Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's sad that it doesn't handle heavy traffic well. That should be where it does best . Tesla's system, for example, is nice on the open road but absolutely wonderful in heavy traffic. Too bad about not handling full stops, too. I wonder if that's a technical limitation, or if it's just something they didn't want to allow.
Restarting from a full stop requires good pedestrian awareness. In city traffic, there might be people crossing in front of the car when it's stopped. Restart also requires getting the driver back on line. They're probably on a phone. That's why some driver input to start motion is desirable. The user interface problems for automatic driving are very tough.
Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
181–190 of 295 posts
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#182The real problem with self-driving cars is the car to human handoff. Over the long term it's incredible unlikely that humans will be any good at all at remaining aware and 'up to speed' on the current situation in the event that the car needs to give control back to the driver due to road conditions, hardware failure, or sudden situation that it cannot contend with.
I've been driving a Tesla with “Autopilot” for five months now. Since then I've probably logged about 10,000 miles of use of “Autopilot” features – lots of two-hour trips between Eastern and Western MA; a MANC road trip and some shorter road trips; and lots of 30-40 minute commutes.
Prior to getting the feature, I was concerned about handoff. I was concerned that it would be difficult to force myself to pay attention during those times that I wasn't directly responsible for the steering and acceleration.
Instead, I've found that it's easy to pay attention, but that I shift to a more strategic mode: scanning further ahead and around for hazards. It's actual easier to maintain situational awareness than when my attention is split between what's going on in the next 10s–1m, and more tactical tasks such as manually tuning my lane position, speed, and follow distance. Driving with automation feels (I told you this was subjective) safer than manual driving.
Just as in manual driving you keep your eye open for certain kinds of situations (passing a pedestrian or car on the shoulder, erratic driver ahead) and are poised to go into action, I'm especially primed to take the wheel when these risk factors add up (as well as other areas specific to this particular vehicle automation: its uncertainty about which way to steer around a small traffic island at the end of a turn; its failure to see stopped – as opposed to slow – cars just after a sharp turn or lane change; its penchant – mostly fixed now – for taking highway exits). And being ready to shift more cognitive resources over to driving is such a natural part of being a driver in any case, that I imagine this is a common experience.
When autopilot is turned off or I'm in a car that doesn't have it, it feels riskier not to have that second set of “eyes” on the road.
There still could be risk compensation: I could be driving faster because I feel safer, for example. I don't really trust anyone's attempts to figure out a priori whether I or the population of current or potential drivers of automated vehicles are subject to this; instead, I hope we see statistics soon.
And – I have a few decades practice driving non-automated vehicles, that I can pretty effortless fall back to. I've swerved around emerging accidents a few times, and handled drivers coming into my lane and other near misses; I'm decades from having to consciously think about where to put my foot to brake. I do wonder about the hand-off to people who are just now getting their drivers licenses and are going to have almost all their experience in automated vehicles is going to work.
We may be entering a (hopefully brief) pair of uncanny valleys of vehicle automation. (1) Where younger drivers don't have enough practice to deal with crises. (This has always been true of new drivers, but they'll no longer be learning at one year of experience per year; and the handoff requirement is new). And (2) the parent poster's concern, that drivers in general will zone out when the car is driving. My anecdotal evidence, above, is that this isn't yet a problem with the state of the art, but that's just a matter of whether this is the year that happens.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#183The impending dawn of the autonomous car era is the reason why I am not marching on Washington for rail investment. This is really one time where cynical cheapskate politics may hasten rapid, positive societal change.
Maybe you could squeeze a bit more capacity out of freeways by running cars at high speed at short following distances. But a lot of congestion occurs at intersections and self-driving does little to solve that.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
But do they have it in such a cheap car? I know that the feature existed for a long time in very expensive cars.
