Oh ok Thanks for the emphasis with the exclamation mark as if you had to yell. Simulations are great and, but until they are on the road its equally plausible that human erratic behavior is just as much a problem as your assumptions about predictable. Sounds like anecdotal BS to me. I think it's pretty obvious computers will give us all better fuel economy, keep us safer as it can react many 100's of times faster than a human and keep traffic down, because lets be honest how often do you deviate from your regular commute route to avoid traffic? How many more routes does your computer know in milliseconds? You can hypothesize whatever you want, but planes and space craft have been flying themselves for years and they are safer for it. Military convoys are almost always computer assisted these days with one real driver on front and another in the rear. The rest are usually AI. Have you even checked on Googles progress on this topic yet? They've essential "done it". The only problem for them at this point is getting permission and having resources to finish mapping... well basically everything in the world, but of the test highways they have mapped, their cars work perfectly well. We've been watching self driving tech develop for the better part of the last 35 years. Why do you think its so impossible? To be honest I would trust a computer driver over a human in many circumstances.
On another note. As others have said I believe this rumor has more to do with battery tech. Improving batteries has been Apple holy grail forever. I remember them tinkering with fuel cells probably almost 15 years ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ppietra
simulations!
Self driving cars behave in a more or less predictable manner, after all they are basically computer programs. Since safety and comfort will be their biggest concern it is highly unlikely that it will be more aggressive than most humans. It will accelerate more slowly and reduce speed earlier... that increases time of response
Yes, there is a lot of upside to taking driving out of the hands of humans, but there's a lot of work to be done yet.
I'll even say that's an understatement as I assume there are many core technologies needed that haven't yet been invented.
If we don't have this in 50 years ill be shocked. The only think I consider as an unknown at this point is will it being city or highway, first?
I think it will be highway first, and within just a few years. Tesla now has traffic aware cruise control, which enables the car to maintain a user selected distance from the car in front of it. It now has automatic detection of lane departures, and Tesla has announced the intention to support automatic steering of lane changes, by the driver merely using the turn signal. They already have automatic collision avoidance, by using regenerative braking and anti-lock braking, if necessary. I think Teslas will be able to cruise I-5 pretty much on autopilot shortly. Several high-end automakers have these capabilities and more right now.
City driving just has way more variables to take into consideration, although many cars can parallel park without the participation of the driver.
simulations!
Self driving cars behave in a more or less predictable manner, after all they are basically computer programs. Since safety and comfort will be their biggest concern it is highly unlikely that it will be more aggressive than most humans. It will accelerate more slowly and reduce speed earlier... that increases time of response
Commercial planes have never flown themselves. They are flown only by a tiny number of highly trained pilots, and yet, even with the relatively empty and controlled environment of the sky, we are no closer to pilotless passenger planes after over a century of flight.
I don't see driverless cars happening for the foreseeable future, if ever. One would effectively have to ban pedestrians from crossing roads in order to enable them.
I love cars but I have always felt Apple should invest in satellite communications to be freed from cable and Internet constraints. It would open up many possibilities directly connected to their core strengths and established ecosystem.
Commercial planes have never flown themselves. They are flown only by a tiny number of highly trained pilots, and yet, even with the relatively empty and controlled environment of the sky, we are no closer to pilotless passenger planes after over a century of flight. [...]
The technology is there. But there are many reasons why there are still pilots in aircraft. Legal issues mostly, I'd assume.
And also because passengers would freak out en masse if, say, United Airlines decided to fly fully autonomous planes.
If Apple has a bug in their software and crashes a car, the insurance company has a potential $100 billion payout.
I have read discussions that the government will have to pass laws to limit the liability otherwise there will never be self driving cars. Innovators sometimes have to take risks. It all depends on whether the general public wants self driving cars or not, and if they do, there will not be any $100 billion dollar pay outs. They will pass laws to limit the liability.
So here is a hypothetical case: A self driven car encounters a situation where there is no way to avoid a serious accident so it has to decide which type of accident is less bad - crashing head on into a car coming at them in the wrong lane, swerving to the right and run over some bicyclists or try to split between two oncoming cars and hopefully avoid a direct head on collision but certainly be hit by two cars and also breaking the law. Whatever decision it makes, the victims will sue because it was a flaw in the software. There are ethical decisions to be made. But would a human driver do it any better?
They are flown only by a tiny number of highly trained pilots, and yet, even with the relatively empty and controlled environment of the sky, we are no closer to pilotless passenger planes after over a century of flight.
I don't see driverless cars happening for the foreseeable future, if ever. One would effectively have to ban pedestrians from crossing roads in order to enable them.
