Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:05 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post


That's interesting, so like an AV version of Google street maps? That would make huge sense, if you could get all the auto makers to collaborate on it.
Even single automakers have enough cars out there to make this practical. (Not counting Tesla.) It seems like the easiest way to update the maps. Google street view gets out of date fast, not too bad for that application but bad for AVs.
  #102  
Old 12-17-2017, 09:17 AM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Even single automakers have enough cars out there to make this practical. (Not counting Tesla.) It seems like the easiest way to update the maps. Google street view gets out of date fast, not too bad for that application but bad for AVs.
They don't, not nearly. While (let's say Ford) technically travels enough road to scan everything in a year, it doesn't cover nearly all the roads (most driving is the same set of trips over and over), and not a single Ford vehicle currently has the technology...it would take decades and decades to mature.

But that's not why I came back to the thread...I thought this was a good summary of some of the broader AV discussions that are happening.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...riverless-cars
  #103  
Old 12-17-2017, 12:03 PM
RaftPeople is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: 7-Eleven
Posts: 6,592
From an economic perspective, L3/L4 probably make sense but L5 requires increased investment with (possibly) diminishing returns.

That last 10% of scenarios/functionality will probably stretch out a long time.

Last edited by RaftPeople; 12-17-2017 at 12:03 PM. Reason: spelling
  #104  
Old 12-17-2017, 02:10 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
They don't, not nearly. While (let's say Ford) technically travels enough road to scan everything in a year, it doesn't cover nearly all the roads (most driving is the same set of trips over and over), and not a single Ford vehicle currently has the technology...it would take decades and decades to mature.
After they ramp, of course. Current Ford cars are not going to do much good. Maybe early adopters will have to take over to record uncharted roads. Maybe Google will sell them this stuff. Maybe they'll lend a recording car to their dealers and tell them to get recording in order to get AVs to sell.

As for the article, I wonder how useful research on the impact of the automobile would have been before it was introduced. Not very, I expect.
  #105  
Old 12-18-2017, 05:52 PM
Balthisar is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Southeast Michigan, USA
Posts: 11,105
I mean, cross-licensing is pretty common in the industry. There's no reason one company has to do it all, and it's mutually beneficial.
  #106  
Old 12-21-2017, 09:20 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
They don't, not nearly. While (let's say Ford) technically travels enough road to scan everything in a year, it doesn't cover nearly all the roads (most driving is the same set of trips over and over), and not a single Ford vehicle currently has the technology...it would take decades and decades to mature.

But that's not why I came back to the thread...I thought this was a good summary of some of the broader AV discussions that are happening.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/...riverless-cars
Meh. Not the mag's best review article.

1) It does seem that "level 4" is wide swath. If "certain conditions" means only good weather in very limited locations then it is not fitting what most are expecting from level 4. Most expect level 4 will cover the vast majority of circumstances. My daily commute and errands under all weather conditions reasonably expected for me to experience and visit to my brother's. We don't expect it do do off road in a dust storm.

2) Using a short term study of giving people use of a chauffeur-driven car for up to 60 hours over 1 week to predict how people will over time use AVs is just dumb. Give a kid a new toy and the first week they'll use it a lot. Once the novelty wears off usually not so much so.

3) Yes, the questions of owning your own vehicle vs a service, AV as a service, and regulation, are all open. Many are unanswerable right now. Which does not mean we need them before it proceeds.
  #107  
Old 12-23-2017, 08:34 AM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post

