2017 Cadillac is set to have "supercruise". It's a start at least, I wonder how long the trickle down will take?
2017 Cadillac is set to have "supercruise". It's a start at least, I wonder how long the trickle down will take?
Mr_Clutch42 wrote: I do chuckle at the guys that are completely against computer driven cars, but that is the way of life, I suppose (I hope you guys don't complain about terrible drivers). 60 minutes mentioned in a short preview clip that driverless cars have already logged 1 million miles. I've read in an article that said there have been only about 3 accidents with them. All of them were due to human driver error. This will save around 30,000 lives a year, and likely 60,000 injuries caused by car accidents, saving billions of dollars in healthcare, not to mention pain and suffering from losing a loved one. It will also make riding a motorcycle safer, along with bike riding to work. This is perfect for the masses, since driving is a chore for them, and since more expansive public transportation is supposedly not feasible.
I am not completely opposed to them existing. I am completely opposed to owning one or being forced to own.
And I am a bit worried about the safety of them as they age.
93EXCivic wrote:Mr_Clutch42 wrote: I do chuckle at the guys that are completely against computer driven cars, but that is the way of life, I suppose (I hope you guys don't complain about terrible driversI am not completely opposed to them existing. I am completely opposed to owning one or being forced to own. And I am a bit worried about the safety of them as they age.
Seems to me that they will be treated like smart phones are now. You will trade them back in every few years. Software can be updated on the fly as they become available, so it would remain current as long as the platform was still in use (for a few years), and then you would "upgrade" to the latest model. It seems doubtful to me that you'd see self-driving cars with 200k miles on them because the software development will outpace the hardware's life span.
itsarebuild wrote: never gonna happen. Too many people don't have the money for service on their 1990 something commuter. How are they going to buy an automated car? And how are the upper class muckity mucks going to show their superiority without a hopelessly extravagant super car to show off in? Ain't no CEO gonna live like the masses going a preprogrammed speed! Seriously.....
Trickle down. those who can't afford self drive cars will buy used from those who can.. The MOV or so called sane lanes will be the beginning..
WilD wrote: I think these futurist predictions about fractional ownership and self-driving cars are ignoring the fact that better solutions already exist... 1. Lower speed limit to 25 mph for all urban and suburban surface streets (aka non-highways) 2. Add bicycle lanes, possibly by eliminating driving lanes where multiples exist. 3. Develop functioning mass transit. 4. ??? 5. Enjoy utopia.
Lower speed limits are the wrong way to go. Vehicles get the best fuel mileage and pollute the least at 40-45 mph that should be the speed limits now on Urban streets..
It would be too if speed limits kept pace with technology.. In the 1950's I was driving Ford Model A's with mechanical brakes, skinny bias ply tires, and none of modern safety and handling that todays cars have.. At the same speed limits modern cars have..
A few ignorant mothers who think their toddlers and pets should be able to play on roads designed for vehicles is the main reason the speed limits haven't kept up.. As for bicycles much as I like them I recognize their safety limitations and physical requirements.. As I approach my 70's I'm accepting the limitations my body places on me and in my youth my judgment lacked common sense. I swerved in and out of traffic ignoring the risks because like all youth I was going to live forever..
Bike paths and playgrounds are where bicycles belong not holding up progress and putting their riders at risk of becoming food for the tires of a Big SUV "Driven" by a multitasking mother.
93EXCivic wrote: I honestly don't foresee it happening in my life time.
The tidal wave of events will quickly overcome you.. greater population density, Higher fuel costs, the cost of insuring the "human" element..
DocV wrote: I would like to talk to the people engineering these autonomous machines (Apple, Google, Mercedes Benz, etc). I have acquaintances that constantly post links to Silicon Valley drivel stating that this is ~10-15 years out. It's hard for me to imagine placing absolute trust of the safety of my family in the hands of software and sensors. The largest automaker in the world can't even get throttle by wire right -- software problems led to loss of human life: Toyota's killer firmware: Bad design and its consequences It's easier for me to imagine central control of flow on an interstate for instance over totally autonomous capability.
They had a Restricted section of Freeway in Southern California devoted to automated drive cars.. From San Diego to Temecula or about that they ran it for years.. eventually the program ran out of money and now it's just freeway
WOW Really Paul? wrote: Does anyone know of any software that you would trust your life upon? I do not know of such a thing....
It's called most commercial airplanes, traffic lights, heck thousands of things are automated that used to be done by someone.. Oh yes there nominally are a few humans "supervising" almost all of them Just like there will be on roads and freeways
racerdave600 wrote: And the cost to update the highway system would be tragically high, so your yearly tax costs would be more than the car itself.
