Hell yes! I could sleep or read in my car! I’d get back hours and hours of my life. I don’t particlarly like driving.
Oh, well, you’re probably right. But I’d hesitate to use a rented car because the user before me might have tampered with it.
No thanks. It would probably be plastered with ads and/or drive by some store every trip.
Self-driving cars - yes, but not an early adapter.
Google-car - not just ‘no’, but HELL NO!!!
Renting - sure makes sense for someone single, but probably not for a family; assuming dad could ‘take’ the car to work, send it home to take the kids to school and then back home to run errands with mom…
No.
I love this idea. I hate driving… in fact, I don’t drive. (Partly I blame my eyesight, but I could squeak by the test if I wanted to, so partly it’s just that I hate driving.)
However, I am not going to be an early adopter. I’d give it at least three years and probably more like five to seven years to let other people work out the bugs. As I’ve aged, I’ve learned that being an early adopter is just not worth it. Most of my tech purchases are one to three years behind the latest and greatest, even for things I know I want/need.
Better that than Windows: Where Do You Want To Go Today ?
This program has performed an illegal operation and will be shut down.
A few days ago I was an the top deck of a very slow bus wending through the narrow country roads, and I suddenly thought ( for the first time ) how excellent driverless buses would be.
It must have been zeitgeist, as the very next day I saw in Slashdot an item that a report on driverless buses had panicked the Mayor of London’s office, when it came to their attention after they had issued it.
I have no idea why there is a Mayor for London.
Sure. What’s more, a large percentage of the people who responded negatively will, not might, change their minds once the technology is proven. Those not yet of driving age at the time the technology becomes generally available will sign on at rates of nearly 100% (once they’ve reached the applicable age – don’t assume this to be 16 or 18 at that point in time).
This one is a no brainer.
Google has done some great stuff, but I see enough rough edges that I won’t be an early adopter of self-driving cars.
A robo-car is a fascinating idea, and we may see them on the road within the next couple of decades.
But I’m keeping my steering wheel for myself, thank you. Sure, it’s a pain in the ass to drive during rush hour every day…But on weekends when you drive for an hour or two to go fishing, or go visit grandma, or whatever…well, that wonderful feeling you experience is called freedom. Plus, driving is simply fun (when the conditions are right.)
Renting a robo-car by the hour might work for some folks in big cities who don’t have parking adjacent to their house…But I don’t think it will catch on for the majority.
For most people, the car isn’t just a disposable tool for taking you to work…it’s part of your life, an extension of your personal living space: The car is where you keep the baby seat, where you leave an extra umbrella, sunglasses, the signed papers you need to drop off at your kid’s sports club next time you pick him up after practice, the swatch of colored fabric that you want to take with you when you order new curtains, but haven’t had time for the past 2 weeks, etc, etc.
Yeppers. There are lots of things I could do while driving if I didn’t have to, well, drive.
I don’t see how that part works, but what the hey, I won’t fight the hypothetical.
I figure they already know everywhere I go on the Web, which tells at least as much about me as where I might go in meatspace. And I can always send my car on fictitious errands without me, while my iPod plays the flip side of "They’re Coming To Take Me Away, Ha Ha! on an infinite loop into their bugging device.
If self-driving cars can do this, it’ll change everything. This is the big win for self-driving cars.
The question is, can they? Since learning the extent to which Google had to create a granularly detailed map of Mountain View, CA to make their self-driving cars so effective there, it’s rather cooled my optimism over self-driving cars. I think they’ll get here eventually, but I’m now back to assuming my 7 year old will have to learn to drive a regular car.
As soon as the facts in the OP about safety are reasonably certain, and a Google car doesn’t cost much more than a regular car, I’m in.
Google’s digital Mountain View made Street View look like images from a dot-matrix printer by comparison.
No
- It’s Google and Google is evil.
- Navigation systems are good but not that good.
- All the other non-automated idiots on the road.
- I rather enjoy driving (like an asshole).
Some thoughts about renting robo-cars:
-
By and large, you wouldn’t be able to rent cars at peak driving times. Those of us who drive at those times will need to own one.
-
But renting will be ideal for those who need an extra car at non-peak times. For years, I’ve joked that my wife and I really just need 1.1 or 1.2 cars. But we have to have two cars because out in the 'burbs, Zipcar just isn’t there.
