# Re "self driving cars" people talk as if this is a few years away. This seems nuts to me. **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [August 26, 2016, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074 "2016-08-26T23:18:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/141 "2016-09-22T01:24:44Z")
> [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > Tell that to my Uber drivers. 😛 From what I’ve seen, Uber drivers screw up when they ignore the Uber GPS. They frequently try to take their own shortcuts. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/142 "2016-09-22T02:12:05Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Humans can’t do those things without input from humans? > > And sure, there are some things that computerized cars can’t handle _right now_. Nobody’s claiming the technology is currently mature, or even really ready for general adoption. But there’s no reason they can’t be. Interpreting human gestures, for example (like those of the guy with the orange vest and the batons) is something that mass-market consumer-grade video game systems have been doing for years now. There’s no reason you couldn’t give a computer driver the same capabilities as a Kinect. Well, the disagreement isn’t so much much whether it will ever happen, it’s about whether it will happen soon. The naysayers believe that some of the challenges to be overcome will require longer than five years, the more positive types think they’re not so difficult. You can give a car the abilities of a Kinect but it must be far more robust than a Kinect because the consequences of failure are much higher, even if it just means a car gets stranded in a paddock, that could cause a major headache for people directly involved. If a Kinect fails to correctly interpret a gesture, nothing happens, no one cares. I think using people to direct autonomous cars around a temporary parking area is an incredibly inefficient way of tackling the problem, and that we’d be better off coming up with a solution that does away with the parking attendant completely. Of course if you keep manual controls for the human then you don’t need to worry about these fringe cases, when the car gets to the limit of its capability it hands over to the human, and the human does the bit the car isn’t programmed for. You use the car for the predictable driving tasks, the stuff a computer is good at and people aren’t as good at, and you use the person for the fuzzy fringe cases. Things, that yes, the computer may theoretically be able to be programmed for, but it may be impractical to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2016, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/143 "2016-09-22T11:36:02Z")
> [@enipla](#): > > In bad conditions, will the computer be smart enough to take the driveway from a different route? Say going down the road, turning around and making a run at it so you can get more speed up? If it doesn’t make it up the first time, how will it decide if it should give it another shot? Perhaps with a little more speed or 6"s to the left or right. If it can’t see beyond a snowdrift, will it plow through? How easy will I be able to navigate it to anywhere in my yard or off road in places that it has never been? One option which has been discussed up thread is to include a manual override setting. Perhaps that’s a setting not intended for extended use, or high speed use on a public road, but will allow a human driver to input direction and speed to the computer at times when driving needs are outside the computer’s abilities. The computer may still exercise emergency control, such as not running over a pedestrian, but would otherwise allow manual movement. An alternative is what I just found [here](https://3dprint.com/143373/jaguar-land-rover-off-road/) where Land Rover is researching autonomous off road driving capabilities. The off road capable vehicle that you buy for your rough terrain area may come equipped with autonomous off road capabilities that wouldn’t be needed in a Camry, and which can handle the situations you describe. At any rate, I could see a day where self driving is required for all new cars, and human driving is allowed only on an exception basis, i.e. for cars made before self driving was available. Even in this case, I’d be 100% OK with people being able to get the ‘Human Drive’ option (full instrument controls) for times when they aren’t on public roads so they can do whatever their hearts desire. ---
**Author:** ![YamatoTwinkie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/cc9497/32.png) [@YamatoTwinkie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YamatoTwinkie)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2016, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/144 "2016-10-20T13:42:43Z")
Tesla just sent out a video of one of their vehicles navigating through stopsigns, stoplights, and Palo Alto traffic, and then finding a parking spot. Seems to be all running on hardware shipping with their current (as of today) production vehicles. > **[Watch a fully autonomous Tesla drive through the city and find a parking spot](https://www.theverge.com/2016/10/20/13343828/tesla-fully-autonomous-test-video)** > > The Verge is about technology and how it makes us feel. Founded in 2011, we offer our audience everything from breaking news to reviews to award-winning features and investigations, on our site, in video, and in podcasts. Video seems pretty impressive to me. Granted, google has been doing this sort of stuff for awhile, but this on cars that can be purchased right now. 8 cameras, 12 ultrasonic sensors, and a forward radar. ---
