As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Autonomous Transportation] When the cars have all the jobs, the poor will walk the earth

2456748

Posts

  • KrieghundKrieghund Registered User regular
    Once self driving cars start becoming the norm, rather than the oddity, I think personal ownership is going to plummet. Taxi service is going to be where it's at. No dealing with lost drivers anymore. Get your app of choice to call a vehicle, plug your phone in with the destination already set up, and it just takes you there.

    Let's take me as an example. I live in Broward County Florida. Orlando's parks are about a two hour trip (one way) for me. Now let's say that we've gotten smart and put in the high speed rail that keeps going back and forth up in Tallahassee. Or, just take me to the airport if we're still dumb. So I call my cab, and get a lift to the train station and jet up to Orlando. Disney or Universal will pick my up there if I'm staying on site. Have my weekend of fun, get driven back to the train, and take another cab home. Or, I could do what I do now, which is drive up the Turnpike and back. Unless I'm going someplace else in Orlando, there is no need for my car to sit in a parking lot for two days while I'm off doing whatever. Now, I get road hypnosis if somebody isn't there to keep me alert, or I'm taking a five hour energy. So I would really rather not worry about falling asleep going 80.

  • DuffelDuffel jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited March 2016
    japan wrote: »
    Duffel wrote: »
    These things seem like they would be rather unuseful for those of us who live off the roads in the woods, farm work, and any other kind of offroad travel.

    I will admit I might warm up to them if they could make me one that looks like a '67 Mustang, and not a grey-plasticky rodentine bubble.

    A vehicle being able to function driverlessly doesn't preclude a person being able to drive it.

    But I think that'll probably be a niche, like genuinely off road capable vehicles (i.e. not consumer SUVs) are now.

    Thinking of a driverless car like a car is probably the wrong mindset with which to approach it. It's probably very deliberate that the concept models take an appliance-style design approach, like you see in city cars.

    Oh, I'm sure the design is deliberate, and to be fair I think most of the vehicles released these days look like shite. It seems like some of the designs above would allow for a traditionally seated driver, while others would not.

    Still, I live in an area where literally everyone ends up offroad (or at least off paved roads) constantly. We may end up in a situation where people living in cities/the burbs has their regular "driver's license" that will basically teach you how not to die if your autodrive cuts out, and people who live in less developed/rural areas have to have an additional license in the vein of a CDL (which would just be a regular driver's license, but a lot of people wouldn't need them anymore).

    Having to be constantly sitting in a driving position while this thing does the work for you sounds kind of lame, though. If I'm going to sign over my autonomy it better be for the full limosine experience.

    I'm also not terribly crazy about Google/my automotive manufacturer/my car dealership/my insurance company/Russian spammers/whoever else wants to pay for the information knowing literally everywhere I go anytime I don't walk or ride a bike... and, speaking of which, how do motorcycles fit into this bold new future?
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    A lot of farm vehicles can be or already are replaced with automation, since a farm is very structured. Construction, demolition, etc will take longer, since they involve unprepared conditions.

    I'm not talking about stuff like robotractors plowing flat tilled fields. I'm talking about stuff like, "I need to go down on the lower farm to check on cattle/we're going to sticking/chopping tobacco in this field and we need to get all of our tools down there/I'm moving some light equipment from the barn to the field" and all the other offroad things you basically need a beater pickup truck to do.

    EDIT: And of course there's all kinds of other jobs that need to go offroad frequently too. Veterinarians, ten dozen different kinds of researchers like archaeologists, geologists, environmental researchers, pretty much anyone who does anything related to the department of the Interior...

    Duffel on
  • JuliusJulius Captain of Serenity on my shipRegistered User regular
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    As I understand it, one of the major problems with self driving cars right now is that snow confuses the hell out of them. They're fine with the driving part - they can adjust their handling for winter weather just fine. It's knowing where things are when there's snow piled up everywhere that they fail at. Through GPS, they may know that they're approaching the corner of 1st and Main, but their sensors are telling them that they've entered a mysterious alien landscape.

