I think people’s laziness would win out and they’ve be so pre-occupied with something else they wouldn’t care. And it would speed up traffic quite a bit once the majority had it, as analyst have long said consistent slower speed is faster than gun-and-brake, constant lane changing.
We’d need better roads - I don’t see these systems dodging pot-holes.
I love driving and I love driving trips and I’d be first in line to buy one.
I don’t know about that. Speaking as one of the drivers who tries to get through on the yellow, and drives comfortably over the speed limit, my attitude is that once I turn the driving over to the car’s computer and sensors, I’m gonna do something else and let it worry about the road.
Okay, I step away to answer a phone call and my computer decides to post a half finished answer. As I was saying:
I love driving and I love driving trips and I’d be first in line to buy one.
The reasons for that are many.
I prefer looking at the scenery to trying to figure out what the idiot who keeps slowing down and speeding up and swerving all over the place (could be multiple idiots) is doing. I would rather nap or read if there is nothing to look at.
If I really want to drive I can go to a track where people are actually paying attention to the rules. If not the drivers at least the track marshalls. It’s not only more fun it’s also less annoying. Win/Win!
I’d want autopilot as an option, but not as the only possible mode. Mostly because I suspect I’d be cursing at it mightily any time we were in an urban area, otherwise… (it’s the same kind of driving conditions in which I treat some automatic transmissions as if they were manuals).
Another reason to need to be able to take over: for me one of the pleasures of driving is the ability to change routes or stop on a whim. It should be easy, a “just start doing the driving yourself” thing like getting out of cruise control is a matter of touching the gas or brake.
Assuming you could override it, I would purchase one but would always be driving myself except when I am too tired to drive safely or need to make/take a call or have important things to do.
It would also be useful for going out on the town and having the car drive you home. But right now the laws are set up so that you would could still be charged with DUI even if you are having the car drive you. This is silly and will probably be changed to where you would not be charged if you are not in the driver’s seat.
Not until I am absolutely forced to to so. You can have my turbocharged all-wheel-drive manual-transmission-equipped car when you pry it from my cold, dead hands. Driving is a pleasure. I buy high-performance cars and tinker with them because it’s one of the things in life I truly enjoy.
Riding at high speed in traffic with HAL at the controls is a bit frightening.
I guess I don’t mind if drivers that hate driving and would rather be texting and eating and putting on makeup than paying attention buy self-driving cars…and if the computers understand lane discipline better than the average driver, I think being one of the last holdouts driving my own car might be quite enjoyable. The biggest annoyance while driving is other drivers, so if we can take them out of the equation, I’ll probably have a blast.
Yes, but I’d want it to have a better safety record than average. I have had one accident in 60 years and that happened when I made a blind right turn in a crowded parking lot and some idiot woman was driving on the left side. I hit her at under 5 mph. She was such an idiot that she claimed that in a parking lot you were * supposed * to drive on the left.
Anyway, I would love it. I could read, play computer games, post on TSD, etc.
Agreed. With all of the maniacs, assholes, drunken drivers, and simply distracted people, self-driving cars SHOULD be mandatory. I envision you having to drive your car yourself to get onto the highway, then you set the exit you want to go to, then the car drives you to the exit and beeps to get your attention when it takes the exit. If you don’t wake up or respond, it pulls off to the side of the road and continues waiting.
For the beginning, anyway. Eventually we should just be able to program in the final destination. And there should still be places where you could drive the old fashioned way. And I love to drive! But just think - I could get in the car in the evening, set it to take me to Maine, drive to Maine, and have a weekend there. I wouldn’t be tired from all of the driving all night.
I would love such a car, but I suspect some people would regard a self-driving car the way they think about air travel or nuclear power - it may be safer but it is also newer, and therefore scarier.
None of the news stories about accidents with the new self-driving cars will mention if the overall accident rates are the same or lower than with human-driven cars. It will always be -
"A husband, wife, and their eight year old daughter died in a fatal crash between two automated cars last night. Police suspect a failure of their onboard navigation and warning system. This brings to 164 the number of fatalities caused by system failure in the new, automatically-driven cars for this year alone.
