ChiefsPlanet
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Science Driverless cars could change everything (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=285182)

HemiEd 08-21-2023 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17066542)
Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.
Well said

Balto 08-21-2023 02:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17066542)
Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.
It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.

Chief Pagan 08-21-2023 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17066542)
Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.
Well, driverless cars carrying passengers are an actual thing in SF without a human driver ready to take over.

:hmmm:

I guess you can argue they shouldn't be. Or it's not ready to be deployed by the millions.

I do think some of it will be legal and social. If the standard was just being demonstrably safer than humans it would be one thing, but the standard will be higher than that.

And than as the previously shown article pointed out, they still do occasionally have what might be loosely called common sense problems. Like the best way to navigate construction zones or getting out of the way of emergency vehicles in congested urban environments.

Otter 08-21-2023 02:28 PM
Just wait until I hack into that matrix and start playing GTA with RainMan on his way to the office.

DaFace 08-21-2023 02:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balto (Post 17066595)
It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.
And we probably need to start designing roads with driverless in mind. Relying on visual cues gets...messy.

-King- 08-21-2023 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17066464)
Instead of bumping this old thread, I actually considered starting a new one in D.C. ROFL
It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.

Hog's Gone Fishin 08-21-2023 02:53 PM
On a positive note, I would assume that not a single driverless car has received a DUI.

HemiEd 08-21-2023 04:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 17066597)
Well, driverless cars carrying passengers are an actual thing in SF without a human driver ready to take over.

:hmmm:

I guess you can argue they shouldn't be. Or it's not ready to be deployed by the millions.

I do think some of it will be legal and social. If the standard was just being demonstrably safer than humans it would be one thing, but the standard will be higher than that.

And than as the previously shown article pointed out, they still do occasionally have what might be loosely called common sense problems. Like the best way to navigate construction zones or getting out of the way of emergency vehicles in congested urban environments.
Did you read post 56 and the article about that very thing. It is current.

HemiEd 08-21-2023 04:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by -King- (Post 17066655)
It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.
If you can't see how it could be, that is on you. LMAO

Chief Pagan 08-21-2023 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17066642)
And we probably need to start designing roads with driverless in mind. Relying on visual cues gets...messy.
Well sure, if we had special roads that only had driverless cars and were specifically designed for driverless cars.

And bikes and pedestrians were either prohibited, or were at least required to carry transmitters...

That would make it an awful lot easier.

But I don't think it's viable to wait until for that to happen.

I've actually wondered if Japan or South Korea might not get driverless cars on a large scale before the US just because they have a more business friendly environment.

BWillie 08-21-2023 07:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17066792)
If you can't see how it could be, that is on you. LMAO
It SHOULDN'T be a political issue. If the data shows it saves lives and reduces accidents then we should further investigate its usage and expand r & d of this industry.

Megatron96 08-21-2023 07:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17066542)
Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.


Lol, I would never buy/ride in a car without human controls; steering wheel, brake/gas pedals. Not a chance in hell.

chiefzilla1501 08-21-2023 07:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balto (Post 17066595)
It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.
Let’s not forget that not all driverless is intended for regular people driving cars. I imagine first it will be used for commercial purposes. Then for non traditional transportation (ie low speed loops). I could also see it being a useful resource in areas where people don’t have many cars. Would imagine private passenger cars are one of the last dominoes to fall. And man, Uber or Lyft would do this in a heartbeat. And even still, I think we’re a very very long way away from any significant adoption of it

HemiEd 08-21-2023 07:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067128)
It SHOULDN'T be a political issue. If the data shows it saves lives and reduces accidents then we should further investigate its usage and expand r & d of this industry.
Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.

Chief Pagan 08-21-2023 08:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megatron96 (Post 17067134)
Lol, I would never buy/ride in a car without human controls; steering wheel, brake/gas pedals. Not a chance in hell.
Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:

Chief Pagan 08-21-2023 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17067190)
Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.
There is nothing in post 56 about whether driverless cars have a higher or lower accident rate than human drivers.