1) It does seem that "level 4" is wide swath. If "certain conditions" means only good weather in very limited locations then it is not fitting what most are expecting from level 4. Most expect level 4 will cover the vast majority of circumstances. My daily commute and errands under all weather conditions reasonably expected for me to experience and visit to my brother's. We don't expect it do do off road in a dust storm.
I doubt more than 1 in 5,000 people think about Levels at all. And when they do think about AV, they think about going to or from work without intervention, or their friend's house, or shopping, or whatever. The fact that those can be Level 5 or in some cases Level 4 is of no interest to them I'd guess.
  #108  
Old 12-23-2017, 09:34 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,894
When I started the thread I didn't know about the levels, and I agree that the broad range of level 4 muddies the waters. An airport shuttle that runs a regular loop 50 times a day would be a level 4 vehicle, and I could see those starting to roll out in the next few years. A personally owned car that could take you to 98% of mapped addresses on 99.5% of days (.5% being inclement weather that it doesn't think it could handle so it refuses to go) would also be a level 4 vehicle, and yet that would be a massive safety improvement, would be perfectly acceptable to most consumers, and I would certainly consider that to satisfy the premise of my OP. In that sense, I think level 4 vehicles are years away and also decades away.
  #109  
Old 12-23-2017, 09:54 AM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
When I started the thread I didn't know about the levels, and I agree that the broad range of level 4 muddies the waters. An airport shuttle that runs a regular loop 50 times a day would be a level 4 vehicle, and I could see those starting to roll out in the next few years. A personally owned car that could take you to 98% of mapped addresses on 99.5% of days (.5% being inclement weather that it doesn't think it could handle so it refuses to go) would also be a level 4 vehicle, and yet that would be a massive safety improvement, would be perfectly acceptable to most consumers, and I would certainly consider that to satisfy the premise of my OP. In that sense, I think level 4 vehicles are years away and also decades away.
That's the exact L4 example I've been using for a while (the airport loop, with McCarran being a good possibility given NV regulation and weather), and yes, it's very broad. But it does work as a shorthand as "AV with boundary conditions"...and defining those boundaries will be important for regulatory and insurance reasons. But to your point, I'm not sure the levels are much help to anyone not trying to get this technology up and running.
  #110  
Old 12-23-2017, 09:56 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
As for the cars updating the maps ...there are overlapping concepts here.

My initial post was actually thinking about the individual vehicle's private data set developing a highly detailed and recently updated map of the roads most traveled on, and thereby better able to impose top-down expectations on fuzzy information coming in (there was a stop sign there yesterday, now there is a white blob with a bit of red amidst drifts of white that is the height of the stop sign that was there ..., there was a pothole in this location yesterday, plan for its still being here ...).

Uploading and sharing that information, to a cloud and/or by querying and being queried by other local vehicles (V2V), and thereby having detailed deep information of areas where the most vehicles are most used and increasing information for roads less travelled, is an overlapping item. That one of course comes with increased security concerns. V2V so far is, as I understand, more immediate hazard focused and the more open the system the more hackers can play.
  #111  
Old 12-23-2017, 10:39 AM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
As for the cars updating the maps ...there are overlapping concepts here.

My initial post was actually thinking about the individual vehicle's private data set developing a highly detailed and recently updated map of the roads most traveled on, and thereby better able to impose top-down expectations on fuzzy information coming in (there was a stop sign there yesterday, now there is a white blob with a bit of red amidst drifts of white that is the height of the stop sign that was there ..., there was a pothole in this location yesterday, plan for its still being here ...).

Uploading and sharing that information, to a cloud and/or by querying and being queried by other local vehicles (V2V), and thereby having detailed deep information of areas where the most vehicles are most used and increasing information for roads less travelled, is an overlapping item. That one of course comes with increased security concerns. V2V so far is, as I understand, more immediate hazard focused and the more open the system the more hackers can play.
That's a reasonable distinction I wasn't considering, though would the AI be local to the vehicle? As long as data is getting sent to the cloud for analysis it might as well be used for the broader purpose.

That reminds me, I've seen wildly varying estimates of how much data would get uploaded by every AV every day, but they're all big numbers. Fortunately quantum computing will come along any day now to save us.
  #112  
Old 12-23-2017, 12:28 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
That's a reasonable distinction I wasn't considering, though would the AI be local to the vehicle? As long as data is getting sent to the cloud for analysis it might as well be used for the broader purpose.

That reminds me, I've seen wildly varying estimates of how much data would get uploaded by every AV every day, but they're all big numbers. Fortunately quantum computing will come along any day now to save us.
I was presuming local but my ignorance may be showing.
  #113  
Old 12-26-2017, 02:46 PM
N9IWP is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southeast MN
Posts: 6,239
Ars Technica article -- self driving cars are here (well -- in Phoenix -- or more accurately -- a subsection of Phoenix)
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/12...nyone-noticed/

A long way until even 51% of the country in 51% of conditions, but still a step.