    So for now, they drive below the snow belt.

    I think that learning how to handle snow is the last major hurdle they need to cross before they become practical for consumers.

    Solution A: Infrastructure upgrades with transmitters embedded along the roadway path that allow vehicles to communicate and know where they are without visual cues.

    I mean the cars already know where they are. The problem is that those "visual" cues are what they rely on to drive safely. The reason why self-driving cars might possibly be a workable idea is that these will not be relying on massive, expensive infrastructure upgrades.

  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    Julius wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    As I understand it, one of the major problems with self driving cars right now is that snow confuses the hell out of them. They're fine with the driving part - they can adjust their handling for winter weather just fine. It's knowing where things are when there's snow piled up everywhere that they fail at. Through GPS, they may know that they're approaching the corner of 1st and Main, but their sensors are telling them that they've entered a mysterious alien landscape.

    So for now, they drive below the snow belt.

    I think that learning how to handle snow is the last major hurdle they need to cross before they become practical for consumers.

    Solution A: Infrastructure upgrades with transmitters embedded along the roadway path that allow vehicles to communicate and know where they are without visual cues.

    I mean the cars already know where they are. The problem is that those "visual" cues are what they rely on to drive safely. The reason why self-driving cars might possibly be a workable idea is that these will not be relying on massive, expensive infrastructure upgrades.

    Oh yeah, safety. I forgot about that part.

  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    Quid wrote: »
    FWIW

    Google's car finally had an accident it was at fault for.

    Four million plus miles, one accident, zero injuries. The concern others have aired that it would only take one accident for massive public backlash seems to not be the case.

    ....Snailing?

  • honoverehonovere Registered User regular
    Duffel wrote: »
    These things seem like they would be rather unuseful for those of us who live off the roads in the woods, farm work, and any other kind of offroad travel.

    I will admit I might warm up to them if they could make me one that looks like a '67 Mustang, and not a grey-plasticky rodentine bubble.

    Is this off road enough?
    https://youtu.be/4V3gxIJZ548

  • CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    honovere wrote: »
    Duffel wrote: »
    These things seem like they would be rather unuseful for those of us who live off the roads in the woods, farm work, and any other kind of offroad travel.

    I will admit I might warm up to them if they could make me one that looks like a '67 Mustang, and not a grey-plasticky rodentine bubble.

    Is this off road enough?
    https://youtu.be/4V3gxIJZ548

    Predicted future content: Someone making their driverless audi do this same trip, but the video is of two people fucking in the back seat.

    Driverless porn, it's coming. (hur hur)

    "If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
  • DuffelDuffel jacobkosh Registered User regular
    honovere wrote: »
    Duffel wrote: »
    These things seem like they would be rather unuseful for those of us who live off the roads in the woods, farm work, and any other kind of offroad travel.

    I will admit I might warm up to them if they could make me one that looks like a '67 Mustang, and not a grey-plasticky rodentine bubble.

    Is this off road enough?

    No.

    I'm not talking about driving up a well-demarcated, mapped-out dirt road. I'm talking about driving through the green spaces on the map. The places that are not part of any GPS system and by their nature cannot be.

    Lots of people live and work in those green spaces. Probably a minority of people these days, but enough that autodriving cannot be 100% pervasive, at least in some areas.

    Like, I know many people who have to move heavy machinery, equipment trucks, and what have you into those areas with great precision for their jobs. I myself have had to use 4WD offroading in unmarked terrain for school, work, and just general daily living many times throughout my life.

    I can think of a dozen places off the top of my head that I or people I know personally go to regularly that would be impossible to traverse for cars like the ones on P1 even if they weren't automated. Unless we're dealing with truly sci-fi territory, like tech that somehow runs off a mind uplink that you can gaze at an area and tell your implanted HUD "yes, that's where I want to go" and it know what you were talking about.

