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

A more realistic route to autonomous driving

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#11

Post by samsonradu »

friendly_chap wrote: post #10
al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

Given that we are probably heading into an economy where energy will get more and more expensive (at least temporarily, due to a potential oil crunch coming), not sure how flying will be an economical way of transport.

Can you elaborate? Why might a oil crunch be coming?

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#12

Post by al_ramich »

friendly_chap wrote: post #10
al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

Given that we are probably heading into an economy where energy will get more and more expensive (at least temporarily, due to a potential oil crunch coming), not sure how flying will be an economical way of transport.

electric would be the way it goes and you could argue that flying drones flying at a constant speed could be more economical than a self-driving car limited by the current road infrastructure.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#13

Post by al_ramich »

kayoone wrote: post #9
al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

i doubt having hundreds or thousands of heavy vehicles flying above peoples heads is a good idea and will probably not go well with authorities.

agree but it would have to be regulated with virtual/dedicated road lines relatively high up to prevent noise/light blocking issues. if centrally managed, the issues you describe could be minimized.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#14

Post by deathhand »

samsonradu wrote: post #11
friendly_chap wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that we are probably heading into an economy where energy will get more and more expensive (at least temporarily, due to a potential oil crunch coming), not sure how flying will be an economical way of transport.

Can you elaborate? Why might a oil crunch be coming?

Not parent but

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#15

Post by carapace »

What I want is a self-driving golf cart that can take my mother to the doctor and back. It doesn't have to go fast.

I make this point every time I can: kinetic energy is the killer and it goes up with the square of velocity. Half-speed is quarter-deadly.

A golf cart-like machine, limited to a maximum speed not much faster than walking, light-weight, and festooned inside and out with airbags (and other anti-collision/-injury stuff), could be built today, I think it would work just fine, and I bet you could sell a lot of them. ("Baby Boomers" he says under his breath...)

Trying to go straight to robot cars is hubris, it's biting off more than you can chew and then trying to talk past the food in your mouth.

Also, can we please call them "auto-autos"?

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#16

Post by bunderbunder »

al_ramich wrote: post #12
friendly_chap wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that we are probably heading into an economy where energy will get more and more expensive (at least temporarily, due to a potential oil crunch coming), not sure how flying will be an economical way of transport.

electric would be the way it goes and you could argue that flying drones flying at a constant speed could be more economical than a self-driving car limited by the current road infrastructure.

At least with current technology, electric makes the energy consumption problem worse rather than better, on account of the poor energy density compared to combustible fuel. The difference is manageable with cars, but with aircraft, where you have to take all that extra weight and pull it up in addition to moving it around, things get to be pretty stark.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#17

Post by bunderbunder »

panarky wrote: post #8

Building a vehicle that can handle a busy street, with cyclists, pedestrians, roadworks and emergency vehicles, is a tall order. You can try to simplify the problem by limiting your routes to major highways and making the vehicle ultra-visible so other drivers give you a wide berth. But at some point there will be construction, or a car wreck, or debris in the roadway. Eventually you'll need to exit the highway and d…

I agree with you that even limiting the operational environment that these things work in doesn't reduce the number of situations it needs to be able to handle by that much.

But I wouldn't be too quick to interpret a single sentence from a piece of short-form popular journalism as a precise specification of what their cars are and are not designed to handle.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#18

Post by mannykannot »

carapace wrote: post #15

What I want is a self-driving golf cart that can take my mother to the doctor and back. It doesn't have to go fast. I make this point every time I can: kinetic energy is the killer and it goes up with the square of velocity. Half-speed is quarter-deadly. A golf cart-like machine, limited to a maximum speed not much faster than walking, light-weight, and festooned inside and out with airbags (and other anti-collision/…

I have had the same thought, and I have sometimes wondered if this approach has not been widely pursued because it is potentially too disruptive a technology - disruptive of the current patterns of vehicle ownership and use, that is.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#19

Post by tonyedgecombe »

carapace wrote: post #15

What I want is a self-driving golf cart that can take my mother to the doctor and back. It doesn't have to go fast. I make this point every time I can: kinetic energy is the killer and it goes up with the square of velocity. Half-speed is quarter-deadly. A golf cart-like machine, limited to a maximum speed not much faster than walking, light-weight, and festooned inside and out with airbags (and other anti-collision/…

Or shuttles like this:

https://trl.co.uk/news/prev/35671

The last mile if far more interesting at the moment, with shuttles, Ofo bikes, e-bikes and scooters and "baby boomers" on their mobility devices. What it really needs though is more infrastructure to support it, ideally dedicated lanes.

Re: A more realistic route to autonomous driving

#20

Post by paulsutter »

al_ramich wrote: post #7

Going a bit controversial here but will self-driving cars be disrupted before they even take off. The big factor that I feel will impact how autonomous travel will evolve in the future is drone taxies/cars. Providing there is a change in the regulation to support self-driving flying cars/drones, the big advantage is that there would be no existing rules created for human driving (road signs, traffic lights...) to adh…

Disrupted yes but by tunnels. Tunnels will be vastly better than flying cars. Much faster, electric powered, and safer. City centers will be more more pleasant and quiet when surface traffic is all pedestrian.

The manufacturing learning curve has been the path to lower costs through mass production and tunnels will be no exception.

“Without tunnels we’ll be in traffic hell forever” -Elon Musk

Post reply on HN