Brian
  #114  
Old 02-20-2018, 10:00 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702

So it is now just over 4 months since the OP was made


Apparently, Hyundai is already at Level 4 with their Nexo. Cite.
Quote:
A crossover SUV that runs on hydrogen fuel, the Nexo has a range of approximately 800 km (500 miles) and is capable of a full refuel in only three to five minutes. When it comes out this March in Korea, refueling would mean taking the Nexo to dedicated Hydrogen Refueling Stations.

The Nexo comes with semi-autonomous technology that Hyundai promises will be advanced to Level 4 autonomy by 2021. That might not be much of a stretch, though, considering the Nexo’s recent driving demonstration performance earlier this February.

According to reports, the Nexo SUV set a record for autonomous driving on a highway when it completed 190 km (118 miles) on full “cruise” mode. The stretch was managed by three Nexo SUVs and two Genesis G80s — from Hyundai’s luxury brand — outfitted with self-driving systems that follow Level 4 autonomy standards as described by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).

It’s reportedly the first time a self-driving vehicle traveled more than 100 km (62 miles) at the maximum allowable speeds of up to 110 km/h (68 mph). All the while, the vehicles successfully overtook slower vehicles, changed lanes, and used automated toll gates — all without human intervention.
The Nexo goes on sale in March in South Korea. That's March 2018.
  #115  
Old 02-20-2018, 10:25 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,894
Your own quote says it won't be level 4 until 2021 (estimated). We shall see. The description of the highway demo doesn't sound any different from what Tesla and others currently have.

Let the decades roll on!
  #116  
Old 02-21-2018, 12:31 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-21-2018 at 12:32 AM.
  #117  
Old 02-21-2018, 01:43 AM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
I got the magazine from AAA today, and the first editorial was about how they are running the autonomous shuttle in Vegas and how they are partnering with an autonomous vehicle test area.
I can imagine the strategy meetings there about how to have a club for drivers when no one drives anymore. The tow service will still be useful, I suppose.

They seem to be taking this pretty seriously.
  #118  
Old 02-22-2018, 08:41 PM
NetTrekker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Almost every major automaker plans on having an autonomous car on the market with the next 3-5 years. I don't buy it.

Despite Tesla's brilliant marketing, lane keeping assists + adaptive cruise control does not make an autonomous car. Even *if* those two technologies can account for 98% of miles driven, the technology required to bridge the last 2% in order to create a vehicle that can go from any given point A to any given point B isn't even on the horizon. Google's self driving cars, as of a few years ago, reportedly can't handle 99% of roads in the US, nor can they handle snow, heavy rain, any localized GPS outages, or unexpected and/or temporary traffic signals. The idea that these are small problems that are going to be solved in a few years is wishful thinking.

At best, we're going to have long haul interstate truck routes that are completely autonomous, with ports on either end where a real person finishes the job. We'll also see systems like Tesla's Autopilot proliferate down to more affordable cars, but the law and the technology will still require the driver to remain alert and take over when the system can't handle the situation, which will be at some point on every single trip the vehicle takes. This is the best we're going to get for decades.

That's what I think, at least, but clearly I'm a naysayer. Convince me I'm wrong
Google (Waymo) is going to start autonomous vehicle ride sharing service in Phoenix very soon. Self-driving cars are already here.
  #119  
Old 02-23-2018, 07:57 AM
Dendarii Dame is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 14,510
Here's yesterday's science fiction comic strip Brewster Rockit, with another possible hazard self-driving vehicles might present: http://www.gocomics.com/brewsterrockit/2018/02/22
  #120  
Old 02-25-2018, 08:32 PM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/02/washing-avs/

The complications of keeping sensors clean....
  #121  
Old 02-26-2018, 09:53 AM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetTrekker View Post
Google (Waymo) is going to start autonomous vehicle ride sharing service in Phoenix very soon. Self-driving cars are already here.
Gee, I remember when the same thing was being said because they were testing self-driving cars in Pittsburgh a couple years ago.

I guess they're still 'already here'. And in 2020, they'll be 'already here' again. Etc.

Let me know when they're actually out there without being babysat by highly-paid engineers who are ready to take over at the drop of a hat.

I'd really like self-driving cars to become a reality in the not-too-distant future. But there's something weird going on with everyone claiming that their car will imminently be ready for prime time, and then it's always not. I'd give a lot more cred to an honest assessment of how far away they are, and whether the obstacles are surmountable by, say, 2025.
  #122  
Old 02-26-2018, 01:13 PM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Gee, I remember when the same thing was being said because they were testing self-driving cars in Pittsburgh a couple years ago.