  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    The pros for 90% of us are to good to ignore.

    It won't replace trained drivers for specific tasks. Truckers still have to worry about road piracy. If you live in Mountian town West Virginia an auto drive car is not going to be anymore reliable than your truck hell it'll be more dangerous since the GPS could cut at any time

    If you live in or around a city though? Fuck yes.

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
  • zipidideezipididee Registered User regular
    It's all well and good until the self driving cars become so advanced that they gradually become self aware. Asimov warned us about this years ago http://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/82060/20/Isaac_Asimovs_Worlds_of_Science_Fiction._Book_9__Robots.html

    *ching ching* Just my two cents
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    honovere wrote: »
    Duffel wrote: »
    These things seem like they would be rather unuseful for those of us who live off the roads in the woods, farm work, and any other kind of offroad travel.

    I will admit I might warm up to them if they could make me one that looks like a '67 Mustang, and not a grey-plasticky rodentine bubble.

    Is this off road enough?
    https://youtu.be/4V3gxIJZ548

    Predicted future content: Someone making their driverless audi do this same trip, but the video is of two people fucking in the back seat.

    Driverless porn, it's coming. (hur hur)
    Well thats not really off road, its basically a race circuit, and it did it in 27 minutes, with the world record being 8:13.878 and the time for its class being in the 17 minute range.

    Its a 12.42 mile climb. So it only averaged 27 MPH or so. Not exactly all that amazing.

    This is what is is supposed to look like:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcho6-aWLH0


    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    This weekend was the first time I actually wanted the self-driving revolution to have already happened. I had to drive into Chicago Friday night (No, not for the trump rally). It took over an hour to cover the same distance that I covered in 10 minutes going the other way Saturday night. It was speed up then immediately slam the brakes back down to zero cause some FIB decided to switch lanes. I'm positive the whole thing could have kept moving at least at a steady 20mph had there been self-driving cars wireless communicating with each other, and everyone would have gotten through faster.

    I don't want to give up my ability to drive on an open road, but if it makes that shit tolerable bring it on.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    syndalis wrote: »
    My favorite design is Mercedes' four seater that faces inwards. How amazing would it be to take an "uber meeting" where you get picked up, are all face to face, nobody has to think about where you are going and can focus on meeting prep. Hell, make the car a smidge longer and put a table with power outlets in between the seats.

    Nerdier version: 4 folks playing board games on the way to visit friends / family.

    I'm imagining the amazing pounding car-sickness headaches right now.

  • FrostwoodFrostwood Registered User regular
    - Oh, you drive a truck? How quaint!
    You'll still need people to unload the truck.
    You still need people to unload the mail or drop off packages.

    What I'm concerned with is how the cars will handle component failures. Sensors and other things used to help drive the car will eventually fail.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Julius wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    As I understand it, one of the major problems with self driving cars right now is that snow confuses the hell out of them. They're fine with the driving part - they can adjust their handling for winter weather just fine. It's knowing where things are when there's snow piled up everywhere that they fail at. Through GPS, they may know that they're approaching the corner of 1st and Main, but their sensors are telling them that they've entered a mysterious alien landscape.

    So for now, they drive below the snow belt.

    I think that learning how to handle snow is the last major hurdle they need to cross before they become practical for consumers.

    Solution A: Infrastructure upgrades with transmitters embedded along the roadway path that allow vehicles to communicate and know where they are without visual cues.

    I mean the cars already know where they are. The problem is that those "visual" cues are what they rely on to drive safely. The reason why self-driving cars might possibly be a workable idea is that these will not be relying on massive, expensive infrastructure upgrades.

    Well and the fact that they won't, you know, run people down. Which means they need to know wtf they are doing in bad weather.

    Cause I can't see the driverless revolution getting off the ground if like half the US can't use it half the year. It's the kind of thing you need real scale for.

