Autonomous Cars

[AJI]

@ strad, you still have or used to have something to do with drag racing, yeah?

What's your general idea on how an AV would go in a drag? The track is very simple, it's all about RT and launch and wheel spin. Maybe the strip is a great place to perfect some simpler parts of AV?

[roon]

When I was growing up they told us that driving and a license was privilege not a right. Somewhere along the way the people in charge have decided that in the U.S. driving is a right.

May explain the useless tests.

Should those groups be excluded from the privilege of personal motor vehicle transport just because you and I and others 'think' that we're better at driving than an AV? Sounds like discrimination for the sake of our own personal satisfaction and "to hell with the general population" to me…
There's really only one way to equalise the 'privilege' so there is no discrimination, and that is to mandate 100% AV for public road use. This isn't even a question of 'if' anymore, it's a question of 'when'…

There's a difference between being a driver and a passenger. Same for being a pilot, but no one in coach is squawking about not getting to fly the plane because of 'omg, privilege.' Driving is a privilege granted to those who can prove they are able to drive. Being a passenger is a more realistic aim for establishing rights. A right to transportation, as it were. That is currently satisfied by trains, buses, taxis, bicycles, and various other methods, with varying degrees of availability. Public transportation is one of the manifestations of an unspoken right-to-transportation. AVs will be another, potentially superior, method.

100% AV would discriminate against the competent, and privilege the incompetent. Testing and standards could be raised in order to make all cars on the road safer. I don't see an issue with mixed human and automated vehicles. Human driven cars are partially automated these days, and for decades there has been a range of different degrees of automation commingling on roads. ABS and traction control at a basic level. Lane keeping, digital maps, and traffic assist at another.

[AJI]

100% AV would discriminate against the competent, and privilege the incompetent. Testing and standards could be raised in order to make all cars on the road safer. I don't see an issue with mixed human and automated vehicles. Human driven cars are partially automated these days, and for decades there has been a range of different degrees of automation commingling on roads. ABS and traction control at a basic level. Lane keeping, digital maps, and traffic assist at another.

Don't get me wrong here roon, I'm a petrol head. I LOVE cars and bikes. I assume everyone on this site does. I have an historic race car (that is non assisted everything, not even a brake booster) and a modern super bike and my daily drive is a german luxo-barge. I do 40-50,000k's per year and I really enjoy driving and riding, however.., I don't enjoy traffic, or dealing with incompetent or aggressive drivers, or finding a parking space, or dumping the car when I've had a few too many to drive home, or finding a scrape down the side of my car because someone can't park...

I'm just playing devil's advocate for what is inevitably coming… Maybe not in a decade, but there will definitely be a point where, for public safety reasons and for traffic flow reasons, humans will no longer be able to operate a vehicle that travels on public roads, which begs the question; why have the infrastructure for non-autonomous vehicles just to cater to the few who disagree with the implementation of AV?
I think it was you who brought up the very salient point that we once had autonomous transport in the form of the horse. This conversation about a major change in transportation has happened before, horses are now banned from public roads...

[roon]

Yes, those are good counterpoints. In the US, horse drawn carriages are still legal on certain roads. They are required to mount a reflective red triangle on the back of the carriage. I think there will be limits to full automation, although I cannot rule it out. One limit could be infrastructure. Most roads are not AV-friendly highways. They are narrow and of a simpler construction, often receiving less maintenance.

These types of roads are multi-use and have been so for centuries if not millennia. These days they are used by trucks, cars, motorcycles, horses, bicycles, and pedestrians. To decree that such roads are to only be traversed by the products of a handful of tech companies will require a significant cultural shift.

If AVs become sophisticated enough to handle bicyclists and fitness runners on public roads, then they should have similar competence sharing the road with human-driven automobiles.

If multi-use roadways are decided to be too unsafe for humanity, and made illegal by governments, then significant infrastructure will have to be developed in order to keep transportation democratic, equal-access, or rights-based; which you seemed to suggest was a valuable goal. Bicycle lane networks would be needed that are as extensive as the proposed-illegal-for-non-AVs road system. Same for sidewalks and walking paths. Same for trucks, because they are 10-20x more massive than typical automobiles.