**Author:** ![drewder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2016, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/145 "2016-10-20T14:44:29Z")
Sure I’m not an engineer solving the problems of driverless cars but I’m sure I can think up some scenario that they’ll never think of trying to solve because my understanding of their technology is superior. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2016, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/146 "2016-10-20T19:12:29Z")
> [@YamatoTwinkie](#): > > navigating Palo Alto traffic. hmm… Palo Alto. Sunshine and clearly marked lanes on open roads; and when the driver steps out, the car goes off alone to the convenient parking spot nearby. I wonder how long we’ll have to wait to see a similar video–navigating downtown Chicago during a snowstorm; and then the car goes off to park itself in an underground parking garage, pausing to reach out to the machine to take the ticket with the time stamp. It’s impressive technology–and there’s a big market of people who will buy a robo-car,even if it is very limited and can only be used for simple tasks in good weather. But regular cars will still a majority of the vehicles on the road for the next 50 years or more. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2016, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/147 "2016-10-20T19:27:53Z")
I can imagine several ways that parking garages can adapt to allow for self-driving cars to park themselves. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [October 20, 2016, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/148 "2016-10-20T20:16:15Z")
Self-driving cars already use parking structures. ---
**Author:** ![control-z](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/eada6e/32.png) [@control-z](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/control-z)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2016, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/149 "2016-10-21T17:44:09Z")
> [@BlackKnight](#): > > These conversations sometimes get stuck on the difference between what self-driving cars can do _in theory_ and what self-driving cars can be reasonably expected to do in the near future. > > There’s really no known limit to what AI can accomplish. There’s no special realm of human thinking that can’t be emulated by software. _In theory_. That doesn’t mean that software is going to be sophisticated enough in the next 5 years that it will deal with all the things human drivers are expected to deal with on a regular basis. That’s a good summarization of how I feel about it. We really would need a fully functioning general AI to have truly good adaptable self-driving cars. At that point maybe it would be more efficient to just have a human-shaped AI robot to sit in the driver’s seat so it could work with any vehicle. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2016, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/150 "2016-10-21T19:24:17Z")
The only reason to favor a humanoid robot driver is if you need, for some reason, to automate the driving of older cars. Because otherwise, it seems “simpler” just to design an autonomous car that operates independently of the manual controls, or has no manual controls at all. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2016, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/151 "2016-10-21T19:50:02Z")
Funny enough, in aviation they’re building a robot pilot that’s roughly anthropomorphic. The intent is to be able to retrofit it into manned aircraft with less hassle. You strap the main box into the seat, attach “arms” and “legs” to the physical controls then interface it to the aircraft’s databus so it can “read” the instruments and “push” the buttons. Viola as the French don’t say. For sure this is military late-stage research, not something intended for public use next year. But the idea has occurred to people. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2016, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/152 "2016-10-21T20:58:35Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Funny enough, in aviation they’re building a robot pilot that’s roughly anthropomorphic. > > The intent is to be able to retrofit it into manned aircraft with less hassle. You strap the main box into the seat, attach “arms” and “legs” to the physical controls then interface it to the aircraft’s databus so it can “read” the instruments and “push” the buttons. Viola as the French don’t say. > > For sure this is military late-stage research, not something intended for public use next year. But the idea has occurred to people. [Otto Pilot](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1290293/)? ---