They have some 'sillier' accidents, but that doesn't mean more in the big picture.

And not all the companies are the same. My understanding is that Google has a much better track record than some of the other companies.

Megatron96 08-21-2023 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 17067241)
Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:

Lol, never. Doesn't matter, as it's not even legal to do so in the US. It is legal in EUR, and of course they've already had a few fatal crashes using that technology. Geniouses that they are.



Would you ride in a commercial airplane that didn't have pilots? No cockpit either, so even if someone on the plane was a pilot, he couldn't go up and take the controls if something went wrong?

Chief Pagan 08-21-2023 08:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megatron96 (Post 17067248)
Lol, never. Doesn't matter, as it's not even legal to do so in the US. It is legal in EUR, and of course they've already had a few fatal crashes using that technology. Geniouses that they are.



Would you ride in a commercial airplane that didn't have pilots? No cockpit either, so even if someone on the plane was a pilot, he couldn't go up and take the controls if something went wrong?
In bad weather, almost zero visibility, it doesn't matter much if there is a pilot or not.

Pilots give people warm fuzzy feelings and I'm sure there will be a couple in the cockpit trying to stay awake for a few more years as the plane essentially does everything for them.

Same thing with a lot of medical surgery in the not too distant future I would expect.

BWillie 08-21-2023 09:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17067190)
Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.
Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

Megatron96 08-21-2023 09:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 17067286)
In bad weather, almost zero visibility, it doesn't matter much if there is a pilot or not.

Pilots give people warm fuzzy feelings and I'm sure there will be a couple in the cockpit trying to stay awake for a few more years as the plane essentially does everything for them.

Same thing with a lot of medical surgery in the not too distant future I would expect.


Lol, I guess you've never flown an airplane in bad weather. We have these things called instruments. Shockingly, you can actually fly an airplane in zero visibility conditions anywhere in the world.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 04:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067304)
Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.
I actually enjoy driving and being in control. Someone not enjoying driving is kind of foreign to me but obviously there are those. My wife hasn't driven in 9 years and we have four vehicles, lol. I like the freedom of knowing I can go when and where I choose.

I can picture it now, electric self driving cars, where you use your implanted body chip to access, controlled by a central government dispatch. The fee being automatically deducted from your account. No cash please.


Have you ever raced? It is a rush like no other in my opinion.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 05:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 17067247)
There is nothing in post 56 about whether driverless cars have a higher or lower accident rate than human drivers.

They have some 'sillier' accidents, but that doesn't mean more in the big picture.

And not all the companies are the same. My understanding is that Google has a much better track record than some of the other companies.
Quite obviously the percentage of driverless cars compared to standard ones is very small.
But even in this small sample size, the company has already decided to cut it's fleet in half.
Just maybe there is more to it than we are being made aware of?

HemiEd 08-22-2023 06:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067304)
Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.
The more I think about it, I am spoiled to living out here off the grid. We have to go to Springfield today and the idiot drivers/traffic always makes me want to go postal.

Please, make them all get driverless cars!:thumb:

Katipan 08-22-2023 06:25 AM
People in L.A. will keep you in your lane out of spite. (Not me, I can drive) Good luck nice polite driverless blinker.

Gravedigger 08-22-2023 07:12 AM
It's not a political issue, it's entirely financial. Big oil won't let it happen, not anytime soon. The politics is just theater, like nobody gives a shit about your gas stove Doris. I personally look at a movie like Minority Report and think that would be a perfect scenario to have. Not the eye scanning thing, but the fact that you could just get in a car and it get you to work safely, without traffic jams, stupid drivers, dealing with a busy gas station, and having to take long stops at traffic lights, I'd be down for it. You're never going to hit zero sum, and the process to get to that though is going to be rough.

DrunkBassGuitar 08-22-2023 07:16 AM
the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.

DrunkBassGuitar 08-22-2023 07:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 10761412)
Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.
  • Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
  • People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
  • Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
  • Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
  • Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
  • The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.
yeah but like a bus or a train can already do all of those things

BWillie 08-22-2023 07:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkBassGuitar (Post 17067512)
the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.
Wear and tear to roads from leaking oil, gasoline and brake fluid is probably even worse. Its not like a electric sedan is as big of a difference than a car to a semi or even close.