[AJI]

Two days ago the new train system began testing in Sydney (it goes on-line early next year). It's completely driverless as you would expect, but to get around the issue of accidents with other vehicles or humans or animals the line is entirely elevated, even though it is mostly over flat ground. Crazy expensive, but done in the name of safety…

Autonomous cars are coming, very soon. There are a multitude of problems for integrating them into the current road systems, but stage 1 requires AV's to adapt to us, which typically and ironically is the hardest way to do it, however the final product will be much more advanced than it would need to be if they had their own roads. The difference between driverless trains and AV's is of course that the AV manufacturer has to foot the bill for the research (the consumer will ultimately pay that bill), but once the AV has become ubiquitous the thinking on future road infrastructure will surely have to shift..?

I asked the question a few pages back about the integration of motorcycles into an AV world. This is the single biggest obstacle that I can think of. Currently motorcycles are probably the best mode of transport for fast solo human transport, but I can't really think of a way for them to coexist in an AV world?

[Andres125sx]

There are people who can´t react on a dangerous situation, there are people with no respect to other drivers making dangerous moves becasue they must be the first always, there are people who´s too old and lost eyesight, reaction times, etc. and there are a lot of people who don´t pay enough attention when behind the wheel to the point it´s almost a miracle they usually arrive to their destiny.
.
AVs will be awesome both for those who shoudn´t drive a car, and for the rest of humankind as roads will be several orders of magnitude safer

Overall I agree with that. However I don't think everyone should be forced into an A.V.

And I fully agree with you, this was my first post in this thread

In my imaginary perfect world wich will never become true as we all know politicians , autonomous cars will be the vast mayority, and people like myself who enjoy driving will have to pass a way more strict driving licence exam wich does include controlling the car in dangerous situations, but once passed there won´t be ridiculously slow speed limits wich even the police break as they´re way too slow, so those with a driving licence wich will be a minority won´t be forced to go as if we all are carrying 1000kg of nitroglycerine into the car


But there are A LOT of people who don´t like driving, and who I don´t like them driving as they´re VERY dangerous. I´m including my mom (72) and my best friend into this group. With people like them with an autonomous car, all of us will be safer when on the road, they will be VERY happy to keep the freedom a car provides but without driving wich they don´t like at all, and speed limits won´t need to be so low because people who is dangerous at the wheel won´t be at the wheel anymore

[Andres125sx]

Nosense is assuming everybody is capable of driving 1 ton vehicles over 100km/h between people, children, etc.

*snip*

There are people who can´t react on a dangerous situation, there are people with no respect to other drivers making dangerous moves becasue they must be the first always, there are people who´s too old and lost eyesight, reaction times, etc. and there are a lot of people who don´t pay enough attention when behind the wheel to the point it´s almost a miracle they usually arrive to their destiny.


AVs will be awesome both for those who shoudn´t drive a car, and for the rest of humankind as roads will be several orders of magnitude safer

I presume you wanted to say - nonsense is assuming everybody can drive cars 100% safely,

Exactly

I'm a son of electronics engineer, I learned to read electronic schematics at almost the same age I learned to read and write, and not just read, understand the logic (and little of underlying physics), made an AM radio when I was 6, I do mechanical and electronics design, and some industrial chemistry since then for 35 years, and I think it is a seriously dumb idea to develop fully autonomous cars for public roads as they are now. At one point they will simply become ridiculously complex and with complexity will come all sorts of unexpected behavior and consequent problems.

I´m not electronics engineer, buy complexity is the result of evolution. Everything is more and more complex gradually, but that shouldn´t mean things will collapse at some point. In my mind the dangerous part of AVs is first units, when there will still be several bugs, like that Tesla not noticing the white truck due to a clear background, but once solved, there shoulnd´t be any problem

[Andres125sx]

There's really only one way to equalise the 'privilege' so there is no discrimination, and that is to mandate 100% AV for public road use. This isn't even a question of 'if' anymore, it's a question of 'when'…

Probably right.
Thank goodness I will be ashes by then.
As an aside a think tank in Europe has determined that robots will displace 1.2 Billion workers in the next couple of decades.

Same old story from industrial revolution. But never happened, there are also new jobs each year, move on

[Just_a_fan]

I asked the question a few pages back about the integration of motorcycles into an AV world. This is the single biggest obstacle that I can think of. Currently motorcycles are probably the best mode of transport for fast solo human transport, but I can't really think of a way for them to coexist in an AV world?

Motorcycles are fast in modern traffic because everything else is slow in modern traffic. One of the key points about AVs is the cooperation with other vehicles so that traffic is kept moving. That would make the motorcycle pointless (from the perspective of cutting through traffic). It doesn't answer the question about what to do about those who just prefer the motorcycle. I guess they'll be no worse than now - everyone is a threat and you ride accordingly.