**Author:** ![thirdname](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@thirdname](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thirdname)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/153 "2016-10-23T06:48:28Z")
As with many people above, I don’t believe that anytime soon cars will be able to deal with all the unusual situations that occur. Can it accept traffic directions from a police officer? Can it decide to swerve into a ditch to avoid a child in the road or a giant hunk of concrete, but to run over a dog or a cardboard box? Can it tell the difference between a large puddle and a dangerously flooded road? I would worry about sudden, unexpected failures of the software. Perhaps you drive the car in an environment unlike any place it was tested in, and the pattern-recognition and such fails. Maybe the car drives you straight into some muddy water thinking it’s a dirt road, or onto the roof of a building, or onto a tree canopy next to a cliffside road. The possibility of hacking worries me most, if self-driving cars become universal. What if something got access to Tesla’s computers that they use to write the software, and inserted malicious code? It could be a Stuxnet-like virus, or a foreign agent or disgruntled employee. Some subtle bit of obfuscated code gets hidden in a software update, and then one day at a particular time, all of the affected cars crash into the nearest obstacle at maximum speed. The likelihood of that happening might be low, but the damage would be enormous, potentially millions dead. Or they cause massive economic damage by simply not working. What if 2/3 of the semi trucks in the country were all bricked at the same time? ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/154 "2016-10-23T19:12:52Z")
> [@thirdname](#): > > As with many people above, I don’t believe that anytime soon cars will be able to deal with all the unusual situations that occur. Can it accept traffic directions from a police officer? Can it decide to swerve into a ditch to avoid a child in the road or a giant hunk of concrete, but to run over a dog or a cardboard box? Can it tell the difference between a large puddle and a dangerously flooded road? > > I would worry about sudden, unexpected failures of the software. Perhaps you drive the car in an environment unlike any place it was tested in, and the pattern-recognition and such fails. Maybe the car drives you straight into some muddy water thinking it’s a dirt road, or onto the roof of a building, or onto a tree canopy next to a cliffside road. > > The possibility of hacking worries me most, if self-driving cars become universal. What if something got access to Tesla’s computers that they use to write the software, and inserted malicious code? It could be a Stuxnet-like virus, or a foreign agent or disgruntled employee. Some subtle bit of obfuscated code gets hidden in a software update, and then one day at a particular time, all of the affected cars crash into the nearest obstacle at maximum speed. The likelihood of that happening might be low, but the damage would be enormous, potentially millions dead. Or they cause massive economic damage by simply not working. What if 2/3 of the semi trucks in the country were all bricked at the same time? How many updates to windows have contained malicious code inserted by “disgruntled employees”. There are far more vulnerable channels than the embedded systems in a car for causing massive society wide problems. It is a fairly simple matter for updates to software to require some manual process or to be installed or rolled out to a small cross section of vehicles at a time. We are also referring to a dozen competing manufacturers writing their own software for their cars. In the lottery grade odds of an explot getting through, the chance of an exploit having any meaningful effect on multiple brands is diminishingly tiny to the point of non existence. Most of your concerns have already been torn apart in other threads, most situations you mention the computer is already more likely to see coming and stop. The computer reacts way faster than any human being. If the computer was unable to stop in time to avoid hitting a little kid, a human driver in many cases would just be realizing they ran over a kid and might want to try and stop now. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/155 "2016-10-23T19:20:27Z")
> [@thirdname](#): > > As with many people above, I don’t believe that anytime soon cars will be able to deal with all the unusual situations that occur. Can it accept traffic directions from a police officer? Can it decide to swerve into a ditch to avoid a child in the road or a giant hunk of concrete, but to run over a dog or a cardboard box? Can it tell the difference between a large puddle and a dangerously flooded road? > > I would worry about sudden, unexpected failures of the software. Perhaps you drive the car in an environment unlike any place it was tested in, and the pattern-recognition and such fails. Maybe the car drives you straight into some muddy water thinking it’s a dirt road, or onto the roof of a building, or onto a tree canopy next to a cliffside road. > > The possibility of hacking worries me most, if self-driving cars become universal. What if something got access to Tesla’s computers that they use to write the software, and inserted malicious code? It could be a Stuxnet-like virus, or a foreign agent or disgruntled employee. Some subtle bit of obfuscated code gets hidden in a software update, and then one day at a particular time, all of the affected cars crash into the nearest obstacle at maximum speed. The likelihood of that happening might be low, but the damage would be enormous, potentially millions dead. Or they cause massive economic damage by simply not working. What if 2/3 of the semi trucks in the country were all bricked at the same time? For every potential problem scenario you suggest above we can also suggest an equivalent situation where autonomous functionality removes the possibility of driver error. Overall, given that no situation is free from risk, is autonomous driving safer than purely human? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/156 "2016-12-14T15:27:34Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > As I’ve posted elsewhere on the Dope: Autos are already on the road in Singapore; they are taxis developed by a company called nuTonomy. They began service Thursday; the future is now. > > [http://bigstory.ap.org/article/615568b7668b452bbc8d2e2f3e5148e6/worlds-first-self-driving-taxis-debut-singapore](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/615568b7668b452bbc8d2e2f3e5148e6/worlds-first-self-driving-taxis-debut-singapore) > > [Self-driving taxi trial kicks off in Singapore - BBC News](http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37181956) > > [http://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-08-26/first-self-driving-cars-debut-in-singapore](http://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-08-26/first-self-driving-cars-debut-in-singapore) I keep trying to tell people that the future is now and they keep not believing me, but (creepy little girl voice) [they’re here: > [@](#): > > Uber is bringing a small number of self-driving cars to its ride-hailing service in San Francisco — a move likely to excite the city’s tech-savvy population and certain to antagonize California regulators. > > The Wednesday launch in Uber’s hometown expands a public pilot program the company started in Pittsburgh in September. The testing lets everyday people experience the cars as Uber works to identify glitches before expanding the technology’s use in San Francisco and elsewhere. ]([http://bigstory.ap.org/article/uber-self-driving-cars-hit-streets-san-francisco](http://bigstory.ap.org/article/uber-self-driving-cars-hit-streets-san-francisco)) As usual, however, Uber is flouting the law by simply claiming that they aren’t doing what they are clearly doing: > [@](#): > > California law, however, requires a test permit for self-driving prototype vehicles, and Uber does not have one. The company argues that the law doesn’t apply because its cars require a human backup. Seriously, fuck this company. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2016, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/157 "2016-12-14T18:01:40Z")
Agree that Uber are pirates and ought to be shut down. But if self-driving cars can hack it in San Francisco, they’ll do fine in pretty much all of urban and suburban America, plus interstates and small towns. Which covers the vast majority of the population, albeit not much of the total land area. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/158 "2016-12-15T02:47:54Z")
Hey, look! [California Tells Uber To Stop Rides In Self-Driving Cars](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UBER_SELF_DRIVING_CARS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-12-14-20-38-06)! ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/159 "2016-12-15T06:43:28Z")
A new development has just been announced. > [@](#): > > The Transportation Department proposed rules on Tuesday that all new cars and small trucks contain communications technology to broadcast data to one another about their speed, location and direction they are traveling. > > Under the new rules, cars would be able to use wireless technology involving chips and a dedicated band of radio airwaves to detect if another vehicle around the corner and hundreds of yards away was moving too fast in its direction and headed for a collision. What happens next would be up to the automaker, which would decide if it would put in place automated response technology to brake or simply provide a visual or audio warning to a driver. [http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/technology/cars-talking-to-one-another-they-could-under-proposed-safety-rules.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/technology/cars-talking-to-one-another-they-could-under-proposed-safety-rules.html) More details: > **[The DOT wants all cars talking to each other by 2023 - Autoblog](https://www.autoblog.com/2016/12/13/dot-v2v-vehicle-to-vehicle-communication-2023/)** > > The organization believes the technology has the potential to prevent hundreds of thousands of crashes. ---
**Author:** ![jz78817](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jz78817/32/1028_2.png) [@jz78817](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jz78817)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2016, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074/160 "2016-12-15T08:32:09Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Hey, look! [California Tells Uber To Stop Rides In Self-Driving Cars](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UBER_SELF_DRIVING_CARS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-12-14-20-38-06)! unsurprising, since Uber is a company built upon lies. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/re-self-driving-cars-people-talk-as-if-this-is-a-few-years-away-this-seems-nuts-to-me/764074.md?page=9)