Why the push for Autonomous driving?

[BMWTurboDzl]

40,000 people die in automotive crashes every year in America. There are many, many more collisions, reported and unreported, that involve some type of injury.

To put that in perspective, it's like a Boeing 737-Max crashing every single weekday of the year.

Two 737-Max crashes caused all off the airplane type to be grounded for safety reasons and at the time, many travelers swore off ever flying in a 737-Max.

Imagine the scenario: Every day, Monday through Friday, a 737-Max crashes, everyone dies, and we all just accept that as normal and carry on. Any efforts to reduce these deaths are questioned and written off as just another way for companies to make money.

Interesting suggestion but lets provided some context.

115 million cars on the road every day. That's at a minimum 115M people every day.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/...unted 150,hitting American streets every day.

Conversely approx 2M people travel in the US by air ever day.

https://www.statista.com/chart/2459...e of 2.56,virtually identical to 2019 levels.

 

[PKFan]

This topic is addressed in the well written "Why We Drive" by Matthew Crawford. It's definitely worth the read.

 

[IndyIan]

We will own nothing and we will be happy.

Eh, you might be? If you live in the right parts of Europe, you could have a very good life living in a townhouse or apartment, bike to work everyday, and on the weekends go hiking in the mountains, or skiing without owning a car.
When you have infrastructure not designed specifically for cars, not having one isn't a huge deal, and saves you money for other things...

Oddly enough, I think true autonomous driving vehicles will make cars more practical in europe and may lower their standards for public transportation...

 

[Vil_Riker]

Eh, you might be? If you live in the right parts of Europe, you could have a very good life living in a townhouse or apartment, bike to work everyday, and on the weekends go hiking in the mountains, or skiing without owning a car.
When you have infrastructure not designed specifically for cars, not having one isn't a huge deal, and saves you money for other things...

Oddly enough, I think true autonomous driving vehicles will make cars more practical in europe and may lower their standards for public transportation...

It's a goal expressed by the WEF...

 

[SC Maintenance]

There's always going to be a driver side or someone who has control of vehicle operation.

That is not the model at all. The model is you don't even own a car. Cars are a fleet you summon - like Uber, and it takes you somewhere.

Were obviosly a long ways away , but that is the end goal.

The gameplan is simple - money and control of the population. Freedom of movement is hence under control of a central system. "May I have your papers please comrade".

 

[IndyIan]

It's a goal expressed by the WEF...

Yes, I can agree that having a multi-billion, multi-national company trying to maximize shareholder returns, owning everything in your city is probably not a great idea! How to prevent that is another topic though, but a strong simple democracy with very limited corporate influence is key I think.

I still think autonomous cars isn't a terrible idea though, at least a dozen people a year die every year around my area from driver error accidents. I'm getting old enough now that I can think of over dozen aquantinices that have died in car accidents that were all caused by a driver and I live in a relatively cheap car insurance area(maybe because dead people don't cost much after and accident?)....

 

[fdcg27]

I can see the appeal of true autonomous operation.
Thousand mile slogs that might otherwise have you heading for the airport would become easy and relaxing.
Driving through scenic areas and being able to admire the views while paying no attention to driving would be great.
I like to drive and enjoy using a car but I can see a significant place for true autonomous operation to be enabled by the driver as desired.
We aren't there yet and the answer has little or nothing to do with the number of cameras a car might have or the software implemented.
Autonomous operation will depend upon smart highways and a standardized inter-vehicle communication protocol. Not sure where the bandwidth for either will come from.
Those alone mean that we won't see true autonomous operation in my lifetime and maybe not that of anyone here.

 

[GON]

I still think autonomous cars isn't a terrible idea though, at least a dozen people a year die every year around my area from driver error accidents. I'm getting old enough now that I can think of over dozen aquantinices that have died in car accidents that were all caused by a driver and I live in a relatively cheap car insurance area(maybe because dead people don't cost much after and accident?)....

Sorry for the loss of some of your aquatinces.

I would ask this question- if every motor vehicle accident found both drivers at fault no matter what at least 30 percent, would the number of accidents be reduced? Would drivers become more aware and defensive in their driving?

