Driverless cars & trains

[RobertInOntario]

We recently had our auto show here in Toronto and there was some talk at the show and in the news about self-driving cars. This has been annoying me for several reasons -- one is frankly that I enjoy driving and this would take away all the fun! Another is that self-driving cars are supposed to be safer (because the technology can regulate the distance that the cars are apart, etc.) but I can think of several instances where I can't imagine it working, or at least the driver would still have to be partly driving the car.

For example, a driver has a good chance of discerning the difference between a child playing on the sidewalk verses a child running from the sidewalk onto the road. How is GPS software going to be able to discern what a child on the sidewalk is going to do? A driver could see the child on the sidewalk, then slow down and take precautions. I can think of other examples too where human judgment should be safer than GPS technology.

There is also talk of driver-less commuter trains!

Just wondering if anyone else has any thoughts on this.

Thanks, Rob

[ngauger]

I heard that the driverless cars will still require a driver to make those kind of decisions. Also the technology takes into account people crossing in front of the car. The only case as you say if it's a area where the speeds are higher, then no, the technology would not be able to react

Also - I don't like it because the driverless cars will most likely go the speed limit or 5 MPH over. Unusable around here where everyone routinely drives 10 - 15 MPH over the limit on the highways..

[RobertInOntario]

I agree, Mike. It sounds as if it might be more of a driver-assist technology. We also have the same situation here with people driving a good 10-15 mph above the speed limit.

[MountainMan]

I've got mixed emotions, but given the lousy driving habits so prevalent on the roads today, and the constant self-distractions of cell phones, meals, make-up and map reading while still hurtling along at 80 mph, I personally lean towards letting the cars AI make the critical decisions.

Driverless trains are not a problem - they are already in use in various places and work very well, especially since the train is confined to its rails.

[Sumpter250]

I spent the better part of my life, repairing "technology", that " shouldn't have failed ", but it did.

I simply cannot, will not, and do not want "technology" driving my car. I can accept being the victim of my own stupidity.
I cannot accept being the victim of a stupid technological "glitch".
Add to that, as people become less involved with "driving" they WILL become totally involved with "Distraction".
There are far more "Distracted Drivers" now, than there ever were "Drunk Drivers", and in more cases than not the drunks were easier to spot, and avoid.

When technology is "turned on", "powered up", "switched on"......there is always a current surge through every circuit, that stresses each and every component of that "technology". It could fail at start-up, or, and this is the worst scenario, as a result of the repeated stress, could fail at any time.....( like just at the very moment you need it, to avoid a head on collision with something that just fell off the truck in front of you )

Add to that ! The program that "drives the car" will have to have an answer written, for every ( not just the most common ), "What if ? " that could possibly happen, even if the chances of it happening are one in Infinity !! ( like the child playing on the sidewalk, who "suddenly runs out into the street", without any previous warning signs ).

Yes. I could die tomorrow from a collision with some Near Earth Object, crashing through my roof, and changing me into a "grease spot on the living room rug"....That, I can't control.

My car?, at least to some degree I can control that, and, the situations it and I get into. "Can software/firmware do that ? "
I - - Do Not - - Think so !!!

[BR60103]

As little as I trust new technology, my worry is always the other guy, the one who takes his tool kit to it on the weekend and readjusts everything and puts it back together with a few parts left over.

[RobertInOntario]

Sumpter, I basically agree with you. I can't see how the technology can replace human judgement -- or, at least it will make its own types of mistakes (i.e. freezing up, crashing, shutting down, conflicting with something else, etc.).

[RobertInOntario]

I just dropped my son off at his middle school and traffic was crazy. The roads are narrow because of all the snow banks (so passing by oncoming traffic is a challenge, often with only one car being able to get by at a time) and there were kids & adults walking around everywhere from all sorts of directions. I thought how on earth would a self-driving car figure out how to weave through all this!

I can see this new technology being used, however, on the highway as a sort of high-tech cruise-control system -- that makes sense. But then you'd still have to make decisions about how to navigate around traffic jams (i.e. whether to exit the freeway and find a detour), maneuvering around an accident in one of the lanes, moving over for a police car whizzing by in pursuit of someone or driving around a slow-moving convoy of trucks. I can think of all sorts of instances where human decision would be needed.

Rob

[Lester Perry]

I heard that the driverless cars will still require a driver to make those kind of decisions. Also the technology takes into account people crossing in front of the car. The only case as you say if it's a area where the speeds are higher, then no, the technology would not be able to react

Also - I don't like it because the driverless cars will most likely go the speed limit or 5 MPH over. Unusable around here where everyone routinely drives 10 - 15 MPH over the limit on the highways..

I don't live that far from you and was wondering where you find 10 - 15 MPH over. From my experience especially on I 95 I 495 & De 1 you will get run over at those speeds.
I have a Chrysler 300C. I needed tires for it and had to get high speed tires by law. They must survive 150 mph. That blew me away so I did some research, My car has a top speed of 195. It has a governor on it to limit it to 149. Uh has anyone here ever driven 149 mph ? Anyway If they can govern it to 149 why not 69 ? Whoa That would mean I couldn't rum 85 on I 95 where the speed limit is 65. That would be to easy.

As far as the topic of auto pilot goes. If they could use radar or what ever to apply brakes it you are tailgating or drive erratically as when you pass out or fall asleep. I would be OK with that. And drunk drivers. Just take their car from them. Will you loan your friend your car if the government took his car because of DUI. I know this is all to simple.