  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    edited March 2016
    Frostwood wrote: »
    - Oh, you drive a truck? How quaint!
    You'll still need people to unload the truck.
    You still need people to unload the mail or drop off packages.

    What I'm concerned with is how the cars will handle component failures. Sensors and other things used to help drive the car will eventually fail.
    Components and things fail in non-driverless cars/cars piloted by humans. And once again these are the sorts of things computers will be much, much better at identifying and in the case of acute issues, reacting to.

    If anything they are more likely to be serviced because they can drive themselves to the service centre while I am at work instead of having to get up at 5AM and/or get them serviced on a weekend.

    I also wonder if they will become more like a commodity ala phones, and you just take yours in and swap it over for a refurb in a giant Apple Store.

    Apothe0sis on
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited March 2016
    shryke wrote: »
    Julius wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    As I understand it, one of the major problems with self driving cars right now is that snow confuses the hell out of them. They're fine with the driving part - they can adjust their handling for winter weather just fine. It's knowing where things are when there's snow piled up everywhere that they fail at. Through GPS, they may know that they're approaching the corner of 1st and Main, but their sensors are telling them that they've entered a mysterious alien landscape.

    So for now, they drive below the snow belt.

    I think that learning how to handle snow is the last major hurdle they need to cross before they become practical for consumers.

    Solution A: Infrastructure upgrades with transmitters embedded along the roadway path that allow vehicles to communicate and know where they are without visual cues.

    I mean the cars already know where they are. The problem is that those "visual" cues are what they rely on to drive safely. The reason why self-driving cars might possibly be a workable idea is that these will not be relying on massive, expensive infrastructure upgrades.

    Well and the fact that they won't, you know, run people down. Which means they need to know wtf they are doing in bad weather.

    Cause I can't see the driverless revolution getting off the ground if like half the US can't use it half the year. It's the kind of thing you need real scale for.

    I mean it is an 'with manual control too' feature for the foreseeable future still. Plus it is realistically only a Dec-Feb problem, and thanks to the amazing power of CO2 emissions it is less and less of one every year.

    tinwhiskers on
    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • Moridin889Moridin889 Registered User regular
    I think this is going to be like the Manual/Automatic transmission shift. Slowly losing the pervasive knowledge of shifting and clutch usage and stuff.

    Eventually most people won't even know how to drive cars outside of the vaguest ideas

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited March 2016
    shryke wrote: »
    Julius wrote: »
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    As I understand it, one of the major problems with self driving cars right now is that snow confuses the hell out of them. They're fine with the driving part - they can adjust their handling for winter weather just fine. It's knowing where things are when there's snow piled up everywhere that they fail at. Through GPS, they may know that they're approaching the corner of 1st and Main, but their sensors are telling them that they've entered a mysterious alien landscape.

    So for now, they drive below the snow belt.

    I think that learning how to handle snow is the last major hurdle they need to cross before they become practical for consumers.

    Solution A: Infrastructure upgrades with transmitters embedded along the roadway path that allow vehicles to communicate and know where they are without visual cues.

    I mean the cars already know where they are. The problem is that those "visual" cues are what they rely on to drive safely. The reason why self-driving cars might possibly be a workable idea is that these will not be relying on massive, expensive infrastructure upgrades.

    Well and the fact that they won't, you know, run people down. Which means they need to know wtf they are doing in bad weather.

    Cause I can't see the driverless revolution getting off the ground if like half the US can't use it half the year. It's the kind of thing you need real scale for.

    I mean it is an 'with manual control too' feature for the foreseeable future still. Plus it is realistically only a Dec-Feb problem, and thanks to the amazing power of CO2 emissions it is less and less of one every year.

    Which means most of what people are talking about with new designs and new ways of approaching commuting go right out the window cause we are just gonna be stuck at "cars that sometimes drive themselves" rather then "driveless cars" till these things can drive themselves around, like, Ontario in mid-January.