WTF?! You do know there is a great deal of automation that exists in modern commercial and private planes, right? That doesn't mean they can be pilot-less, but a self-driving car also doesn't mean it will be driver-less. You jump from a comment about an increase in computer assisted vehicles (which do exist already) to driver-less vehicles like you'll stick your kid in the car and it will get them to school on time while you sit home and relax, the way you jump from same-sex marriage to child molestation in the same sentence. Seriously, WTF?!
Fully Automated would definitely be a PR problem and you need a human in case of a crisis. I was intrigued by what the author of the article i linked to said about landings though. I have heard that some runways are very dangerous to land on and would probably NEED a human pilot. It's easy to take it for granted in areas with large modern runways, but there are plenty of Airports are in downright awful locations and require highly trained pilots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
The technology is there. But there are many reasons why there are still pilots in aircraft. Legal issues mostly, I'd assume.
And also because passengers would freak out en masse if, say, United Airlines decided to fly fully autonomous planes.
I just don't get, why not kill 2 birds with one stone? If theyre using the vans for driverless cars, might as well strap on those street mapping cameras as well.
It doesn’t matter how many benefits there are to an idea if it’s physically impossible to implement.
There are always those hurdles (often more aptly compared to mountains) in advancing society, but they do tend to happen.
You ever look at, say, Seinfeld episodes today and see how old the cars and clothing looks from just 20 years ago. I personally didn't really see any major change happen, but there is it preserved for all time… it just happened in very small increments over a long period. Can you really predict this will not a feasible in 2065?
I just don't get, why not kill 2 birds with one stone?
If theyre using the vans for driverless cars, might as well strap on those street mapping cameras as well.
Earlier today I saw another company with the same sort of mapping gear on top their vehicle with the wheel calibration as well. Psomas. The SUV was clearly labeled as a Mapping vehicle.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
Agreed, not for a long, long time anyway. People who are predicting that true self-driving cars will be on all our highways and side streets in 5 years are going to be disappointed. Ain't happening ...
That said, I'm sure that there are lots of benefits in trying to develop the technology now and using bits of it to improve safety in regular cars though. Not sure how that helps Google but I think that they are mostly doing it to boost their wowie brainshare.
There are more safety issues with self driving cars as well. All you need is one accident caused by a bug or fault in the self driving car and whichever company owns that car will go bankrupt. Tell me which insurance company will insure a car that has no driver? How are you going to sue a car for an accident? If people aren't driving the car then auto insurance companies won't have anything to insure because the people inside the car can't be at fault because they weren't driving. Optical recognition of streets/roads/highways and other vehicles would only work if all the roads were changed so nobody could change lanes or speed. Let's spend more time on developing something that would actually help society in the near future instead of trying to copy iRobot.
There are studies that show that self driving cars might actually be worse for congestion. Human drive more aggressively with higher acceleration curves which reduces latency/lag specially on crossroads.
simulations!
Self driving cars behave in a more or less predictable manner, after all they are basically computer programs. Since safety and comfort will be their biggest concern it is highly unlikely that it will be more aggressive than most humans. It will accelerate more slowly and reduce speed earlier... that increases time of response
The safety benefits are largely over blown, much like antilock brakes. The level of AI required to actually improve safety on the highway isn't going to be realized anytime soon.
What I'd love to see is a hybrid car or preferrably in my case pickup that doesn't suck. A hybrid in this concept would have the internal combustion engine driving a generator only, running only when directed by the driver. I really like the idea of electric cars as I've worked large scale automation for years and have plenty of experience with motors. The thing that bothers me is the short range offered by current battery tech. Well that and the whole industry can't seem to realize anything new in functional design.
A massive amount of work, I can't even imagine an AI capable of navigating the roads I'm driving today. You have low visibility, roads literally covered with snow and at times white outs. So how would current AI handle this compared to the stage events we have seen so far.
This will be a huge problem, humans would still on average take the route that does the least damage to other humans.
AI tech will have to move far more rapidly than in the past. Current self driving systems are not even close to implementing AI, the are more or less elaborate terrain following robots.
A few dead people will slow it down.
I know that there are interests in the government pushing for this technology with the sad belief that it would increase safety on the road. I don't see this working out well at all. Even though there are examples on the road today, driving is not the same thing as a line following robot. An average driver gets new experiences thrown at them constantly requiring them to adopt instantly. No AI is capable of this at the moment.
