Live data from Hacker News

Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

techspot.com

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to give a counterpoint (I know this opinion will be extremely unpopular on HN) I'd explain how there was a time when we were free to drive our own cars, and make our own decisions. And simply hop in a car and drive. Not like now where you get in the car and it asks you to download the latest software update, then it monitors your every move, sending back data to the car makers/NSA and showing you ads as you driv…

What a horrible attitude in your last paragraph. Anyway, your right to drive a car probably won't be taken away. Your ability to afford the insurance necessary to operate on public roads is probably a different matter.

Sorry if it came across as harsh. I believe there's two options...

a) We let our freedom be gradually eroded over a long period of time, so that people don't notice it, and so that any one generation can't really remember how great things were.

b) There's a wake up call event that shows people we should not allow ourselves to go down this road at all.

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attitude I see from younger generations is that the freedom to drive your car is like the freedom to wash your dishes or balance your checkbook by hand. Driving, specially in overcrowded cities, is increasingly seen as a chore and a hassle. Getting rid of it means freeing up from one to four hours a day to study, play, or talk to their friends. If you want to keep driving as a hobby, I'm sure there will be some a…

If you're a "city" person, that may be the case. But it's a terribly big generalization to make about all younger generations. The younger generations I know can't wait to drive, and have the freedom to travel where they want to.

>The younger generations I know can't wait to drive, and have the freedom to travel where they want to.

I think it's simply the ability to be able to go wherever that lures teenagers to driving. I know that's why I got a job and saved up for my first car. You can still do this when cars are that don't require a driver.

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm rooting for some massive disasters/scandals with self driven cars, to put the idea to bed. And you can be pretty sure there will be some big disasters if they ever get anywhere with it. During the Vietnam War, more Americans were killed in auto accidents on the DC beltway alone than in the actual war. Auto accidents are one of the leading causes of death, and driver error is the leading cause of auto accidents.…

I think you should probably update your stats. Auto deaths are almost half what they were in the 60s in the US, despite more cars and more miles driven. And that figure is coming down by a pretty good percentage each year. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in... To put in in perspective, every year in the US: * People die from heart attacks: 600,000 * People die from auto accidents: 32,000 Obv…

Heart attacks, in the cases where they are preventable, only end up killing the person who failed to prevent them. People who drive cars poorly end up accidentally killing other people all the time. And it's hardly a "freedom" anymore when people are practically required to either drive everywhere or at least be around constant car traffic in order to get anywhere.

Getting human-operated cars off the road doesn't diminish freedom, it enhances it.

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you countering his argument or just grumbling to yourself? What drive less car can do and the system in the whole can do is to be able to know where and when a car is driving in the vicinity where normal human cannot perceive. So the situation you describe will not happen at all if those systems are in place. Actually, you just describe a scenario where it is preferable to have a system that monitors human error…

Next you'll be telling me that speech recognition works. It doesn't.

Pick up a goddamn Android phone and see for yourself.

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> "It's going to be pretty impossible to take away the peoples right to drive cars" No, they will simply phase out manual cars. No big deal, it just means it will be almost impossible to crash, and that's a good thing. It doesn't mean you won't be able to drive, but you'll be driving with a computer keeping watch over the road ahead and obstacles around you. Put the car in auto mode and sit back... Most people will…

"There won't be a setting to turn off to achieve an outcome whereby the car touches any other object. It just won't happen while you're driving on public roads." Can you not see the idiotic flaw in your plan. You're driving along. You're coming to a junction. A bike isn't looking and is going full speed and will hit into the front side of your car. You do not have time to brake. Your only option is to swerve into the…

"Can you not see the idiotic flaw in your plan."

It's not my plan. It's the inevitable path of innovation and technology. What I described should be obvious.

Eventually, all cars will be driver-less, and the "old style" of car will be rare to see on the road. Like pre-1974 cars are extremely rare to see now. Everyone will want the newer, safer, cooler, energy efficient cars that drive you home safely, even when you're high.

"You're high. It's not going to happen."

Yes, I'm high. But it will happen. The bicycle situation you describe is one where the computer could still take action to minimize injury to the cyclist, and reduce the risk of causing a major accident with other vehicles. Most drivers would panic and "swerve into the next lane" as you describe, which is not the best action to take. It's about controlled evasive action, not "holy crap... slam on brakes...over-steer... enter skid... over-compensate over-steering... enter another skid... crash."

If the cyclist collides with your car because of cyclist error, then what you have firstly is an extremely unlikely situation, as cyclists are usually focused on what they are doing. They're not adjusting the air-con, or thinking about sex while riding through traffic - they are concentrating.

"You still have to account for cyclists, pedestrians, animals...".

Come on bolder88, get real. Driver training teaches us to avoid swerving into the path of oncoming vehicles to avoid impact with wildlife. The computer would not allow you to do so, and that's how it should be. However, the computer WOULD allow you to swerve into the other lane if there was no oncoming traffic. Otherwise, the safest option is to run over the animal.

With pedestrians, it's certainly a challenging scenario for the driver-less car, but I still think that the automatic hazard avoidance systems can save the day better than manual intervention. That's because it takes great skill to control a car in an emergency situation. Most drivers don't know how to control a skid, because most drivers don't get any practice with such driving.

Perhaps then, to meet you half way, some drivers can apply for a special license that gives them full control. For the rest of us, the computer is the safer option for controlling the vehicle during an evasive maneuver.

Re: Self-driving cars projected to reduce injuries by 90%, save $450B annually

#146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to give a counterpoint (I know this opinion will be extremely unpopular on HN) I'd explain how there was a time when we were free to drive our own cars, and make our own decisions. And simply hop in a car and drive. Not like now where you get in the car and it asks you to download the latest software update, then it monitors your every move, sending back data to the car makers/NSA and showing you ads as you driv…

The attitude I see from younger generations is that the freedom to drive your car is like the freedom to wash your dishes or balance your checkbook by hand. Driving, specially in overcrowded cities, is increasingly seen as a chore and a hassle. Getting rid of it means freeing up from one to four hours a day to study, play, or talk to their friends. If you want to keep driving as a hobby, I'm sure there will be some a…

Yea, perhaps disable auto pilot mode when you are in less crowded areas.
Post reply on HN