Jump to content

Automated Driverless Vehicles


Dale
 Share

Recommended Posts

The first example I've seen of this was in the film Minority Port, with self-driving cars.

I guess I've often viewed technology as a mixed blessing. I can see potential vulnerabilities of the human driver in self-driving cars, especially if someone managed to hack into it and take control. I'm sure law enforcement would see the potential in it as well.

Edit: Minority REport. Ugh, what a foolish typo.

Edited by ambermonk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest jasondonervan

^ True. I can't wait to go to gigs outside of Liverpool, get blazed up, bevvied, then be transported home in a right state.

 

tumblr_lxsv3rAHdF1qlzduwo1_500.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't know im thinking it'll be slowly introduced, more and more 'autodrive fast lanes' until it's everywhere (in decades). I'd imagine it'll get implimented in long-distance truck shipping first, because they would have the most to gain from it.

 

I'm a little worried what happens when "3.5 million professional truck drivers in the US plus another 5.4 million or so employed in related industries" are out of a job all of a sudden, I mean that's almost 3% of the population out of a job :/ Closely followed by taxi, bus drivers? At lease long distance bus drivers at first... Anyway it's like a second industrial revolution scenario (somebody told me a better buzzword for that)...

 

I guess there's already drone shipping boats, and you know drone deliever thangs.... Drones are too scary!!

MQ-9_Reaper_in_flight_(2007).jpg

 

Anyway, I also wonder, if we perfect drone technology pretty soon (because the military...) maybe by the time we could self driving cars we'll just have self driving heli-drones? Sounds a little crazy but what if self driving cars are the lazerdisk and self driving heli-drones are blu-ray???? :cerious:

if there is too much unemployment, it's time for a job guarantee scheme towards sustainable development jobs and other jobs that actually benefit or contribute to society (funded by government) or an unconditonal basic income - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25415501

 

Ultimately, too much unemployment due to automation means that the economy must change and accommodate for technological advancement (you can't stop it when it is profitable for business to get rid of the workforce).

Our present day concepts of 'work' and a 'job' have to change as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

i don't know im thinking it'll be slowly introduced, more and more 'autodrive fast lanes' until it's everywhere (in decades). I'd imagine it'll get implimented in long-distance truck shipping first, because they would have the most to gain from it.

 

I'm a little worried what happens when "3.5 million professional truck drivers in the US plus another 5.4 million or so employed in related industries" are out of a job all of a sudden, I mean that's almost 3% of the population out of a job :/ Closely followed by taxi, bus drivers? At lease long distance bus drivers at first... Anyway it's like a second industrial revolution scenario (somebody told me a better buzzword for that)...

 

I guess there's already drone shipping boats, and you know drone deliever thangs.... Drones are too scary!!

MQ-9_Reaper_in_flight_(2007).jpg

 

Anyway, I also wonder, if we perfect drone technology pretty soon (because the military...) maybe by the time we could self driving cars we'll just have self driving heli-drones? Sounds a little crazy but what if self driving cars are the lazerdisk and self driving heli-drones are blu-ray???? :cerious:

if there is too much unemployment, it's time for a job guarantee scheme towards sustainable development jobs and other jobs that actually benefit or contribute to society (funded by government) or an unconditonal basic income - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25415501

 

Ultimately, too much unemployment due to automation means that the economy must change and accommodate for technological advancement (you can't stop it when it is profitable for business to get rid of the workforce).

Our present day concepts of 'work' and a 'job' have to change as well.

 

 

That's a whole can of worms. So when you have more technological demands on workers, that means you'll need a much more educated workforce. Having a lot of educated people walking around and realizing how fucked up our social structure is will most likely fuel conflict of classes.

 

La Revolución!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great for those who have been unable to drive for whatever reason (disability, illness etc) but I can't help but think the more gizmos you put on a 2 tonne machine the more likely it is that something will go wrong. I'm not saying it would be worse than not having it, but there is a lot of tech there that could fail mid-drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A buddy of mine was telling me about how someone's trying to make a system where each car is aware of each other by transmitters and communicate throughout the commute. Would be a great failsafe for when an engine dies on the highway.

 

Speaking of highways, these things will probably all go the exact speed limit on the freeway. What a bore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be pretty awesome to have a bed installed in your self driving car and be driven to work in the comfort of your own bed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno, there already are driverless trains and driverless buses and they work pretty well. Sure, they're on rails/optical rails, but I don't think it's that different.

