Truckers protest against autonomous trucks in Missouri

This happened a little sooner than I expected. I'm sure the news about UPS' autonomous trucks in Arizona and Texas had a lot to do with it:

https://krcgtv.com/news/local/truckers-gather-at-capitol-to-push-for-new-bill-prohibiting-driverless-trucks

There are obvious parallels to the Luddites here, and it's important to remember what happened to the Luddites - the pop-culture understanding of them is that they were a bunch of shortsighted vandals who destroyed the looms and then sheepishly went back to work at better jobs in the automated textile mill the next week, surely feeling quite foolish. But actually the Luddites never got their jobs back - they died in grinding poverty, going to their graves with every indication being that they were entirely right about automation all along. And then their children did too. Their grandchildren and great-grandchildren got those new better jobs. Economists state that automation doesn't have a long-term impact on employment levels because they consider two to three generations of utter ruin to be a short-term problem...something to think about.

Makes you wonder if the improvement in efficiencies of having automomous trucks driving 'round the clock will outweigh the cost of going around one state that doesn't allow 'em?

In reply to WonkoTheSane :

If you can't join them, berk them? 

Well I suppose we all could go on a rampage smashing Cute Utility Vehicles and demand the return of the Solstice/Sky and that one Dodge almost made but I don't think it would turn out too well.

Been a long time since I read about the Luddites but you're opposed to change, violently, and you get left by the side to die a horrible death.

Hmmm.

Meh.  For years we've been hearing about the shortage of drivers due to aging out/low birth rate/no-one wanting the job/closed off to only U.S. citizens and now they're pissed about a solution.

This has been coming down the pike for some time.  Some time.  Enough time to save up a deposit for a business/personal loan to buy an automated truck much as you would have bought a regular truck to drive yourself.  

I'd imagine the Commerce Clause will put a halter pun intended on any law Missouri tries to pass. 

WonkoTheSane said:

Makes you wonder if the improvement in efficiencies of having automomous trucks driving 'round the clock will outweigh the cost of going around one state that doesn't allow 'em?

The Feds will be lobbied to make sure it's legal in all 50 states, then this won't be a problem. 

As for, jobs/outsourcing/automation, it's not good for us, but further discussion will likely end up under Margie's patio.

z31maniac said:

 

The Feds will be lobbied to make sure it's legal in all 50 states, then this won't be a problem.

The "Feds" can be lobbied to make sure it's NOT legal in all 50 states, then this won't be a problem.

I'm pulling for the Luddites, er... Truckers.

I foresee a system much like ship pilots. Where a truck does the long monotonous drive from city to city by itself and stops in a lot on the outskirts of the big cities. Then a local driver takes it the last 10-15 miles through city traffic, to its destination. 

Toyman01 said:

I foresee a system much like ship pilots. Where a truck does the long monotonous drive from city to city by itself and stops in a lot on the outskirts of the big cities. Then a local driver takes it the last 10-15 miles through city traffic, to its destination. 

Definitely a possibility in the short term, but I expect around 2030 the "pilots" would be obsolete too.

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Planes have had auto pilots since before WW2,  Trains pretty much could be remote controlled. Ships long ago  set the throttle and programed  course.  

Does anyone honestly believe trucks will be any exception?  That come next July we will start seeing driverless trucks?  

Toyman01 said:

I foresee a system much like ship pilots. Where a truck does the long monotonous drive from city to city by itself and stops in a lot on the outskirts of the big cities. Then a local driver takes it the last 10-15 miles through city traffic, to its destination. 

This.

If the trucker lobby is smart, they'll negotiate to make it so that every vehicle requires an "engineer" to monitor systems, help with the load, manage issues that pop up on the road, etc. 

frenchyd said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Planes have had auto pilots since before WW2,  Trains pretty much could be remote controlled. Ships long ago  set the throttle and programed  course.  

Does anyone honestly believe trucks will be any exception?  That come next July we will start seeing driverless trucks? 

Possibly, the difference is safety, there's a lot more risk in allowing a train, ship or plane to be remote-controlled than a car or truck. For now I think we'll see trains of trucks with one driver "supervising" in the lead truck and the rest unmanned, until the system proves itself.

GameboyRMH said:

frenchyd said:

In reply to GameboyRMH :

Planes have had auto pilots since before WW2,  Trains pretty much could be remote controlled. Ships long ago  set the throttle and programed  course.  

Does anyone honestly believe trucks will be any exception?  That come next July we will start seeing driverless trucks? 

Possibly, the difference is safety, there's a lot more risk in allowing a train, ship or plane to be remote-controlled than a car or truck. For now I think we'll see trains of trucks with one driver "supervising" in the lead truck and the rest unmanned, until the system proves itself.

I rarely ever see a convoy of trucks from the same company going to the same destination at the same time.  