But with robocars, Zipcar can send the car to your door from wherever their lot is, so that second car that you only need occasionally can be a short-term rental.
- Car rental will also change the nature of cars, because there won’t be a reason for them to rent you more car than you need. The one-person car will come about due to demand from rental companies who want to be able to rent cars as cheaply as possible. And once the norm, one-person cars will greatly increase the capacity of our roads, and of course consume less fuel, whether that’s gasoline or voltage.
Count me as one who will NEVER change his mind, heck, I even hate automatic transmissions, I’ve never owned one, and OG-willing, I never will.
I think many people will. You could sleep during your commute. You could send the car to pick up the kids at soccer practice instead of having to do it yourself.
I see no reason why this would be so. The car software will have plenty of safeguards and the car’s computers will have plenty of processing power. Why would some remote operator have the ability or the need to interfere?
Why would they do that?
AFAIK most cars have black boxes that record that now. If you get in an accident, your insurance company and the cops will both get that data. I know a few friends who went further and accepted a contract for a dash cam from their insurance company. It records the view from your windshield and you get a discount. My friend Bob used the dash cam data to prove he was blameless in an accident.
I don’t see an autonomous automobile recording or sharing any more data than a manually driven vehicle.
At first, this will be true. Then, upgrades to both hardware and software will come. In a very short time, autonomous vehicles will be vastly safer than manually driven ones.
I’ve been championing the autonomous car since nineteen ninety three. As I often say (and post) we are far ahead of the schedule I set then.
As long as I could get one with a manual transmission.
Just getting. I’d get one in a heartbeat. I hate driving, I suck at driving, and I love drinking. Even a first generation Google-car 1.0 would be safer on the road than I am.
I can’t drive, so I’d love to have one.
However, that also means that if I have to take the wheel at any point, I’m screwed.
So put me down for “it depends on what the legal issues are regarding non-drivers using one”.
A few weeks ago, my brakes failed. Just totally went. One moment they were working normally, and the next, I had no brakes.
Fortunately, they had been working normally as I headed downhill towards a T intersection at 35 mph, and failed after I’d turned and was on a level road, going at maybe 5 mph due to a traffic backup. I was able to steer the car into the curb to get the car to stop.
But if the brakes had failed when I was going down that hill, would I have remembered to reach for the emergency brake? Probably not - it didn’t occur to me until much later that that’s what I should have done when I was trying to stop my car at 5 mph, when I had more time to react. But a robo-car would not have forgotten, and if not equipped to pull the emergency brake itself, it would have told me to do so.
I like driving. But I’m sure that, sooner or later, cars will drive themselves much more safely than I can drive one. And when that day comes, I’ll cheerfully hand over the keys, so to speak.
It must also be noted that Google (or Apple or whoever) knowing where you are with your car is is already on the way ahead of autonous vehicles. That’s “connected car” technology, already being installed and eagerly being opted for, at least on the free trial basis. Yes, it will be used to drive (heh) ads at you. Possibly promoting bricks and motor establishments near you based your previously established profiling. The major point of those OnStar systems already is that “they” (can at least at any time) know where you are.
Not much different than what happens now otherwise and again, is in progress independent of autonomous vehicles.
Maybe not Google or Apple but some outside of vehicle alone information should be to some degree contolling the car - these systems will work best when the cars communicate with each other, broadcasting traffic conditions ahead to other vehicles calculating routes, warning cars behind that their brakes are engaging in response to an asshole non-autonomous driver cutting across and which direction this front car will attempt to turn to avoid that unpredictable actor, or warning nearby vehicles that its own brakes have failed and what it is doing about it, listening for information from traffic lights and train crossings such that the car fairly effectively times them, coasting to hit it just as it turns green, vehicle to vehicle communication can allow for tight peleton formations, virtual car trains, resulting in much greater fuel efficiency on highways and allowing many more vehicles to share the road at higher speeds during peak hours … Not sure if a central computer need be involved or just each vehicle having access to more information than a driver has and responding according to a defined set of rules.
V2V communication may make it possible (at least in congested areas) to drive slower yet arrive sooner by managing traffic at intersections more efficiently.