Self-driving car discussion catch-all

Yeah, one of the posts at the top says:

You can make this similar comparison: The Audi A6 4wd has been in 0 fatal accidents. This period accounts for 101,164 vehicle years (#of registered vehicles over the course of a year). Assuming an average of 13,000 miles driven per year (actual is 13,474) you get zero fatalities per 1.3 billion miles driven.

So I guess we should make everyone drive audi a6s, right?

It means you should Uber only people who drive an Audi A6 4wd.

Driving can be stressful. Driving can cause anger. I wonder if a driverless society will show a statistically measurable decrease in anger? Think of it this way; 2019 guy is on edge. On the way home from work, someone cuts him off in traffic, he takes a wrong turn, and ends up late and that's just enough to push him over the edge later on so that he punches a guy in the bar that night. 2029 guy doesn't have any of that happen and does not punch a guy in a bar that night. Obviously people are responsible for their own emotional state, but in terms of 317 million population it seems to me that if you regularly have some stressful/unpleasant happen to a large percentage of that population, and then remove nearly all of those events, there would be a statistically measurable change in behavior.

Provided that driver less cars results in the near elimination of traffic jams (possible, but not right away) will we see housing prices fall in the highest of high areas as people are willing to be further away because the commute is no longer as bad?

I think the traffic jam stuff is another development track, one of coordination between cars, and eventually with a dense net of IOT devices to feed back into that system. Probably that will follow self-driving cars. (But someone in the auto industry, as to my computer background, might have a better idea.)

People are really adaptable to the 'new normal' and I agree it will relieve frustration and anger but people will just find something else to be frustrated and angry about.

Widespread automated cars will be a big disruption to lots of industries. Housing prices will definitely change. Airlines. Cell data plans. Really anything that people pay more for today to avoid time in the car.

Disruption indeed. Exactly the word I was thinking of last night as we drove 8 hours with an infant to visit family.

With self driving cars would we even have to stop to change her diapers? How safely rated would it be? Are car seats still necessary if risk of accident becomes near 0?

Lots of other thoughts. Like not having to stop to eat because I would be hands free. Less dine in spaces and more drive thru lanes for all fast food right?

Jeez I could have just taken a nap.

Stele wrote:

Lots of other thoughts. Like not having to stop to eat because I would be hands free. Less dine in spaces and more drive thru lanes for all fast food right?

Drive-thru lanes? Pssh. Just order from your phone and have it delivered straight to your car by another autonomous vehicle, while you're still cruising down the highway at 80MPH.

merphle wrote:
Stele wrote:

Lots of other thoughts. Like not having to stop to eat because I would be hands free. Less dine in spaces and more drive thru lanes for all fast food right?

Drive-thru lanes? Pssh. Just order from your phone and have it delivered straight to your car by another autonomous vehicle, while you're still cruising down the highway at 80MPH.

or by aerial drone to your sunroof.

Except that traffic laws won't adjust until humans are out of the equation. So if you have a self-driving car, enjoy going 55 mph on the highway, getting flipped off as every other driver passes you. To a computer, particularly one programmed with safety as the highest priority, traffic laws will be absolute. Commutes will end up being quite a bit longer I think. Though at least a computer will observe the "slower vehicles in the right lane" laws.

Nevin73 wrote:

So if you have a self-driving car, enjoy going 55 mph on the highway, getting flipped off as every other driver passes you.

For this reason alone I want one.

Nevin73 wrote:

So if you have a self-driving car, enjoy going 55 mph on the highway, getting flipped off as every other driver passes you.

Meh. I’m be too busy doing something else with my commute time to notice.

Nevin73 wrote:

Except that traffic laws won't adjust until humans are out of the equation. So if you have a self-driving car, enjoy going 55 mph on the highway, getting flipped off as every other driver passes you. To a computer, particularly one programmed with safety as the highest priority, traffic laws will be absolute. Commutes will end up being quite a bit longer I think. Though at least a computer will observe the "slower vehicles in the right lane" laws.

But in 2019 that’s not the case. The self driving car that killed someone was going over the speed limit, which was what it was program to do. Self driving cars were originally program to follow every rule to the letter, and it didn’t work so they made them more dynamic and flexible which is what we have right now

I think it will take a long time to get the ego out of driving significant enough to make an impact on stress. I see no difference in someone getting angry because someone else cut them off and someone getting angry because their self driving car slowed down temporarily to let another self driving car get in front of them.
Among many other examples: having to not cheat at a stop sign or making a right turn on red when there is a sign preventing it. Self driving cars won't completely rid us of our impatience and self righteousness.

Plus, nature is a bitch. Self driving cars can be much safer in extreme conditions but they won't be fool proof. The I5 has extreme fog and gusting wind conditions. Flash flooding in Texas is only avoidable if your self driving car turns into a boat.

Self driving cars also won't prevent owners from skipping maintenance and running them in unsafe condition. Nor will they prevent flats and blowouts.

fangblackbone wrote:

I think it will take a long time to get the ego out of driving significant enough to make an impact on stress. I see no difference in someone getting angry because someone else cut them off and someone getting angry because their self driving car slowed down temporarily to let another self driving car get in front of them.
Among many other examples: having to not cheat at a stop sign or making a right turn on red when there is a sign preventing it. Self driving cars won't completely rid us of our impatience and self righteousness.

I'm not sure. When I take transportation where I'm removed from the act of driving - so plane; train; bus; back seat of a car - I don't really pay much attention to other planes/trains etc. So I don't get mad on a plane (for example) when the pilot always another plane to back out in front and thus delay my flight.