You guys are funny. Self driving cars aren't ready because complex AI is needed, insurance companies don't want any part, it will increase congestion... If you don't want self driving cars at least find arguments that are true, or at least believable. Google has self driving cars on the road now, in multiple states, doing maneuvers on lumbar street and used in "aggressive mode", which drives quicker and more efficiently than humans. I think they have one that can win a race against professional drivers, forget regular ones. Insurance companies will have no problem getting involved, because their cars virtually never get in accidents, unlike humans which get in lots of accidents. So, a huge net gain in money when a lot of people pay, and less money going out. And it won't increase congestion for obvious reasons. It can see 360 degrees, it can see in greater detail, has faster reaction times, it doesn't get drunk, fall asleep, or text. Car crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers and young adults. If you've ever lost someone or know someone who lost a friend to drunk driving, you know the appeal. Your teenage kid doesn't have to be drunk to get in a drunk driving accident. All it takes somebody else being irresponsible behind the wheel to send a 2000 pound piece of metal at your family. I would trust a computer controlled car over a distracted tired and confused human any day (which are all of them). Look around you, it doesn't take long to see how bad the drivers are these days. You can say goodbye to 30,000 deaths a year when this gets released. And the funny part is, you won't even know whose life it saved. It could have been your cousin whose life was saved, but, thankfully you'll never know. As far as being street legal, I've heard Google recently say the laws don't say autonomous cars are illegal, they're just being proactive. Of course there are laws in place in California, Florida, and one ir two others explicitly saying it's legal. The proof is in the pudding, and you'll see them being used in a few years. Google will probably start by rolling them out with some web service or app that allows you to hail an autonomous taxi in big cities.
Comments
Oh ok Thanks for the emphasis with the exclamation mark as if you had to yell. Simulations are great and, but until they are on the road its equally plausible that human erratic behavior is just as much a problem as your assumptions about predictable. Sounds like anecdotal BS to me. I think it's pretty obvious computers will give us all better fuel economy, keep us safer as it can react many 100's of times faster than a human and keep traffic down, because lets be honest how often do you deviate from your regular commute route to avoid traffic? How many more routes does your computer know in milliseconds? You can hypothesize whatever you want, but planes and space craft have been flying themselves for years and they are safer for it. Military convoys are almost always computer assisted these days with one real driver on front and another in the rear. The rest are usually AI. Have you even checked on Googles progress on this topic yet? They've essential "done it". The only problem for them at this point is getting permission and having resources to finish mapping... well basically everything in the world, but of the test highways they have mapped, their cars work perfectly well. We've been watching self driving tech develop for the better part of the last 35 years. Why do you think its so impossible? To be honest I would trust a computer driver over a human in many circumstances.
On another note. As others have said I believe this rumor has more to do with battery tech. Improving batteries has been Apple holy grail forever. I remember them tinkering with fuel cells probably almost 15 years ago.
Quote:
simulations!
Self driving cars behave in a more or less predictable manner, after all they are basically computer programs. Since safety and comfort will be their biggest concern it is highly unlikely that it will be more aggressive than most humans. It will accelerate more slowly and reduce speed earlier... that increases time of response
It could be personal blimps. Like a Segway for the sky. I'm sure they could make the harness as attractive as the Apple Watch.
I think it will be highway first, and within just a few years. Tesla now has traffic aware cruise control, which enables the car to maintain a user selected distance from the car in front of it. It now has automatic detection of lane departures, and Tesla has announced the intention to support automatic steering of lane changes, by the driver merely using the turn signal. They already have automatic collision avoidance, by using regenerative braking and anti-lock braking, if necessary. I think Teslas will be able to cruise I-5 pretty much on autopilot shortly. Several high-end automakers have these capabilities and more right now.
City driving just has way more variables to take into consideration, although many cars can parallel park without the participation of the driver.
Commercial planes have never flown themselves. They are flown only by a tiny number of highly trained pilots, and yet, even with the relatively empty and controlled environment of the sky, we are no closer to pilotless passenger planes after over a century of flight.
I don't see driverless cars happening for the foreseeable future, if ever. One would effectively have to ban pedestrians from crossing roads in order to enable them.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
Apple is supposedly working on a vehicle-related project that is "too exciting to pass up" for potential hires ...
You get to drive around all day.
See the country!
So you are right... thank for making me look into it. Interesting read here if anyone's inclined.
http://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/automation-myths/
Commercial planes have never flown themselves. They are flown only by a tiny number of highly trained pilots, and yet, even with the relatively empty and controlled environment of the sky, we are no closer to pilotless passenger planes after over a century of flight. [...]
The technology is there. But there are many reasons why there are still pilots in aircraft. Legal issues mostly, I'd assume.
And also because passengers would freak out en masse if, say, United Airlines decided to fly fully autonomous planes.
If Apple has a bug in their software and crashes a car, the insurance company has a potential $100 billion payout.
I have read discussions that the government will have to pass laws to limit the liability otherwise there will never be self driving cars. Innovators sometimes have to take risks. It all depends on whether the general public wants self driving cars or not, and if they do, there will not be any $100 billion dollar pay outs. They will pass laws to limit the liability.