It's called GPS and the cars themselves will have proximity sensors just like many have now..
rcutclif wrote: Lots of good things in this thread that will all be challenges for driverless cars. But I will point out that they are still challenges for human drivers in almost all cases too, so really we have to figure out which option (or something else entirely) solves the problem better. Since pedestrians don't cause much problem on modern freeways it will start there.. Urban will follow as fenced walkways are installed.. For example, pedestrians are unpredictable. This is true for both human and computer drivers. It has been a significant problem for human drivers for a long time (see any car ever that has had a beautiful bumper ruined by DOT standards). The question is not can computers 100% predict pedestrians, because, they cannot. But the real question is, can computer drivers handle unpredictable pedestrians better than the average (or the exceeding above average) human driver, and I bet the answer either already is yes, or it will be shortly. Remember how we all complain about how bad human drivers are these days? Setting a pretty low bar for a computer to be better than.
itsarebuild wrote: In reply to rcutclif: If you truly believe that the software of a plane, power plant or other currently computer assisted device is adequate perhaps you can also tell me why there are still pilots and power plant workers..... Have you heard of these things called drones? Yes it's comforting to know that there is a human up front "in Charge" But how skilled are they? Have they had spin recovery training or stall experience? In my flight training back in the 1960's I learned those sorts of things hands on.. Now days that's taught in simulators.
Kreb wrote: Whether this is a troll thread or not does not concern me. Nobody is forcing us to participate. I for one don't mind driving automation as long as there's an opt-out. In a sense, it might add to my enjoyment of automobiles by virtue of removing the most drudging elements. If I could read, surf GRM or what not, while sitting in traffic, it won't bug me nearly as bad. Then when I get behind the wheel with my full senses engaged it will be for a true enthusiast experience. As for urban Vs. rural, it's interesting how for a time it was a popular meme that guys would be doing tech work from distant locales, since you didn't need the traditional office space to do your work. Yet in certain ways it's gone the opposite direction. Programmers are stacked up like bees in a hive in San Francisco, which tells me two things: first, that people like and profit from being around other people. Especially younger people who are inherently more social. And second, most people need that energy and aren't disciplined enough to tie themselves to a desk without a structured environment around them. But that's getting off topic. Rural living will always have its place. My only concern is that its become more hostile than it used to be, between the drug faction, the anti-government types and other anti-socials. There are many rural places where I feel more ill-at-ease than in the city - and I live in Oakland, CA.
My GF is a program director who directs programmers in India to work for South American and European companies.. From Home.. Work has changed so dramatically that I can't conceive what my Grandchildren will do.. So has transportation. The freeway built in the late 50's that turned a 1/2 hour + commute into a 7 minute breeze is now a 3 hour parking lot.. I used to hand crank my MG to start in the morning because the battery was dead. File the points and gap the spark plugs every other weekend.. Now there aren't points and sparkplugs last 100,000 miles
SVreX wrote: In reply to Ian F: Not trying to be disagreeable, but that wasn't the core of oldopelguy's rural comment:oldopelguy wrote: Automated cars; yet again city people will make life more difficult and expensive for rural America who will get zero benefit from it. No automatic car will ever be able to drive down the gravel road to my house because of the soft spots that change with the moisture in the ground, random wildlife, and SD snowstorms. Beyond that, if the road needs modifications for automatic cars it would bankrupt my county for just the paved roads, let alone gravel. Traffic is something you only have to deal with in cities, and if you don't like it move. Those of us who don't live there shouldn't have to subsidize your convenience.The only thing he said about roads and infrastructure was "IF the road needs modifications..." As he noted, they WILL make life more difficult and expensive for rural America. And, as others have noted, there are some fabulously interesting opportunities coming. I agree with your assessment of the opportunities, but also agree with his assessment of the negative impact on rural America with minimal benefit.
I hope nobody believes that coming changes will all be perfect.. History has shown otherwise.. On the other hand change is inevitable.. While we no longer ride horses to work we also don't have to deal with horse manure (except as something you buy to put on Roses) not stinky ugly messes attracting hoards of flies.
The future we won't have Jaguar XK-E and 427 Cobra's (except in museums and the rare occasion of the Ubber rich playing with their toys) Yet we won't be spending 2 weekends a month doing the required maintenance work cars of that nature demanded.
Automated cars are coming--- just ask any of the CEO's of the big automakers. There will be bumps in the road, and fatalities, but as long as the industry and govt. support the idea, it will continue on.
It will have positive and negative effects, like most things.