Attorneys for the family have announced that they are suing the manufacturers for $55 billion in damages and punitive damages. Industry analysts warn that litigation expenses have tripled the cost of the navigation devices over the last five years, and that the trend is continuing."
Regards,
Shodan
Evo or WRX? 
Or the teutonics a la A4/S4 or Golf R?
I’m inclined to agree, driving is an absolute pleasure. The problem is that I consider most commuting and sitting in traffic to be junk-driving, nothing enthusiastic about it at all.
So yes, I’m all for an autopilot feature in any future performance car I own, and currently love dynamic cruise control, paddle shifters, and the ability to let it shift itself when I’m not manually doing so. Give me autopilot for the commutes, clutch-less shifts for spirited/track days, and I’m happy.
I’d want the safety record to be better than the average driver. That doesn’t mean a lot, considering some drivers, but mostly I want to know what the fatality rate is vs the average. You can walk away from a fender bender, usually. A pile-up due to car error? Not so much. Even if the cars were heavily tested for 10+ years I’d still be scared to get in one on the year of their release. I’m very much a in-control sort of gal. My brain would probably try and convince me that I’d do a better job than the car, even if that was a lie. I’d do my best to look at it objectively, but for the first month or more I’d probably ride in it gripping the seat with the clutch of death hoping nothing happens.
That being said, I would probably get one once they were proven better. I suffer from motion sickness if I try and read in a car, but that’s trainable and even just sleeping on the way would be awesome.
If there was a sort of “national traffic grid centralized automation system” that would be really nice, but the security on that better be airtight. Imagine the havok (and death) a hacker could cause with a fully automated traffic system.
There’s too many hurdles in my mind to having a fully point-a to point-b system where it even parks for you. Long driveways made of dirt? What about parking garages with poor GPS reception? Tunnels? Road construction? Parkways that ban commercial vehicles? Bridges with low weight limits? One lane bridges? Train crossings? If we put all that data into the computer, sure, but that’s a whole lot of data to add and update all the time. Heck, you’d think having a GPS determine a route that a commercial vehicle can go on would be easy, but our GPSs here at the company can’t determine that and it tells the vans to go on restricted roads all the time. I’m sure the engineers working on this know what they’re doing far better than I do, but it seems like a lot to overcome to me.
Oh, this is so gonna happen. Too many lives and too much money to be saved for it not to.
Google has recently gotten into the local delivery service business. Why would a company driven by technological innovation enter into a fairly mundane, low margin, low technology, highly competitive industry? My suspicion is that they will automate the delivery process, sending little delivery bots around the neighborhoods with the packages. The bots will be small, slow and made up of lightweight materials so they don’t hurt people – and have no people of their own to protect. Once the public gets accustomed to the bots moving packages with no accidents, the last objections to placing people in the care of robot drivers will disappear.
No government would allow a self driving car that was as bad at driving as real drivers are.
With that behind me, if it’s no better than me, I’d probably choose to retain control under most circumstances. Perhaps I’d turn over the duties during a long highway drive.
FWIW California and one or two other states have already passed laws allowing it in anticipation of the technology. NJ is considering one (which is what inspired me to ask the question).
So I assume you can switch the auto drive on and off? If so, I can see myself confusing which mode I’m in, and sitting liking a ninny waiting for the car to move by itself, while it was sitting there waiting for me to put my foot on the gas pedal.
I simply meant that if the technology were no better than a human driver, the gov’t would likely not find the technology good enough to allow on the street. If all our cars were automated, there’s no way we would accept 30k deaths per year. I could see accepting deaths from high speed blowouts, deer impacts, rock slides, etc, but a routine accident? No way.
I hate cars that turn on headlights automatically, so I don’t think so.
I believe that’s a moot point. Although there’s not a lot of data yet, google’s self-driving car has a better track record than the average driver.