Why empty? It’s a kind of cab without driver and could reduce motorized individual traffic; car owner would be companies or public transport operators. Will John Q. Public spend some thousand $favorite_currency for a self-driving car and waste money by driving around empty and useless (empty OR useless happens)? I doubt that, it’s too stupid.
Robots, among other things, would be also capable of starting to move ALL (cars in a row) AT ONCE when the traffic lights change to green, unlike human drivers, who tend to start moving only when the car immediately before them does so… with all the negative consequences for the fluence of traffic. … (etc). Yes, I’m sure robot drivers (or drivers’ assistants) could improve traffic conditions (especially in the cities, or on the highways) quite considerably.
My Wife and I had a fun idea some years ago: That MAYBE things aren’t ‘so’ until somebody thinks about it, or says it aloud.
Of course we then notice if something happens after somebody has verbalised it.
It brought about the concept of ‘Creedons’ – (As in Apostle’s Creed) – That if enough people believe something it becomes real. The idea behind faith and prayer in religion I suppose…
Now you have ‘put it out there’, maybe it will happen?
But in a survey regarding self-driving cars, ‘Half of the respondents were also put off by the fact that driverless vehicles would not be able to exceed the speed limit.’
Not quite. The “driver” nut is now replaced by the “programmer” nut. Or, worse, the “hacker” nut. At least the “driver” is putting his own ass at risk when he does something stupid or malevolent.
Never underestimate The Rule of Unintended Consequences. Keep in mind that 100+ years ago, the automobile was seen as a way of improving the urban environment. Getting rid of all those horses meant getting rid of all that horse shit on the streets, which was a major health concern at the time. And, as far as the thinking went, it was correct. And accurate.
Somebody will always find a way to take something new and fuck it up, deliberately or accidentally. And no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted.
its not that simple.. that’d be a horde of programmers and a horde of testers. if drivers’d be aware all the time that they’re risking their own ass the world would be a better place. if a driver makes an error its a human error.. anyone can do that. if the automatic car makes one there’s a black box that’ll log everything and the factory will be sued allover…
also it’s probably not true that ‘no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted’.
Precisely. The safest car in the world would be the one with no driver seatbelt or airbag and a twelve inch spike sticking out the centre of the steering wheel.
There are hordes of programmers and testers and millions of users – and still there is no Operating System which is secure.
I guess there will be as much success in creating a secure self driving car as in creating a secure OS.
“And no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted.”
Some turn out far more wonderful! I am digging the 21st century and the magic our tech offers. I dont believe in it like a religion, I just see that it’s working and has miraculous possibilities. I think it’s a miracle to have a flat panel screen (my ipad) that holds the world’s knowlege, entertainment, and many of it’s people at my fingertips while simulataneously controlling my home theatre system so I can lounge in the tub changing internet radio on the speakers while I laugh at funny videos.
The tech to auto-drive cars does include proximity sensors, radar tech, and a variety of ways to give cars the ability to know what’s around them, including little girls with kittens and crusty old hippies on bikes. At least the car won’t be distracted because it’s boyfriend was a jerk today.
I thought selfdriving-cars already existed for 100 years or more. They’re called cabs ou taxis. The user nor drive them neither own them – usually the driver is someone more skilled and with more trainning that gets paid to do this umpleasant job.
And, being redundant, I repeat: diferent than cars-whitout-drivers, the people who are served by it don’t nead to own it. Plus, taxi-cabs are already a form of public transport (although not coletive).
(It reminds me that maybe we should incorporate a theoretical diference that is used in Health Planning for Populations: Public Health and Colective Health are not sinonimous. Colective Health is a Health Planning made up WITH the population; Public Health is made FOR the population, but without them. Of course i prefer Colective rather than Public, as I prefer a bike than a bus)
taxis are inconvenient (have to wait for them, around here in bad weather that can take hours), definitely NOT private, and you have to pay through the nose every time you use them. I assure you that operating, maintaining and parking my smart car does not in any way approach the cost of using a taxi instead, and my car is ready when i am. If I was driving to job without parking in a congested area on a regular basis, I’d use a bike or bus. Taxis are for a night out when you’re drinking. Last time I tried that, however, I found myself alone on a downtown street in a minidress and coat at -30C ducking into a hotel lobby to warm up and call yet another cab for four miserable hours. If I’d not planned on a cab I’d have brought sufficient clothing to make it home by bike or on foot. Buses don’t run at night here.
