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

A more realistic route to autonomous driving

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 91 posts

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#21

Post by tim333 »

al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

>the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving

There are plenty of air traffic regulations to deal with

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#22

Post by tim333 »

friendly_chap wrote: post #10
al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

Given that we are probably heading into an economy where energy will get more and more expensive (at least temporarily, due to a potential oil crunch coming), not sure how flying will be an economical way of transport.

Solar/wind are getting cheaper, battery powered flying is starting to be a thing like the existing Alpha Electro https://electrek.co/2018/04/27/all-electric-trainer-plane-ai... and proposed airliners https://www.dezeen.com/2017/09/28/easyjet-will-fly-electric-...

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#23

Post by tim333 »

carapace wrote: post #15

What I want is a self-driving golf cart that can take my mother to the doctor and back. It doesn't have to go fast. I make this point every time I can: kinetic energy is the killer and it goes up with the square of velocity. Half-speed is quarter-deadly. A golf cart-like machine, limited to a maximum speed not much faster than walking, light-weight, and festooned inside and out with airbags (and other anti-collision/…

You'd have the issue of the golf cart blocking the traffic on the way to the docs and possibly getting hit by cars / trucks.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#24

Post by slfnflctd »

deathhand wrote: post #14
samsonradu wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate? Why might a oil crunch be coming?

Not parent but https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

They've been talking about peak oil since the late 1950s, and just about every single prediction about it has been wrong. I got caught up in the hype about it 5-10 years ago, and it took a while before I realized it was mostly a garden variety doomsday cult. [Yes there is such a thing as peak oil, and we may have even already hit it, but it's not going to destroy civilization as some have loudly declared.]

Gasoline consumption is not going up the way it used to, and there apparently is a whole lot more oil than a lot of people thought-- I'm guessing due to a combination of countries not providing correct numbers (it's a national security issue after all), new oilfield discoveries and new extraction techniques. Add in more efficient vehicles and alternative energy sources, and you quickly realize the worst that's going to happen is some gradually increased prices for products & services most closely tied to the current cost of fuel.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#25

Post by konschubert »

paulsutter wrote: post #20
al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

Disrupted yes but by tunnels. Tunnels will be vastly better than flying cars. Much faster, electric powered, and safer. City centers will be more more pleasant and quiet when surface traffic is all pedestrian. The manufacturing learning curve has been the path to lower costs through mass production and tunnels will be no exception. “Without tunnels we’ll be in traffic hell forever” -Elon Musk

You mean Subways?

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#26

Post by falcolas »

mannykannot wrote: post #18
carapace wrote: post #15

What I want is a self-driving golf cart that can take my mother to the doctor and back. It doesn't have to go fast. I make this point every time I can: kinetic energy is the killer and it goes up with the square of velocity. Half-speed is quarter-deadly. A golf cart-like machine, limited to a maximum speed not much faster than walking, light-weight, and festooned inside and out with airbags (and other anti-collision/…

I have had the same thought, and I have sometimes wondered if this approach has not been widely pursued because it is potentially too disruptive a technology - disruptive of the current patterns of vehicle ownership and use, that is.

I’d say it’s not profitable enough to justify the R&D costs. You can’t sell a $50,000 golf cart and expect the government to give additional incentives.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#27

Post by ghaff »

ivansavz wrote: post #2

I like the simplifying-the-problem approach a lot! Roads in the US/California are so good that I can see it happen, and with clear labelling this could totally "ship" in a few years (i.e. remove the safety driver). The next step would be 1h-out-of-town commuters + close-suburbia to specific dropoff points in downtown or wherever jobs tend to be. Again, stay on big roads that have good signalling, and keep the bright…

> The min-busses with flexible routes are a common mode of transportation in certain Eastern European countries, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka

They are. But that makes me wonder why we don't already see a lot of this type of thing in the US. My instinct would be the cost of a minimum wage-ish driver isn't the difference between this mode of transportation working and it not. Of course, it does exist in a sense with Lyft Line and Uber Pool although those don't get a lot of attention.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#28

Post by allannienhuis »

konschubert wrote: post #25
paulsutter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disrupted yes but by tunnels. Tunnels will be vastly better than flying cars. Much faster, electric powered, and safer. City centers will be more more pleasant and quiet when surface traffic is all pedestrian. The manufacturing learning curve has been the path to lower costs through mass production and tunnels will be no exception. “Without tunnels we’ll be in traffic hell forever” -Elon Musk

You mean Subways?

except you get to park the subway car in your driveway.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#29

Post by ghaff »

ashraymalhotra wrote: post #4

IMHO this is how self driving applications should start. Driving on the US freeways (say between LA and SF) isn't about your driving skills. It's mostly just about trying not to fall asleep. And machines are way better than humans at this! Even outside the US, there are many areas (like UAE), which have amazing highways, sparse traffic and there isn't rail/air connectivity to some places. Self driving "shuttles" seem…

In general, highways seem like a pretty logical starting point. There are some potential complications like car accidents and debris but they seem far more tractable than random pedestrians, cyclists, and all the complex driving behavior on city streets resulting from traffic lights, trucks stopped to make deliveries, etc. etc.

It doesn't enable end-to-end autonomous taxis, so you need a sober, licensed driver in the driver's seat even if they don't need to be able to take over on a second's notice.

Handling long distance highway driving would actually be a big win. It just doesn't stir imaginations the same way that completely eliminating a driver door-to-door does--especially among people who really want to get out of car ownership and driving entirely.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#30

Post by maxerickson »

ghaff wrote: post #27
ivansavz wrote: post #2

I like the simplifying-the-problem approach a lot! Roads in the US/California are so good that I can see it happen, and with clear labelling this could totally "ship" in a few years (i.e. remove the safety driver). The next step would be 1h-out-of-town commuters + close-suburbia to specific dropoff points in downtown or wherever jobs tend to be. Again, stay on big roads that have good signalling, and keep the bright…

> The min-busses with flexible routes are a common mode of transportation in certain Eastern European countries, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshrutka They are. But that makes me wonder why we don't already see a lot of this type of thing in the US. My instinct would be the cost of a minimum wage-ish driver isn't the difference between this mode of transportation working and it not. Of course, it does exist in…

A similar service is quite common in the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_responsive_transport#Un...

Lower costs there can perhaps lead to a virtuous cycle of increased service and use.

Post reply on HN