    Like, the comment right above this one? Not happening unless these things can navigate every weather and whatever else condition.

    shryke on
  • Captain MarcusCaptain Marcus now arrives the hour of actionRegistered User regular

    It's not that it won't be an issue, but OTOH, Jane, middle manger mother of 3, is not going to be assassinated by Iranian cyber division, but she sure as hell could be t-boned by a drunk driver. Honestly, if political assassinations increase 100 fold (and that's not realistic), we'll still see far fewer deaths than we do today by a huge margin, because human error in driving is one of the largest causes of death in people who aren't old.

    Self-driving cars will likely save tens of thousands of lives per year.

    No no no, not spy stuff like that (although that probably will be an issue) I meant like criminals using it as a way to off rivals or angry exes using it to murder their former lovers. Forget stealing the keys from your abusive boyfriend, the car's programmed to only recognize his voice or fingerprint so you can't run away to the shelter. Or you do manage to start it up, and he gets a message from the car on his phone, locks the doors, and tells the car to drive back into the garage and now you're trapped there until he comes home from work and beats the shit out of you.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Krieghund wrote: »
    Once self driving cars start becoming the norm, rather than the oddity, I think personal ownership is going to plummet. Taxi service is going to be where it's at. No dealing with lost drivers anymore. Get your app of choice to call a vehicle, plug your phone in with the destination already set up, and it just takes you there.

    Let's take me as an example. I live in Broward County Florida. Orlando's parks are about a two hour trip (one way) for me. Now let's say that we've gotten smart and put in the high speed rail that keeps going back and forth up in Tallahassee. Or, just take me to the airport if we're still dumb. So I call my cab, and get a lift to the train station and jet up to Orlando. Disney or Universal will pick my up there if I'm staying on site. Have my weekend of fun, get driven back to the train, and take another cab home. Or, I could do what I do now, which is drive up the Turnpike and back. Unless I'm going someplace else in Orlando, there is no need for my car to sit in a parking lot for two days while I'm off doing whatever. Now, I get road hypnosis if somebody isn't there to keep me alert, or I'm taking a five hour energy. So I would really rather not worry about falling asleep going 80.

    This always sounds like a good idea but runs headon into a few major issues:

    Firstly, people store shit in their cars. On both a temporary and fairly permanent basis. One of the few perks of driving to work frankly. Your car is a great storage spot. Doing a bunch of shopping and you leave shit in the car between stops. Buying a bunch of large and/or heavy shit during a shopping trip. All sorts of other things. There is a fairly common need for a giant personal bag on wheels basically. Cars are both a burden and a boon when it comes to getting around because of this and it's actually living in the city where this becomes the most obvious cause that's really when you can start asking yourself "Do I want to take the car or not?"

    The other thing I can think of off the top of my head that dovetails with the above in many ways as well is the size of fleet you would need to do away with personal ownership. How many cars, running at what times, distributed across what area, etc, etc. Like, think current livery services and then imagine the increase in fleet size and distribution you'd need for everyone to be using them all the time and, as noted above, potentially hanging on to the thing for long periods of time. Imagine the costs you'd need to charge to make that work.

    As an alternative means of public transport it's got promise but I think the logistics of it will prevent a precipitous drop in personal ownership till we see a massive shift in how people live and distribute themselves. And one of the big things with driveless cars and how they would fit into the world is the idea that they don't require that kind of shift.

    Basically even if they existed in perfect form right now we'd be a long way away from alot of people not owning a car.

  • Emissary42Emissary42 Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    The number one problem that needs to be addressed is the ability (or lack thereof) to identify potential obstructions. This includes not only things currently on the road, but things at the edge of the road that have the potential to collide with the car without warning. Such as pedestrians, wild animals, shopping carts, runaway tractor tires, etc.

    So far, it's actually inclement weather that causes the most problems. Cars have a more difficult time interpreting noisy data from rain, or inferring road lines partly obscured by snow.

