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

Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 556 posts

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#281

Post by likeclockwork »

cloudwalking wrote: post #254
kiba wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all have cars because cars are incredibly useful; Got 4 young kids and you need to get groceries for the week? This only work that way because that's how your life is structured, not that it is a law of nature. If you live near a grocery store, you wouldn't have to buy enough grocery to last you a week. You can just buy what you need.

And then go back to the grocery store every day. What a waste of time. You can also wash your laundry but hand. The reality is we have these appliances (including cars) because they increase our personal efficiency quite a bit.

Going to the grocery store ever? What a waste of time when you can order groceries.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#282

Post by unityByFreedom »

Slartie wrote: post #121
unityByFreedom wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The driverless bar for safety is way higher than very clever driver assistance or even rocket science. I agree. This isn't about beating the national safety average, which includes drunk driving accidents, inclement weather, motorcycles, old cars and unwieldy trucks. It's about providing a safer alternative in scenarios where you have no other. And, it probably needs to be affordable too. There is a lot of other lo…

> it's too bad investors are climbing over each other to throw money down the long, narrow corridor that is self driving I don't consider that bad. Anyone is free to make bad investments. I do consider it bad that they haven't yet had to book that many losses, due to the hype still going strong and them finding enough other idiots to join the party. I'm longing for the day on which bad investment decisions (such as i…

> I don't consider that bad. Anyone is free to make bad investments.

You don't find it unfortunate when capital is allocated towards failing business models rather than tech that has real promise?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#283

Post by _xnmw »

IMTDb wrote: post #137
_xnmw wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still an interesting question: is 3 seconds of erroneous/unreliable behaviour per year acceptable from an autonomous vehicle?

Even 5 minutes per year is totally acceptable. 5 minutes is 300,000 miliseconds. Split over the course of 365 days at 86400 seconds per day, we are looking at roughly 1 milisecond of erratic behaviour every 105 seconds. Not enough to crash a car

My practical experience with system failures is that they tend to not be evenly spread out in any kind of predictable pattern. Instead they tend to be acute and concentrated at a few points.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#284

Post by mkcny »

pjdemers wrote: post #279

I don't remember the source, but a few years ago I saw the results of a poll about self driving cars. The question was: "How much more would you pay for a car that could drive itself?" In the US, 50% of the responses said $0. It is not a feature that the market wants. That's why we don't have self driving cars.

But this is so obviously wrong. Every time someone takes a cab, they're paying for a "car that could drive itself". There's a huge market for this.

How much more often would you take a cab if the cost was dramatically lower?

Not to mention the existing market for professional drivers that aren't transporting people.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#285

Post by flowerlad »

pjdemers wrote: post #279

I don't remember the source, but a few years ago I saw the results of a poll about self driving cars. The question was: "How much more would you pay for a car that could drive itself?" In the US, 50% of the responses said $0. It is not a feature that the market wants. That's why we don't have self driving cars.

People don’t always know what they want. Before Steve Jobs unveiled the iPhone how many people knew they wanted a smart phone?

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#286

Post by diffeomorphism »

Steltek wrote: post #268
diffeomorphism wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally, I would like a pony. Realistically there is no alternative option, so there is no question. > for slightly more comfortable transport In some large metro areas, maybe. Outside of that bubble millions of people depend on a car to even be able to work.

Large metro areas effectively subsidize the rural areas. Those millions of people have enjoyed amazingly subsidized civil engineering to have that car commute. If those commutes built-in the correct costs in land usage, gov budget impact, and environmental impact, those commutes would be untenable.

You missed the phrases "flyover states" and insulting people as rednecks and hillbillies.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#287

Post by mikestew »

ivanhoe wrote: post #245
bogle wrote: post #133

If we expect driverless cars to be further delayed and we continue building our cities to encourage micromobility (bikes, electric scooters, segregated lanes, car free streets, etc.) then at which point does the value of the driverless car become moot because we no longer drive? Does this sound unlikely? Consider European cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam which have encouraged cycling over the last two decades and…

What you're saying is taking into account only big cities and young population, but in small places and suburbs you depend on cars to do anything, get anywhere. Old people can't be expected to walk far or drive scooters and bikes everyday. And population is mostly getting older, plus with the rise of remote work I presume that more and more people will move outside the big urban centers looking for slower pace and ch…

Old people can't be expected to walk far or drive scooters and bikes everyday.

You need to give some serious readjustment to your mental image of “old people”. Perhaps the word you’re looking for is “disabled” or “differently-abled”, depending upon your preference. Some of those people, maybe disproportionately so, also happen to be old.

I’d type more, but this AARP member crashed his scooter on the way to work on Friday, and my shoulder’s still a little sore. Wear your helmets, mine cracked so that my skull wouldn’t.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#288

Post by jeffreyrogers »

pjdemers wrote: post #279

I don't remember the source, but a few years ago I saw the results of a poll about self driving cars. The question was: "How much more would you pay for a car that could drive itself?" In the US, 50% of the responses said $0. It is not a feature that the market wants. That's why we don't have self driving cars.

I don't think that's the reason. There's a lot of money going into self driving cars and a lot of talented people working on them. The reason is that it's easy to make a self-driving car that can drive in predictable situations (first done in the 80s), but it's extremely hard to make one that handles unusual situations.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#289

Post by upstandingdude »

Steltek wrote: post #272
ryan93 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dont pretend like its normal to go through the hassle and expense of car rental just to do a routine activity

Are you thinking of full on rental like Enterprise or car sharing like Zipcar? Zipcar is pretty dang easy and it's what car-free people think when you absolutely need a car for a trip.

Thats more or less prohibitively expensive, because your hiking location would be outside of parking zone most likely, thus you're on the clock the whole time. Not my idea of a relaxing experience. Looks like zipcar is even station bound which makes it worse. You have to get yourself and all the stuff to the station somehow and then take it back from there again when you are done.

Re: Driverless cars are stuck in a jam

#290

Post by rdlecler1 »

We just invested an ag robotics company started by senior engineers from some of the top driverless car companies because they felt that they were never going to actually get a driverless car to market. We welcome the influx of talent.
Post reply on HN