I guess they're still 'already here'. And in 2020, they'll be 'already here' again. Etc.

Let me know when they're actually out there without being babysat by highly-paid engineers who are ready to take over at the drop of a hat.

I'd really like self-driving cars to become a reality in the not-too-distant future. But there's something weird going on with everyone claiming that their car will imminently be ready for prime time, and then it's always not. I'd give a lot more cred to an honest assessment of how far away they are, and whether the obstacles are surmountable by, say, 2025.
As I've said here before, Level 4 is in some sense always imminent, because the environment is by definition contained. (in fact, I know of a couple of places where L4 is already happening away from public roads) What's different about Waymo is that, for the L4 they are claiming in Phoenix, supposedly some of those vans won't have an engineer in the back hovering over a big red button.

That's a win of sorts for L4, but I'm still not sure I count it as the "future" of autonomous vehicles since each of those vehicles still costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. But progress!
  #123  
Old 02-26-2018, 02:19 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
Gee, I remember when the same thing was being said because they were testing self-driving cars in Pittsburgh a couple years ago.
You mean the test that started 18 months ago? 18 months is now "a couple years"?
  #124  
Old 02-26-2018, 03:27 PM
TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 40,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/02/washing-avs/

The complications of keeping sensors clean....
Saw this over the weekend. And it's an indication of how far away safe self driving cars are. Car washes are no worse than plenty of real world road conditions. A self driving car that only works on clean streets in Sunny Southern California weather where no animals, bugs, lawn sprinklers, plastic bags, smog residue, or other contaminants could affect the sensors isn't going to fly, except maybe in California where no knows how to drive right anyway.
  #125  
Old 02-26-2018, 10:16 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702
4 months & 10 days after the OP was made:
Quote:
Driverless cars will be tested in California for the first time without a person behind a steering wheel under new rules that state regulators approved Monday for the fast-developing technology.

The regulations are a major step toward getting autonomous vehicles to dealerships and onto the streets of California, where companies such as Tesla and Waymo are leading the way on the technology. Until now, driverless cars could only be tested on public roads in the state if a person could take the wheel in an emergency.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-26-2018 at 10:20 PM.
  #126  
Old 02-26-2018, 11:03 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Saw this over the weekend. And it's an indication of how far away safe self driving cars are. Car washes are no worse than plenty of real world road conditions. A self driving car that only works on clean streets in Sunny Southern California weather where no animals, bugs, lawn sprinklers, plastic bags, smog residue, or other contaminants could affect the sensors isn't going to fly, except maybe in California where no knows how to drive right anyway.
You mean like the cars in San Francisco? That are working now?
We Bay Area denizens can take a lot of abuse, but saying that Mountain View is in Southern California goes too far. We have our pride up here, and we don't put "the" before route numbers.
  #127  
Old 02-27-2018, 03:26 AM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
From your own link:

Quote:
The vehicles will no longer need to have drivers inside during tests, but people will still be in charge. Under the regulations, driverless cars being tested on public roads must have a remote operator monitoring at all times, ready to take over as needed. The remote operator must also be able to communicate with police as well as any passengers in the event of an accident.

Law enforcement must provide permission to test on local roads and be provided with routes the cars will take.
  #128  
Old 02-27-2018, 09:49 AM
Tastes of Chocolate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: slightly north of center
Posts: 4,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
You mean like the cars in San Francisco? That are working now?
Think winters in the north. If the sensors can't handle being continually splashed with salty slush, which dries to a white powder, they won't work here. Even seeing the paint lines on the asphalt, through the salt, can be iffy.
  #129  
Old 02-27-2018, 09:57 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
From your own link:
I've gotta let you know now, that for months I've been giggling at your posts. You seem to think that you can or need to try and refute everything that gets posted, but it just looks hilarious. Why don't you just come back in 9 years and then try refuting the whole shebang? I mean, the OP did say "decades away", right?

