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

Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 269 posts

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#201

Post by politician »

tzs wrote: post #189
mike-cardwell wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine, once automated cars are safe and popular enough, they will mandate that all new cars must have it and set a date after which only automated cars are allowed on the road. It will become an offence to take over and drive manually unless the circumstance demands it. You'll be fine driving your Aston Martin, but your kids, or their kids might not be.

I expect that as the automated cars get sophisticated enough that they no longer act individually, but rather each car is in constant communication with the cars in the area so that they can coordinate maneuvers and engage in global planning, a semi-manual option might be added to the system so people can drive for fun. They way that would work is that when you car is in semi-manual mode, it tells the others cars tha…

Honestly, I'd expect semi-fun mode to be implemented to prevent human drivers from passing, thus killing the "fun" and reinforcing the "driving is tedious" meme in order to serve a greater safety goal.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#203

Post by [deleted] »

duaneb wrote: post #196
mike-cardwell wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine, once automated cars are safe and popular enough, they will mandate that all new cars must have it and set a date after which only automated cars are allowed on the road. It will become an offence to take over and drive manually unless the circumstance demands it. You'll be fine driving your Aston Martin, but your kids, or their kids might not be.

You're not factoring in the Media, which will raise a big fuss about taking away their rights and robots not being safe... you get the idea. I can't imagine how people will react once there's an actual possibility a car could be driving on the road with no human controlling it.

[deleted]

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#204

Post by jlgreco »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #180
Tycho wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My suspicion is that the figures quoted around these Google cars and their safety record, if you take them at face value, lead to a ludicrous level of optimism.

I think that Google have simply done a better job of creating a self-driving car than you are willing to let yourself believe. They have done this by attacking the problem from the 'Big Data' mindset which Google are intimately familiar with. Instead of trying to crack hard AI problems (computer vision being the most obvious) they are simply counting on being able to record and use enough information both before and…

They are already putting radars into higher end luxury cars as part of their cruise control systems. Granted, google cars involve a good bit more than those systems, but I am fairly confident that the usual trend of features trickling down into normal consumer cars will continue.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#205

Post by oillio »

StavrosK wrote: post #198
tzs wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect that as the automated cars get sophisticated enough that they no longer act individually, but rather each car is in constant communication with the cars in the area so that they can coordinate maneuvers and engage in global planning, a semi-manual option might be added to the system so people can drive for fun. They way that would work is that when you car is in semi-manual mode, it tells the others cars tha…

Most of these things will not be possible merely because they give you an unfair advantage. What you call "racing" I call "being at my destination much sooner", and, yes please, I would like every other car to step aside so I can get home faster. Which, of course, only means that everybody will try to abuse this.

Make "race mode" cost money then. Cheap enough that an occasional race is not ridiculous, but expensive enough that it is not practical for a commute. It probably wouldn't be an incredible advantage anyway. Your car could drive much faster if it knew exactly what every car around it was planning on doing.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#206

Post by hansef »

icebraining wrote: post #188
spindritf wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm 31, don't have a driver's license, I live in Europe, I'm doing perfectly fine, thank you I have a license but don't have a car (actually owning a car was too much of a hassle) and you're only telling half the story. Yes, day to day not having a car is fine, but every once in a while you want to buy something larger that is not delivered, or move some stuff, or go for a short vacation, or even just drive out of…

A car that drives itself, or, even better, a car that I can cheaply rent that will drive itself to my doorsteps, then drive me wherever I want to go, and then return itself would be absolutely perfect. We have those, they're called cabs/taxis ;) Well, I suppose they're not exactly cheap, but personally I use them so rarely that it doesn't really matter, even though I'm on a tight budget.

Ubiquity and response time matter. I live in Los Feliz, a popular LA neighborhood full of lots of 20 and 30 somethings with disposable income. It's nigh impossible to hail a cab here. In fact, outside of NY and the downtown business districts of a few other major American cities at certain times of day, "cab on demand" basically doesn't exist. If I want to go out without driving on Friday night, I use an app like Taxi Magic to request a cab, then wait somewhere between 10 and 30 minutes for a cab driver who speaks relatively poor English, has never heard of the bar I'm going to, needs me to provide turn-by-turn directions the entire way, misses our side-street repeatedly, and then is annoyed that I'm paying with a credit card.