  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular

    It's not that it won't be an issue, but OTOH, Jane, middle manger mother of 3, is not going to be assassinated by Iranian cyber division, but she sure as hell could be t-boned by a drunk driver. Honestly, if political assassinations increase 100 fold (and that's not realistic), we'll still see far fewer deaths than we do today by a huge margin, because human error in driving is one of the largest causes of death in people who aren't old.

    Self-driving cars will likely save tens of thousands of lives per year.

    No no no, not spy stuff like that (although that probably will be an issue) I meant like criminals using it as a way to off rivals or angry exes using it to murder their former lovers. Forget stealing the keys from your abusive boyfriend, the car's programmed to only recognize his voice or fingerprint so you can't run away to the shelter. Or you do manage to start it up, and he gets a message from the car on his phone, locks the doors, and tells the car to drive back into the garage and now you're trapped there until he comes home from work and beats the shit out of you.

    Yes abuse is very bad. Not really a problem that can be helped or hurt by automated cars.

  • King RiptorKing Riptor Registered User regular
    Quid wrote: »

    It's not that it won't be an issue, but OTOH, Jane, middle manger mother of 3, is not going to be assassinated by Iranian cyber division, but she sure as hell could be t-boned by a drunk driver. Honestly, if political assassinations increase 100 fold (and that's not realistic), we'll still see far fewer deaths than we do today by a huge margin, because human error in driving is one of the largest causes of death in people who aren't old.

    Self-driving cars will likely save tens of thousands of lives per year.

    No no no, not spy stuff like that (although that probably will be an issue) I meant like criminals using it as a way to off rivals or angry exes using it to murder their former lovers. Forget stealing the keys from your abusive boyfriend, the car's programmed to only recognize his voice or fingerprint so you can't run away to the shelter. Or you do manage to start it up, and he gets a message from the car on his phone, locks the doors, and tells the car to drive back into the garage and now you're trapped there until he comes home from work and beats the shit out of you.

    Yes abuse is very bad. Not really a problem that can be helped or hurt by automated cars.

    Also I can safely say that the auto industry is not going to get rid of keys and manual locks and if they did they are going to include an emergency overide so nobody is trapped in a car

    I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Emissary42 wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    The number one problem that needs to be addressed is the ability (or lack thereof) to identify potential obstructions. This includes not only things currently on the road, but things at the edge of the road that have the potential to collide with the car without warning. Such as pedestrians, wild animals, shopping carts, runaway tractor tires, etc.

    So far, it's actually inclement weather that causes the most problems. Cars have a more difficult time interpreting noisy data from rain, or inferring road lines partly obscured by snow.

    There are several roads on my commute where if it is raining decently I can't see the lines in the road, and the reflectors they have aren't any help because they aren't in line with the stripes.

    I'm extremely impressed with driverless car tech and look forward to whatever future that brings but it is still a long way off from being adopted.

  • RT800RT800 Registered User regular
    edited March 2016
    I dunno if I trust a driverless car.

    Better to replace our aging infrastructure with an elaborate series of pneumatic tubes that suction people to their destination.

    RT800 on
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    Has there been any research into how effective the new pseudo-driverless safety features making their way into cars are? I went with someone who test drove a couple of Lexuses recently and those were a big selling point.

  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Emissary42 wrote: »
    knitdan wrote: »
    The number one problem that needs to be addressed is the ability (or lack thereof) to identify potential obstructions. This includes not only things currently on the road, but things at the edge of the road that have the potential to collide with the car without warning. Such as pedestrians, wild animals, shopping carts, runaway tractor tires, etc.

    So far, it's actually inclement weather that causes the most problems. Cars have a more difficult time interpreting noisy data from rain, or inferring road lines partly obscured by snow.

    There are several roads on my commute where if it is raining decently I can't see the lines in the road, and the reflectors they have aren't any help because they aren't in line with the stripes.

