Self-Driving Cars Will Make Organ Shortages Worse

[Leo99]

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology..._shortages.html



Much has been said about the ways we expect our oncoming fleet of driverless cars to change the way we live—remaking us all into passengers, rewiring our economy, retooling our views of ownership, and reshaping our cities and roads.

They will also change the way we die. As technology takes the wheel, road deaths due to driver error will begin to diminish. It’s a transformative advancement, but one that comes with consequences in an unexpected place: organ donation.

 

[Wolf359]

Well vehicle deaths are up lately with everyone texting and talking on their phone. So it's going to get better before it gets worse.

 

[andyd]

Heh heh Talk about a first world problem

 

[BrocLuno]

Driverless cars are going to be a game. They will all be going along in an orderly fashion and those of us still manning the tiller, will be trying to figure out how to game the algorithms... Force them to open the spaces, or slow to allow passing, etc.

The only way this is going to work is if every driverless car has on-board cameras to image all the vehicles around them and notify traffic control if something is amiss ... And I'll volunteer to be "amiss"

The image stream will overwhelm the authorities low-bid servers and IBM written sorting routines, so there will be all sorts of glitches that we can play off of

I'm really curious to see how they will deal with say wild horses out in Nevada? Or motorcycles splitting lanes...

My guess is we are a l-o-n-g way from actual adoption anywhere but some urban centers ...

 

[B320i]

In anything but grid-lock, I fail to see a driver-less vehicle being able to negotiate peak-hour traffic with human drivers without causing a 300 vehicle pile-up.

There is a driverless "bus" trial in my city. Not only is it being trialed in a very quiet, waterside suburb, it is also painfully slow. I've said to my friends that "It would probably overheat and self-destruct if you tried it out on St. George's Terrace in peak-hour shenanigans."

A big problem I foresee is the myriad of data inputs and ridiculous number of "possible outcomes" making it difficult for the computer to make a decision. Other very REAL possibilities include computer-virus infections - what happens to passengers then? Or if the "AI" somehow turns evil?

 

[Wolf359]

Well the latest car to have V2V is the Mercedes 2017 E-class. It's the only car that has it so I guess for now, it can only talk to other 2017 E-class cars on the road. It does have a bunch of cameras though, some front ones for lane tracking and rear ones for back up camera. It even has the bird's eye view with all the cameras. Reading up on how V2V works, it does communicate with MB's server and then back. Would be interesting if someone could make an OBDII add on so that all cars newer than 1996 could add it as an option. I don't think it's streaming video though, just car data.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: B320i
In anything but grid-lock, I fail to see a driver-less vehicle being able to negotiate peak-hour traffic with human drivers without causing a 300 vehicle pile-up.

There is a driverless "bus" trial in my city. Not only is it being trialed in a very quiet, waterside suburb, it is also painfully slow. I've said to my friends that "It would probably overheat and self-destruct if you tried it out on St. George's Terrace in peak-hour shenanigans."

A big problem I foresee is the myriad of data inputs and ridiculous number of "possible outcomes" making it difficult for the computer to make a decision. Other very REAL possibilities include computer-virus infections - what happens to passengers then? Or if the "AI" somehow turns evil?


We're a long way from the AI turning evil. I don't think V2V even has AI, that might be in the server that it reports to. There's lots of tech in cars now that could make them driverless, but they don't work that well in the city, automatic distance/cruise control, lane departure warning, blind spot monitoring, night vision assist. Probably not that good with pedestrians and lights so far.

Anyway for a good book on an evil AI, try A Fire Upon the Deep by Vernor Vinge, a little dated now, but it was a good read when it came out, won the SF Hugo award.

 

[Jimzz]

Don't worry suicides will go up greatly to fill in. esp after self driving rigs are in service.

Many do not understand the amount of our economy is based on people driving. UPS, FedEx, Wal/Kmarts, heck even Dominos would cut a lot of jobs day 1 they have this option.

 

[Bud]

I guess it's just something you younger folks will have to deal with. At my age if I wake up in the morning I feel pretty good about things.

 

[HerrStig]

It will be offset by more dope smoking and resulting behavior.

