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

The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 156 posts

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#31

Post by TheEzEzz »

larrymcp wrote: post #18

Well if this is a "race" as the headline says, it sure is gonna be a long race, folks. These cars haven't yet been programmed to handle things like snow-covered roads where you can't see the lines, or construction zones that have you driving on the opposite side of the road at the direction of flaggers, etc... there's just a ton of work remaining to be done if your goal is truly to "rid the world of human drivers".

If those high targets are the only things remaining then I'd say the race is pretty close to finishing. I'd be more pessimistic if features on the todo list still included 'identifying stop signs', 'recognizing people', 'not killing people', and 'driving more smoothly than a teenager'.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#32

Post by zuminator »

nostromo wrote: post #8

One thing I haven't heard much about is how humans and AI drivers will interact. If we all assume that AI cars are going to be very conservative and very competent drivers, will people take advantage of that? Will human drivers become even bigger assholes that cut off AI drivers at every possibility, knowing that an AI will not hit them? Why wait in a big line for an exit, when you know an AI car will always let you…

To some extent this sounds similar to how people treat public transportation buses now. Drivers and pedestrians behave more recklessly, knowing that the bus operator will go through great lengths to avoid a collision.

But you raise the interesting point that it might perversely be safer to make automated cars less safe. Make them just dangerous enough that people won't be deliberately stupid around them.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#33

Post by jacquesm »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #16
chromaton wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Chinese Soda Fallcy I've never heard of this particular logical fallacy and search engines are no help. Can you explain?

Hrmm, I did find exactly one instance of the phrase on Google. I'm surprised, too. As it was explained to me, a Chinese Soda Fallacy is a business plan wherein you stand to make a dollar selling a Coke to everybody in China. You will make a billion dollars! Except that the market-clearing price for Coke in China isn't a dollar, and not everybody wants one, and so on and so forth. The idea that you will make a dime ev…

I think you're looking for the term 'Chinese Math':

http://www.fastcompany.com/1710460/chinese-math-or-1-mistake...

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#34

Post by gbhn »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #24
sanswork wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>that deranged person can just sit down in front of the car, bringing everything to a halt. They can do that now unless you are suggesting running them over as a solution.

You can jump out of your car and either rationally debate with them the merits of allowing access to the right-of-way, or jump directly to violent threats. The problem with autonomous cars as they are being rationalized to the public is that half the time the car will have no occupants at all. There will be nobody in the car to leap out and shake their fist.

Or just do what a driverless car would do: call the authorities or turn around and proceed by another route.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#35

Post by aurizon »

well, first auto-car, then auto-truck, then auto-truck-train. (3-10 trailers with one tractor, and possibly hub motors suitable for long hauls with no turns) Then electric cars pas gas based cars. Then electric trucks with droppable battery packs - full charged in 2 minutes by changing it. Then they will get into local driving and delivery, into large mechanical drop boxes at houses and businesses. Deliveries 24-7. The box can be a wall port with a live floor = lots of space. The beginning of the robot age. The last thing they will invent, before people are gone, will be the robot consumer...

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#36

Post by cpitman »

irln wrote: post #12
nostromo wrote: post #8

One thing I haven't heard much about is how humans and AI drivers will interact. If we all assume that AI cars are going to be very conservative and very competent drivers, will people take advantage of that? Will human drivers become even bigger assholes that cut off AI drivers at every possibility, knowing that an AI will not hit them? Why wait in a big line for an exit, when you know an AI car will always let you…

If AI driven cars achieve a superior safety record there won't be many human drivers...the insurance premiums will price most people out of the market. That is, the cost of insurance for human drivers will be exceedingly high.

I don't see why the cost would be any higher than it is today. If anything, driver-less cars would have lower insurance premiums. So if you can afford/justify your insurance today, you could still afford it in the future.