Imagine instead being able to use an app where, in any urban area, you can have a car sitting in front of your house in 3-5 minutes, with reasonable mileage rates, exact GPS coordinates preprogrammed, and no haggling over tip and payment method at the end of the ride.

Speaking as half a couple paying $1000 a month in car payments, car insurance, maintenance and gas, this is going to fundamentally change the calculus for private car ownership in America.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#207

Post by rogerbinns »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #159
rogerbinns wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computer driven cars also have the option of just stopping when things aren't looking good (analogous to a panic). For all we know they could stop when a leaf blows across the road - unlikely to cause an accident because of the reaction time. The "just stop" approach isn't available for planes or nuclear power plants for example.

The "just stop" approach is also problematic on a busy highway.

I don't know where you live, but where I live the highways have lots of stopping during busy times. And of course drivers always have to be aware of stopped cars as they do happen. I suspect highways are where the automated cars have the easiest time, and it is far more likely side roads and suburban areas that are more confusing. Abrupt stops are more likely there (eg kids/pets running across the road). In the US I do believe that running into the back of another car under almost all circumstances makes you at fault.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#208

Post by damoncali »

TylerE wrote: post #128
damoncali wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me, it is a side effect of some problems with my vision. I hear it is curable with vison therapy, but that is quite expensive.

That's actually really interesting. I've always worn glasses but my vision has gotten progressively worse as I've aged - it's not bad, even now, I can legally drive without glasses - but it's enough to be noticeable. I also was much less prone to motion sickness when I was younger - I would happily read full novels while riding along as a grade schooler.

My eyes have been awful since I was a kid, but just near-sighted. My daughter needed vision therapy as a young child, and when I went into the therapist's office, I got an exam for my glasses prescription.

Turned out that I had similar issues, just not noticeable. It had to do with my eyes not being able to properly maintain a focus at a specific distance over time, and their ability to track properly. I've always been a slow reader - this is at least partly why. I was told that it's also responsible for the fact that I get car sick within seconds of reading in the car, and that it goes away with therapy. Unfortunately, I never did go through with the therapy.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#209

Post by protomyth »

danweber wrote: post #146
ridiculous_fish wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing that more accidents happen in intersections than on the highway. My understanding is that Google's self-driving cars are currently limited to highways and known-course driving. I don't think it's going to do a very good job driving in San Francisco city streets (but then, who does?)

From what I know it's always known-course. If you were to get a google car today for your commute (you can't), you would first drive to and from work yourself, probably more than once, so it can map everything. Knowing where there should be a stop sign and traffic lights significantly reduces risks. The computer still needs to be able to learn when new ones appear, of course.

It would also help with some roads that are incorrectly marked on the GPS. There is a highway in ND that has a 4 mile stretch that has a miss marked road. Multiple GPS maps show the road about 100 yards west of where it actually is. Damn annoying driving 4 miles with the GPS constantly saying "Get back on the road". Thought it was just a garbage GPS map, but it happened on a couple of models.

Guess I really don't have to worry until they figure out how to get the car to drive on snow covered roads.

Re: Google's Autonomous cars complete 300,000 miles without an accident

#210

Post by jrockway »

adolfojp wrote: post #64
andrewljohnson wrote: post #25

Autonomous cars are the next big tech that changes the world - I put them up there with computer, Internet, and smart phone. When economists think about technology, they look at it as a productivity booster. From that angle, robot cars will have a huge impact - so many commute hours will be transformed to work, or even leisure, which also boosts productivity. So many smart people are about to be given a 10% or better…

Eating food from a tube could also give us a lot more free time but we don't do it because it is not an enjoyable experience. We not only enjoy the flavors and textures that regular food provides, we also enjoy the rituals that accompany eating. In this regard driving cars is somewhat similar. A lot of people enjoy driving and many actually find it therapeutic. Some exceptions do exist, like driving in heavy traffic,…

I'd eat food from a tube. I don't enjoy the flavors, textures, or rituals that accompany eating. (Sometimes, I even have a caffeine pill instead of a cup of coffee in the morning. Gasp!)
Post reply on HN