[ngauger]

I don't live that far from you and was wondering where you find 10 - 15 MPH over. From my experience especially on I 95 I 495 & De 1 you will get run over at those speeds.
I have a Chrysler 300C. I needed tires for it and had to get high speed tires by law. They must survive 150 mph. That blew me away so I did some research, My car has a top speed of 195. It has a governor on it to limit it to 149. Uh has anyone here ever driven 149 mph ? Anyway If they can govern it to 149 why not 69 ? Whoa That would mean I couldn't rum 85 on I 95 where the speed limit is 65. That would be to easy.

As far as the topic of auto pilot goes. If they could use radar or what ever to apply brakes it you are tailgating or drive erratically as when you pass out or fall asleep. I would be OK with that. And drunk drivers. Just take their car from them. Will you loan your friend your car if the government took his car because of DUI. I know this is all to simple.

Up here in PA - We drive a bit saner than those DE drivers

Yeah, I've been going 70 on 495 (5 MPH ver the posted 65) and have been passed like I'm standing still by a few DE drivers But for the most part most do go 70 - 75

[MountainMan]

I spent the better part of my life, repairing "technology", that " shouldn't have failed ", but it did.

I simply cannot, will not, and do not want "technology" driving my car. I can accept being the victim of my own stupidity.
I cannot accept being the victim of a stupid technological "glitch".
Add to that, as people become less involved with "driving" they WILL become totally involved with "Distraction".
There are far more "Distracted Drivers" now, than there ever were "Drunk Drivers", and in more cases than not the drunks were easier to spot, and avoid.

When technology is "turned on", "powered up", "switched on"......there is always a current surge through every circuit, that stresses each and every component of that "technology". It could fail at start-up, or, and this is the worst scenario, as a result of the repeated stress, could fail at any time.....( like just at the very moment you need it, to avoid a head on collision with something that just fell off the truck in front of you )

Add to that ! The program that "drives the car" will have to have an answer written, for every ( not just the most common ), "What if ? " that could possibly happen, even if the chances of it happening are one in Infinity !! ( like the child playing on the sidewalk, who "suddenly runs out into the street", without any previous warning signs ).

Yes. I could die tomorrow from a collision with some Near Earth Object, crashing through my roof, and changing me into a "grease spot on the living room rug"....That, I can't control.

My car?, at least to some degree I can control that, and, the situations it and I get into. "Can software/firmware do that ? "

Interesting comments. Unfortunately, records show that the failure rate among the "human software" driving cars is unacceptably higher than the AI kind. AI doesn't drive while on the cellphone, or while eating, or doing make-up, or reading, or while drunk.
I - - Do Not - - Think so !!!

[Lester Perry]

Mikey the worst I have seen was in Georgia. I believe the speed limit was 70 but not sure. I was running along at 80. Everyone was passing me like I was running 20. I decided to keep up with traffic. I chickened out at 100 and decided to just let them go.

[Puddlejumper]

Rather than use technology to drive the car for you, I'd rather see technology to keep driver's informed, honest, and focused. In other words, perhaps governors on vehicles that limit speed to 69 MPH... or even better a "tattle tale" system whereas if you get above a certain speed, road side detectors read a wireless tag in your license plate and send your info to the MVA who issues you a Citation. Or in car technology that renders cell phones useless when in the vehicle is shifted into drive. Sensors that can tell how close you are to the car in front of you, and reduce your speed accordingly to prevent tailgating. Sensors that won't let you merge if there isn't space to do so. There are already sensors that will apply the brakes in your car if the car in front of you suddenly applies theirs. Roadside communicators that constantly monitor the conditions of the road surface (icy?), flow of traffic, interruptions ahead, and communicate such info to your car so you can make educated decisions on travel routes, etc.

It all sounds far fetched, in some cases it may seem invasive to your privacy, but in all cases it is better than relying on a computer to drive the vehicle for you.

[RobertInOntario]

Rather than use technology to drive the car for you, I'd rather see technology to keep driver's informed, honest, and focused. In other words, perhaps governors on vehicles that limit speed to 69 MPH... or even better a "tattle tale" system whereas if you get above a certain speed, road side detectors read a wireless tag in your license plate and send your info to the MVA who issues you a Citation. Or in car technology that renders cell phones useless when in the vehicle is shifted into drive. Sensors that can tell how close you are to the car in front of you, and reduce your speed accordingly to prevent tailgating. Sensors that won't let you merge if there isn't space to do so. There are already sensors that will apply the brakes in your car if the car in front of you suddenly applies theirs. Roadside communicators that constantly monitor the conditions of the road surface (icy?), flow of traffic, interruptions ahead, and communicate such info to your car so you can make educated decisions on travel routes, etc.

It all sounds far fetched, in some cases it may seem invasive to your privacy, but in all cases it is better than relying on a computer to drive the vehicle for you.

I generally agree with this. I think governors and sensors (telling you that you're too close to a car ahead of you, etc.) would all be good. Not too keen on having a ticket emailed to me if I drive the car too fast! although I rarely drive above 70-75 mph, which is the standard speed on our major highways. Also, I like to have my cellphone available in case my wife or sons would like to use it while I'm driving. But all the other ideas are great though!

[RobertInOntario]

Mikey the worst I have seen was in Georgia. I believe the speed limit was 70 but not sure. I was running along at 80. Everyone was passing me like I was running 20. I decided to keep up with traffic. I chickened out at 100 and decided to just let them go.

It's also bad in the UK -- over there, 70 to 80 mph seems slow! At least from what I remember from our many trips there.