# Self driving cars are still decades away **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 10, 2017, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499 "2017-10-10T17:38:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/21 "2017-10-11T13:56:07Z")
I’m also confused, since there seem to be a lot of smart people thinking this is just around the corner, but I didn’t think AI was nearly good enough to pass this minimal test: Can recognize both of, tell the difference between, and react appropriately to, a police officer standing with her hand palm out, and an office standing and waving her hand in a 'OK, go" motion? Are there cars that are close to being able to do this? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/22 "2017-10-11T14:27:28Z")
We’re not going to get full acceptance of self-driving cars from AI learning software in it’s current state. The public loves technology these days, but just in the early stages of development, with a lack of specific law to cover self-driving cars, the experiments will soon lead to tragic loss of human life and a great deal of law restricting the use of self driving vehicles. However, I think it might only take about 10 years to get a self-driving car ready that could meet reasonable safety standards, but probably more time than that to weave through the legal and political minefield. ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/23 "2017-10-11T14:34:17Z")
For future reference, there are established levels of autonomy for cars to help facilitate discussion: [Autonomos Driving Levels 0-5: Understanding the Differences](http://www.techrepublic.com/article/autonomous-driving-levels-0-to-5-understanding-the-differences/) At present, autonomous cars like Tesla and Cadillac are pretty much at Level 3: it can drive itself under some limited circumstances, but the driver is still required to pay attention and must be ready to intervene at any time. So when you say this: > [@steronz](#): > > When there’s no expectation of the driver having to do anything on a routine trip. That is to say, I should be able to plug in an address in my driveway and take a nap without any guilt should something happen while I’m sleeping, nor should I have more than a minimal risk of waking up halfway through the trip to find that my car encountered some unsolvable situation and has parked itself for the last 3 hours waiting for me to rescue it. You’re talking about a Level 4 or Level 5 car. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/24 "2017-10-11T14:56:40Z")
> [@Machine\_Elf](#): > > For future reference, there are established levels of autonomy for cars to help facilitate discussion: > > [Autonomos Driving Levels 0-5: Understanding the Differences](http://www.techrepublic.com/article/autonomous-driving-levels-0-to-5-understanding-the-differences/) > > At present, autonomous cars like Tesla and Cadillac are pretty much at Level 3: it can drive itself under some limited circumstances, but the driver is still required to pay attention and must be ready to intervene at any time. > > So when you say this: > > You’re talking about a Level 4 or Level 5 car. Yes, thank you for the link and the definitions. It appears I’m talking about a Level 4 car, but the devil is in the definition of the “Operational Design Domain.” I’m sure there are Level 4 vehicles now, such as the automated truck train, that just have a limited ODD. ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/25 "2017-10-11T17:02:51Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > I’m sure there are Level 4 vehicles now, such as the automated truck train, that just have a limited ODD. I wonder whether that’s true. The Rio Tinto/Pilbara article is about a real train, as in “steel wheels traveling down a railroad,” not a concatenation of 53-foot trailers towed behind a steerable tractor piloted along a paved surface. To my knowledge, at this time there are no Level 4 autonomous road-going vehicles available for sale to, or use by, the general public. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/26 "2017-10-11T17:21:48Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > My WAG is that “adaptive cruise control” (inclusive of stop and go traffic) and “enhanced safety features” with V2V as part of the package becomes fairly standard on new vehicles fairly quickly. If so, then thank goodness I bought a car just last year that \*doesn’t \*have any of that. But the thought that there will be other cars out there with that technology scares the shit out of me. Just this week (and it’s only Wednesday), we’ve learned that a virus has infected the U.S. military’s drone fleet, and NK has hacked into the joint US-South Korea war plans. I’m not expecting cars to be more hack-proof than stuff like that anytime soon. And stuff that can be hacked, will. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/27 "2017-10-11T17:24:19Z")