Once I'm reasonable confident of my self-driving car, it'll be no different than when I take an Uber. I'll be reading/playing my Switch/napping.

Mantid wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:

So if you have a self-driving car, enjoy going 55 mph on the highway, getting flipped off as every other driver passes you.

Meh. I’m be too busy doing something else with my commute time to notice. :P

Don't worry, you'll still be able to masturbate while traveling down the freeway in your self driving car.

jrralls wrote:

Driving can be stressful. Driving can cause anger. I wonder if a driverless society will show a statistically measurable decrease in anger?

This would be measurable now if you look at people who switch from car commutes to carpooling, trains, buses; or in big statistics if you look at parts of the world with statistically higher percentage of commuters using such options.

fangblackbone wrote:

Plus, nature is a bitch. Self driving cars can be much safer in extreme conditions but they won't be fool proof. The I5 has extreme fog and gusting wind conditions. Flash flooding in Texas is only avoidable if your self driving car turns into a boat.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with this (self driving cars turning into boats).

IMAGE(https://cdn.howmuch.net/articles/the-cost-of-an-american-commute-569a.jpg)

This number assumes that people’s time spent driving is “free.” If you add in their average pay per minute, the number would skyrocket. But with self-driving cars not only would that free time be much more “free” total cost should go down as well, (for almost everything). Another reason I think set-driving cars will be the smart phones of the 2020’s.

A friend of mine brought up the question of what might happen to car insurance companies and income from police writing tickets when driverless cars reach high saturation. Both of those things can go straight to hell for all I care, but I worry more about what kind of unfair tactics these “industries” might perpetrate to inhibit the use of driverless cars once their demise is within view.

This thread reminded me of something I read a few days ago. UPS is currently using self driving semi trucks.

I’m on my lunch, but as soon as I’m done I’m going to drive my “self” driving UPS semi
truck the remaining 50 miles to my destination. 8) What I mean is that I will be driving it myself. Haha.

I guess I should update my resume?

Drive in pitch darkness and pouring down rain. Hated it soooooooo much. Self-driving cars need to get here yesterday.

The National Transportation Safety Board found the safety driver ultimately at fault for the Uber crash that killed a pedestrian in Tempe last year. They also called for better safety rules and other improvements to the self-driving system that could have helped prevent the crash.

Additionally, they found that Uber had programmed its cars to only identify pedestrians if they were in a crosswalk, which as a transportation engineer (and programmer) is a lapse I cannot fathom.

Still hope the tech gets here, but it's going to be a long and bumpy road.

ActualDragon wrote:

The National Transportation Safety Board found the safety driver ultimately at fault for the Uber crash that killed a pedestrian in Tempe last year. They also called for better safety rules and other improvements to the self-driving system that could have helped prevent the crash.

Additionally, they found that Uber had programmed its cars to only identify pedestrians if they were in a crosswalk, which as a transportation engineer (and programmer) is a lapse I cannot fathom.

Still hope the tech gets here, but it's going to be a long and bumpy road.

That conclusion is bullsh*t. This Ars article makes it clear that the software was incredibly badly designed and conscious decisions were made to operate at more safety risk to make a demo look better.

I'm not ok with them renting a fall person up front while they make what should be criminally negligent implementation decisions.

Also interesting is how the laws will react. Up here in Canada, driverless cars would fall under two regimes.

Everything mechanical/electronic falls under federal jurisdiction.

The rules for a human driving fall under provincial jurisdiction.

If it is auto-driving, that is, **not a human**, then technically, you can't be charged for violating a provincial driving regulation. The owner of the car could still get fined/ticketed, but who gets the demerit points removed?

peanut3141 wrote:

I'm not ok with them renting a fall person up front while they make what should be criminally negligent implementation decisions.

100% with you here. Uber did not set up the safety driver for success - going down to one person, not monitoring for automation complacency, etc. It ultimately reveals a failing of the company to promote safety and take their role seriously in testing on public roads.

Policy is going to be a very interesting battleground moving forward.

I'm still in favor of the rules that Volvo and other non-Uber companies have been pushing towards: every collision that a self-driving car is involved in should be the manufacturer's liability.

Gremlin wrote:

I'm still in favor of the rules that Volvo and other non-Uber companies have been pushing towards: every collision that a self-driving car is involved in should be the manufacturer's liability.

Yes, but it's a lot more complicated than that.

What about the self-driving Volvo that crashes into a self-driving Volkswagon - which manufacturer has liability?

What about the guy that hides behind parked cars and jumps out in front of the self-driving car such that there is no feasible way the car could have stopped (because insurance scam/suicide/high on PCP)?

The good news is that the very nature of a self-driving car means that it's collecting a huge amount of data that can recorded for post-accident analysis. Crash survivable accident data recorders need to be mandated as part of the law for self-driving cars.

It should probably be required that they have 360 degree video surveillance.

Some of the newer tractors that I drive have some driver assist functionality. For instance, if someone changes lanes in front of me and slams their brakes, the tractor automatically slams it’s brakes as well. But that’s never happened to me. What usually happens is someone will change lanes in front of me, essentially cutting me off but not slamming their brakes, and the tractor still slams it’s brakes unnecessarily.

One of the other assist functions is “lane encroachment” detection, which will blast an annoying sound at me if it thinks I’m drifting out of my lane. The problem is that it often thinks I’m drifting when I’m not, and the alert sound can be a distraction on its own because it’s so jarring. It also blasts the alert sound at me if I ease partially over to another lane on purpose, like to avoid a car that’s stopped on the shoulder.

I don’t know if these features have ever actually helped me.