Google's Driverless Future
reason.com
Google's Driverless Future
1–10 of 56 posts
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#2So get the driverless car that isn't run by Google. I get that there are privacy issues, but I still think this article is overly alarmist.
As an aside, I expect autonomous driving to be phased in gradually - I'd wager freeways first, then city centers, and rural areas only at the very end. However, once there's a sufficient installed base of autonomous vehicles, I expect it will be illegal to drive manually in those areas, because it kind of defeats the point.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#3It's going to take a long time to get people comfortable with driverless cars. In the meantime, can the technology be immediately converted to "assisted" driving to help avoid collisions, crossing the center line, etc.? Make it a lot harder for people to "bump" into each other. We might be able to get some of the benefits of driverless cars sooner.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#4So get the driverless car that isn't run by Google. I get that there are privacy issues, but I still think this article is overly alarmist. As an aside, I expect autonomous driving to be phased in gradually - I'd wager freeways first, then city centers, and rural areas only at the very end. However, once there's a sufficient installed base of autonomous vehicles, I expect it will be illegal to drive manually in those…
An alarmist article in Reason, you say? How intriguing.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#5I think it's too early to make these conclusions. The self driving cars are produced by Google X, and have nothing to do (yet) with the data-collecting Ads division. I would be very surprised if the cars send personally-identifying data back to Google, and I think there would be a considerable public backlash.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#6A person in security told me that a big fear they have is car bombs. You would now be able to send groups of cars to a location without risking human life. That us good enough reason to not want self driving cars. I still think some of the functionality can be used for accident prevention.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#7It's going to take a long time to get people comfortable with driverless cars. In the meantime, can the technology be immediately converted to "assisted" driving to help avoid collisions, crossing the center line, etc.? Make it a lot harder for people to "bump" into each other. We might be able to get some of the benefits of driverless cars sooner.
Start using it in places you absolutely have to. Retirement communities where the elderly have lost their ability to drive, etc.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#8A person in security told me that a big fear they have is car bombs. You would now be able to send groups of cars to a location without risking human life. That us good enough reason to not want self driving cars. I still think some of the functionality can be used for accident prevention.
Would that also have been a good enough reason not to want regular cars?
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#9there's a fundamental assumption in this article that I think is very doubtful. this article assumes that part of the customers 'payment' for a self-driving car will be advertising.
That seems like a very poor assumption. Personally, I assume google will make money selling a car (or the tech), just like any other business. Just because the search business is free and makes their revenue through advertising doesn't mean that the car business would have the same approach.
Re: Google's Driverless Future
#10[deleted]