You can’t assume your solutions are our solutions.
There are too many sinister Orwellian overtones to ponder. I remember reading a quote from some California politician about the possibility of getting a discount for using a thermostat in your home that would be controlled by the utilities company. She thought we should all be excited by the possibility that the utility company could turn down your A/C or heat to avoid rolling brownouts.
Sure, a self-driving car may yield to bicyclists; but it may not. And what if they they have to ban non-self-driving cars to make the system work?
I’m with Yehuda on this one. Car chaos would surely reduce with more self driven cars and cars that could self drive, and so take over when the driver is failing. lets face it, most of the really terrible drivers don’t enjoy the work of driving and likely would love to give it up if they could maintain the privacy and convenience of a private auto. For many people the auto is the only space they ever get to have to themselves for talking to themselves, having a tantrum, or otherwise sorting through personal stuff. Doing it without having to operate the vehicle would be a relief all around.
And exactly how are they going to control all these vehicles? All I’m going to say is that something like this would require a *MASSIVE* amount of infrastructure such as GPS systems, and an equally impressive complex of sophisticated, high-powered/high-speed computers to track all these vehicles in relation to one another in real-time.
Now I’m going to ask you to think back about a month ago and consider the condition of the infrastructure in New York and New Jersey. The power grid was down; communications were disrupted; and even basic hardware such as rails, roads, bridges, and tunnels were totally unusable.
Something like ‘robo-cars’ could maybe work in a limited application such as getting around a large complex, but I cannot ever imagine the American public willingly getting out of their U-drive-em motorized metal cocoons. Trust me, we could burn up every drop of gasoline on the planet; people would demand that the government powers-that-be immediately find some way of turning something else into petroleum. Either that or we would see a rush to build nuclear power plants in order to produce electricity for electric cars like you would not believe, regardless of whether or not we had found a way to safely handle the nuke wastes.
You are all much braver than I, I’d, “NEVER” trust a computer enough to let it drive me!! My wife works for a car dealership, (no we don’t own one!), service dept. and she tells me all the time of the “computer burps”, problems with our current cars. I wouldn’t let it control my bicycle or any car that I was in, period!
There’s a Japanese anime from 10 years back or so that was based completely on the idea that all cars had become driverless and that therefore there was a police force specifically setup up to rescue riders/pedestrians from cars that went out of control. Don’t remember any hacking episodes, but as I think about it, the implication would have had to been that the AI got confused, ie bugs.
Bring on your wonderful system of self-driving cars. All it’ll take to turn the setup into utter chaos is one kamikaze-nut on a 600cc sportbike. And you haven’t even begun to figure in the clowns that’ll have to ‘play’ with the system (for whatever reason they dream up). If you haven’t previously read it, a strongly recommend Harlan Ellison’s “Repent Harlequin, Said the Ticktock Man”. What a wonderful example of playing with an orderly world.
right now drivers can adjust to cyclists, i believe if they had to set up an infrastructure to aid these computer driven cars cyclists would have to be banned from the roads in order for the roads to operate, in a perfect world something like this would be accompanied by a bicycle infrastructure that complements the new completely overhauled car infrastructure, something tells me cyclists would be forgotten in this situation
Alas, drivers drive bikes as well…
Streets filled with empty cars… What a nightmare!
Why empty? It’s a kind of cab without driver and could reduce motorized individual traffic; car owner would be companies or public transport operators. Will John Q. Public spend some thousand $favorite_currency for a self-driving car and waste money by driving around empty and useless (empty OR useless happens)? I doubt that, it’s too stupid.
Yeah, a robot’s not going to lose its temper and try to run you over. And you would imagine they would be predictable, that would be a nice change.
Robots, among other things, would be also capable of starting to move ALL (cars in a row) AT ONCE when the traffic lights change to green, unlike human drivers, who tend to start moving only when the car immediately before them does so… with all the negative consequences for the fluence of traffic. … (etc). Yes, I’m sure robot drivers (or drivers’ assistants) could improve traffic conditions (especially in the cities, or on the highways) quite considerably.