As your car becomes better able to send information to "the cloud", don't be surprised if auto insurance companies not only charge an annual premium, but start billing a driver supplementally every month for miles driven.

 

[PimTac]

We will own nothing and we will be happy.

And you will likely share the autonomous vehicle with strangers as you make that evening trip to the store or wherever.

 

[IndyIan]

Sorry for the loss of some of your aquatinces.

I would ask this question- if every motor vehicle accident found both drivers at fault no matter what at least 30 percent, would the number of accidents be reduced? Would drivers become more aware and defensive in their driving?

As your car becomes better able to send information to "the cloud", don't be surprised if auto insurance companies not only charge an annual premium, but start billing a driver supplementally every month for miles driven.

Of the fatal car accidents that I know some of the details, apportioning blame probably wasn't going to be a factor as they were on a highway. A couple have been just straight distracted driving... And one was teenager poor decision/risk reward analysis for a pass.... I'm sure none involved expected to have a chance of a major crash in the moments before it happened.
I do see people in town driving a bit aggressively, but nearly all of those accidents aren't major.
We have no fault insurance here which I think kind of looks at accident details, but if you keep on getting in more than your share of fender benders, you will pay more regardless of fault...

I can see the appeal of true autonomous operation.
Thousand mile slogs that might otherwise have you heading for the airport would become easy and relaxing.
Driving through scenic areas and being able to admire the views while paying no attention to driving would be great.
I like to drive and enjoy using a car but I can see a significant place for true autonomous operation to be enabled by the driver as desired.
We aren't there yet and the answer has little or nothing to do with the number of cameras a car might have or the software implemented.
Autonomous operation will depend upon smart highways and a standardized inter-vehicle communication protocol. Not sure where the bandwidth for either will come from.
Those alone mean that we won't see true autonomous operation in my lifetime and maybe not that of anyone here.

The more I think about it, its really the highways that need automated driving first, in terms of saving lives. Implement some sort of "slot car" system with a wire in the pavement or metal plates or something, and have some simple over the air communications between local cars or simple radar to detect how far away the next car is. I think the tech is available now to do this, but getting everyone to agree on standards and designing the right system the first time is tough, then actually building the infrastructure would be cost a bit, and having the system handle human drivers in the mix is more complicated.
IMO there's no technology barrier, just the public isn't ready for it yet.

 

[Exhaustgases]

And you will likely share the autonomous vehicle with strangers as you make that evening trip to the store or wherever.

Or it can be hacked, by a person that wants to have a nice date with a young woman, or whom ever, and either be there at pickup time or have it stop to pick him up. Just one type of scenario of the dangers of such type of transportation.
Just look at problems with mass transit and how dangerous it can be. Then think of Covid and an infected car that comes to pick you up for your store trip. Every thing about autonomous, and not owning your own car is very dangerous.
If they really want cars off the road, then only license drivers that can handle the vehicle, on ice, at high speed on a track, in a slide etc.
That will weed out about 98% of drivers on the roads now.

 

[97K15004WD]

If you are worried about autonomous cars:

1. Buy a motorcycle
2. Buy funds and stocks that support things other than autonomous vehicles and vehicle research
3. Avoid VCs that provide funding for these things.
4. Oh, and don't buy an electric car (no humans needed to handle hazardous liquid fuels). Very easy to fully automate and "refuel" compared to ICE.

Otherwise, you are just along for the ride (pun intended) - subject to the whims of capitalism, technology, and someone else's idea of transportation.

 

[demarpaint]

This is part of the reason. It's just the first step. The next step, and Elon Musk has talked about it openly, is to replace individually owned cars with a service model where no one owns a car, you order a ride and an autonomous vehicle shows up and takes you where you want to go.

The end goal is the elimination of privately owned and operated transportation.

Good luck with that Elon. Here's something to ponder, stick to building electric cars, you're pissing off more people than you think with comments like that.

 

[andrew_j]

All the manufacturers are working on autonomous driving vehicles. Why is it such a big goal? We constantly hear of failures causing bad crashes. These crashes usually occur at higher speeds and are bad.

You don’t hear of the massive success over failure because it is not interesting and dramatic as a crash.