I could even see all insurance getting cheaper, since the risk of accidents for all cars should decrease as the mix of cars gets more and more automated.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#37

Post by cpitman »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #29
sokoloff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not obvious to me why older cars are more likely to be in fatal accidents. Even though my '66 Mustang is wildly less safe in many ways, it also gets driven with much more care than what I see around me.

There's probably a bathtub-shapes curve of driver care. I'm sure that drivers of classic American sports cars, at this distance from their dates of manufacture, are taking due caution. People with new cars all have ABS, stability control, and the other bells and whistles. But people who are driving the 1994 Dodge Colt were probably forced into it by financial circumstances. They don't have an investment to protect, t…

Do you mean they push wrecked cars down the length of the bridge to get them off? Or are they literally in such a rush that they just chuck it off the side of the bridge? Because that would be awesome.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#38

Post by rdtsc »

jurassic wrote: post #11
nostromo wrote: post #8

One thing I haven't heard much about is how humans and AI drivers will interact. If we all assume that AI cars are going to be very conservative and very competent drivers, will people take advantage of that? Will human drivers become even bigger assholes that cut off AI drivers at every possibility, knowing that an AI will not hit them? Why wait in a big line for an exit, when you know an AI car will always let you…

I don't really see the problem with this. Cars should yield to pedestrians and cyclists, and the only reason they don't always do so now is because of some impatient humans at the wheel who prioritize their speed over the safety of other road users. Without road-raging human drivers behind the wheel, is the vehicle occupant going to care that they got to nap a few minutes longer on the way to work? Or got to read a f…

> Cars should yield to pedestrians and cyclists

The problem is if they don't and pedestrian gets killed there is not way to resurect the pedestrian, and start over. Therefore, pedestrian's goals is staying alive regardless of what laws are written in the books.

To put it another way, most countries out there have laws about "cars yield to pedestrians on crossings" but in a lot of places I wouldn't want to prove a point or rely on the drivers to obey the law vs just staying alive and in one piece.

> autonomous police cars who bringing reliable traffic enforcement to all road users.

Hmm. Now this is interesting. We are almost there -- red light cameras, speed camers, automated toll booths, cars are always recording and logging their speed, acceleration and hundres of other parameters, onstar system. Now we just need an incentive such as an insurance discount to have cars be remotely disabled and pulled over of they speed too much where it becomes unsafe, or if they run red light.

At first you'd think nobody would buy it, but maybe if car insurance goes from $500 a quarter to $150 there would be some takers. Then before you know it, it would become illegal to drive cars that don't have that feature.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#39

Post by grogenaut »

gbhn wrote: post #34
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can jump out of your car and either rationally debate with them the merits of allowing access to the right-of-way, or jump directly to violent threats. The problem with autonomous cars as they are being rationalized to the public is that half the time the car will have no occupants at all. There will be nobody in the car to leap out and shake their fist.

Or just do what a driverless car would do: call the authorities or turn around and proceed by another route.

Edit: ellaboration. Stopping in traffic and calling the cops because of this is going to be a non-starter. If you're the cause of the blockage how are they going to get there? The GP is right, there are many situations where it's not going to well, and I can see lots of pranks by highschoolers that will completely mess with self driving cars.

Heck an accidental release of confetti would be an interesting experiment.

Re: The High-Stakes Race to Rid the World of Human Drivers

#40

Post by mc32 »

sanswork wrote: post #19
thrownaway2424 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you underestimate how crazy and obnoxious people can be. Take San Francisco, as an example. There are people who are poor and disenfranchised, and mentally ill, who feel that it gives them some power to saunter out into traffic and make everybody stop. With an autonomous car, that deranged person can just sit down in front of the car, bringing everything to a halt. Take New York as another example. For years…

>that deranged person can just sit down in front of the car, bringing everything to a halt. They can do that now unless you are suggesting running them over as a solution.

More likely are laws introduced against willfully and unconstructively obstructing autonomous vehicles with right of way and by way of facial recognition the autonomous vehicle turns in the perpetrator., else it summons its neighbors to swarm the offender till authorities come to resolve the impasse.
Post reply on HN