Alos shitty people and bad drivers also cause traffic jam. A driverless society (which I acknowledge will not happen in my lifetime) you would have yo think lower traffic by a ton just due to efficiency.

LoneWolf 08-22-2023 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067304)
Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.
JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?

DaFace 08-22-2023 08:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneWolf (Post 17067542)
JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?
I mean, I can take a nap if I'm not driving. And I'm a fan of naps more than I am a fan of staring at the car in front of me.

BWillie 08-22-2023 08:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneWolf (Post 17067542)
JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?
Its mental fatigue not physical. Notice I said long trips. If you dont think you get mental fatigue the longer you drive you are kidding yourself.

Rain Man 08-22-2023 08:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 10761412)
Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.
  • Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
  • People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
  • Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
  • Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
  • Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
  • The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.
Excellent point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkBassGuitar (Post 17067521)
yeah but like a bus or a train can already do all of those things
Excellent point.


I think the key is to get irrational humans to drive less, regardless of how that happens.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067304)
Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.
Excellent point.

Some people enjoy driving, and that's great. I figure there'll always be niches where a human driver is needed.

But I'm right there with you on not enjoying driving. It's a big waste of time. There are times when I'm out in some huge rural area where it's kind of peaceful, but most of my driving is not out in a rural utopia. And while the scenery can be nice, I'd rather see the scenery from a train where I'm not needing to watch the road.

If you think about the number of hours Americans spend driving every year, how many great novels are going unwritten? How many kids' treehouses are going unbuilt? How many lonely housewives are being left unsatisfied? There are a million better ways that that billion hours could be used.

loochy 08-22-2023 09:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17067484)
The more I think about it, I am spoiled to living out here off the grid. We have to go to Springfield today and the idiot drivers/traffic always makes me want to go postal.

Please, make them all get driverless cars!:thumb:
Lol...the sprawling metropolis of Springfield and its miles of bumper to bumper traffic is sure to send fear through even the most seasoned of drivers.

LoneWolf 08-22-2023 09:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 17067621)
I mean, I can take a nap if I'm not driving. And I'm a fan of naps more than I am a fan of staring at the car in front of me.
I don't believe you can take a nap if you are on auto pilot. You have to keep your eyes forward and on the road or the vehicle gives you a warning.

If you're on auto pilot, you are basically driving without moving your arms or making all the "exhausting" decisions like "do I stop at this stop sign", "can I make this right turn on a red light", and "do I have enough time to pass this jackass in front of me before my exit."

LoneWolf 08-22-2023 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067630)
Its mental fatigue not physical. Notice I said long trips. If you dont think you get mental fatigue the longer you drive you are kidding yourself.
It's not mental fatigue from driving. It's mental fatigue from doing anything for a long period of time. If you are sitting in the drivers seat staring out the window for hours on end, you are going to be mentally fatigued as long as you are awake. At least driving gives you something to keep you occupied.

Otter 08-22-2023 10:18 AM
I lean more towards getting unnecessary drivers off the road through remote work, delivery services, and walking while implementing driver less vehicles as a compliment to the primary solution mentioned above.

There are WAYYYY too many people who just suck at driving that are placing others in danger for no good reason.


BTW: Get off your cell phone. If you were that important that you need 24/7 connectivity you wouldn't be driving.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 10:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by loochy (Post 17067650)
Lol...the sprawling metropolis of Springfield and its miles of bumper to bumper traffic is sure to send fear through even the most seasoned of drivers.
Exactly!:)
I lived in Chicagoland for 18 years and there is no way I could handle that now., Used to travel to NY, LA, Boston etc. by car on business.

But, for the past 9 years, we have lived where a car going by is an event you look up and notice. o:-)

So going to Springfield, is a dramatic change for this old man. Last month at 2:30 in the afternoon I was wondering why everyone in Springfield was out driving instead of working. :cuss:

Have great day!