I'm not making any arguments. I'm posting news articles that show the rapid and steady advance of this technology. None of your posts really refutes anything except the assumptions that you might have made; they certainly don't refute anything in the articles themselves.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-27-2018 at 09:58 AM.
  #130  
Old 02-27-2018, 09:23 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tastes of Chocolate View Post
Think winters in the north. If the sensors can't handle being continually splashed with salty slush, which dries to a white powder, they won't work here. Even seeing the paint lines on the asphalt, through the salt, can be iffy.
I wonder how the experiment in Pittsburgh is going?
It's not like the heuristics human drivers use to more or less stay in line on snow covered roads are going to be that hard to implement. And there are large swathes of the country where this is a non-issue.
  #131  
Old 02-27-2018, 09:27 PM
CCitizen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Almost every major automaker plans on having an autonomous car on the market with the next 3-5 years. I don't buy it.

Despite Tesla's brilliant marketing, lane keeping assists + adaptive cruise control does not make an autonomous car. Even *if* those two technologies can account for 98% of miles driven, the technology required to bridge the last 2% in order to create a vehicle that can go from any given point A to any given point B isn't even on the horizon. Google's self driving cars, as of a few years ago, reportedly can't handle 99% of roads in the US, nor can they handle snow, heavy rain, any localized GPS outages, or unexpected and/or temporary traffic signals. The idea that these are small problems that are going to be solved in a few years is wishful thinking.

At best, we're going to have long haul interstate truck routes that are completely autonomous, with ports on either end where a real person finishes the job. We'll also see systems like Tesla's Autopilot proliferate down to more affordable cars, but the law and the technology will still require the driver to remain alert and take over when the system can't handle the situation, which will be at some point on every single trip the vehicle takes. This is the best we're going to get for decades.

That's what I think, at least, but clearly I'm a naysayer. Convince me I'm wrong
I hope you are wrong and I know you are right.

They promised Fusion Power a few years away in 1980s.

They promised flying cars.
  #132  
Old 02-27-2018, 09:30 PM
CCitizen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
ETA: I think it'll be great to be able come back here in 2020 and see how many of the companies listed at the OP's link made good on their plans.
More likely then not, instead of self driving cars they will come up with promises of self driving cars in 2023.
  #133  
Old 02-28-2018, 09:10 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
I've gotta let you know now, that for months I've been giggling at your posts. You seem to think that you can or need to try and refute everything that gets posted, but it just looks hilarious. Why don't you just come back in 9 years and then try refuting the whole shebang? I mean, the OP did say "decades away", right?

I'm not making any arguments. I'm posting news articles that show the rapid and steady advance of this technology. None of your posts really refutes anything except the assumptions that you might have made; they certainly don't refute anything in the articles themselves.
What are your academic qualifications?
  #134  
Old 03-01-2018, 07:17 AM
USCDiver's Avatar
USCDiver is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NC
Posts: 5,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
What are your academic qualifications?
Now we need academic qualifications to giggle?
  #135  
Old 03-01-2018, 07:43 AM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,894
Bo, if I stipulate that automakers are indeed conducting impressive tests and making bold predictions with aggressive timetables, will you stop bumping this thread with eager reporting of such news? If and when tests are complete and an automaker announces a firm release date you can rub my nose all in it, but until then, I'm not sure what you're giggling about.
  #136  
Old 03-01-2018, 10:18 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
Bo, FWIW some of us find the updates on how rapidly progress is being made to be interesting.


A worthwhile approach might be to bump this thread once a quarterish to review progress of hitting certain targets?


Target one: vehicles constrained to fairly limited areas or routes as big as perhaps a metro's downtown for ride hailing, or trucks that go distances on certain highways to and from various defined depots and delivery points. Target 1a is having that available in cities and regions that experience rough winters as well as those with year round mild seasons.

Target two: vehicles marketed to the general public that do not require hands on at all times and that can handle driving in the same weather circumstances that most drivers feel able to handle and that cover the vast majority of driving routes that consumers drive (city (alleyways inclusive), to suburban, to interstate, to small towns. Owners will have the option to drive the vehicle themselves and there may be some circumstances in which the car announces that the requested route includes portions that it is does not assess it can handle safely prompting the user to either opt to choose a different route or destination or time of travel or to take over driving for the portions it will not do.

Target three: true level 5. Vehicles for all uses that do not even include an option for the user to drive and at most have a panic button for user psychological well being. (That panic button could include the option of a service that includes having a real person located elsewhere take over remote control of the vehicle in Black Panther style.)