    I'm extremely impressed with driverless car tech and look forward to whatever future that brings but it is still a long way off from being adopted.

    I'd figure part of it would involve infrastructure changes, like tagging lanes with little ultraviolet sticker strips or something, and requiring all non-automatic vehicles to be similarly tagged with a strip that emits an infrared or ultraviolet signature that the automatic car can target. Newer models would just have wireless telemetry to talk to each other.

  • EchoEcho ski-bap ba-dapModerator mod
    I'm having fun thought experiments with a society that's entirely self-driving.

    Do you really need to own a car? A lot of people probably won't. Most car rides can be planned enough in advance that you can order a car from A to B whenever, wherever, and a car arrives to pick you up, drives you to the destination and then goes off on the next errand.

    I'm 36 and I don't have a driver's license. Went as far as applying for a learner's permit, but then I moved to a big city with excellent infrastructure and those plans fell to the side. Only thing I do feel I miss out on is the ability to do things like a big weekly grocery haul, or buying furniture at Ikea that I need to haul home.

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Echo wrote: »
    I'm having fun thought experiments with a society that's entirely self-driving.

    Do you really need to own a car? A lot of people probably won't. Most car rides can be planned enough in advance that you can order a car from A to B whenever, wherever, and a car arrives to pick you up, drives you to the destination and then goes off on the next errand.

    I'm 36 and I don't have a driver's license. Went as far as applying for a learner's permit, but then I moved to a big city with excellent infrastructure and those plans fell to the side. Only thing I do feel I miss out on is the ability to do things like a big weekly grocery haul, or buying furniture at Ikea that I need to haul home.

    In mostly urban areas I can see this being plausible but in most of America (by geography) I question it's plausibility. Though at least like 50% of that is a cultural thing.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Echo wrote: »
    I'm having fun thought experiments with a society that's entirely self-driving.

    Do you really need to own a car? A lot of people probably won't. Most car rides can be planned enough in advance that you can order a car from A to B whenever, wherever, and a car arrives to pick you up, drives you to the destination and then goes off on the next errand.

    I'm 36 and I don't have a driver's license. Went as far as applying for a learner's permit, but then I moved to a big city with excellent infrastructure and those plans fell to the side. Only thing I do feel I miss out on is the ability to do things like a big weekly grocery haul, or buying furniture at Ikea that I need to haul home.

    In mostly urban areas I can see this being plausible but in most of America (by geography) I question it's plausibility. Though at least like 50% of that is a cultural thing.

    A lot of it could be fixed by yet-better urban infrastructure. Public transit and cycling could get better if you took away a lot of the space reserved for cars, it's just that nobody wants to make that first move because it would be both expensive and hilariously unpopular from the holdouts or the people who live too far out and would still be locked out of sharing in it.

  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    edited March 2016

    It's not that it won't be an issue, but OTOH, Jane, middle manger mother of 3, is not going to be assassinated by Iranian cyber division, but she sure as hell could be t-boned by a drunk driver. Honestly, if political assassinations increase 100 fold (and that's not realistic), we'll still see far fewer deaths than we do today by a huge margin, because human error in driving is one of the largest causes of death in people who aren't old.

    Self-driving cars will likely save tens of thousands of lives per year.

    No no no, not spy stuff like that (although that probably will be an issue) I meant like criminals using it as a way to off rivals or angry exes using it to murder their former lovers.
    People with skills and resources have always had (and always will have) a multitude of ways available to kill people. Assuming that mass-market self-driving cars have sane software security practices (not a given today, but it is improving), they would probably be less vulnerable to tampering than an average vehicle today. A self-driving car would probably detect a cut brake line at startup, for example.
    Forget stealing the keys from your abusive boyfriend, the car's programmed to only recognize his voice or fingerprint so you can't run away to the shelter. Or you do manage to start it up, and he gets a message from the car on his phone, locks the doors, and tells the car to drive back into the garage and now you're trapped there until he comes home from work and beats the shit out of you.