That’s why cars shouldn’t be networked. A hack should require physically going to the car. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/28 "2017-10-11T19:21:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s why cars shouldn’t be networked. A hack should require physically going to the car. Self-driving cars without networking is a dead end. We’ll just end up in massive self-driving gridlock if the cars can’t communicate, and we’ll lose a major benefit of self-driving cars which is to clear up the massive traffic problems in metropolitan areas. Hacking can be prevented, but since we’ve accepted shoddy protection in consumer products so far, and don’t hold suppliers liable for allowing hacking in the first place, it’s probably not going to change when it comes to cars. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/29 "2017-10-11T19:46:53Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Just this week (and it’s only Wednesday), we’ve learned that a virus has infected the U.S. military’s drone fleet Do you have a link to this story? ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/30 "2017-10-11T20:34:41Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Do you have a link to this story? > **[Exclusive: Computer Virus Hits U.S. Drone Fleet](https://www.wired.com/2011/10/virus-hits-drone-fleet/)** > > A computer virus has infected the cockpits of America’s Predator and Reaper drones, logging pilots’ every keystroke as they remotely fly missions over Afghanistan and other warzones. The virus, first detected nearly two weeks ago by the military’s... ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2017, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/31 "2017-10-11T23:02:07Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > Self-driving cars without networking is a dead end. We’ll just end up in massive self-driving gridlock if the cars can’t communicate, and we’ll lose a major benefit of self-driving cars which is to clear up the massive traffic problems in metropolitan areas. Hacking can be prevented, but since we’ve accepted shoddy protection in consumer products so far, and don’t hold suppliers liable for allowing hacking in the first place, it’s probably not going to change when it comes to cars. Non-self driving cars will be networked also. Cars will communicate with nearby cars to keep their distance and automatically react to upcoming traffic situations. If all work on self-driving cars stopped today, the hacking problem would be just as bad. ---
**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:** [October 11, 2017, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/32 "2017-10-11T23:46:06Z")
If self driving cars are still decades away, [at least the ground will be well prepped for them by then](https://apnews.com/1cd50acb51054aac8cdc87adf8e4310a/Self-driving-cars:-Not-ready-yet,-but-new-rules-open-a-path): > [@](#): > > California’s Department of Motor Vehicles formally proposed rules Wednesday that **starting next year** will govern how everyday people in the trend-setting state can get robocars. It was a big step forward for regulations that were **first discussed more than four years ago, first drafted in December 2015** and then substantially redrafted to accommodate companies’ concerns. > [@](#): > > in California alone the 42 companies with testing permits have been logging hundreds of thousands of miles on nearly 300 prototypes with few crashes that were clearly the technology’s fault. > [@](#): > > Automakers and tech companies have complained to lawmakers that a growing “patchwork” of state laws is threatening to inhibit deployment. > > Legislation intended to clear away federal regulations has moved quickly through Congress. **The House has passed a bill** that would permit automakers to seek exemptions to safety regulations, such as to make cars without a steering wheel, and allow the sale of hundreds of thousands of self-driving cars. **A Senate committee approved a similar measure last week** by a voice vote. (bolding mine) ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2017, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/33 "2017-10-12T00:29:32Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > If self driving cars are still decades away, [at least the ground will be well prepped for them by then](https://apnews.com/1cd50acb51054aac8cdc87adf8e4310a/Self-driving-cars:-Not-ready-yet,-but-new-rules-open-a-path)(bolding mine) Remind me never to drive a car in California again. I figured I’d be too old to care when the robots took over, but I see they won’t be facing that much resistance in the first place, they won’t be needing terminator style functionality. Now I’m surprised we survived the blender with a brain back in the 70s. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2017, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/34 "2017-10-12T00:47:18Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Non-self driving cars will be networked also. Cars will communicate with nearby cars to keep their distance and automatically react to upcoming traffic situations. > If all work on self-driving cars stopped today, the hacking problem would be just as bad. Indeed the [NHTSA](file:///Users/donseidman/Downloads/V2V\_NPRM\_Fact\_Sheet\_121316\_v1.pdf) has already “issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to mandate vehicle-tovehicle (V2V) communication technology for new light vehicles in the United States.” Cybersecurity is a definite item of concern they have. > [@](#): > > The current proposed design for the V2V system employs > a security level of at least 128-bit encryption and is NIST > compliant. > The proposed rulemaking remains consistent with the > security approach detailed in NHTSA’s V2V research > report, where NHTSA and industry research partners > developed a security system design based on the widely > and successfully applied public key infrastructure, employing > digital certificates. The system design consists of three > primary components: > > 1. A message authentication proposal designed to > enhance confidence in the authenticity of V2V messages > and secure the exchange of safety data; > 2. V2V devices, which broadcast and receive safety > messages and ensure that each incoming message is > checked to detect and avoid misbehavior; and > 3. A misbehavior