“who tend to start moving only when the car immediately before them does so…” – should read “only AFTER the car immediately IN FRONT of them…”
Knight Rider comes true…
Until the day Terminator / I, Robot car attacks start.
once we get the monkey out from behind the wheel… then we only have to worry about hackers monkeying up everything.
Now you’ve done it K’Tesh…
My Wife and I had a fun idea some years ago: That MAYBE things aren’t ‘so’ until somebody thinks about it, or says it aloud.
Of course we then notice if something happens after somebody has verbalised it.
It brought about the concept of ‘Creedons’ – (As in Apostle’s Creed) – That if enough people believe something it becomes real. The idea behind faith and prayer in religion I suppose…
Now you have ‘put it out there’, maybe it will happen?
I think you’re confusing religion and the end of Peter Pan.
johnniecabs!!!
Like!
Met the actor who was the voice of the Jonniecab (as well as the EMH, “The cowboy” among many others)
Very nice guy
Already here in a limited form: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/09/12/heathrow-driverless-pods-_n_958262.html
But in a survey regarding self-driving cars, ‘Half of the respondents were also put off by the fact that driverless vehicles would not be able to exceed the speed limit.’
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/industry-news/drivers-uneasy-about-driverless-cars-1.1427280
My wife sent me a funny link, not unrelated!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/nov/27/ipad-germany
Ahhh – the difficulties with new technology :-0
oh no you didn’t … lol
chip tuning will get a whole new meaning. those things will be able to pass you safely in the narrowest spaces with most awesome speed
The most dangerous component of all motor vehicles is the nut behind the wheel. Removing it makes the vehicle 100% safer.
Not quite. The “driver” nut is now replaced by the “programmer” nut. Or, worse, the “hacker” nut. At least the “driver” is putting his own ass at risk when he does something stupid or malevolent.
Never underestimate The Rule of Unintended Consequences. Keep in mind that 100+ years ago, the automobile was seen as a way of improving the urban environment. Getting rid of all those horses meant getting rid of all that horse shit on the streets, which was a major health concern at the time. And, as far as the thinking went, it was correct. And accurate.
Somebody will always find a way to take something new and fuck it up, deliberately or accidentally. And no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted.
its not that simple.. that’d be a horde of programmers and a horde of testers. if drivers’d be aware all the time that they’re risking their own ass the world would be a better place. if a driver makes an error its a human error.. anyone can do that. if the automatic car makes one there’s a black box that’ll log everything and the factory will be sued allover…
also it’s probably not true that ‘no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted’.
Precisely. The safest car in the world would be the one with no driver seatbelt or airbag and a twelve inch spike sticking out the centre of the steering wheel.
No, the safest car would be the one that’s about to be crushed and used for scrap metal …
There are hordes of programmers and testers and millions of users – and still there is no Operating System which is secure.
I guess there will be as much success in creating a secure self driving car as in creating a secure OS.
“And no new technological advance ever turns out to be quite as wonderful as was originally predicted.”
Some turn out far more wonderful! I am digging the 21st century and the magic our tech offers. I dont believe in it like a religion, I just see that it’s working and has miraculous possibilities. I think it’s a miracle to have a flat panel screen (my ipad) that holds the world’s knowlege, entertainment, and many of it’s people at my fingertips while simulataneously controlling my home theatre system so I can lounge in the tub changing internet radio on the speakers while I laugh at funny videos.
The tech to auto-drive cars does include proximity sensors, radar tech, and a variety of ways to give cars the ability to know what’s around them, including little girls with kittens and crusty old hippies on bikes. At least the car won’t be distracted because it’s boyfriend was a jerk today.
I thought selfdriving-cars already existed for 100 years or more. They’re called cabs ou taxis. The user nor drive them neither own them – usually the driver is someone more skilled and with more trainning that gets paid to do this umpleasant job.
And, being redundant, I repeat: diferent than cars-whitout-drivers, the people who are served by it don’t nead to own it. Plus, taxi-cabs are already a form of public transport (although not coletive).