 

[Michael_P]

Since 1994, 16% of all organ donations came from motor vehicle accidents. Source: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

 

[bubbatime]

For every action, there is an equal, and opposite, reaction.

 

[spiritrider]

Originally Posted By: Leo99
They will also change the way we die. As technology takes the wheel, road deaths due to driver error will begin to diminish. It’s a transformative advancement, but one that comes with consequences in an unexpected place: organ donation.

HA!

I have been a software engineer, software architect and software development manager (including of QA groups) for over 30 years. This includes both MIL-STD and FDA requirements. There is no such thing as perfect software driven systems.

You won't find me ever letting some code drive my vehicle.

 

[69GTX]

I can just see motorists "willingly" going along with driverless cars pushing them along at a max 65 mph along I-95 in my state. And in some areas it drops to 50 mph for miles. That will be interesting. If there's a switch to shift to manual, it will be done quite a bit. The one or two jamokes going 75-85 mph while the other sheeple are doing 65 mph will cause accidents. And the computers won't be able to prevent a pile up. Then you're going to have all the aging Baby Boomers who will think the 65 mph speed limite is too fast...and select 55-60 mph as their programmed speed....lol.

 

[CT8]

O.K.

 

[CT8]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: 69GTX
I can just see motorists "willingly" going along with driverless cars pushing them along at a max 65 mph along I-95 in my state. And in some areas it drops to 50 mph for miles. That will be interesting. If there's a switch to shift to manual, it will be done quite a bit. The one or two jamokes going 75-85 mph while the other sheeple are doing 65 mph will cause accidents. And the computers won't be able to prevent a pile up. Then you're going to have all the aging Baby Boomers who will think the 65 mph speed limite is too fast...and select 55-60 mph as their programmed speed....lol.


It could be better or worse. Maybe they'll be programmed to know that slower traffic is to keep right and they'll just drive in the right lane. Or when they see someone coming up on them doing 85, they'll just move over instead of just sitting in their lane. At least trucks stay out of the left lane and when you do see one in the left lane once in a while, they know they're supposed to move over once they pass the slow poke they're trying to go around. The computer will probably be programmed to follow at a 3 second distance, not the 1.5 to 2 seconds that most people do. Plus with electronic braking, they can apply maximum force to the brakes, there's already collision avoidance systems in use now.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: spiritrider
Originally Posted By: Leo99
They will also change the way we die. As technology takes the wheel, road deaths due to driver error will begin to diminish. It’s a transformative advancement, but one that comes with consequences in an unexpected place: organ donation.

HA!

I have been a software engineer, software architect and software development manager (including of QA groups) for over 30 years. This includes both MIL-STD and FDA requirements. There is no such thing as perfect software driven systems.

You won't find me ever letting some code drive my vehicle.


Remember all those people who wouldn't drive a car with an explosive in their steering wheel that might just randomly go off and kill you? Now I don't know remember if I have 8 or 10 airbags in my car. Oh, and I guess they were kinda right, thanks Takata. I'm sure in the future someone will program a virus into it that will have a unique trigger and will either make a great movie or a real life horror show. Every generation needs their own Titanic.

 

[MarcS]

Originally Posted By: 69GTX
I can just see motorists "willingly" going along with driverless cars pushing them along at a max 65 mph along I-95 in my state. And in some areas it drops to 50 mph for miles. That will be interesting. If there's a switch to shift to manual, it will be done quite a bit. The one or two jamokes going 75-85 mph while the other sheeple are doing 65 mph will cause accidents. And the computers won't be able to prevent a pile up. Then you're going to have all the aging Baby Boomers who will think the 65 mph speed limite is too fast...and select 55-60 mph as their programmed speed....lol.


Alternately, you'll be puttering around in traffic while all the connected cars in the autonomous vehicle lane whiz by at 120mph while bumper to bumper.

By the time autonomous vehicles are commonplace we'll be half way to growing new organs with stem cells. Embrace the future

 

[4WD]

BrocL - I was thinking the same thing - like will there be a passive side to these contraptions that the RAM 3500 (see the pic I posted wrt to men and Mazda) aggressive driver can exploit ...
Of course - unlike me it will not become torqued up by tailgating ...