IMO the true problem is that private transportation causes lots of problems, takes up a huge amount of space and is becoming increasingly unaffordable. Electric cars or self-driven cars aren't going to change that, so I'd say multiply cabs, nationalise them, and leave cars for workers who need to carry heavy stuff around. At least in the kind of city where that sort of thing would work, not L.A. of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work in the software/firmware industry, and I will never voluntarily put my life and limb in the hands of a lowest-bidder software developer who doesn't give a shit about staying at a given employer/position for more than 18 months. One case-sensitive mistake in the code and it's off the cliff with ye!

 

Plus, there's no way we can ever afford to outfit the roadways, especially not dirt/gravel roads that need frequent grading/grooming, with the sensing equipment required to make driver-less cars safe in all weather conditions and real-world emergency scenarios. There are almost 5 million miles of roadway just in the US alone. How many dollars per mile will it take to retrofit?

 

Humans are dangerous enough WITHOUT the assistance of technology, and when you mix in software which will ALWAYS have flaws you are begging for death. Toyota has killed nearly 90 people via software glitch. Software bugs alone cost the world $60B/year, exploitation of vulnerabilities ramps that figure up significantly, and now we think it's a good idea to add the immeasurable cost of human casualties to the invoice?

 

Automated transportation is fine for rail-based routes and other FIXED paths, and low-speed variable paths in densely populated areas, but in the real world and rural areas it just won't work on a large scale. It will be a LOOONG time, possibly never, for there to be such thing as "Three Laws Safe" robotics. Humans are imperfect, and things created by humans will generally be more imperfect.

 

-_Trail_Ridge_Road_in_Twin-2000000000582

 

Fjord-Roads.jpg

Edited by jsmcpn2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't need to retrofit the road, the car itself uses LIDAR to image it's environment in realtime. Couple this with constantly updating maps and data from other vehicles and you won't have to worry that your car is in control of the driving. In fact the LIDAR and infrared will know that the deer is there in the middle of the night that you can't see. As for driving in inclement weather, we already rely on an host of electronic systems which prevent the car from careening off the road. This can only get more sophisticated as time passes.

 

The major factor on the road that causes accidents is the human one. not driving to the conditions, egotistical behaviour, etc. What will happen is that eventually this technology will force the inattentive or aggressive plebs (most everyone on the road that isn't you (heh)) to have their cars under electronic supervision, to stop that unsafe lane change, or brake before an intersection when something is coming that the driver can't see, or not follow the car in front so close, etc. You'll be given the choice whether to go semi or fully automatic, but i think unless you invest in a vintage car, you'll never be allowed to drive solo anymore, well not without mega high insurance premiums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current LIDAR technology, at least the non-bleeding-edge mainstream kind, is almost completely worthless in heavy rain, snow, mist, fog, and dust. Even the most high tech experimental, multi-million dollar test equipment can barely mitigate interference from reflection, refraction, diffusion, and noise from other sources of radiation. It definitely can't deal with hundreds of other vehicles sending out their own imaging sweeps in every direction.

 

LIDAR optics windows can get covered in mud, ice, snow, leaves and other debris, rendering it useless. It has trouble recognizing terrain that is covered in mud, ice, snow, and water because it cannot see through to the actual road surface below, so it could easily mistake a thick layer of snow. or a water-filled sinkhole or flooded area as a suitable driving surface and end up putting the car into a ditch. It would take a very expensive combination of technologies, both vehicle-attached and road-attached as well as GIS data (which is constantly subject to change and goes out of date), to provide reliable, redundant, accurate auto driving in the real world. GPS doesn't work well in bad weather, tunnels, or big cities with densely packed skyscrapers. Ultrasound is very low resolution and only good for general purpose range-finding (such as adaptive cruise control and emergency braking.

 

And like I mentioned, any of the technologies in question are subject to software mistakes, tampering, hacking, and plain old malfunction. Automobile accidents are mostly a social problem, you can't fix that with expensive electronics and buggy software. All it will do is shift the cause of death from the driver to the programmer.

Edited by jsmcpn2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I think the technology will eventually become good enough some day just like any other technology, but I don't think automatic cars aren't going to change the problems of driving much. Certainly not accidents, pollution, noise, sprawling cities, a 20-metre wide street being actually sort of narrow, congestion, parking, etc.

And as with any technology ultimately it's a political problem: whether your life depends on a "lowest-bidder software developer" is a matter of politics, how road renovation is done is also a political matter, how to control vehicle inspection regulations is a political matter, what happens to drivers who lose their job is another political problem, and so on.

Edited by poblequadrat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm a delivery driver and at first I'm like, "Oh shit, this will replace me soon!!"