    You call a cab (or whatever passes for a cab by then) instead, which is also probably a better option in current times than getting popped for GTA.

    a5ehren on
  • Loren MichaelLoren Michael Registered User regular
    Frostwood wrote: »
    - Oh, you drive a truck? How quaint!
    You'll still need people to unload the truck.
    You still need people to unload the mail or drop off packages.

    even without standardized packaging like shipping containers either of those are completely and easily automatable

    a7iea7nzewtq.jpg
  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
    Tomanta wrote: »
    Has there been any research into how effective the new pseudo-driverless safety features making their way into cars are? I went with someone who test drove a couple of Lexuses recently and those were a big selling point.

    My Subaru Forester has the forward facing cameras that detect obstacles, i.e. pedestrians, vehicles, the back wall of my garage, and can apply the brake up to and including full stop. It also does adaptive cruise control which is super nice for both stop and go traffic and in situations like changing lanes because I can basically let it make sure I'm not rear ending the car in front while I secure a safe passage to the next lane.

    It has prevented at least two fender benders and one more violent collision in the year and a half that I've had it.

    /anecdote

  • BrainleechBrainleech 機知に富んだコメントはここにあります Registered User regular
    Atomika wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Self-driving RVs.

    Roadside hotels may be in trouble.

    Hadn't even thought of that.

    Yes.

    Convenience businesses are gonna get burnt

    I kind of see Roadside hotels lasting because ever sit in a car for 8+ hours?
    A bed or a chance to get out and streach even if you are not the one driving is nice

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Brainleech wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Self-driving RVs.

    Roadside hotels may be in trouble.

    Hadn't even thought of that.

    Yes.

    Convenience businesses are gonna get burnt

    I kind of see Roadside hotels lasting because ever sit in a car for 8+ hours?
    A bed or a chance to get out and streach even if you are not the one driving is nice

    Ideally there would be sleeper cars.

    You'd mostly just need to add showers to rest areas.

  • AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    Brainleech wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Self-driving RVs.

    Roadside hotels may be in trouble.

    Hadn't even thought of that.

    Yes.

    Convenience businesses are gonna get burnt

    I kind of see Roadside hotels lasting because ever sit in a car for 8+ hours?
    A bed or a chance to get out and streach even if you are not the one driving is nice

    your cars will have beds, like winnebagos

    you can get out and stretch anywhere

    and you'll be asleep, so who cares, right?

  • Mr KhanMr Khan Not Everyone WAHHHRegistered User regular
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Brainleech wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Self-driving RVs.

    Roadside hotels may be in trouble.

    Hadn't even thought of that.

    Yes.

    Convenience businesses are gonna get burnt

    I kind of see Roadside hotels lasting because ever sit in a car for 8+ hours?
    A bed or a chance to get out and streach even if you are not the one driving is nice

    Ideally there would be sleeper cars.

    You'd mostly just need to add showers to rest areas.

    I could see that going very bad very quickly. (shivers)

  • CalicaCalica Registered User regular
    Duffel wrote: »
    Having to be constantly sitting in a driving position while this thing does the work for you sounds kind of lame, though. If I'm going to sign over my autonomy it better be for the full limosine experience.

    This. It's unrealistic to expect a human to sit by ready to take control in an emergency. We just aren't wired to maintain that kind of attention with nothing really going on. Imagine your job was to sit and watch a green light for several hours, and to quickly push a button if the light turns red (which it almost never does). It'd be exhausting. If you're expected to constantly pay attention, you might as well just drive, because then at least your brain is engaged.

    Also, if something goes wrong in a self-driving car at highway speeds, we're unlikely to be able to react in time to do anything anyway. People are much more likely to intervene when it's not necessary (because the car would handle the situation fine on its own) or miss their window in the milliseconds it takes to recognize that something is wrong and decide what, if anything, to do.

Sign In or Register to comment.