Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think it’s impossible if certain roads/highways or lanes become marked as autonomous only. Just as pedestrians and bicycles are banned from using high-speed roads, manually-operated cars could be banned from using certain roads/lanes, removing a lot of variables that manually-operated cars bring.
Defeating the promise of automated driving, and underscoring the obviousness of its impossibility, since this is roughly as useful as a Tram.
Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
161–170 of 923 posts
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#162This strikes me as weird: > "This is one of the hardest problems we have. This is like we are going to Mars," Hitzinger said in a comment. "Maybe it will never happen." First of all, it seems obvious that we are going to go to Mars, eventually. Maybe not any time soon, but never? Seriously? But the bigger thing is that there is about 1000 times more economic benefit to self driving cars than of going to Mars, at leas…
Yeah, some guy named Elon might not agree.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it's possible to automate highway driving under most conditions (and safely transition either to a stop or human-piloting when those conditions aren't met), then at least 80% of the value is there. Given that planes, which rely on a class of specifically trained professionals with minimum hour requirements, still have issues with this from time to time, I don't think this is a realistic thing for cars. Driving s…
And yet air travel is far safer than road travel and they embraced autopilot long ago. The problem with complete automation is how accidents are perceived. Probably a good thing considering how low the bar is right now for road safety. Being killed by a robot's mistake is perceived far worse than by human error. I think a middle ground like autopilot on the highway could significantly improve safety while still accom…
I don't think so. Airplane autopilot automates away the safe, boring parts of air travel, much like highway driving, so in that sense I agree with you. Truly autonomous landing is still a big deal, and planes that the benefit of ATC, and I don't think there are any planes that taxi or takeoff autonomously. Furthermore, accidents involving autopilot are always at the edge, when control changes from computer to human unexpectedly or when the human has to take over the autopilot in less than ideal conditions. I don't think there's much perception in the public eye of "robot pilots killing people"
I think once autonomous driving accidents go through the courts a few times, the same will happen to cars. After another decade of development and legislation, people will die not because the robot made a mistake per-se, but because it encountered a situation it can't cope with and the human wasn't ready to take over in an emergency, or because the robot tried to cope with the emergency situation the wrong way and the human didn't notice in time and took over too late (if at all). This may still sound like the computer making a mistake, but the subtle difference is that the mistake is made in an extraordinary situation, as opposed to the current accidents that happened in regular driving conditions. I think this subtle distinction will be enough for the PR people to spin the blame away from the manufacturer.
Call my cynical, but I can also see successful lobbying efforts in the future by corporations to reduce liability in class-4 and lower autonomous car accidents involving unusual situations, citing the fact that the driver should have been paying attention and taken over.
That aside, road safety is better than ever these days, with a lot of what would have been fatal accidents being merely property damage due to modern safety systems, and highway driving is probably the safest kind of driving out there, thus it is not clear to me (and I have no data either way, I don't think a study has ever been done) that current offerings (Tesla et al.) are any safer compared to similarly priced modern luxury cars per mile driven, and I'm not sure that will change in the future. The only reason I see for adopting highway autopilot is not safety but comfort. You might argue that comfort contributes to safety and enables longer driving times, but driving for 8 to 12 hours is pretty safe regardless, and I don't think I could do more than that even if I was a passenger.
This is a bit of a controversial opinion, but I don't think we will see a meaningful reduction in fatal accidents or serious injuries due to self-driving cars for a long time, but I do think we will see a reduction in accidents involving only property damage or minor injuries from low to medium speed accidents, and I see a sharp decrease in parking-lot scrapes and dings in the near future. Low to medium speed streets and tight maneuvers is where I see most "bad" human drivers have the most trouble and already things like parallel parking assist are a godsend to these people.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#164The technology is not the only problem. The lawyers that are defending every dead body, and there will be dead bodies, that will sink self-driving cars. Even if everyone is 95% safer with self-driving cars, those that are killed by a self-driving car (in combo with a public that is easily swayed with non-objective arguments) will be hard to dismiss.
With a self driving car you know exactly what happened in an accident as video and telemetry is recorded. This is a tremendous advantage over having to reconstruct it without this data.
On the contrary I expect legislation forcing every car to include telemetry like the Chinese are forcing every car to be connected.
This accident's data is evidence, not opinion, not a belief, not a prejudice.
The usefulness of this has already been proven with airplanes.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#165Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to disagree. Most of the value is in taxi services, where you get dropped off / picked up exactly where you want, there is no need to dedicate so much land and structures to parking, there is no need to have cars sit idle for 95% of their existence, and no need to search for parking spots and walk long distances. Of course, I live in a city, where parking is a major pain. But the other things still hold. It it…
> Most of the value is in taxi services I’m imagining how gross a taxi would be that doesn’t have a driver to provide passengers a low level of behaviour moderation.
I've talked to a number of uber drivers. The cameras recording the passengers are a much greater inhibitor of bad behavior than the driver.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#167The technology is not the only problem. The lawyers that are defending every dead body, and there will be dead bodies, that will sink self-driving cars. Even if everyone is 95% safer with self-driving cars, those that are killed by a self-driving car (in combo with a public that is easily swayed with non-objective arguments) will be hard to dismiss.
We could say that now about automobiles. If I were to get into an accident and then have lawyers for the other vehicle, plus everybody stuck in traffic behind me also sending their lawyers after me, I’d never drive. Insurance solved that problem, both by eliminating the possibility of a catastrophic financial loss, and by creating a buffer between me and all those lawyers. I predict that insurance will solve the lawy…
Indeed we can which is why some cities on the planet have gone carless and more and more opposition is mounting in the face of traffic deaths, pollution and so so on. Even in the US, maybe the most car dominated country in the world, there is a political revival of talks about high speed rail and alternative forms of transportation.
The other important difference being that the step from having no cars at all to having cars was one of the largest leaps in mobility in human history. Self-driving cars are nice, but not that much of a leap, and they have much more ambiguous implications when it comes to the job-market. They will face significantly larger hurdles with significantly less payoff in sight.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a fantastic amount of value in cities and urban areas. Self-driving cars can work as a massive network to reduce or eliminate congestion and give people back hundreds of millions of hours spent stuck in traffic. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/08/22/us/traffic-commute-gridlo... They can also, if Level 5 becomes a thing, reduce traffic collisions. And if they all end up electric, through route optimization they c…
How would they "reduce or eliminate congestion"? Congestion is inherently caused by too many people trying to go to or through the same place at the same time. That's not possible without reducing the amount of people trying to travel during a given time period in a given place.
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not true. VW fully owns AID which is developing its level 4 stack. VW is also invested in Argo
I stand corrected. Still, VW is using MobilEye's tech in their ride-sharing service [0], which probably means that their own tech is not very close to the competitors. [0] https://newsroom.intel.com/news-releases/volkswagen-mobileye...
Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'
#170I agree in part in that I am skeptical that full self-driving cars will happen in the next few years, but he is completely wrong when it comes to the long term. Not only will the tech get as good as humans, but most forget to account for the fact that the environment will meet the cars part way. We will eventually update markings and beacons on the roads to make it easier for the cars, implement networks in which the…