Target four: the vehicles that meet at least target two are affordable enough and desirable enough that they begin to make up a majority of new vehicles sold. This might occur before target three or after.


I think we will see fairly rapid progress hitting target one and maybe even 1a with many milestones over the next two to three years. Those are the first vehicles automakers will be selling as ride hailing and transport vehicles, thinking that such will displace individually owned vehicles for increasing portions of market share over time. Target two is the more interesting milestone and four is the big deal point.

A separate target that I have no idea where to place in the order is new cars nearly all with V2V capacity and with some ability for the car to warn and minimally partially take over control to avoid or reduce harm from collision. That capacity being widespread makes meeting the target two and above easier but is not required for the target to be met.
  #137  
Old 03-01-2018, 01:07 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
Bo, if I stipulate that automakers are indeed conducting impressive tests and making bold predictions with aggressive timetables, will you stop bumping this thread with eager reporting of such news? If and when tests are complete and an automaker announces a firm release date you can rub my nose all in it, but until then, I'm not sure what you're giggling about.
I think it's funny to see someone try and rebut what is just a set of facts.

"Waymo is testing this type of car on California streets" really isn't subject to a rebuttal of "well they aren't complete Level 5 autonomy" because the claim was never made.

It's news. It's information. It's not an argument or opinion, in and of itself.

I juxtapose it with the date the OP was written because the OP claims that "self driving cars are still decades away". I think it's interesting to see that we're getting closer all the time because I don't think "decades away" is at all realistic and in that sense my posts are an argument or opinion, but only in relation to the "decades away" posited by the OP.

So far all the available evidence suggests that "decades away" is overly pessimistic. I mean, as long as L4 or L5 cars are available before 2038, the prediction is off, right?

ETA: stereonz, I have no desire to rub your face in anything; you're cool. When I use OP, I mean "original post" not "original poster". In fact, I forgot it was you who started the thread until I checked just now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Bo, FWIW some of us find the updates on how rapidly progress is being made to be interesting.


A worthwhile approach might be to bump this thread once a quarterish to review progress of hitting certain targets?
Thanks; I appreciate that. I have no control over when companies publish or promote their work, tho; I post 'em when I see 'em.

I do try and not post stupid news like "Waymo has 16 new cars ready to go in Arizona" unless the car has significant new tech that differentiates it from a previous car. I'm not trying to help publicize a company, for instance; I'm just interested in the subject.

If people don't want to read about such things as often as they happen, they are free to bookmark the thread and come back at intervals more to their liking, right? It seems to me that's a better way to handle it than to ask me not to post as often as I have.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 03-01-2018 at 01:10 PM.
  #138  
Old 03-01-2018, 01:12 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 25,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
What are your academic qualifications?
My academic qualifications for what? For posting links to articles that I read? Or for giggling?

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 03-01-2018 at 01:12 PM.
  #139  
Old 03-01-2018, 08:19 PM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
I've gotta let you know now, that for months I've been giggling at your posts. You seem to think that you can or need to try and refute everything that gets posted, but it just looks hilarious. Why don't you just come back in 9 years and then try refuting the whole shebang? I mean, the OP did say "decades away", right?

I'm not making any arguments. I'm posting news articles that show the rapid and steady advance of this technology. None of your posts really refutes anything except the assumptions that you might have made; they certainly don't refute anything in the articles themselves.
Just caught up on the discussion. Bo, listen, we've gotten along well over the years and I've enjoyed your posts, but following "4 months & 10 days after the OP was made:" with "I'm just posting information" is just another variation on "I'm just asking questions!" Clearly you're asserting a point there about the immediacy of the technology, and since we're in the cleverly-named IMHO, I'm going to point out where I see hype. (which, admittedly, is most everywhere these days)

It would be good if we could get along and throw stuff in the quarry together, but in the meantime, yeah, I'm going to continue offering my honest opinion. That it's still a lot of hype. Everywhere.
  #140  
Old 03-01-2018, 08:31 PM
Maserschmidt's Avatar
Maserschmidt is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 5,766
Here, I'll even throw in something positive. We got to talk to the guys who helped set this up, and these big machines are running non-stop with zero human interaction (except around loading/unloading). It's off-road L4, and it shows how great this can work in a closed system.