HemiEd 08-22-2023 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otter (Post 17067807)
I lean more towards getting unnecessary drivers off the road through remote work, delivery services, and walking while implementing driver less vehicles as a compliment to the primary solution mentioned above.

There are WAYYYY too many people who just suck at driving that are placing others in danger for no good reason.


BTW: Get off your cell phone. If you were that important that you need 24/7 connectivity you wouldn't be driving.
Bingo!

On a recent trip we were taking to Indianapolis, a young lady in a mini van wasn't even hiding the fact she was texting/using her phone for many miles on I-44. She was actually holding it up near the rear view mirror like she was facetiming someone doing 75mph.

They should make a device, similar to those breathalyzer interlocks to keep the driver off of their phones.

Rain Man 08-22-2023 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17067827)
Exactly!:)
I lived in Chicagoland for 18 years and there is no way I could handle that now., Used to travel to NY, LA, Boston etc. by car on business.

But, for the past 9 years, we have lived where a car going by is an event you look up and notice. o:-)

So going to Springfield, is a dramatic change for this old man. Last month at 2:30 in the afternoon I was wondering why everyone in Springfield was out driving instead of working. :cuss:

Have great day!
I recognize that I'm not as good a driver as I used to be, too. I'm still fine, and I've never been at fault in an accident, but I can tell that my skills are declining over time. This is a modern paranoia based on late-night ambulance chaser ads, and I recognize that I'm still a fine driver, but I don't want to at some point get in a crash and get sued because I didn't notice a stop light or something.

Lzen 08-22-2023 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by -King- (Post 17066655)
It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.
There are political factors in many things; most things, actually. There are gray areas when it comes to things like this. That's why sometimes I hate that we have to post certain things in DC. Sometimes, I would like a good, vibrant discussion with many different viewpoints. But I know that certain subjects will get relegated to DC no matter what. :(

Lzen 08-22-2023 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog's Gone Fishin (Post 17066678)
On a positive note, I would assume that not a single driverless car has received a DUI.
All joking aside, that is probably one of the main selling points on something like this. But I would argue that distractions such as cell phones present a much bigger danger.

Lzen 08-22-2023 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan (Post 17067241)
Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:
Apples and oranges.

Lzen 08-22-2023 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkBassGuitar (Post 17067512)
the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.
I get your point about the number of cars being the same but I think you're missing one element. Driverless cars would be able to make traffic flow much more smoothly. No idiots who hold up traffic because they don't know how to hit the gas to get up to the flow of traffic. Or no idiots who are afraid to enter the roundabout.

Now, this is all assuming that the software is good and works well. My fear is that there are bugs in the software or that they are able to be hacked. Just think of the havoc one could wreak if all cars were driverless and they could be hacked. That's scary.

Lzen 08-22-2023 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17067539)
Wear and tear to roads from leaking oil, gasoline and brake fluid is probably even worse. Its not like a electric sedan is as big of a difference than a car to a semi or even close.

Alos shitty people and bad drivers also cause traffic jam. A driverless society (which I acknowledge will not happen in my lifetime) you would have yo think lower traffic by a ton just due to efficiency.
Uhhh......nope. The wear and tear on the roads (at least here in the midwest) has A LOT to do with salt on the roads in the winter.

Dante84 08-22-2023 01:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lzen (Post 17068032)
All joking aside, that is probably one of the main selling points on something like this. But I would argue that distractions such as cell phones present a much bigger danger.
Human error in general is the cause of 90%+ of car accidents.

Take the human out of the equation, and accidents go down substantially.

Dante84 08-22-2023 01:04 PM
Check out Zoox.

Rain Man 08-22-2023 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante84 (Post 17068102)
Check out Zoox.
I want one of those. That's going to be my next car if they come available.

Lzen 08-22-2023 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante84 (Post 17068096)
Human error in general is the cause of 90%+ of car accidents.

Take the human out of the equation, and accidents go down substantially.
Oh, I know that. I regularly see articles of crashes around the state of Kansas. One thing that stands out is how often someone goes off the road and then overcorrects which in turn causes them to lose control and crash.