reporting requirement to share signatures > misconfigured, or malicious vehicles enabling > other vehicles to block V2V messages from misbehaving > vehicles. > In addition, the Agency is also seeking comments on > potential alternative approaches to security and looks forward > to receiving comments on both the proposal and the > alternatives presented in the NPRM. It is also true that the V2V input functions as one of many overlapping sources of data about what is going on around the vehicle. Input from any source that is discordant with input from the other sources is unlikely to be acted on in a drastic fashion. Car rapidly braking ahead via the V2V channel may cause some instant slowing down and only more complete braking if the information is confirmed via other channels, for example. Certainly hacks that get past security systems and that somehow override other inputs are not impossible. OTOH deaths that occur every day from accidents that these systems will routinely prevent are a certainty. To be sure though the full benefits will take some time to realize if for no other reason the simple fact that the cars on the road now will last a long time. I do also suspect that a requirement for cars to broadcast safety related information will precede any requirement for cars to be able to receive such information. Devices like that and warns that merely warn a driver of hazards may be what the report meant by > [@](#): > > V2V devices can be installed directly in vehicles when the > vehicles are originally manufactured, after initial manufacture > via an “aftermarket” installation, or could potentially > be carried into vehicles by drivers in the form of a handheld > device (and perhaps, eventually, even as a function on > a smartphone). Pertinent to this thread, they agree that V2V complements autonomous systems: > [@](#): > > It is the Department’s view that these technologies are > highly complementary to each other, and when deployed > in concert will have significant safety benefits. Vehicles that > contain automated driving functions—such as automated > emergency braking and adaptive cruise control— > generally rely on an on-board suite of sensors, such as > radar and cameras. V2V offers an additional source of data > inputs, which could help these automated technologies > better avoid or mitigate crashes. > V2V expands sensing performance beyond what is achievable > by “line-of-sight” sensors (e.g., LIDAR, radar, cameras). > With V2V, a vehicle gains capabilities like “seeing” > around corners, buildings or trucks, and many vehicles > ahead or behind. V2V has a larger effective sensing range > than conventional sensors, providing additional lead time > for decision algorithms, which is essential for higher levels > of automation. V2V packs a rich set of “vehicle performance > and status” information directly from the source, > which enables automation algorithms to “know” what > surrounding vehicles are doing and not have to guess or > estimate what they may be doing. > Is V2V a “must have” for highly > automated vehicles? > Our discussions with both traditional automotive and > “high-tech” companies involved in development of highly > automated vehicles suggests that within a given operational > design domain (ODD) as specified for a particular > product model, safe operation of such automated vehicles > is possible without V2V. However, industry stakeholders > also agree that, if available, they would utilize V2V > information to enhance their systems, and even further, > it would not be possible to optimize the benefits of automated > vehicles without V2V. > When the proposed V2V mandate becomes a Final Rule, > the technology will be required on all new light-duty > vehicles—including highly automated passenger vehicles. And yes having cars so enabled paves the way for autonomous vehicle adoption. ---
**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:** [October 12, 2017, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/35 "2017-10-12T01:51:29Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > [Road trains](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train) in the outback. An ideal use case for autonomous vehicles. Yeah I’m familiar with road trains. **Snowboarder** ’s link was to a literal train though, one that runs on rails. > [@Snowboarder Bo](#): > > I think it may well be 15 years or so before 75% or more of all vehicles on the road are autos, but I don’t think it’ll be more than 10 years before significant numbers of autos are on the road. > > I don’t think it’ll even be 6 years, and I think most of them will be electric or hybrid engines. The average age of cars on the road in the US is about [11.5 years](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-ihs-average-car-age-20150729-story.html). Even if every single new car on the market from tomorrow on was self driving, it’s going to take over a decade before you see 50% penetration in to the market. Given this is clearly not the case, even in the best of circumstances, it will be at least 15 years before there is anything close to 50%. 