Autonomous cars

[Svip]

Self-driving cars are coming. Yet this supposedly significant development has gone amiss on this forum. So I'd like to start a debate on the matter.

 

I believe that autonomous cars will be 1) available to the public at large within a foreseeable future (say 15 years) and 2) that they will on average be better drivers (read: less accident prone) than human drivers (this is a statement with reservations, but I'll get back on that).

 

I am a software developer and a car enthusiast (I don't refer to myself as a 'petrolhead', because that's not primarily what I am interested in about cars). As such, I view this subject from two viewpoints: As someone interested in technology and software, and as someone interested in cars and driving in general. Both viewpoints contain optimism and skepticism.

 

Let's start with the positives. Currently, a few automakers are working on developing self-driving cars. These include BMW, Volvo and Tesla, among a few others. Google is the noticeable outlier here, because they are not an automaker. And Google have been the most 'aggressive' in their opposition to human drivers, so much that their first prototype contained no instruments to control the car. (However, during road tests, law in California requires a human should be present and at any moment be able to assume control.)

 

Google have been releasing data on how well their testing phase is going, because they can legally do it on roads in California. According to their most recent data, their cars have been involved in 13 accidents since 2009. All 13 of which were incidents, where their cars were rear-ended by another car, while stationary at a stop light. Out of their 1 million miles (~1.6 million kilometres) while autonomous, their cars have at fault for 0 accidents. Since by US standards, an accident occurs for every 440,000 miles (~700,000 kilometres) driven, this would seem better than the natural average.

 

All things considered, self-driving cars don't have to be perfect, just better than humans and fewer accidents will occur.

 

However, their data and testing are missing a lot of important features. First of all, in addition to 1 million miles in autonomous mode, about 600,000 miles (960,000 kilometres) were driven in manual mode. Their report fails to mention if one of the drivers had ever had to take over one of the cars to avoid an accident.

 

We'll assume they haven't, because then again, their testing is primarily dealing with urban condition. You may think that's a decent test, since urban driving tends to resolve in the most minor accidents. That's true, but the most fatal accidents occurs on country roads and motorways, particularly on adverse conditions. Scenarios these cars have not been tested in yet. Like: How will they cope going downhill in wintery condition? Will they use engine braking rather than the foot brake? How well will they foresee problems ahead that are not directly traffic related (stormy weather, etc.)?

 

True, the last one might be a force majeure, but wintery conditions certainly won't be completely unrealistic.

 

But the fact of the matter is; while Google's numbers look promising, these cars are certainly not ready to be sold in replacement of regular cars. Not without severe restrictions.

 

And that might be the way out for some automakers. It may end up being too costly, too large a time frame and/or too complicated. So rather than ensure it works under all conditions, the cars will simply have a range of situations where it is available in. Decent enough conditions and specific road types.

 

Indeed, I could see the point of self-driving cars for the motorway, then manual takeover during urban environments.

 

That way, automakers won't actually have to make a complete autonomous car, but just one with it as one of its features. We already have cars that can parallel park themselves, so why not?

 

Indeed, my prediction is that the first 'autonomous' cars won't be fully autonomous, but only for certain conditions.

 

But for autonomous cars to work even better, more cars on the road should be autonomous, if not all. But a car has an average lifespan of 10 years, so when the autonomous car rolls out to dealers, it would take at least 10 years for there to be a majority of them, and that's assuming all cars sold from then on will be autonomous. Which they won't.

 

Like with all new features, this will be an exclusive feature. Think Mercedes-Benz S-Class exclusive. The new Dacia from that point in the future won't have it. And may never have it.

 

One assumption is that eventually, all cars will be autonomous. But that presumes too much. It presumes that everything will go well.

 

Speaking as a software developer, I know software is prone to errors. I simply find it unlikely that we won't have a case on our hands at some point, where an autonomous car have killed someone. Be its passengers or pedestrian or whatever, someone will die due to a software error. (In reality, the difference in dying due to a human error or software error is moot; you are still dead.)

 

And herein lies an important legal (and ethical) challenge. Who is to blame for the death? Surely, the automaker who wrote the algorithm. And I am sure the courts will agree. This will certainly stop some automakers from even getting into autonomous cars and others will let them remain exclusive, where the price for the car itself can possible cover any possible legal costs.