So here is a hypothetical case: A self driven car encounters a situation where there is no way to avoid a serious accident so it has to decide which type of accident is less bad - crashing head on into a car coming at them in the wrong lane, swerving to the right and run over some bicyclists or try to split between two oncoming cars and hopefully avoid a direct head on collision but certainly be hit by two cars and also breaking the law. Whatever decision it makes, the victims will sue because it was a flaw in the software. There are ethical decisions to be made. But would a human driver do it any better?
WTF?! You do know there is a great deal of automation that exists in modern commercial and private planes, right? That doesn't mean they can be pilot-less, but a self-driving car also doesn't mean it will be driver-less. You jump from a comment about an increase in computer assisted vehicles (which do exist already) to driver-less vehicles like you'll stick your kid in the car and it will get them to school on time while you sit home and relax, the way you jump from same-sex marriage to child molestation in the same sentence. Seriously, WTF?!
Fully Automated would definitely be a PR problem and you need a human in case of a crisis. I was intrigued by what the author of the article i linked to said about landings though. I have heard that some runways are very dangerous to land on and would probably NEED a human pilot. It's easy to take it for granted in areas with large modern runways, but there are plenty of Airports are in downright awful locations and require highly trained pilots.
Quote:
The technology is there. But there are many reasons why there are still pilots in aircraft. Legal issues mostly, I'd assume.
And also because passengers would freak out en masse if, say, United Airlines decided to fly fully autonomous planes.
It doesn’t matter how many benefits there are to an idea if it’s physically impossible to implement.
Neither is true.
I just don't get, why not kill 2 birds with one stone?
If theyre using the vans for driverless cars, might as well strap on those street mapping cameras as well.
There are always those hurdles (often more aptly compared to mountains) in advancing society, but they do tend to happen.
You ever look at, say, Seinfeld episodes today and see how old the cars and clothing looks from just 20 years ago. I personally didn't really see any major change happen, but there is it preserved for all time… it just happened in very small increments over a long period. Can you really predict this will not a feasible in 2065?
Whatever's going on. It's strange.
I just don't get, why not kill 2 birds with one stone?
If theyre using the vans for driverless cars, might as well strap on those street mapping cameras as well.
Earlier today I saw another company with the same sort of mapping gear on top their vehicle with the wheel calibration as well. Psomas. The SUV was clearly labeled as a Mapping vehicle.
Please - no "self driving cars." Self driving cars aren't going to happen.
Agreed, not for a long, long time anyway. People who are predicting that true self-driving cars will be on all our highways and side streets in 5 years are going to be disappointed. Ain't happening ...
That said, I'm sure that there are lots of benefits in trying to develop the technology now and using bits of it to improve safety in regular cars though. Not sure how that helps Google but I think that they are mostly doing it to boost their wowie brainshare.
As for this Apple reference - battery tech?
I would like to see an Apple car! Bring it on! Apple needs to think big, and they have enough money to fund countless such projects.
Apple already rules phones, tablets and computers, they should branch out into other areas also.
You guys are funny. Self driving cars aren't ready because complex AI is needed, insurance companies don't want any part, it will increase congestion... If you don't want self driving cars at least find arguments that are true, or at least believable. Google has self driving cars on the road now, in multiple states, doing maneuvers on lumbar street and used in "aggressive mode", which drives quicker and more efficiently than humans. I think they have one that can win a race against professional drivers, forget regular ones. Insurance companies will have no problem getting involved, because their cars virtually never get in accidents, unlike humans which get in lots of accidents. So, a huge net gain in money when a lot of people pay, and less money going out. And it won't increase congestion for obvious reasons. It can see 360 degrees, it can see in greater detail, has faster reaction times, it doesn't get drunk, fall asleep, or text. Car crashes are the leading cause of death for teenagers and young adults. If you've ever lost someone or know someone who lost a friend to drunk driving, you know the appeal. Your teenage kid doesn't have to be drunk to get in a drunk driving accident. All it takes somebody else being irresponsible behind the wheel to send a 2000 pound piece of metal at your family. I would trust a computer controlled car over a distracted tired and confused human any day (which are all of them). Look around you, it doesn't take long to see how bad the drivers are these days. You can say goodbye to 30,000 deaths a year when this gets released. And the funny part is, you won't even know whose life it saved. It could have been your cousin whose life was saved, but, thankfully you'll never know. As far as being street legal, I've heard Google recently say the laws don't say autonomous cars are illegal, they're just being proactive. Of course there are laws in place in California, Florida, and one ir two others explicitly saying it's legal. The proof is in the pudding, and you'll see them being used in a few years. Google will probably start by rolling them out with some web service or app that allows you to hail an autonomous taxi in big cities.