Self-driving cars are here!

I can't wait for Astro Boy to become reality.

Great. There goes the main argument against legalization... .

When cars are automated, nobody will fear stoned drivers.

Why would they?

Poor reflexes, inhibited judgment, impaired powers of observation. Sure they're less aggressive and more self-aware than drunk drivers, but it's still not something you want on the road with you.

Slow poke but the thing I have against cars is that they are expensive, and dangerous as hell.

I am scared for my life every time I go on the free way, people are fucking insane on the roads.

I wish I could EMP blast texting drivers.

Dangerous things (cars, guns, knives) aren't bad. They just need to be used responsibly.

Well humanity is not the most responsible of species on the planet earth.

And accidents still occur even to the most responsible of drivers, usually due to the fault of someone less than responsible.

edited 31st May '11 3:41:14 PM by Thorn14

Which are who the robots are replacing. As in all things, if you can replace a person with a robot, you should.

I think this is a good step forward.
As it is an attempt to remove the human error from a potentially dangerous activity, however I'd want some really really thorough testing before public use.

What's the US legal position on using mobile phones in any capacity while driving?

Recently made it illegal around here, but only handheld phones. Seeing how the primary distraction of typical cell phone use on the road (ie, not texting) is the conversation, I suspect a subtle plug for bluetooth under the guise of SAFETY.

edited 31st May '11 5:22:44 PM by Pykrete

It's illegal in California I know. It seems to vary from state to state. Well handheld phones anyway. Bluetooth is still legal.

edited 31st May '11 5:28:12 PM by Aondeug

So, are we going to have to buy security software for cars now, or just trust that it won't be hacked by criminals for malicious intents while going to the grocery store?

edited 31st May '11 5:49:44 PM by victorinox243

You can already hack cars.

I.. Don't support this.

I'm ok with other people getting cars that drive themselves, but I don't want to lose the right to drive my car of my own free will.

And what about when I go off-roading? Or taking a shortcut? Or if I just enjoy driving? If I had to choose I'd rather everybody had to keep manually driving than risk everybody being forced to use some automaton.

And keep in mind where I live, our drivers are some of the most insane.

More than likely it'll be special roads, like interstates and highways, where if you like driving there already, you need help.

Fun thought experiment.

Say someone manages to create an algorithm for a self-driving car that actually works, and somehow magically gets enough testing done to show that while the algorithm does in fact crash the cars occasionally, it crashes less often than human drivers, and causes driving fatalities less often than human drivers.

A) Is it the correct option to make it illegal to NOT use the self-driving car? After all, we just said it provably kills less people than letting humans drive . . .

B) How is the creator of the software going to prevent himself from getting his pants sued/insurance claimed off? In a normal car crash, we generally place the blame for an individual crash on one of the individuals involved, who we judge to have failed to pay enough attention (or similar), and thus the blame for many crashes is spread out among many individuals. For the self-driving car, however, it's clearly the algorithm's fault, and one man (or one company) designed the algorithm and is thus "responsible".

Of course, if you simply say he isn't responsible by comparing the number of crashes with the algorithm to the number of crashes without the algorithm, well, this removes the incentive to further improve the algorithm, which is obviously not a good idea. We want incentives to keep the amount of damage done as low as reasonably possible.

You could solve these problems by doing it "airplace-style", i.e. with the vehicle controlled automatically almost all of the time, and a human alertly watching just in case something unexpected happens. The problem is that this seems to remove most of the benefits of having the system in the first place (this way, you still have to be alert and paying attention, and it's possible that the human might override the car when they shouldn't have, causing an unnecessary accident . . . and it's even more boring than before, except for the occasional moment of stark terror).

For all the reasons you just listed, that's why I would rather leave it up to human error.

I don't like letting machines make decisions for us.

Exoskeleton for heavy lifting? Sure, the human is still the one choosing what to lift and when.

Automatic car that doesn't let me steer? Fuck no.

If you take the option in that you can take over at any time (like in airplanes), why not leave it in full manual control? Much of a modern car is already automated - no more choke to set, ignition timing is automatic, automatic transmissions (some cars), light-sensors to cycle the headlamps depending on ambient light levels, ABS brakes, traction/stability control, moisture sensors for the wipers, and so on.

These things (should) all leave the driver free to concentrate on maneuvering and navigation (and not for texting and yacking on a cell phone). Operating a modern car can be as simple as ensuring you put gas in it and driving it around from Point A to Point B - so much of the process is automated or user-friendly.

Navigation can be relegated to a GPS widget (or having a friend tell you where to turn), so all you have left to do, even in unfamiliar areas, is work the pedals, steer, and avoid bumping into things...

We can't even manage to get that right?

edited 31st May '11 7:15:37 PM by pvtnum11

You know every time you're on the road, you are putting your life in the hands of another person.

Unless you're the only person driving, but how often does that happen?

edited 31st May '11 7:24:41 PM by blueharp

So? When my family gets in the car with me, they're putting their lives into my hands, and I'm putting my life into the hands of other drivers to do their part. If you want a world without risk, you're not going to find it on this one.

In order to gain the benefits of driving where you want, when you want, you have to incur the negligable risk that you might be involved in an accident that particular trip. That or take a taxi. But then, guess what? You've put your life into someone else's hands again, and now there's precious little you can do about it if you see that an accident is about to occur, short of balling up in your seat. Take the bus? Same thing, and now you don't even have a seat belt. Walk? Pedestrians are hit, too, plus it's a slower form of movement.

Joke: Obviously, the best thing to do is not go anywhere, ever.

So - weigh the benefits against the credible level of risk, and make a decision. I choose to drive.

edited 31st May '11 7:32:49 PM by pvtnum11

Seriously, I'll take the risk, I enjoy driving.

I'd rather let it be toggled, that way I can drive manually, and others can drive automatically if they wish.

Then if I go to a bar and get hosed, I can autopilot back home.

edited 31st May '11 7:34:57 PM by Barkey

Speaking as someone who will be a software engineer in the very near future, I trust most of the worst drivers out there a hell of a lot more than I trust a computer. At least bad drivers can be predictably bad and I can adjust to their presence — software or imaging faults can come out and cascade from absolutely nowhere.

^^ As do I - unless it's rush-hour downtown, which is Teh Suck.

^ So, if we do have this system installed, will the computer have some sort of system to alert the driver that it is about to hard-fault?

[PROCESSOR FAILURE DETECTED, PLEASE ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL IMMEDIATELY.]

I can already see it now, some guy falls asleep on his morning auto-commute, and the car has a fault and drifts into oncoming traffic or something before he can wake up. Bam, car wreck.

edited 31st May '11 7:38:31 PM by pvtnum11

I'd imagine that the failsafe would be to use a small back-up function to immediately slow the car to the stop in the event of a computer crash, until the human takes control or the system reboots. Still, God help anyone who dares to cross the street...