http://www.mining.com/rio-tinto-auto...bara-material/

Last edited by Maserschmidt; 03-01-2018 at 08:33 PM.
  #141  
Old 03-02-2018, 12:50 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
... If people don't want to read about such things as often as they happen, they are free to bookmark the thread and come back at intervals more to their liking, right? It seems to me that's a better way to handle it than to ask me not to post as often as I have.
Meh. Not sure where the line is but I think one should also not treat a SD thread as their personal blog to post updates on a subject of personal interest. Stated as a general rule: I do not see your several posts hitting anywhere in the area where I imagine the line to be.

But that's off topic and more ATMB. Do the targets I suggest seem like the most meaningful milestones to be looking for to others here? Are there others than would be more important to note?
  #142  
Old 03-02-2018, 01:09 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maserschmidt View Post
Here, I'll even throw in something positive. We got to talk to the guys who helped set this up, and these big machines are running non-stop with zero human interaction (except around loading/unloading). It's off-road L4, and it shows how great this can work in a closed system.

http://www.mining.com/rio-tinto-auto...bara-material/
That is cool isn't it. I'm friendly with their patent law team. And I agree - lots of hype. Things are moving along but the hurdles are huge.
  #143  
Old 03-03-2018, 04:15 AM
Batano is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
except maybe in California where no knows how to drive right anyway.
We are entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/ge...state-overview

Last edited by Batano; 03-03-2018 at 04:15 AM.
  #144  
Old 03-19-2018, 03:42 PM
Tangent's Avatar
Tangent is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cowtown
Posts: 9,799
"Woman dies in Arizona after being hit by Uber self-driving SUV"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKBN1GV296

Quote:
The vehicle was in autonomous mode with an operator behind the wheel at the time of the accident, which occurred overnight Sunday to Monday, Tempe police said.

“The vehicle was traveling northbound ... when a female walking outside of the crosswalk crossed the road from west to east when she was struck by the Uber vehicle,” police said in a statement.
Uber is "suspending North American tests of its self-driving vehicles." Could be a big setback--I imagine they've got a lawsuit headed their way. It may be that the woman was making a risky crossing--outside the crosswalk at night--and a human driver might have hit her in the same circumstances, but the fact that it was a self-driving vehicle will draw extra scrutiny and more suspicion of "driver" error.

Also from the article:

Quote:
Fallout from the crash “will likely prove negative for all auto makers and suppliers with aspirations in autonomous driving, Buckingham Research Group analyst Glenn Chin wrote in a client note. “A human fatality is likely to spur increased public and regulatory scrutiny of AVs around a process that is admittedly quite lax in the U.S.
  #145  
Old 03-19-2018, 03:50 PM
steronz is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 4,894
I figured that would get posted here before long, but I think it's important for the sake of progress not to let incidents like this put a halt to important research. Eventually self driving cars will save lives, and there's good reason to believe that autonomous driver aids already are. I'd hate to see my prediction come true if it's because regulators shut the whole thing down.

Last edited by steronz; 03-19-2018 at 03:50 PM.
  #146  
Old 03-20-2018, 12:51 PM
Orwell is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Keystone State
Posts: 2,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I figured that would get posted here before long, but I think it's important for the sake of progress not to let incidents like this put a halt to important research. Eventually self driving cars will save lives, and there's good reason to believe that autonomous driver aids already are. I'd hate to see my prediction come true if it's because regulators shut the whole thing down.
It could be regulators who slow things down. It could be insurance companies. It could be lawyers. In the end, there is liability, and it needs to be ironed out legally before autonomous cars become more than a curiosity.

I also think driverless cars have a long way to go. Things like pedestrians, snow, heavy rain, road maintenance and lots of other variables need to be accommodated.

As far as this incident goes, I am interested in exactly how the accident happened, and whether an attentive human driver would have been likely to avoid hitting the careless pedestrian.