(It reminds me that maybe we should incorporate a theoretical diference that is used in Health Planning for Populations: Public Health and Colective Health are not sinonimous. Colective Health is a Health Planning made up WITH the population; Public Health is made FOR the population, but without them. Of course i prefer Colective rather than Public, as I prefer a bike than a bus)
taxis are inconvenient (have to wait for them, around here in bad weather that can take hours), definitely NOT private, and you have to pay through the nose every time you use them. I assure you that operating, maintaining and parking my smart car does not in any way approach the cost of using a taxi instead, and my car is ready when i am. If I was driving to job without parking in a congested area on a regular basis, I’d use a bike or bus. Taxis are for a night out when you’re drinking. Last time I tried that, however, I found myself alone on a downtown street in a minidress and coat at -30C ducking into a hotel lobby to warm up and call yet another cab for four miserable hours. If I’d not planned on a cab I’d have brought sufficient clothing to make it home by bike or on foot. Buses don’t run at night here.
You can’t assume your solutions are our solutions.
Taxis are very conveniente if you 1) call them and book them 2) to eventual bail-out in awckwards situations. They are made for it.
part of me hopes they never fix the glitch and just end up having to ditch the program altogether
hmmmm…. does this mean I can join my wife in the back seat???
no, you must !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkzzvRfzigw
RV Autopilot in Darwin Awards movie.
There are too many sinister Orwellian overtones to ponder. I remember reading a quote from some California politician about the possibility of getting a discount for using a thermostat in your home that would be controlled by the utilities company. She thought we should all be excited by the possibility that the utility company could turn down your A/C or heat to avoid rolling brownouts.
Sure, a self-driving car may yield to bicyclists; but it may not. And what if they they have to ban non-self-driving cars to make the system work?
I’m with Yehuda on this one. Car chaos would surely reduce with more self driven cars and cars that could self drive, and so take over when the driver is failing. lets face it, most of the really terrible drivers don’t enjoy the work of driving and likely would love to give it up if they could maintain the privacy and convenience of a private auto. For many people the auto is the only space they ever get to have to themselves for talking to themselves, having a tantrum, or otherwise sorting through personal stuff. Doing it without having to operate the vehicle would be a relief all around.
And exactly how are they going to control all these vehicles? All I’m going to say is that something like this would require a *MASSIVE* amount of infrastructure such as GPS systems, and an equally impressive complex of sophisticated, high-powered/high-speed computers to track all these vehicles in relation to one another in real-time.
Now I’m going to ask you to think back about a month ago and consider the condition of the infrastructure in New York and New Jersey. The power grid was down; communications were disrupted; and even basic hardware such as rails, roads, bridges, and tunnels were totally unusable.
Something like ‘robo-cars’ could maybe work in a limited application such as getting around a large complex, but I cannot ever imagine the American public willingly getting out of their U-drive-em motorized metal cocoons. Trust me, we could burn up every drop of gasoline on the planet; people would demand that the government powers-that-be immediately find some way of turning something else into petroleum. Either that or we would see a rush to build nuclear power plants in order to produce electricity for electric cars like you would not believe, regardless of whether or not we had found a way to safely handle the nuke wastes.
You are all much braver than I, I’d, “NEVER” trust a computer enough to let it drive me!! My wife works for a car dealership, (no we don’t own one!), service dept. and she tells me all the time of the “computer burps”, problems with our current cars. I wouldn’t let it control my bicycle or any car that I was in, period!
There’s a Japanese anime from 10 years back or so that was based completely on the idea that all cars had become driverless and that therefore there was a police force specifically setup up to rescue riders/pedestrians from cars that went out of control. Don’t remember any hacking episodes, but as I think about it, the implication would have had to been that the AI got confused, ie bugs.
Bring on your wonderful system of self-driving cars. All it’ll take to turn the setup into utter chaos is one kamikaze-nut on a 600cc sportbike. And you haven’t even begun to figure in the clowns that’ll have to ‘play’ with the system (for whatever reason they dream up). If you haven’t previously read it, a strongly recommend Harlan Ellison’s “Repent Harlequin, Said the Ticktock Man”. What a wonderful example of playing with an orderly world.
right now drivers can adjust to cyclists, i believe if they had to set up an infrastructure to aid these computer driven cars cyclists would have to be banned from the roads in order for the roads to operate, in a perfect world something like this would be accompanied by a bicycle infrastructure that complements the new completely overhauled car infrastructure, something tells me cyclists would be forgotten in this situation