It will not solve our traffic problems, it will just allow you to do something else while stuck in traffic. Every day there are more people, more cars, and more congestion. To think that automation will magically solve our traffic grid-lock problems is incorrect IMHO. When they add more lanes to highways does it reduce congestion? Nope---it just slows the problem from getting worse. I see the same with automation.
I don't have a huge problem with it as long as I'm not forced to allow a computer to do my driving. The day I'm no longer allowed to drive is the day I leave the U.S.
I am so torn on this subject. Every day on my drive, I see people that shouldn't be allowed on the roads doing everything but paying attention to driving. But if my privilege to drive is removed by laws and/or made so expensive only the massively rich can afford it due to insurance or taxes, I am completely against it. I know I will be the outlaw hoarding gasoline and diesel, driving around being chased in a home built, non-trackable car in the future.
CGLockRacer wrote: I am so torn on this subject. Every day on my drive, I see people that shouldn't be allowed on the roads doing everything but paying attention to driving. But if my privilege to drive is removed by laws and/or made so expensive only the massively rich can afford it due to insurance or taxes, I am completely against it. I know I will be the outlaw hoarding gasoline and diesel, driving around being chased in a home built, non-trackable car in the future.
Change is coming.. it has since time began. Relax and enjoy the good things and learn to accept the others..
The wealthy can enjoy things you can't. Always been that way.. Try hard to become rich but if you don't make it maybe next life you can come back as the son or grandson of someone rich..
Don't worry, I doubt a modern version of the French revolution is coming soon.
STM317 wrote: Seems to me that they will be treated like smart phones are now. You will trade them back in every few years. Software can be updated on the fly as they become available, so it would remain current as long as the platform was still in use (for a few years), and then you would "upgrade" to the latest model. It seems doubtful to me that you'd see self-driving cars with 200k miles on them because the software development will outpace the hardware's life span.
Which in turn could create one of those "new businesses" SVReX alluded to: take cars with obsolete software (and related systems), but still useful hardware (chassis & drivetrain), upgrading them to current standards and re-selling or re-leasing.
In reply to Ian F:
Yep.
I see 50 or more exciting and really viable business opportunities in this thread alone.
In reply to frenchyd:
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - Adam Savage
In reply to Ian F:
My new business will be taking all of the autonomous E36 M3 out and making the cars human drivable. LSX the Googlecar! 
CGLockRacer wrote: In reply to Ian F: My new business will be taking all of the autonomous E36 M3 out and making the cars human drivable. LSX the Googlecar!
Can you start a business in California putting carbureted Chevy 350s into new Malibus? Not legally. What makes you think that if we get to legally (due to say, insurance reasons) required automated cars that you'll get to take that equipment out any more than you can remove catalytic converters in California?
And speaking of carbed 350s, computer controlled EFI has proven to be more reliable and more efficient than old purely mechanical systems. And did not spell the end of home mechanic-ing and hot rodding, either. But some of you guys sound just like the guys that cried about the vanishing of carburators and the advent of ECUs.
Autonomous cars are coming soon, and many will be all electric. You'll call a cab from your smartphone and it will take you to any destination in it's range that you want and it will go and recharge automatically whenever it gets low (and will sit there between calls charging at a local to it charge port). 200 mile ranges will be common which will definitely serve the taxi industry in urban markets quite well. The added benefit is lower maintenance costs due to fewer moving parts and the parts that are there will be more reliable. As was said, this will probably be the future of mass transit, as it will be easy to go point to point at any time, rather than having to get to a central location to take a train to another central location on a fixed schedule.
As for computer reliability, as was mentioned, embedded systems are quite reliable these days, from the computers that run your clock and microwave to the ECUs in cars now, which tend to be overall quite reliable for decades. They don't usually have multiple redundancies, and I can see that being a requirement for an autonomous car, but the tech is not that difficult to deal with and will be only getting easier and cheaper as it goes on.
In reply to Chris_V:
*For off-road use only
I'm meaning to be humorous. I don't like that is is coming, but not much I can do about it. I know it will be safe and reliable and theoretically more efficient. But taking away my freedom to drive is not something I'm going to give up without a fight.
In reply to CGLockRacer: Nobody will take your right away anymore than they've taken your right to ride a horse.. But you will choose to give it up for the same reason people gave up their horses.. Yes some still ride horses, on weekends for a hobby.. A few, not everybody.. You will have choices but you'll choose what is best for you.
In reply to Chris_V:
I still cry about the vanishing of carburetors and the advent of ECU's. I was born in the wrong time period.
You'll need to log in to post.
