit dates.

 

I had not heard about this in the local news. One thing in that press release caught my attention:
"we'll also be re-introducing rides with a trained vehicle operator, which will add capacity and allow us to serve a larger geographical area."

One of my friends signed up for x amount of free rides and he said after the first one that the system is not ready for prime-time. He was picked up at a grocery store parking lot, then when dropped off at the restaurant destination, the vehicle passed up the building and stopped in a "designated drop off area" which was half a block away. The vehicle would stop-start-stop-start due to pedestrians on the sidewalks and vehicular traffic at stop signs on side roads. Then on the ride home, he wanted to actually go home and the car brought him to a main road about 1/4 mile from his house. He said he wanted to go to his house, not walk home in 100+ heat, but was told the vehicle mapping did not include neighborhoods, only main roads. The "driver" was unable to do anything other than tell him to press the "help" button and talk to customer support. He explained the situation and they gave authorization for the driver to take over manual control and drive into the neighborhood to his house.

He was originally very excited about the system but completely changed his mind after actually experiencing it.

 

I wonder if it's easy to cut off the driverless cab - On the east coast that's just how every drives anyway +- (your either passing or being passed)

 

Hell, I have spent way to much time in big cities. Been in many a taxi that might as well been driverless...

 

OMG!!! JOHNNY CABS!!!!!!!!!!! (Total Recall)

 

The obvious solution to the problem of AI is to make the manufacturer FULLY RESPONSIBLE for ALL "unintended consequences".

Simple, easy, effective.

 

And no one will then make them. Or make very few.

 

Not sure how I feel. Either have a computer that is certain to fail operate the car or a driver that can't be bothered with paying attention to the road operate the car.

 

Dunno why they used pictures of yellow cabs. This is what they really look like.






Another view:

 

Years of dealing with automated controls in powerplants taught me that automatic controls are great and can outperform most human operators- when they're working.

It's when they don't work that you have to have a competent human ready to override the automatic stuff and take control.

Too many variables in traffic for me to trust my life to a computer and the sensors that drive it. Powerplant is a relatively stable and controlled environment. A moving vehicle subject to traffic and other drivers? Don't think so.

I'm not a Luddite. I'm a realist and certainly not a starry-eyed dreamer.

 

Kenneth, what's the backstory on that crash? Taxi or other driver at fault?

 

Driverless cars will never completely replace traditional vehicles. I wonder when the first big law suit is going to happen?

 

Here's an article about it. Not much anyone could have done to avoid that collision.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/04/wa...on-in-arizona/

 

We can hope.

NOT

SOON

ENOUGH.

Hopefully, followed by an unending stream of them until the corporations involved in driverless cars are all bankrupt.

 

And it's from May of 2018. The leaps and bounds that the tech has made since then would be significant.

It's coming, and I get a kick out of the folks that rail against it.

My company is very involved in many aspects, from ADAS to V2X to brake systems. My current daily driver is loaded up with all the safety systems (albeit on a 2017 model), and I'm both impressed and disappointed at some of them. Of course, my LaCrosse is not capable of any level of autonomy, but once you've had the safety systems (lane departure detection/correction, automatic emergency braking, adaptive cruise, etc), you come to appreciate that added safety and can envision the next steps that the tech will take. I would personally LOVE to try the Supercruise feature that GM uses on certain Cadillacs.

Autonomous vehicles will start off in fleet sales, like taxis and delivery. Personal vehicles are still a ways off.

 

I might have been able to dodge that one, or turn a little, but maybe not.

The reason I rail against automated vehicles is because of the unwashed masses and because of government. That's because of who I am. I also am extremely skeptical of the tech aspects because of what I do.

The first point is cynicism. There's a reason a manual transmission is called STANDARD. It used to be standard, and people knew how to use them. Within two generations, that skill has been lost. To be fair, I only have the theoretical knowledge of how to ride a horse, or drive a buggy behind one. People are worse drivers because a stick shift makes you pay attention, and leave some room. If you do not drive, you will lose the ability to do so. If all automated cars get a central recall signal by the government, you are abandoned and you won't be able to drive an old one.

The second point is fear. I am a free man, and I want to stay that way. Thinking an autonomous vehicle will just magically be able to work on our existing roads is a folly that is about to be proven in large scale applications. Giving up control of where you can go, and even giving up control if you can go anywhere at all is such a big thing it's in the Constitution under the Privileges and Immunities Clause. Just like other things of Big Tech, restricting your freedoms under the guise of adopting new tech is something I am very afraid of.

The third point is that I know the current limits and the absolute limits of this technology. It does not now, and will never be able to, fully deal with an open system. The system MUST be closed, and all vehicles MUST have a transponder, and there MUST be central control, because the only way to make machine vision absolutely reliable is to not only rely on it to see, but rely on a central brain to know if something is there or not. Air travel is sort of like this, with controlled airspace and IFFs.