I'm open to driverless cars. I really like the idea when it comes to all the idiots on the road these days. Though for me personally, I will probably stick to driving myself for now. ;)

SithCeNtZ 08-22-2023 01:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lzen (Post 17068067)
Now, this is all assuming that the software is good and works well. My fear is that there are bugs in the software or that they are able to be hacked. Just think of the havoc one could wreak if all cars were driverless and they could be hacked. That's scary.
Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17067983)
I recognize that I'm not as good a driver as I used to be, too. I'm still fine, and I've never been at fault in an accident, but I can tell that my skills are declining over time. This is a modern paranoia based on late-night ambulance chaser ads, and I recognize that I'm still a fine driver, but I don't want to at some point get in a crash and get sued because I didn't notice a stop light or something.
Sounds like you are on it and I understand your concern. Have you started driving slower? Do you carry an extra umbrella rider for those unforseen possiblities? I have been for years and the peace of mind seems worth it.

Funny thing, when driving our Prius, it just doesn't have the power to fly up the hills like a v8 car and I am not intentionally driving 5mph under the speed limit when ascending the hills, but the guys in their lifted F250 trucks do get a little impatient, to put it mildly. The other three are all v8s and it's never an issue.

Rain Man 08-22-2023 04:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17068470)
Sounds like you are on it and I understand your concern. Have you started driving slower? Do you carry an extra umbrella rider for those unforseen possiblities? I have been for years and the peace of mind seems worth it.

Funny thing, when driving our Prius, it just doesn't have the power to fly up the hills like a v8 car and I am not intentionally driving 5mph under the speed limit when ascending the hills, but the guys in their lifted F250 trucks do get a little impatient, to put it mildly. The other three are all v8s and it's never an issue.
I actually just don't drive much any more, other than a big annual business trip. But I kind of think about it now and try to be more attentive when I do drive.

I've got an umbrella policy on my homeowner's insurance. Would that cover a driving claim? I hadn't thought about it before, but it seems like it would.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17068480)
I actually just don't drive much any more, other than a big annual business trip. But I kind of think about it now and try to be more attentive when I do drive.

I've got an umbrella policy on my homeowner's insurance. Would that cover a driving claim? I hadn't thought about it before, but it seems like it would.
I am fairly confident that it covers you, or at least I hope it does, under any circumstance you may be involved in.
I asked that very question to my agent and he told me ours did.
Might be worth a phone call?

HemiEd 08-22-2023 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SithCeNtZ (Post 17068121)
Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty certain these driverless cars are networked (blue toothed, internet, whatever you want to call it), especially the cab company referenced in post 56 from San Francisco. I can not imagine any possibility of them turning a fleet of driverless cars loose without a central dispatch control.

Can you?

However, your normal consumer owned car, has a self contained, non networked computer. You would need to plug into it to hack it, similar to the service code reader.

Thus, the possibility of hacking driverless cars would be a very real possibility.

Rain Man 08-22-2023 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17068493)
I am fairly confident that it covers you, or at least I hope it does, under any circumstance you may be involved in.
I asked that very question to my agent and he told me ours did.
Might be worth a phone call?
I bet it is. As I think about it, the umbrella policy isn't part of my homeowner coverage. It's a separate thing that's just billed on the same invoice each year.

|Zach| 08-22-2023 05:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkBassGuitar (Post 17067512)
to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.
It really is a shame that every single civic and city planning decision is made with cars as the first priority. Great cities plagued by surface parking lot after surface parking lot.

|Zach| 08-22-2023 05:41 PM
Not having to drive would be a dream. Literally life changing.

I have come to dislike it in the past 5 or so years. So many chances for bad and annoying things to happen that can cause people to get hurt or a ton of money come out of my pocket.

I would not need to drive a whole lot of my work commute was not 30-45 mins one day I can get away with most stuff being walkable or public transit adjacent during stretches off of days.

jdubya 08-22-2023 07:29 PM
Driverless car honked at my son while he was crossing the street in SF in a crosswalk.

3 driverless cars were stalled and blocking 2 of 4 lanes in the middle of SF a few weeks ago causing tons of havoc

Chief Pagan 08-22-2023 07:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17068499)
Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty certain these driverless cars are networked (blue toothed, internet, whatever you want to call it), especially the cab company referenced in post 56 from San Francisco. I can not imagine any possibility of them turning a fleet of driverless cars loose without a central dispatch control.

Can you?

However, your normal consumer owned car, has a self contained, non networked computer. You would need to plug into it to hack it, similar to the service code reader.

Thus, the possibility of hacking driverless cars would be a very real possibility.
I generally think that some point in the future driverless cars will be an improvement over human drivers. But yes, if there are millions of Waymo Google cars or Uber driverless cars or any on demand driverless car service...

Yes, the network being hacked is one of those unlikely, but high risk scenarios that need to be taken seriously.

Having millions of cars being ordered to crash simultaneously is the Hollywood movie scenario.

But even just a situation where a hack shuts down tens of millions of cars that commuters count on every day would be serious.

The idea that any network that is online is 100 percent secure is laughable.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17068503)
I bet it is. As I think about it, the umbrella policy isn't part of my homeowner coverage. It's a separate thing that's just billed on the same invoice each year.
Excellent!:thumb:

Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 17068527)
Not having to drive would be a dream. Literally life changing.

I have come to dislike it in the past 5 or so years. So many chances for bad and annoying things to happen that can cause people to get hurt or a ton of money come out of my pocket.

I would not need to drive a whole lot of my work commute was not 30-45 mins one day I can get away with most stuff being walkable or public transit adjacent during stretches off of days.
Up in the Chicago suberb I lived in for 18 years, I would ride my bicycle when the weather permitted, then just wheel it right into my office. It was kind of nice and only a little over a half a mile so I wouldn't get all sweaty on the way.

Then there is the other extreme like China, if I remember correctly, where you basically live at the factory, almost like a prison.

I guess it is the choice you make on where you want to live.

HemiEd 08-22-2023 07:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdubya (Post 17068615)
Driverless car honked at my son while he was crossing the street in SF in a crosswalk.

3 driverless cars were stalled and blocking 2 of 4 lanes in the middle of SF a few weeks ago causing tons of havoc
That has gotta be kind of surreal experiencing that. Had he seen one before?

Have you?

Rain Man 08-22-2023 07:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17068625)
That has gotta be kind of surreal experiencing that. Had he seen one before?

Have you?
I haven't seen a driverless car on the road yet, or a person relaxing with an autopilot. Maybe I've been near them and haven't noticed.

philfree 08-22-2023 09:28 PM
I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.

|Zach| 08-22-2023 09:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by philfree (Post 17068720)
I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.
You have an animated gif with a busty female who has the face of a child in your signature. Nobody is taking man lessons from you.

Chief Pagan 08-22-2023 09:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by philfree (Post 17068720)
I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.
I work from home, but even so...

Spend enough time on California highways where 70 mph traffic is 4 or more lanes wide, only a couple of car lengths apart, and then moments later, you're stuck in grid lock.

Yes, I'd rather just be on my phone/tablet than behind the wheel.

philfree 08-22-2023 10:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by |Zach| (Post 17068727)
You have an animated gif with a busty female who has the face of a child in your signature. Nobody is taking man lessons from you.
That gif is awesome and It's an image of my wife. Blond, green eyes and boobs!

Now **** off you big fat poosy!

|Zach| 08-22-2023 10:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by philfree (Post 17068741)
That gif is awesome and It's an image of my wife. Blond, green eyes and boobs!

Now **** off you big fat poosy!
<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/HP7mtfNa1E4CEqNbNL" width="480" height="400" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe>

HemiEd 08-23-2023 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17068640)
I haven't seen a driverless car on the road yet, or a person relaxing with an autopilot. Maybe I've been near them and haven't noticed.
Me neither, I would imagine my reaction would be "what the ****?!"

mr. tegu 08-23-2023 08:20 AM
Instead of driverless cars what we need to invest in is hover cars. That would solve basically every problem. No more wear and tear on infrastructure and accidents would no longer be a big problem. A couple of hover cars hitting each other would just cause a reaction where each bounces or spins in some direction with no real damage besides maybe some dents.