 

Again, we are not assuming autonomous cars will be perfect, just better. But they won't be able to make a remarkable impact, if they remain a high-class vehicle and not a car for the people.

 

In effect, my prediction is that self-driving cars are coming. They will be better than human drivers in most conditions. But they will be exclusive high-end cars. And it will likely take years if not decades before they are likely to become an everyman's car.

 

Yes, there will be occasional attempts at making a low-cost autonomous car, but I don't think their initial attempts will be successes.

 

There are plenty of other concerns, but I feel this post is getting long enough.

[Dottie]

The first autonomous cars will most likely be high end cars like BMWs, Mercs, etc and maybe fleet vehicles (mainly taxi cabs) and then eventually show up in more common vehicles later on.

 

Itll definitely take years for the streets to be almost entirely full of autonomous vehicles mainly due to the cost of it (especially in more impoverished areas or areas where the nearest car dealer is really far away)

[Flachbau]

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

[Dottie]

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

Thats technology for ya. A lot of jobs will eventually be automated in the future, driving jobs will most likely be one of them.

Its a helluva lot cheaper to automate a job, so why hire people for it?

Dont know why fast food isnt automated yet...

[SouthLand]

Let's just keep the people that hate to drive on public transport so that all the people that LOVE to drive can do it without any problems.

[Flachbau]

 

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

Thats technology for ya. A lot of jobs will eventually be automated in the future, driving jobs will most likely be one of them.

Its a helluva lot cheaper to automate a job, so why hire people for it?

Dont know why fast food isnt automated yet...

 

 

If nobody had jobs in transportation/shipment services or fast food, our economy would be sh*t.. even worse than it is now. It's only a matter of time before something like that happens. Millions would be out of jobs.

[Dottie]

 

 

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

Thats technology for ya. A lot of jobs will eventually be automated in the future, driving jobs will most likely be one of them.

Its a helluva lot cheaper to automate a job, so why hire people for it?

Dont know why fast food isnt automated yet...

 

 

If nobody had jobs in transportation/shipment services or fast food, our economy would be sh*t.. even worse than it is now. It's only a matter of time before something like that happens. Millions would be out of jobs.

 

The economy would not go to sh*t because of that. People are still gonna use those services regardless of whether or not they're automated. People are still gonna get a Whopper regardless of whether a person took their order or a robot or some tablet did.

 

Same as factories. Robots replaced most of the people there, the ones who lost their jobs bickered, then moved on because they couldnt do anything about it.

 

Yes people will be out of jobs but they should have considered another work path that was not going to be automated. Besides, its usually the low paying, low skill jobs that are being automated anyway.

 

Automation will also create jobs. Meaningful jobs that require actual skill (like software engineers, programmers, etc) that design and implement these automation systems.

 

Automation is essentially a trade off. Less low paying, low skill jobs in favour of higher skill jobs mainly in engineering and programming

Edited June 7, 2015 by Winning001

[G's Ah's]

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

 

People will more than likely have to remain on board the vehicle itself just in case something happened that perhaps the computer was not programmed to respond to, or in the event of a software crash.

 

One of my concerns with autonomous cars is the decision making delegated to them, especially in the decisions in which the only way to avoid an accident is to crash into something else.

[Svip]

That's assuming self-driving cars/lorries/buses will be cheaper than regular ones with a human driver. Maybe they cost a lot to maintain? Maybe politicians will come down on the unions' side and impose severe artificial costs on self-driving vehicles. Considering that the transportation industry is about 35% of the labour workforce, this won't be an issue that is going to go idle by. Finding jobs for all those people will not be trivial.

 

We can only create so many fake nonsense jobs for humans. We need to rethink our entire economy system, if we want to have a society where some people simply cannot work through no fault of their own.

[LeFox]

I believe their is still a cloud of mystery around it. Yes it can lead to more innovation, yes, it has function. But the consumption of it. Would it be solar powered? Will it run on gas? That's what would worry me. If the car runs on gas, and you`re going on a long trip, then you sleep, what would happen if the car was to run out? Pull to the side and wait for you to wake up? Would it keep beeping?

 

Hopefully we will know if BMW really does relsase one later this year.

http://m.motortrend.com/wot/1506_bmw_baidu_pair_up_on_autonomous_cars_may_beat_google_to_market.html

Edited June 19, 2015 by ihavcandygetinthevan

[CBH]

We've had self driving cars for years. I use them, occasionally, when I don't want to ride a bike 20 miles.

 

It turns out that the problem with everyone having their own individual motor vehicle isn't that they have to drive it themselves. It's that when they go to work, they're carrying three or four completely empty seats with them. You're not going to fix the glaring inefficiency and wastefulness of all this by replacing the controls with a computer.

[El Dildo]

good topic.

good OP

And herein lies an important legal (and ethical) challenge. Who is to blame for the death? Surely, the automaker who wrote the algorithm. And I am sure the courts will agree. This will certainly stop some automakers from even getting into autonomous cars and others will let them remain exclusive, where the price for the car itself can possible cover any possible legal costs.

I'm curious what exactly is the difference between this scenario and the current state of affairs. car makers already have to worry about compensation payments if manufacturer error is found to blame for vehicular deaths. they already have to worry about massive lawsuits if they fail to issue timely recalls to mass production. and it hasn't stopped car makers from making cars, yeah? it hasn't stopped them from innovating in terms of current electronics that provide for smaller/individual autonomous functions or guidance or entertainment systems.

 

I can see why Google should be cautious, I guess.

but the traditional/established automakers shouldn't feel tepid. especially if - as you predict - they're going to begin by limiting the autonomous line to an exclusive upper-pricing level.

[Svip]

good topic.

good OP

And herein lies an important legal (and ethical) challenge. Who is to blame for the death? Surely, the automaker who wrote the algorithm. And I am sure the courts will agree. This will certainly stop some automakers from even getting into autonomous cars and others will let them remain exclusive, where the price for the car itself can possible cover any possible legal costs.

I'm curious what exactly is the difference between this scenario and the current state of affairs. car makers already have to worry about compensation payments if manufacturer error is found to blame for vehicular deaths. they already have to worry about massive lawsuits if they fail to issue timely recalls to mass production. and it hasn't stopped car makers from making cars, yeah? it hasn't stopped them from innovating in terms of current electronics that provide for smaller/individual autonomous functions or guidance or entertainment systems.

 

Most accidents today are blamed on the driver. It's a tiny minority of accidents that are blamed on car manufacturers. 95% of all car related accidents are blamed on human error. When the car isn't driving itself, anything the driver does is outside the control of the manufacturer anyway, meaning in 95% of cases, they lose lawsuits (or get sued at all).

 

When cars driving themselves, this picture will change. Sure, we assume there will be fewer total accidents, but a larger percentage of those can be blamed on the manufacturer. Another effect will be that people don't trust self-driving cars, in the same way most people wouldn't sit on a plane if there was no pilot, even though a modern airliner can fly itself.

 

You are not completely inaccurate that it is similar to today, it will just be far more pronounced. Another issue is ethnics: If a situation has arrived, where an autonomous car most choose between who to kill, who then should it kill? Should it always prioritise its driver over others? Should children be prioritised over elderly people? Hopefully, an autonomous car should hopefully never come in a situation to make that judgement. You can argue; what about a human in the same situation? Well, the human can always say they didn't have time to think, but a computer would have.

[Lakitu]

I absolutely despise the idea of autonomous cars. Just encourages even more laziness in society, do we need that?

[Killerdude]

 

 

 

I don't like how they can possibly take people's jobs away. I heard of that self driving truck, and if they do taxi cabs then just imagine NYC..

 

The idea is cool, though.

Thats technology for ya. A lot of jobs will eventually be automated in the future, driving jobs will most likely be one of them.

Its a helluva lot cheaper to automate a job, so why hire people for it?

Dont know why fast food isnt automated yet...

 

 

If nobody had jobs in transportation/shipment services or fast food, our economy would be sh*t.. even worse than it is now. It's only a matter of time before something like that happens. Millions would be out of jobs.

 

The economy would not go to sh*t because of that. People are still gonna use those services regardless of whether or not they're automated. People are still gonna get a Whopper regardless of whether a person took their order or a robot or some tablet did.

 

Same as factories. Robots replaced most of the people there, the ones who lost their jobs bickered, then moved on because they couldnt do anything about it.

 

Yes people will be out of jobs but they should have considered another work path that was not going to be automated. Besides, its usually the low paying, low skill jobs that are being automated anyway.

 

Automation will also create jobs. Meaningful jobs that require actual skill (like software engineers, programmers, etc) that design and implement these automation systems.

 

Automation is essentially a trade off. Less low paying, low skill jobs in favour of higher skill jobs mainly in engineering and programming

 

You trade an extremely large number of low pay-low skill jobs, for a small number of high pay-high skill jobs.

 

The amount of people Taxi, Fast food and trucking employs, is unbelievable. You take the average mcdonalds, employs 10-15 total, Replace them with robots, You'd realistically only need 1-2 people to maintain everything. Apply that to every Mcdonalds, Burger King, Wendys, etc.. all over, Millions of people lose their jobs and a lot of those people who work at these places, Are there because they cant do anything else.

 

When nobody has a job, Nobody has money, nobody buys anything, nobody sells anything and everything goes to sh*t. fewer and fewer people will go to the restaurants because they can't afford to and the few that can afford it wouldn't be enough to make up for the lack of customers, Which means the companies can't afford to pay the upkeep of the robots and the technicians who maintain them.

 

Eventually those big chains shut down, Stop buying meat and produce, The farms go out of buisness because nobody buys anything, More people are out of work. Seed places would go under, Farming equipment manufacturers would go under, feeder plants for those companies would go under.

[sivispacem]

We've had decades of automation, centuries in fact, and it's not brought about the apocalypse like you seem to think it will. I see no reason to think this will now.

[Killerdude]

It is a bit of a stretch, But it is possible.

[sivispacem]

So is being struck by lightening, but you don't spend your entire life locked in a Faraday Cage, do you?

 

Actually, lightening is much likelier.

[Svip]

I get where you're coming from, Sivispacem, but your analysis is missing an important factor: The transportation industry employs a huge number of labourers, somewhere between 10% and 20% in the United States. I cannot remember the exact figure, but it's huge.

 

When computers and robots replaced labourers in the manufacturing industry, it was offset by the rise of the computer industry, which in addition to creating the computer industry also created a lot of new services available to the public at large. Needs we didn't know we had we suddenly had! Who would have thought in 2005 that anyone would need a tablet? Now everyone does.

 

The problem is that while that created a lot of jobs (and still does), I am having trouble seeing how many new jobs autonomous vehicles will create. Surely there will be people employed to oversee the whole operation, even if lorries are autonomous, still need to be sent from A to B and then to C and D and so on. But surely logistics companies already have people who do that, considering lorry drivers need to know where to go in the first place.

 

Car mechanics will still remain in business, because let's face it, cars will still break. And even if not, you gotta change those tyres now and then. But in the future, they will also be software maintainers.

 

Now, I admit, I may not be imaginative enough to see the new lucrative businesses that autonomous cars opens up. Stephen Kubrik didn't foresee the personal computer in 2001: A Space Odessy, as they are still using typewriters in the film.

 

I think we must realise that there will eventually come a future where the amount available jobs will be less so than the amount of employable people. And significantly less so. If automation continues - and I hate to make a slippery slope argument - then surely eventually they will have taken enough of our jobs, for some people to remain unemployed through no fault of their own. When we remove the labourers from a huge industry like the transportation industry, where do we send them? They can't all be software engineers.

 

But regardless, I predict some sort of scare against autonomous cars, the introduction will be slowed, but eventually they will begin roaming our streets.

 

Thank goodness we still have motorcycles. Those would be pointless to make autonomous.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Svip

[Killerdude]

What I described in my above post, happened for real, on a smaller scale, instead of fast food chain, insert automotive corporation.

 

Where I live used to be a Major manufacturing area, Southern Ontario, When they outsourced all the jobs overseas and to mexico, A few hundred thousand people lost their jobs, The economy just flatlined, If it wasn't for Chrysler's Windsor Assembly and all the feeder plants the supply it, The whole area would be a ghost town.

This all happened because jobs moved, Imagine what would happen if the jobs just outright vanished.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Killerdude8

[Niko Montana]

It's a cool idea, but it could put taxi drivers, bus drivers etc out of jobs. Also imagine how boring F1, Nascar, Rallycross and driving overall would be. If autonomous cars become more common, then I presume driving laws would change significantly. Personally, I think that they should only be available for those who genuinely need them, for example disabled people.

Edited August 26, 2015 by thedriver111