I don't think they have such a cheap car (not in the US anyways). But it is my understanding that they offer it in their lowest end models.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've got the same car and you're dead on. I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. I don't want to constantly adjust the distance between the car in front of me and my car as conditions change so I end up just managing it myself without cruise control or setting it 'classic' mode where it doesn't use the radar. That said shortly after I bought the car I d…
>I really wanted the automatic cruise control but the truth is it's a hassle in the city on the highway. Yeah, that's one thing I've noticed. Of the three options you get for following distance, even the "closest" one leaves a pretty long gap between you and the vehicle ahead of you. So people will pass you, pull into that gap, and then your car will slow down to open up a long gap between them and you. Lather, rinse…
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) But I think they have a point. The gov't has largely focused on fuel economy for decades now, while tens of thousands of people continued to die or suffer horrible injuries in cars. Sure, seat belts, crumple zones -- a good start. Unleaded? Not sure how that saves you in a crash.
> Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) Yes, in its editorials. But it's otherwise known for quality, more-or-less objective journalism, which makes this article a bit of a disappointment. Then again, I'm reminded of that Paul Graham article about working with newspapers―pretty much any topic except politics or war, according to him, is written about because someone with an interest pitched the articl…
Precisely:
http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/koch-electric-vehicles_u...
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the 2016 Accord with Sensing and occasionally the road departure mitigation system will freak out and warn you even where there is no drifting at all. At one point on my drive the pavement goes from asphalt to concrete and the lane markings lighten, and this fools it nearly every time. Overall, the whole system was worth it for the forward collision mitigation system alone. It can be a bit of a nanny but it ca…
I'll have to test it out on a different bit of highway, perhaps one of our older more weathered areas where lines are less defined to see how it really holds up. I'm fortunate in that I usually only drive off peak hours, so cruise control is usually an option. I typically only use it on long drives, but my wife is a cruise control junkie and she loves the features on the new Honda. I'd agree, the most useful bit seem…
I didn't find this to be an improvement over the right side mirror. The optics of the mirror are such that there is practically no blind spot on the right at all. Cars on the right vanish from the mirror only when they are right next to my car--at that point I will see the car through the window itself when I glance over to the mirror.
It's the left side that's more problematic. Oddly the left side mirror does not have a true blind-spot mirror. There is this left part of the mirror that has different optics but it doesn't cover the whole blind spot. So there is a point around the left passenger door when the car is completely invisible in the mirror. This could have been remedied either with a true blind spot mirror on the left (I think Ford Fusions have these) or with a camera. Instead there is neither. I might just glue a $5 blind spot mirror on there to remedy something that could have been standard equipment.
Sometimes they made strange choices with this car.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free-market ideology if you ask me. The first sentence suggests the hapless government wants to spent $4 billion on research for something you you can have today for $20K. A little later it mentions Washington's "time and billions" spent on fuel-efficiency instead of "saving lives". The government has also funded electric-car research and encouraged Detroit to build them. Contrasting self-driving with electric drive…
Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) But I think they have a point. The gov't has largely focused on fuel economy for decades now, while tens of thousands of people continued to die or suffer horrible injuries in cars. Sure, seat belts, crumple zones -- a good start. Unleaded? Not sure how that saves you in a crash.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) But I think they have a point. The gov't has largely focused on fuel economy for decades now, while tens of thousands of people continued to die or suffer horrible injuries in cars. Sure, seat belts, crumple zones -- a good start. Unleaded? Not sure how that saves you in a crash.
> Yes, the WSJ is known for its free-market ideology :) Yes, in its editorials. But it's otherwise known for quality, more-or-less objective journalism, which makes this article a bit of a disappointment. Then again, I'm reminded of that Paul Graham article about working with newspapers―pretty much any topic except politics or war, according to him, is written about because someone with an interest pitched the articl…
Sorry but no. Ever since Murdoch took over and replaced the editors the quality has noticeably dropped with a lot more inherent bias even in the non-editorial content.
And within the editorial section the change is pretty clear. It's shifted from being centrist to at times being on the hard right.
Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was stupid for this article to start talking about the $4 billion Obama has talked about for research. This article is about features and not a real self driving car. If anything the features make this car very dangerous in the hands of people concerned with their phones and tablets and kind of proves the need for investments like the $4 billion. To me it sounds like the free market is about to make the road damn…
In cases like these, if a collision occurs, who is at fault? Presumably it is the "driver", especially in this case, right? But if/when this gets into the court system, when do people start going after the "self-driving" manufacturers, who have much, much deeper pockets than your average car owner.
For something that is a demonstrable way of saving huge numbers of lives, but still carries some risk, using the model of the vaccination side effect fund seems like a good one to me.