Lzen 08-23-2023 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SithCeNtZ (Post 17068121)
Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.
The comparison you used is not exactly correct. They are making cars now that they can use GPS to track you. Is this a way to hack? Is there another way for someone to hack in and gain control? I don't know but maybe. Your argument still has not convinced me. But I do agree that more driverless cars probably means fewer crashes because some idiot thought their phone was more important than, you know, actually paying attention to the road.

Teak 08-23-2023 02:02 PM
I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.

BWillie 08-23-2023 02:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by philfree (Post 17068720)
I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.
Being a good driver is all about having a big dick.

Rain Man 08-23-2023 02:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teak (Post 17069569)
I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.
Are you comfortable with the self-driving on the highway? Or do you feel like you have to be just as alert as if you're driving? Can you read a book?

I've never driven or been a passenger in a car that does this stuff. I'm curious about how I would adjust.

BWillie 08-23-2023 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 17069623)
Are you comfortable with the self-driving on the highway? Or do you feel like you have to be just as alert as if you're driving? Can you read a book?

I've never driven or been a passenger in a car that does this stuff. I'm curious about how I would adjust.
I do NOT have FSD and only have AP2. I read, fiddle with my phone. There is a little hack I do so I dont get the nag but as long as its an interstate with lines (all interstates have good lines, some sketchy highways dont) and no construction I can dick off quite a bit. You can easily tell after a while what roads will give it trouble and its obvious when the car wants you to take over.

loochy 08-23-2023 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teak (Post 17069569)
I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.

So is it trustworthy enough to sit back and really enjoy some road head instead of trying to focus on not crashing?

Rain Man 08-23-2023 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17069632)
I do NOT have FSD and only have AP2. I read, fiddle with my phone. There is a little hack I do so I dont get the nag but as long as its an interstate with lines (all interstates have good lines, some sketchy highways dont) and no construction I can dick off quite a bit. You can easily tell after a while what roads will give it trouble and its obvious when the car wants you to take over.
Interesting.

My dream is to just get in the car and read a book and eat a sandwich and look dreamily out the window. It seems like maybe we're not quite there yet.

Teak 08-23-2023 02:50 PM
To be fair I've seen head being given for years before Auto Pilot.
I don't try and avoid having to answer to the need to let AP know I am there. But I do get to see a lot more scenery.

Katipan 08-24-2023 06:19 AM
Is it really road head if there's no danger of crashing? You're just in your mobile lazy boy.

HemiEd 08-24-2023 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teak (Post 17069569)
I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.
Interesting post. Sounds like it still needs human supervision or at least an owner/rider that is paying attention.

philfree 08-24-2023 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17069584)
Being a good driver is all about having a big dick.
Same goes for being a good putter.

Teak 08-24-2023 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HemiEd (Post 17070777)
Interesting post. Sounds like it still needs human supervision or at least an owner/rider that is paying attention.
Let's take one at a time. The skewed intersections sees FSD slow to make a left turn even with no on coming traffic. It fiddles looking for the entry onto the new road more so if the intersection has islands or acute angle. It finally gets these right but if you have traffic behind you they may see your hesitant motions as someone who needs a horn to encourage getting it done. One needs a "new driver" bumper sticker to explain this.

The failure to distinguish highway exits say into churches or malls with turn lanes would be helped greatly if mandated painted arrows on the road very early in the lane. I think with self driving cars you need mandates on highly visible lane markings on the roads to guide decisions.

Emergency flashing should be a case with the car expecting some kind of human intervention.

Except for the emergency vehicle incidents, in town these problems almost disappear.

Is it still early, yes but the success rate will increase exponentially with practice. You can't get rid of all accidents but you will see lower incidents and of lessor severity than with humans well within 2 years.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:42 AM.
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.