 

I agree with Koda on all points.

While you appreciate those things, I have no use for them in my daily driving.
Looking back over the 40+ years that I have been behind the wheel, none of them would have ever been needed.

I also drive manual transmission vehicles, which I thoroughly enjoy as they give the feeling of REALLY driving. Note that I actually enjoy driving. I sometimes do it just to do it, not because I have to go somewhere. The most exciting thing about my work week is the drive from the house to work and back. I can't imagine how boring it would be to passively sit in a vehicle and be transported to a destination.

 

Hateful systems for morons who can't / won't drive safely. Let them stay home.

Autonomous vehicles are actually WORSE than what was portrayed in Orwell's 1984. They're Big Brother on a scale that the guy who invented the concept couldn't imagine.

 

Good grief, you guys.

Fear? No use for improved safety features (as if you can react faster than software)? Hateful systems?

 

No fear, as I said I enjoy driving, not being driven. I equate it to cooking. Some people have never been in a kitchen and have no desire to cook, while others thoroughly enjoy preparing food items.

Note that I said those features have not been needed in the past 40+ years. I never said I could react faster, I said I did not need to. Probably because I know how to pay attention to my surroundings as I drive. I am aware of what is happening well in front of me, behind me, and to the sides of me. I also drive vehicles that were not designed with blind spots that require some form of technology to compensate for those design flaws.

 

No fear here either. It's a trust (or should I say distrust) issue. I've seen what happens when electronic brains lose their minds and based on things this damn phone does, I have no desire to be anywhere near a software-controlled driverless car.

I can't even get high speed internet out here in the wilds of Vajenya and they expect me to wet my britches over driverless vehicles? That odds are would try to drop me off at the end of the paved road, a quarter mile from the house? Yah right. That's the issue with almost all of these schemes. They assume everyone lives in cities. I've lived in cities and never will again.

 

It's rare that my favorite low budget 80s movie is relevant, but autonomous vehicles were not good then, either.

 

My kids knew how to operate a pushbutton phone, when they were little. As soon as I presented them a dial phone, they hadn't any idea as to where to start.
One must wonder as to why so much resource is put into something nobody, outside of maybe those of advanced age who no longer are capable of operating a motorvehicle, really needs. These projects are fun for those getting a kick out of developing such toys. If they weren't get funded from some faceless somebody or group, it's doubtfull that they would be devoting so much effort. Then there's always the possibility for abuse. The trade-off for making life easier is the ability to track one's movements or even forbid a customer from reaching a desired destination.
The ongoing pandemic has shown most everybody how easy it is to do without unnecessary goods and services.
Then there's the moral question. How do you program ethics into A.I.- operated devices? Over here, shallow types like showing off to their neighbors as to how much expendable income they have, by buying robotic lawnmowers. The nickname over here for them is "Hedgehogmower", because of obvious reasons. A motorclub magazine, over here, illustrated such dangers taking place in traffic. For example, if an autonomous vehicle were to get caught in a situation to where it either had to head-on collide with a speeding vehicle seating 4 armored car robbers or mow down a mother with her two children, the autonomous vehicle would most likely decide completely opposite from how a normal human being would decide.
Then there's the Hacking question. What if some evil clown with a laptop or smartphone remotely tampers with the vehicle's bord electronics?
If the developers of these toys argue that autonomous vehicles fill the safety gap created by lack of law enforcement, failing legislation and the availability of drivers' licenses to those who are neither mentally fit nor morally, then I think that the idea misses the point entirely. This is the exact same parallel to designing vehicles to where visibility is greatly hampered, by creating safety passenger capsules using thick intrusive A,B,C and even D pillars. Whereas, those vintage panorama windshields enabled drivers to avoid the same accidents of which modern vehicles invite

 

They're NOT "safety features" when the computer controlling them loses it's mind. Then, it's going to be mass-murder via Corporate and Government Control.

NO, thanks. Every one involved in bringing autonomous vehicles to market should be sent to prison when one of those pieces of shiit kills someone due to "unforseen circumstances". It is TOTALLY forseeable that "unforseen" stuff is going to happen.

In a perfect world, they'd be outright illegal. I'll settle for the manufacturer being 100% financially responsible for any collisions.

The L-A-S-T thing this world's transportation systems need is for people's driving skills (and decision-making abilities) to atrophy even more. People rely too damn much on Government, and "convenience features" sold by Corporate Criminals already.

 

Soooooo....do you want the government to step in and regulate/make this illegal or not? Are you for an unregulated free market or not?

 

I'm going to close this thread. Please remember: