The driverless future
- Thread starter tbm3fan
- Start date
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
Hmmm never heard of anyone prosecuted.
67Monaco
Old Man with a Hat
I believe an assumption draws on life experiences and the ability to determine ones comfort level with expected out comes of said actions.
Wildaugust
Senior Member
If we're all going to have to lose our freedom of choice in the name of safety and end up with our personal property, in this case our cars, rendered useless by intrusive legislation, maybe the powers that be should first consider replacing all of the doctors and hospital staff with computer controlled robots. I mean, 200,000 to 440,000 people being killed by medical mistakes compared to 33,000 to 35,000 dying in car wrecks? Seems like hospitals are far more dangerous than cars!
Medical errors kill hundreds of thousands each year in the US
It's basically the same here too. A Canadian university, The University of Alberta I believe, did a study a few years back and found that you are approximately 8 times more likely to be killed in hospital/by a medical mistake than you are to die in a car accident.
Medical errors kill hundreds of thousands each year in the US
It's basically the same here too. A Canadian university, The University of Alberta I believe, did a study a few years back and found that you are approximately 8 times more likely to be killed in hospital/by a medical mistake than you are to die in a car accident.
tbm3fan
Old Man with a Hat
Another comment...
(CNN)Google's driverless car just caused its first crash. To the casual observer this may seem to vindicate the doubters. In fact, all it does is prove that the future is now.
After more than a million miles of autonomous driving, Google's vehicle reached an intersection where it arguably had the right of way. The car assumed that an approaching bus would yield to let it pass, and when the bus did not slow down the driverless car -- going at a speed of about 2 mph -- made contact with the side of the bus, which was traveling at 15 mph.
No one was harmed, and Google has already released a statement affirming that the car learned from its mistake, and now understands that buses are less likely to yield than other types of vehicles. It should also be noted that the passenger who was in the car at the time said that he, a licensed reasonable person, would have made the same mistake the car did.
Mark Goldfeder
The incident comes on the heels of last month's announcement by U.S. safety regulators that for the purposes of federal law they would consider the "'driver"' in Google's new self-driving car, to be ... the car itself.
That small doctrinal shift could eventually completely change the world as we know it, and this crash only serves to prove that point.
The law uses the "reasonable driver" standard in evaluating negligence liability. Simply put, if a driver can show he took as much care as a "reasonable driver" should have taken, he is generally not held liable in case of an accident.
Until now, that just meant comparison to a reasonable person. But if a "driver" can now be defined both as a "reasonable person" and as a computer -- one that can react on the roadway 10 times faster than the average human being -- then what does it mean to say "reasonable driver" anymore?
Cop pulls over Google's driverless car 00:55
The traditional fear has been that cars driven by computers would not be as safe as those driven by people. That's why California drafted a law requiring that all vehicles -- including driverless cars -- have a built-in steering-wheel and a licensed human passenger capable of taking control. This assumes it is safer to allow a human driver to grab the wheel in the event of an emergency.
2014: Google's driverless cars 03:44
But that assumption is far from clear. The average U.S. driver has one accident roughly every 165,000 miles. Google's driverless cars are already doing much better, and constantly improving. It is becoming clear after millions of miles of research, that it is safer to simply let the computer drive -- even in the event of an emergency. Google is so sure of this that there is no steering wheel in their latest design. And the federal government seemed to agree when it officially recognized the computer as a "capable driver" in the fullest legal sense of the word -- even in the Google car, where a human cannot possibly take over.
So -- getting back to our original question -- if sooner or later half the cars on the road are driven by computers, what happens to the "reasonable driver" standard? If an average guy in an average car has an accident which the average "reasonable person" could not have avoided, should he now be held liable because a driverless car would have easily avoided it?
The assumption used to be that when driverless cars started to get into accidents, much of the legal wrangling would revolve around driverless car owners -- or other responsible parties such designers, programmers, and manufacturers -- having to prove that their vehicles met the "reasonable driver" standard. But increasingly, it appears that the technology is so good that the opposite will eventually be true: Human drivers will have the burden of proving that they met the new "reasonable" standard.
Will two separate standards evolve? If not, what happens when the skill of computer drivers is simply too far out of reach for the average human being to be considered safe under the same "reasonable" standard?
Will people simply be forced to give up driving on the open road? Don't laugh -- it's not out of the question.
Consider how the law treats drunk drivers: We ban drunk drivers because they cannot meet the "reasonable driver" standard. We don't compare them to a "reasonable drunk driver" because the law assumes a "reasonable driver" who is drunk would not drive in the first place.
It is quite possible that in a matter of years the empirical evidence will be clear: When a stone sober human gets behind the wheel instead of letting the car drive itself, the danger to others increases so drastically that doing so will be barred by law, the same way we bar people who are drunk or otherwise impaired.
In other words, a human being -- just by virtue of being human -- simply won't meet the new legal standard for a "reasonable driver."
And that might not be such a bad thing: 33,000 Americans die annually in automobile accidents, 93% of which are caused by human error.
As cars have taken small steps toward becoming smarter over the last 15 years, with the additions of sensors and vehicle-to-vehicle communications among other innovations, the frequency of accidents has fallen over 50%. If we remove the ability for a human -- a tired, distracted, drunk, angry, or simply slow-reacting human -- to take over, experts believe that accident frequency could drop by an additional, and astounding, 80%.
And computer drivers are getting better, not worse. As the incredible savings in human lives becomes clear, it will become more difficult to rationalize allowing human beings on the open road. Americans love to drive it's true -- but if they could save 33,000 lives every year by letting the computer drive instead, they may well choose to do it.
That's why I think the writing is on the wall: Human drivers will soon be one of those things -- like the rotary phone or the typewriter -- that you will have to tell your grandkids about. Not only will human driving be unnecessary -- many assume that by 2040 self-driving cars will be the norm -- but it may well be considered genuinely unsafe, not to mention against the law!
Not to worry though, the legal acceptance of the artificial driver will only hasten the reconciliation of facts with people's feelings, and the development of new social norms. In other words, by the time your grandkids are barred from driving, they probably won't much care.
Wollfen
Old Man with a Hat
It does bring up some interesting points and the last point is the biggest of all, by the time people are banned from driving because it will be "unsafe " to let them do so the younger generation wont really be bothered by the change. It is the older generations that have had that taste of driving cars themselves, those that have found the great pleasure in self determination that will be the most affected by such a change. 25 years time I guess I will be too old to care though.
I wonder how old warriors felt when horse drawn chariots became obsolete and you could no longer feel the wind in your hair as you raced along with a four horse team tearing along a dirt road?
I wonder how old warriors felt when horse drawn chariots became obsolete and you could no longer feel the wind in your hair as you raced along with a four horse team tearing along a dirt road?
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
After looking for a newer car to update the 70Bigblockdodge DD fleet. The boringness of these cars I may change my mind and just let them drive themselves.
tbm3fan
Old Man with a Hat
We had a train derailment out here this morning. A news crew was out in the area doing a news report from the sidewalk. In a split second you saw the reporter jump out of the way and the news camera, on tripod, get knocked over. A car/driver apparently jumped the curb right where the reporter was and then continued past, after hitting the camera, to then hit another car. Yep, that was a reasonable driver who did all that by apparently rubber necking rather than paying attention. One thing about driverless cars and that is no more rubber necking by the car. I detest drivers who have to slow to a crawl to watch what is happening. That probably includes 95% of all drivers at a minimum.
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
Lol, I love the slow down and look at a tow truck and a broken down car never saw that before.
Some of you may have seen this. I was wondering when BMW would weigh in.. link below but article is short so i just posted it all.
My back to the windshield, facing rear seat, at 200 kph on the Autobahn..dunno about that. Not in my lifetime anyway so guess I can't get too worked up about it
BMW marks 100 years with self-driving sedan concept
My back to the windshield, facing rear seat, at 200 kph on the Autobahn..dunno about that. Not in my lifetime anyway so guess I can't get too worked up about it
BMW marks 100 years with self-driving sedan concept
To celebrate its 100th birthday, BMW rolled out a self-driving concept car that it believes represents its future.
Because it's BMW, designers had to find a way to incorporate self-driving capability into a car that will uphold its commitment to passionate driving performance. Not an easy task.
“At the BMW Group, we are always on a quest for the best solution. It’s part of our DNA,” said Harald Krüger, chairman of the board of management, at the Munich event marking the centenary.
The resulting concept car is a sedan that has "coupé-type sportiness." It assists the driver by, for instance, showing the ideal path on a highway and speed. But then for self-driving, it transforms. The steering wheel and center console retracts. The front passengers can face those in the rear seat.
BMW thinks we're on the verge of a self-driving world.
“If, as a designer, you are able to imagine something, there’s a good chance it could one day become reality,” said Adrian van Hooydonk, had of BMW Group Design, in a statement. “So our objective with the BMW Vision Next 100 was to develop a future scenario that people would engage with.”
Because it's BMW, designers had to find a way to incorporate self-driving capability into a car that will uphold its commitment to passionate driving performance. Not an easy task.
“At the BMW Group, we are always on a quest for the best solution. It’s part of our DNA,” said Harald Krüger, chairman of the board of management, at the Munich event marking the centenary.
The resulting concept car is a sedan that has "coupé-type sportiness." It assists the driver by, for instance, showing the ideal path on a highway and speed. But then for self-driving, it transforms. The steering wheel and center console retracts. The front passengers can face those in the rear seat.
BMW thinks we're on the verge of a self-driving world.
“If, as a designer, you are able to imagine something, there’s a good chance it could one day become reality,” said Adrian van Hooydonk, had of BMW Group Design, in a statement. “So our objective with the BMW Vision Next 100 was to develop a future scenario that people would engage with.”
300rag
It's Not Going to Shift Itself
At least this gives you the option of driving yourself.
yeah.. and I sure hope that "personal" transportation will always have this option for the "man" to take over for the "machine" for many years into whatever driverless future awaits.
mentioned already in thread..couple of movies creatively dealt with this. Demolition Man (1993) and I, Robot (2004), and a bunch of others:
What Sci-Fi Movies Get Wrong About Cars
Last edited:
70bigblockdodge
Old Man with a Hat
Do you know how many morons I pass (tells you how slow they are going) that have the GPS screen suctioned cupped to the windshield dead center in their vision. These are the people that would benefit greatly from self driving car.
So many it probably would scare the crap out of many of us. GPS right up their in windshield viewing area has got to be among the dumbest things ever.
Just from the vantage point of my 1/2 ton truck i see the most reckless, flagrant "eyes of the road" stuff. all speeds, making turns, etc., but MOVING forward heads down staring down at/pecking on that frickin' phone/GPS device.
Im for whatever makes us all safer...certain driverless/driver-assisting technology has that promise. I just aint ever gonna be up for the "machines" takin' over 100% of vehicle operation.
Landyacht
Active Member
A driverless car would allow blind people to travel places on their own.
tbm3fan
Old Man with a Hat
Some people need driverless in Illinois
Cops stop car with tree wedged in grille, charge driver; photos go viral
and sadly this would probably never have happened
New Jersey trooper struck at accident scene dies of injuries
Cops stop car with tree wedged in grille, charge driver; photos go viral
and sadly this would probably never have happened
New Jersey trooper struck at accident scene dies of injuries
Wollfen
Old Man with a Hat
Here is a story detailing how quick self driving features are rolling out, it makes for some interesting reading.
Self-driving cars are closer than you think
Self-driving cars are closer than you think
A Tesla crashed in Florida last week .. reportedly the 'Auto Pilot" couldn't distinguish a "white" truck trailer from a "bright" sky AND reportedly the driver was watching a Harry Potter movie. The story didn't end well for the driver
Different but related story .. this one went viral a couple of months ago. Dunno if its proved to be staged or discredited by now, but after watching it a few times, it sure looks like what it seems to be.
source: Man takes 'autopilot' literally, snoozes behind wheel of self-driving Tesla
Different but related story .. this one went viral a couple of months ago. Dunno if its proved to be staged or discredited by now, but after watching it a few times, it sure looks like what it seems to be.
source: Man takes 'autopilot' literally, snoozes behind wheel of self-driving Tesla
Similar threads
