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

Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

901–910 of 923 posts

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#901

Post by Fjolsvith »

humanrebar wrote: post #850
aetherson wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you destroy a yield sign, maybe it will eventually cause some problems, or maybe not. We could imagine a world in which destroying smart infrastructure could pretty instantaneously and reliably cause massive traffic jams, which seems like it would appeal more to certain trolls and perhaps protestors. We could also imagine a world in which more subtle attacks could reliably and fairly quickly cause injury/fatality…

You can cause horrible traffic jams now by throwing a few mattresses or a bunch of caltrops onto the highway at the right time of day.

Then imagine the jam flowing around the blockage without stop-starts due to the automated vehicles networking and managing traffic.

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#902

Post by Fjolsvith »

kohtatsu wrote: post #722
TwoBit wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you destroy a yield sign, the system will immediately know because all the cars previously recorded it.

So presumably every self-driving vehicle is going to be constantly streaming all sorts of information in their purview to a central hub? That is a privacy nightmare without regulation on scrubbing extraneous information, done before upload: for example blocking out of pedestrian data; not just faces but clothing and gait, and probably also any data captured through windows. It would be ideal to have a limited view of…

> That is a privacy nightmare without regulation on scrubbing extraneous information, done before upload: for example blocking out of pedestrian data; not just faces but clothing and gait, and probably also any data captured through windows.

If you can be photographed legally in a public place, what's going to protect your privacy in public?

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#903

Post by quickthrower2 »

bobthepanda wrote: post #492
quickthrower2 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Values change. No one would take a taxi where the driver is just some unlicensed taxi driver. Back in the 90's that would be consider akin to hitchhiking in danger! Now we have Uber. Also I drive because it's faster, and because once you go from A->B getting to B->C is probably easier. Not for privacy. Most people just need to get to work or school or their kids to school for the bulk of their car use. Kids to school…

Cars are different than a lot of goods though, because in and of themselves they are a wealth signal (at least in the US). Most Americans don't really need an SUV or a pickup; a minivan or a sedan are more practical. Yet most Americans are buying them, because it makes them feel better about what they're driving and they want to show off. You may only take your car to the grocery store, but if you meet Becky from PTA…

Jones gonna keep up

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#904

Post by tripzilch »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #175
colordrops wrote: post #165

I 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…

We can't even bloody keep the yellow markings on the road visible, and "paint" is a technology we've had for thousands of years. Where in dog's name is the money for installing and maintaining all that smart infrastructure going to come from?

Probably in those places in the world where "we" can keep the markings on the road visible and the roads properly maintained?

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#905

Post by tripzilch »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #901
humanrebar wrote: post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can cause horrible traffic jams now by throwing a few mattresses or a bunch of caltrops onto the highway at the right time of day.

Then imagine the jam flowing around the blockage without stop-starts due to the automated vehicles networking and managing traffic.

The future needs self-throwing mattresses.

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#906

Post by tripzilch »

gambiting wrote: post #810
j-c-hewitt wrote: post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing and it happens all the time. This is something that a human driver familiar with the road will notice and it will be unlikely to cause an accident. An out-of-towner might get into an accident. An automated vehicle would ideally not even be looking at signs and just operating from its stored data.

That's an absolutely crazy idea. You are only required by law to follow signs that are actually there, full stop, a car should never rely on some built in database of data. I cannot imagine a database of signs that would be constantly up to date and somehow distributed to all cars on the road.

> I cannot imagine a database of signs that would be constantly up to date and somehow distributed to all cars on the road.

Really depends on where you are. I agree I can't imagine it in the USA, but in the Netherlands, where every square metre is documented, attributed and zoned (yes including the leftover grassy triangle bits between highway ramps, everything). We could totally do that if necessary.

I don't know if documenting all the traffic signs would be the right solution. If anything I would imagine this database to include way more virtual traffic signs than are actually there. Not for the legal traffic rules, but virtual ones that would be nice if they existed and everybody in the flock held to them.

Point is that worldwide there is a huge variety in the quality of roads, the quality of signage, driving culture and attitude, and the general predictability of the environment. Some places will lend themselves more naturally to the first forms self-driving cars will take than other places that are more "free form".

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#907

Post by tripzilch »

j-c-hewitt wrote: post #795
cbhl wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious counterpoint to "operating from stored data" is an accident or construction causing a lane to be closed, or a child chasing a ball across the road.

In the hypothetical world in which self driving cars are the norm and not the exception detours would be in the system so that SDCs would not need to read signs. Even now a lot of traffic maps get updated to show detours, delays, and temporary closures due to accidents. FWIW I am a near-term self-driving car skeptic and have been for a long time. I just think that these are not the kind of issues that really pose a m…

We will nano-tag alcohol and keep a database of all wandering drunks, for self-driving cars to either avoid them or take them home!

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#908

Post by growlist »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #175
colordrops wrote: post #165

I 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…

We can't even bloody keep the yellow markings on the road visible, and "paint" is a technology we've had for thousands of years. Where in dog's name is the money for installing and maintaining all that smart infrastructure going to come from?

Don't get me started on the potholes. There are some traffic lights near me which need patching every month or two in the winter. Can they not just engineer it to lift in a new concrete slab each time?

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#909

Post by ascagnel_ »

dmix wrote: post #294
Sharlin wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Intercity traffic is a problem we solved in the 1800s.

Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun. But otherwise agreed a ton of this stuff could be solved with modern trains. But appeasing all of the special interest groups in between has made infrastructure development impossibly expensive or takes a decade. So we keep driving cars even long…

> Riding trains is great, getting to the train station(s) in a busy city, worrying about the schedule and being in the right spot for the right train, etc, is not at all fun.

I'd say that, in the majority of cases, it's either no more difficult or outright easier than getting to an airport, as airports tend to be located on the outskirts of cities (requiring connecting train/bus service or private cars), while most rail hubs tend to be in city centers.

Re: Volkswagen exec admits full self-driving cars 'may never happen'

#910

Post by jfengel »

cmsj wrote: post #774
ajhurliman wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what they meant by "tricking" the cars is to paint roads in a deceiving way to make cars meander into lakes or something like that, not hacking everyone's cars.

It doesn't even have to be malicious. I was driving through Germany recently and some roadworks on a highway meant we were using temporary contraflow lanes, and even with my big fancy human brain, I was sometimes struggling to decide which of the layers of permanent/temporary lane markings I should observe.

Sounds like a great case for computers. They can communicate with each other and all make the same decisions. Even if it's "wrong", it'll be safer if they all make the same wrong decision than a bunch of people coming to different conclusions and demonstrating it only by putting 3,000 pounds of steel where they think it should go.
Post reply on HN