 

But then I thought about it in terms of it driving me around to deliver and that doesn't sound too bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say this regarding technology in cars: I currently (one more week, thank fuck) valet cars to earn dosh. Many more recently made cars have park-assist technology, namely sensors that beep when you get too close to an object. Ford (tied in my estimation with buick for the most annoying) rear sensors start beeping when the car is about 4 feet away from whatever is behind it - and when you get to about 2 feet, it turns into a steady tone reminiscent of a flatlining heart-rate monitor. It's fucking insane to think how bad the average driver is that we need sensors that go off that far away from potential collisions.

Also, a rear-view camera in a ford fiesta (similar in size to an austin mini) made me howl with laughter, as does a (non-suv) porsche with automatic transmission.

 

Anyhow - youtube driverless cars - surprising progress!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I work in the software/firmware industry, and I will never voluntarily put my life and limb in the hands of a lowest-bidder software developer who doesn't give a shit about staying at a given employer/position for more than 18 months. One case-sensitive mistake in the code and it's off the cliff with ye!

 

Plus, there's no way we can ever afford to outfit the roadways, especially not dirt/gravel roads that need frequent grading/grooming, with the sensing equipment required to make driver-less cars safe in all weather conditions and real-world emergency scenarios. There are almost 5 million miles of roadway just in the US alone. How many dollars per mile will it take to retrofit?

 

Humans are dangerous enough WITHOUT the assistance of technology, and when you mix in software which will ALWAYS have flaws you are begging for death. Toyota has killed nearly 90 people via software glitch. Software bugs alone cost the world $60B/year, exploitation of vulnerabilities ramps that figure up significantly, and now we think it's a good idea to add the immeasurable cost of human casualties to the invoice?

 

Automated transportation is fine for rail-based routes and other FIXED paths, and low-speed variable paths in densely populated areas, but in the real world and rural areas it just won't work on a large scale. It will be a LOOONG time, possibly never, for there to be such thing as "Three Laws Safe" robotics. Humans are imperfect, and things created by humans will generally be more imperfect.

Don't you place your life and some decisions on the operation of an automated machine or program today? Think about it for a moment. You do this already.

I'm sure countries will want very rigourous testing to be carried out over a long timespan before driverless vehicles are commercially viable. You talk as if governments will not look into this.

 

There might be some upfront fixed investment costs involved in potentially upgrading highways (or maybe driverless cars can simply 'sense' the road via mapped out GPS systems)? But any upfront costs are sure to be returned due to high profitability from driverless vehicles. Think about a logitics company wanting to buy 20 driverless delivery vehicles. They pay the upfront cost, but they make a return on it over a short period as they don't have to carry through an employee, pay a salary, lose productivity due to sickness of the employee, lower motor insurance premiums, less accidents etc. The corporate world will be the first to adopt driverless vehicles before it hits the consumer markets. The pressures to go along with it are enormous and it seems like you are underestimating these market pressures.

 

What flaws in the software are you referring? Do you not think rigorous tests and experiments will be carried out? Do you seriously think that more accidents will occur in driverless vehicles? Humans are not better than machine techology when it comes to accuracy and attention to detail (no distractions whilst driving). There will be external pressures to go along with driverless vehicles in society - mainly the profitability side of things for the corporate/logistics world, but also from a governmental point of view, it would prevent many more accidents. Like I said, the pressure to go along with this technology are massive.

So I'm a delivery driver and at first I'm like, "Oh shit, this will replace me soon!!"

 

But then I thought about it in terms of it driving me around to deliver and that doesn't sound too bad.

maybe the customer can type in a code onto a computer panel on the external area of the vehicle, and the door opens with the goods they have purchased? Why are you still needed? Edited by Bread
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why it's almost 2019 and the flying cars of Blade Runner are still just a fantasy... even then, in that movie, it was only seemingly the police and commerce that had the ability to take to the sky - people are poor enough drivers as it is in two dimensions, but add a third? Not gonna happen anytime soon.

 

This whole driverless vehicle thing will work in controlled environments, but as suggested before, there's really no practical or cost-effective way to retrofit basically everywhere to work with them under all the different conditions.

 

I think the best we'll get is computer-assisted driving (early-warning braking, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So I'm a delivery driver and at first I'm like, "Oh shit, this will replace me soon!!"

 

But then I thought about it in terms of it driving me around to deliver and that doesn't sound too bad.

maybe the customer can type in a code onto a computer panel on the external area of the vehicle, and the door opens with the goods they have purchased? Why are you still needed?
Because ...

http://youtu.be/zfRnuxE92cg

 

 

haha but seriously, for quality control and shit. Plus I totally agree with dude about real world conditions. I mean you just cannot predict some people's level of unawareness or assholery on a given day!

Edited by soma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.