The tech has massive implications especially for freight industry.

 

[svtrit]

40,000 people die in automotive crashes every year in America. There are many, many more collisions, reported and unreported, that involve some type of injury.

To put that in perspective, it's like a Boeing 737-Max crashing every single weekday of the year.

Two 737-Max crashes caused all off the airplane type to be grounded for safety reasons and at the time, many travelers swore off ever flying in a 737-Max.

Imagine the scenario: Every day, Monday through Friday, a 737-Max crashes, everyone dies, and we all just accept that as normal and carry on. Any efforts to reduce these deaths are questioned and written off as just another way for companies to make money.

It would be much more effective in the short term to strengthen our drivers education process and make it more difficult to keep your license if you are a repeat offender. There is a balance between rights and the ability to wreck havoc with your vehicle, I suppose, but it sure seems hard to have a license taken away for bad drivers.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Personally, I think the best advantage is in the near bumper to bumper traffic during the rush hours. In the morning if you can enjoy your coffee and check the news. Unfortunately, in the afternoon, people will nod off.

 

[Torrid]

If you are worried about autonomous cars:

1. Buy a motorcycle
2. Buy funds and stocks that support things other than autonomous vehicles and vehicle research
3. Avoid VCs that provide funding for these things.
4. Oh, and don't buy an electric car (no humans needed to handle hazardous liquid fuels). Very easy to fully automate and "refuel" compared to ICE.

Otherwise, you are just along for the ride (pun intended) - subject to the whims of capitalism, technology, and someone else's idea of transportation.

I’m not sure how you arrived a number 4 in particular, but if you think anyone is remotely close to full automation at the consumer level ICE, EV, or otherwise, we’re no where near it. We have cars doing well enough to lull owners into a false sense of safety which is by far more dangerous when it decides to give up and require the driver to take over in an emergency as opposed to just driving in the first place. You should try a conversation with someone that absolutely trusts these systems with their lives if you want to have nightmares. It’s only a fancy driver’s aide that should be treated as such and some see it as so much more than that.

 

[alarmguy]

All the manufacturers are working on autonomous driving vehicles. Why is it such a big goal? We constantly hear of failures causing bad crashes. These crashes usually occur at higher speeds and are bad.

They already are on the roads in San Fransisco. A GM invested company and one other company run driverless taxis 24 hours a day.
I would guess since there is no driver to pay it is more lucrative. This one day will transcend to other shipping and delivery companies.
Just like cars themselves used to be deadly, they started requiring headrests, seatbelts, air bags, bumpers... I think just a matter of time to perfect the AI vehicle. Just like AI is going to replace most white collar jobs, if these companies ignore the future, they will be outdated from the marketplace.

 

[alarmguy]

There's always going to be a driver side or someone who has control of vehicle operation. So if some idiot decides to use the Tesla parking feature on a public street and the car rolls through a stop sign, the individual who has the ability to control the car is responsible.

It's no different and someone forgetting to engage a parking brake.

Their ultimate goal is the have no human controls in the cars, similar to that new space craft. If there are no controls the occupant can not be responsible for any thing.

1. Well, have I got news for you guys! *LOL*
There are no drivers in the driverless taxis operating on the streets of San Fransisco.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/10/san-francisco-robotaxi-approved-waymo-cruise/

2. This has nothing to do with insurance, the ultimate goal of car companies is to stay competitive. The cars companies take on a huge amount of liability and the cars themselves will still need to be insured. But costs will come down because they are far safer than human drivers.

 

[PimTac]

They already are on the roads in San Fransisco. A GM invested company and one other company run driverless taxis 24 hours a day.
I would guess since there is no driver to pay it is more lucrative. This one day will transcend to other shipping and delivery companies.
Just like cars themselves used to be deadly, they started requiring headrests, seatbelts, air bags, bumpers... I think just a matter of time to perfect the AI vehicle. Just like AI is going to replace most white collar jobs, if these companies ignore the future, they will be outdated from the marketplace.

I can see where someone will get into one of these cars to go to the airport. They are running late so they ask the car if they can take shortcuts to speed things up.

I’m sorry Dave, I can’t do that.