75% will be much longer. ---
**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:** [October 12, 2017, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/36 "2017-10-12T02:04:21Z")
> [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > Yeah I’m familiar with road trains. **Snowboarder** ’s link was to a literal train though, one that runs on rails. Aye, a freight train. With no humans. That can successfully cross hundreds of kilometers. Did I mention that there are no humans involved? You know what else is becoming largely autos (or drones)? Every other physical aspect of mining. I was just using it to illustrate that the argument “it’ll be decades before robots can _x_” are far off the mark. The early days of it are here; they are happening. > [@Richard\_Pearse](#): > > The average age of cars on the road in the US is about [11.5 years](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-ihs-average-car-age-20150729-story.html). Even if every single new car on the market from tomorrow on was self driving, it’s going to take over a decade before you see 50% penetration in to the market. Given this is clearly not the case, even in the best of circumstances, it will be at least 15 years before there is anything close to 50%. 75% will be much longer. Good info; thank you. Forgive me if I respectfully disagree with your estimates, however. I want an auto as soon as I can get one. As soon as they are available and affordable for me, I’m done driving unless absolutely necessary. I still want to get places in my comfortable little bubble, I just don’t want to have to do the actual driving, not when the auto can do it safely and efficiently. I suspect that there are a lot of people like me and that the transition will go faster than you anticipate. Still, I’d be willing to concede that the 15 year mark should start when they actually hit the road, not today. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2017, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/37 "2017-10-12T04:49:33Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Aye, a freight train. With no humans. That can successfully cross hundreds of kilometers. Did I mention that there are no humans involved? Is this actually a good example of the future being right upon us? There have been automated railroads since the 1960s. ---
**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:** [October 12, 2017, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/38 "2017-10-12T06:28:08Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Aye, a freight train. With no humans. That can successfully cross hundreds of kilometers. Did I mention that there are no humans involved? Yeah, but, you know, a train. It would be the most simple thing a robot has to do. It has to start and stop and that is all. If anything it is surprising it hasn’t been done earlier, particularly in outback Australia where the biggest thing that can go wrong is that it hits a kangaroo. > [@](#): > > I want an auto as soon as I can get one. As soon as they are available and affordable for me, I’m done driving unless absolutely necessary. I still want to get places in my comfortable little bubble, I just don’t want to have to do the actual driving, not when the auto can do it safely and efficiently. I suspect that there are a lot of people like me and that the transition will go faster than you anticipate. > > Still, I’d be willing to concede that the 15 year mark should start when they actually hit the road, not today. 😃 Well people will get cars when they can afford one and they can justify the expense. I doubt the introduction of self driving cars will make many people buy cars when they otherwise wouldn’t. More likely they will consider the self driving option when it comes time to replace their car. The way cars are marketed suggests that lots of people enjoy driving. What percentage? I don’t know. I know I enjoy driving and although I would certainly use auto-drive in some circumstances, I would not _always_ use it. For one, if I’m going to be sitting in a car for 30 minutes, I may as well drive it, if only to give me something to do. So for me at least, I’m not going to buy an auto when I wouldn’t already be buying a car. When it’s time to buy I will look at the self-driving option and if it is in my budget I may get it, but there are other much bigger priorities such as boot space, rear seat space for child seats, turning circle, etc. The last time I bought a car I declined to get the lane assist, parking assist, and all that because it wasn’t worth the cost. I’d be interested to know what self driving would be worth to people. To me it’s worth about $5000. Any more and I wouldn’t bother. I suspect there are a lot of people like me and that the transition will go slower than you anticipate ;). Honestly I don’t know. I don’t know if 10% are like me or 90% or 50%. I’m not a luddite, I would like to see it all happen, I just think it will be a slow gradual process ---
**Author:** ![lisiate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f05b48/32.png) [@lisiate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lisiate)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2017, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/39 "2017-10-12T07:55:48Z")
$5,000 sounds about right for me too, but I imagine the value of an autonomous vehicle will really depend on your situation. Someone facing an hour-long commute through stop-start traffic with a daily battle to find a park will find a lot more value in an autonomous vehicle than someone with a pleasant 10-20 minute drive with little traffic. ---
**Author:** ![Doubticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e56c9b/32.png) [@Doubticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doubticus)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2017, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499/40 "2017-10-12T17:25:36Z")
The technology is basically there. But the regulatory hurdles and insurance issues will drag the whole affair out another 10 years. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/self-driving-cars-are-still-decades-away/798499.md?page=3)