Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 295 posts

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#251

Post by gambiting »

ghaff wrote: post #160
JonFish85 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Especially if people start arguing that the manufacturers are effectively going "pay full attention at all times. Nudge. Nudge. Wink. Wink." knowing that people routinely don't pay attention when automated systems like these are used.

There are places in the world(I saw it in Netherlands) where you have a "cruise control forbidden" signs. Yes, even the dumb cruise control that only holds a set speed. I saw those signs near construction zones and such, I guess the idea is that people should pay 100% attention in there.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#252

Post by cgriswald »

elif wrote: post #204
kazinator wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the competitive reality of driving in congested, urban areas. Drivers who cut in can save a lot of time over the course of a commute. They disrupt traffic flows and delay everyone else. So efficient traffic flows have to be defended. > Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; Yes, and some drivers like, for instance, to pass around 25 other cars who are making the same…

The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.

> in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers)

Mergers must yield to drivers already in the roadway. The only obligation those on the roadway have is to not speed up or slow down to prevent the merge.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#253

Post by cgriswald »

elif wrote: post #197
superuser2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fucking ridiculous. Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; why do they all actively attempt to thwart other drivers from getting into the lanes they need?

I don't think it's about time or efficiency at all. I think it has to do with perceived fairness and our self-righteous culture. The faster-moving disappearing lane gets an inherent advantage, which could have been renounced by merging too early. People feel cheated. The problem is that, objectively, people merging all over the place creates more traffic than a uniform zipper merge so we all suffer. In reality, the l…

Relevant code: http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2010/title-40/chapter-6/...

"The driver of a vehicle about to enter or cross a roadway from any place other than another roadway shall yield the right of way to all vehicles approaching on the roadway to be entered or crossed."

My search suggested highway on ramps are "other than another roadway."

Also see: http://www.eregulations.com/georgia/driver/laws-governing-ri...

"If you are about to enter or cross a highway from an alley, private road or highway, you must stop and yield the right-of-way to all other pedestrians and vehicles already traveling on the roadway or sidewalk you are entering or crossing;"

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#254

Post by elif »

cgriswald wrote: post #252
elif wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.

> in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) Mergers must yield to drivers already in the roadway. The only obligation those on the roadway have is to not speed up or slow down to prevent the merge.

You're right. I had misread the law.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#255

Post by Nutmog »

TrevorJ wrote: post #77
mchahn wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and am currently in the middle of a 360. You have no faith in AI. The car will always be better at driving than the human. It would be much better at handling a 360 than a human ever could. Actually humans are very bad at handling 360s unless you are a pro.

>The car will always be better at driving than the human. I don't think this is true yet. We can interpret the incoming data incredibly well in ways the machine vision can't yet match. This is absolutely vital for driving. The difference between an empty trash bag in the road and a toddler in the road is a matter of vital importance, and correctly identifying the difference matters a lot. Humans area actually capable…

I wouldn't say the difference matters a lot. Instead humans and computers would just have different thresholds for when to stop and when to run over something. If a computer is less accurate at distinguishing them, then it'll simply err on the side of caution more often than a human. You would find there are more inconvenient stops, not that more more babies get killed.

I'm sure I've stopped for empty trash bags before because I wasn't sure if they contained something solid. That doesn't mean I failed as a driver. Everything went fine. Same if it's a computer but it might stop more often than a human.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#256

Post by elif »

kazinator wrote: post #211
elif wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. You are effectively using aggressive driving (a crime) in order to circumvent actual laws (yield to mergers) and to self-righteously defend the worldview that you have constructed in order to provide a superficially logically consistent explanation for your emotional frustration about losing out.

> traffic engineers disagree with your assessment of efficiency. Do they? > You are effectively using aggressive driving Not me, personally. (I ride a bicycle and use transit from time to time, and the occasional rental car on weekends and holidays: out of the vicious rush-hour traffic.) Fact is, if you throw a blinker, there will be those drivers who will reduce gaps and not let you in. Usually not in merge situatio…

I'm not sure I'm understanding your position very well. Are you saying that people exiting the slow lanes to enter the "moving lane" constitutes a hazard, and by punishing those actors by not letting them in, you are minimizing that hazard? If so, i'm inclined to agree philosophically.

However, I don't believe anyone should impose their philosophy with 2 tons of steel.

RE: traffic science, here are some references http://www.amazon.com/Traffic-Drive-What-Says-About/dp/03072... http://www.edmunds.com/driving-tips/car-merging-psychology-d...

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#257

Post by tizzdogg »

plg wrote: post #215
ben1040 wrote: post #27

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you…

To me this sounds horribly unsafe. You are lulled into this state where you don't have to pay attention to steering UNLESS you have to pay attention to steering, and you will find this out suddenly. So if you always have to pay attention, even when the system is active, then what exactly is the point of the system in the first place? Wouldn't it be safer to always pay attention? I guess this is an empirical question.…

I was once in an accident caused by the driver using cruise control. My driver had his feet relaxed and off the pedals when a car swerved in front of us.. he reacted by going to hit the brakes and because his feet were not in a position where he knew the relative position of the pedals, he hit the accelerator instead of the brake. We swerved off the highway down an embankment at 75-80mph. We were all very lucky to be relatively uninjured, but to this day I refuse to touch cruise control or any other automated driving features. I don't know if modern adaptive cruise control and collision avoidance would have helped in my case, but I really, really don't trust a driver who is relaxed and not being constantly vigilant.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#258

Post by SixSigma »

eru wrote: post #212
jklowden wrote: post #94

Earlier 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…

Oh, and efficiency saves lives in and off itself. (One possible path, using less oil for cars, we can use more oil instead of coal in other applications. Thus mining less coal. Coal mines are crazy dangerous per Joule mined comparatively.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used but the rate of consumption of that resource rises because of increasing demand.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#259

Post by jhulla »

SixSigma wrote: post #258
eru wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, and efficiency saves lives in and off itself. (One possible path, using less oil for cars, we can use more oil instead of coal in other applications. Thus mining less coal. Coal mines are crazy dangerous per Joule mined comparatively.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used but the rate of consumption of that resource rises because of increasing demand.

The only solution out of this paradox with respect to carbon fuels is taxation. Unfortunately, as much as we'd like, a global carbon tax regime is not practical, nor enforceable. So we're stuck.

Re: Honda's $20k Civic LX now offers self-driving capability for highway use

#260

Post by Domenic_S »

ma2rten wrote: post #193
ben1040 wrote: post #27

This looks like the "Sensing" feature that Honda has implemented on some of their other vehicles. I just bought a 2016 Accord that does the same thing -- there's a camera mounted on the windshield, another camera in the front grille, and a radar sensor on the front bumper. Calling it "self-driving" is kind of a misnomer and I think the article kind of blows it out of proportion. It will track the car in front of you…

I have the 2016 Honda Civic LX with Sensing. It doesn't require me to keep my hands on wheel. However, it keeps losing the lane, requiring you to steer manually. Maybe the lane markings are not clear enough here in Los Angeles. Also, the adaptive cruise control often brakes abruptly, even making the front collision warning system go off. I also don't know if it activates the brake lights when it brakes (since traditi…

> (since traditional cruse controls don't)

of course they do, where are you getting that?

Post reply on HN