[roon]

Synchronized braking should reduce/eliminate traffic waves.

[Big Tea]

Synchronized braking should reduce/eliminate traffic waves.

That would make it enormously safer, but I am old school, and was schooled at the time that brakes are for emergencies and miscalculations. I know it would not work today, but synchronized stop accelerating would be a huge energy saver and avoid many accidents. 2 or 3 cars traveling 30 mph over the speed limit is not dangerous in its self, its when one of the front ones lift the trouble starts.

[strad]

@ strad, you still have or used to have something to do with drag racing, yeah?

What's your general idea on how an AV would go in a drag? The track is very simple, it's all about RT and launch and wheel spin. Maybe the strip is a great place to perfect some simpler parts of AV?

Honestly AJI I could see a time when the sanctioning bodies could create a class for AVs and follow with a requirement in the name of safety that all top classes convert to AV.
However that would ruin it for us adrenaline junky drivers. The John Force's of the world would hate it.

[theblackangus]

I'm just playing devil's advocate for what is inevitably coming… Maybe not in a decade, but there will definitely be a point where, for public safety reasons and for traffic flow reasons, humans will no longer be able to operate a vehicle that travels on public roads, which begs the question; why have the infrastructure for non-autonomous vehicles just to cater to the few who disagree with the implementation of AV?

(Since you are playing devils advocate)
By saying this you are implying that all non-av vehicle values become 0 as they cannot be used anymore.*
This becomes an issue as many people don't have the means to afford new transportation frequently. Many of these people need transportation and cannot rely on public transit. (Rural America for example). I know many people who cannot afford to spend more than 5-8k on a car. How long before you can get an AV for that much?

You can't just say - too bad you can't drive because you cannot afford a new car. (You could but that wouldnt go over well)
So the shift will have to take a long time and will only start to happen once nearly everyone thinks AV's are better drivers with no major trade-offs. I'm guessing a minimum of 15-20 years (two generations of owners) after AV's become cost effective enough to be afforded by the majority.

So, in short, I think there will only be 1 infrastructure in most places and it will have to be a shared infrastructure, because the transition period will not be short. Plus how is an AV better if it needs special infrastructure, where people navigate the roads just fine (with-in reason)? Infrastructure is expensive especially in large countries like the US, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, etc.

*It would seem most likely the cost to retrofit will be more than an older vehicles value for quite a while. And of course excluding cars that are trackable.

[strad]

@ theblackangus
That's true ..It will take long enough for there to be cheap used AVs on the market.

[Big Tea]

I'm just playing devil's advocate for what is inevitably coming… Maybe not in a decade, but there will definitely be a point where, for public safety reasons and for traffic flow reasons, humans will no longer be able to operate a vehicle that travels on public roads, which begs the question; why have the infrastructure for non-autonomous vehicles just to cater to the few who disagree with the implementation of AV?

(Since you are playing devils advocate)
By saying this you are implying that all non-av vehicle values become 0 as they cannot be used anymore.*
This becomes an issue as many people don't have the means to afford new transportation frequently. Many of these people need transportation and cannot rely on public transit. (Rural America for example). I know many people who cannot afford to spend more than 5-8k on a car. How long before you can get an AV for that much?

You can't just say - too bad you can't drive because you cannot afford a new car. (You could but that wouldnt go over well)
So the shift will have to take a long time and will only start to happen once nearly everyone thinks AV's are better drivers with no major trade-offs. I'm guessing a minimum of 15-20 years (two generations of owners) after AV's become cost effective enough to be afforded by the majority.

So, in short, I think there will only be 1 infrastructure in most places and it will have to be a shared infrastructure, because the transition period will not be short. Plus how is an AV better if it needs special infrastructure, where people navigate the roads just fine (with-in reason)? Infrastructure is expensive especially in large countries like the US, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico, etc.

*It would seem most likely the cost to retrofit will be more than an older vehicles value for quite a while. And of course excluding cars that are trackable.

Many vehicles today seem to have the 'bare bones' already included in them.
I have ordered a low end car for delivery Sept 1 and it has the 'Camera' for anti collision and lane departure sign reader rear sensors cruse etc. (Its Automatic) High end cars have had most of this for some time.

I think just about everything has electric power steering today which can be converted, braking system could be modular if the 'brain' is there

I believe by 2020 just about all cars will be convertible with some work, soon after with plug in modules.