Last edited by Orwell; 03-20-2018 at 12:52 PM.
  #147  
Old 03-20-2018, 03:53 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 45,779
Before this happened Arizona bragged about how reducing the regulations on these cars would be so good for the state and the industry. Whoops.
Now it was an Uber car, and I'm not sure I'd trust Uber with an autonomous tricycle. But I worry that dumbass politicians get sold a bill of goods by certain companies and get convinced that this is closer to being ready for the streets than it is. Self-driving cars are closer than decades away but further than months away.
  #148  
Old 03-20-2018, 06:42 PM
markdash is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,976
I read the story about the Arizona pedestrian killed by the automated car and was looking for some discussion. Some points of emphasis:

(1)The pedestrian was not crossing at a crosswalk. Apparently some are using this as an excuse for why the accident happened, but IMO self-driving cars need to be able to deal with such a situation.

(2) Following up on (1), the pedestrian supposedly darted in front of the car unexpectedly in poor lightning conditions. I think it likely an accident would have happened regardless of the driver.

(3) The car was going 38 mph in a 35 mph zone. So by the rule of law the car was "speeding," but this brings up an interesting question: In a future where all cars are self-driving, how relevant are current speed limits? I would imagine an infinitely attentive/careful AI would be able to drive more safely at higher speeds than a human driver.

I firmly believe self-driving cars will eventually become standard but clearly a lot more testing and research need to be done before their implementation...
  #149  
Old 03-20-2018, 07:43 PM
Stranger On A Train is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 19,051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orwell View Post
It could be regulators who slow things down. It could be insurance companies. It could be lawyers. In the end, there is liability, and it needs to be ironed out legally before autonomous cars become more than a curiosity.
I’ll point out, just because the free market advocates and libertarians are inevitably going to promote it, that ‘regulation’ by liability claims is a terrible, shitty, expensive, and often futile way to force manufacturers to improve their products. Even when companies lose large class action suits they can still delay and reduce awards through legal manuvering taking years and ensuring that the only people who genuinely benefit are the lawyers, and while I’m not going to cut a Dick the Butcher style complaint about lawyers, such action should really be the last recourse due to gross negligence, not a standard way of protecting the public interest after the fact of a failure. The best way is to encourage the industry at large to voluntarily develop a set of design and verification test standards that meet independent expert scruitiny and serve to assure that the interest of public safety is well represented in the design-to-market process. It’s not undue government oversight or damaging to innovation, and in fact a set of objective universally-adopted standards for safety and testing will serve to help indemnify manufacturers and operators from accidents which they could not be reasonably expected to prevent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
Before this happened Arizona bragged about how reducing the regulations on these cars would be so good for the state and the industry. Whoops.
Now it was an Uber car, and I'm not sure I'd trust Uber with an autonomous tricycle. But I worry that dumbass politicians get sold a bill of goods by certain companies and get convinced that this is closer to being ready for the streets than it is. Self-driving cars are closer than decades away but further than months away.
I’m not sure I would trust Uber with a Roomba, but to be fair, they have made strides in complying with public concerns and assuring that drivers are competent and safe, including tracking individual driver habits. I frankly think that a random Uber is probably safer than a random cab (and almost certainly cleaner and more courteous). Which begs another question; when you select the autonomous vehicle service, who is going to help you with your luggage or make conversation on your way to the airport? Sure, many users do not need or want this interaction, but some will happily pay for a human touch, which means that even when Uber and other companies can provide automated drivers they may still employ a human in a ‘chauffeur’-level service even if not actually operating the vehicle.

I expect truly unaided autonomous vehicles to be operating on all public roads sometime between 10 and 25 years, depending on the development of the technology, adjudication of accidents and other lawsuits, and the adoption of laws which explicitly define responsibility and liability of operators. Concurrent with that, as more and more accidents that occur will be revealed as being caused by human error, insurance and (perhaps) licensing requirements on people who wish to operate a motor vehicle will increase to the point that many (but not all) people will opt to either purchase an autonomous vehicle or more likely subscribe to a commuter transportation service which charges a flat rate + mileage that is cost competitive with owning and maintaining a vehicle and license. Ultimately, the economics will drive widespread adoption of autonomous vehicle technology, provided that manufacturers and operators are not in such a rush that they try to push immature systems on the public.

Stranger
  #150  
Old 03-20-2018, 07:56 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,996
Let us, for the sake of discussion, assume that this fatality is determined to be one that would have been if anything more likely to have occurred with a typical human driver.

The public and regulatory response to it will be telling of how the industry is going to proceed. Is the public going to demand perfection from AVs?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017