But I suppose that might happen. 

They have Road trains in Australia so if that ever becomes popular here I suppose•••••• 

In reply to frenchyd :

IIRC they don't take off & land on autopilot.

mtn said:

Toyman01 said:

I foresee a system much like ship pilots. Where a truck does the long monotonous drive from city to city by itself and stops in a lot on the outskirts of the big cities. Then a local driver takes it the last 10-15 miles through city traffic, to its destination. 

This.

 

If the trucker lobby is smart, they'll negotiate to make it so that every vehicle requires an "engineer" to monitor systems, help with the load, manage issues that pop up on the road, etc. 

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of this issue nor did I sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.  It seems to me that a "how can we work alongside driverless trucks to increase safety/efficiency/lower cost, how can we work with the new system" seems like a much more logical approach than "berkeley you smarty trucks lets ban you"

I can see where a chunk of drivers are coming from in regards to autonomous trucks.

But as previously mentioned, they should be arguing for 'engineers' or 'specialists' that sit in them, monitor, and take control if it starts bugging out.

It will require different/more/harder training, but it'd mean they keep a job they otherwise would've lost.

Or they can go to a smaller local company and continue driving as I don't see any small carriers willing to shell out the cost of trucks, charging stations, driver training, mechanic training, etc etc.

Lets have the driverless trucks only drive from 10pm until  6 am  , then like the Pony express , stop and get a new.......driver

In reply to purplepeopleeater :

Check the newest offering from Boeing and Airbus. 

There are convoys of trailers, but they don't travel on the same roads we drive on-

2 and three trailer combos are also used on US highways, but they are heavily regulated.

In reply to Cooter :

Amen!

The Railroad:  Technology that works!

purplepeopleeater said:

In reply to frenchyd :

IIRC they don't take off & land on autopilot.

 

They don't, but the programming, sensors, ability, is fully capable of doing so. 

z31maniac said:

purplepeopleeater said:

In reply to frenchyd :

IIRC they don't take off & land on autopilot.

 

They don't, but the programming, sensors, ability, is fully capable of doing so. 

Autoland have been around for a while now (allowing landing at a fully fogged in airport). It requires a specially equipped airport and newer plane, but most large airports will have it.  I don't think they do auto-take off, but that's just because it's very straight forward even in pretty bad conditions (also a critical safety time).

I think the only thing a modern airline really needs the pilot for on some routes is to taxi, talk to the controllers and of course punch numbers into the nav computer.  The pilots are there mostly for emergency situations.

GameboyRMH said:

Possibly, the difference is safety, there's a lot more risk in allowing a train, ship or plane to be remote-controlled than a car or truck. For now I think we'll see trains of trucks with one driver "supervising" in the lead truck and the rest unmanned, until the system proves itself.

Did you say what you meant to?  More risk to use a remote controlled train, ship or plane than a truck?

I think the exact opposite.

aircooled said:

z31maniac said:

purplepeopleeater said:

In reply to frenchyd :

IIRC they don't take off & land on autopilot.

 

They don't, but the programming, sensors, ability, is fully capable of doing so. 

Autoland have been around for a while now (allowing landing at a fully fogged in airport). It requires a specially equipped airport and newer plane, but most large airports will have it.  I don't think they do auto-take off, but that's just because it's very straight forward even in pretty bad conditions (also a critical safety time).

I think the only thing a modern airline really needs the pilot for on some routes is to taxi, talk to the controllers and of course punch numbers into the nav computer.  The pilots are there mostly for emergency situations.

Yeah, exactly. I have worked with software for years and understand, regardless of all testing, it still doesn't act the way it's expected some times. 

It was fascinating, to see how many planes they can get on and get off of the tarmac so efficiently as I was sitting there having my burger and a beer. You could see 7-10 planes just lined up behind each other coming in to land. It was really coo. 

Streetwiseguy said:

GameboyRMH said:

Possibly, the difference is safety, there's a lot more risk in allowing a train, ship or plane to be remote-controlled than a car or truck. For now I think we'll see trains of trucks with one driver "supervising" in the lead truck and the rest unmanned, until the system proves itself.

Did you say what you meant to?  More risk to use a remote controlled train, ship or plane than a truck?

I think the exact opposite.

Yeah that's what I said. The vehicles cost more and pack a lot more kinetic energy, and can carry many more passengers. And the plane and ship can find themselves in serious trouble just from getting lost.

Note that they're testing these trucks in a lot of areas where the risk of encountering proper adverse weather is pretty low.

The big issue with self driving vehicles is still that they have trouble handling proper adverse weather, basically when you really would want the machine to take over. I suspect we'll see the "self driving but with an 'engineer' onboard" for quite a while. Depending on whom you talk to in academia in this field, actual level 5 capability is much further away than certain hypists would want you to think.