Autonomous cars

foxtrapper wrote:

Storz wrote: But what I can do is take control of my car and go enjoy a twisty back road somewhere.

Which you may be better able to do, with tourists and soccer moms being driven, instead of wandering into your lane as they text away and such.

That is what is at stake here...

No, you are assuming the instant there is one Google car anywhere that all other forms of transportation will be completely eliminated everywhere. There is no reason to believe that is or will be the case.

Of course it won't be instant, but give it time. Driving your own car will be legislated or priced out of existence.

Glad you guys have a rosy picture of this, I just can't see it.

Storz wrote: Glad you guys have a rosy picture of this, I just can't see it.

Fixed!

In reply to foxtrapper:

If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

Nick (LUCAS) Comstock wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

Bingo. Nanny state over reach through incrementalism.

The majority of motorcycle accidents are single vehicle. That's not going to change with less drivers. What will change is that those numbers will seem exaggerated due to less car accidents and it will be deemed too unsafe and prohibited for your safety.

I don't think it'll ever get quite that bad, at worst eventually driving a car on the street will be like driving a tractor or horse-drawn buggy on the street today. I'd say that's at least 30 years away. I find most street driving to be not enjoyable, I'd rather be doing something else if I could. If I lived in one of the few places with good driving roads maybe I'd feel differently about it.

It's amazing to me how much trust people put in the engineers / manufacturers of these cars. Will they be safer than human driven cars? Maybe, probably, but we don't know yet. Preliminary indications appear to be yes, but we're dealing with a tiny, tiny sample size. There are also millions of situations that these autonomous cars haven't dealt with yet....we'll see.

One thing I think is certain. Regardless of how much you grow to love your fancy new autonomous car, it will be obsolete in 3-4 years. Just like those precious hand-held devices that need to be updated, or replaced every few years, these cars will be the same-----it's the tech industry's business model. The days of $1K beaters will be gone. Just as an Apple II is now totally unusable, the first automated cars will phase out within a few years, and you'll be forced to drive another, newer, more better robot car. It's the disposable society model that drives the tech sector. This sort of thinking repulses me.

I see the acceptance of these similar to this----- If you enjoy shopping at the Apple store, you will probably like, even love your new automotive overlords. If-- like me, you'd rather drive a railroad spike through your head than enter an Apple store---- autonomous cars probably aren't for you.

I see these things spreading first in major cities, then out into the hinterland. Looks like I'll be digging a hole in the side of a mountain and living off the grid. I hear Montana is nice.

I understand why lovers of tech are looking forward to this brave new (computer driven) world. It's just not for me. As Joe Walsh once sang, I'm an analog guy living in a digital world.

Get off my lawn!

In reply to Joe Gearin:

Also we assume they will take off. Everyone assumed smart watches would take off and they just haven't.

Also having gone to engineering school, there are plenty of engineers I'd trust to build something like this but more then enough that they thought of them possible being involved in something like this makes me want to run away screaming. Fortunately I think they all work for the government.

Nick (LUCAS) Comstock wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

ABS and airbags are the norm today. My old cars with no abs and even drum brakes are still legal. So no, I don't think there is a nefarious plan afoot to eliminate everyone from driving anything anywhere.

If nothing else, that's what the antique vehicles tags are all about. So I can continue to drive my hopelessly antiquated whatever. Acetylene lights, steering tiller and a band brake around the driveshaft. Perfectly legal. Though perhaps rightly not necessarily a good idea on the interstate highways.

Joe Gearin wrote: One thing I think is certain. Regardless of how much you grow to love your fancy new autonomous car, it will be obsolete in 3-4 years. Just like those precious hand-held devices that need to be updated, or replaced every few years, these cars will be the same-----it's the tech industry's business model. The days of $1K beaters will be gone. Just as an Apple II is now totally unusable, the first automated cars will phase out within a few years, and you'll be forced to drive another, newer, more better robot car. It's the disposable society model that drives the tech sector. This sort of thinking repulses me. I see the acceptance of these similar to this----- If you enjoy shopping at the Apple store, you will probably like, even love your new automotive overlords. If-- like me, you'd rather drive a railroad spike through your head than enter an Apple store---- autonomous cars probably aren't for you. I see these things spreading first in major cities, then out into the hinterland. Looks like I'll be digging a hole in the side of a mountain and living off the grid. I hear Montana is nice. I understand why lovers of tech are looking forward to this brave new (computer driven) world. It's just not for me. As Joe Walsh once sang, I'm an analog guy living in a digital world. Get off my lawn!

No I don't think autonomous cars will become obsolete any faster than usual. Why would they? That would devalue the vehicle to most car buyers (especially considering resale value). A new V2V communication standard may come out but it won't be necessary to use the car. You may choose to buy a car with some fleetingly-useful technology built into it, like a tablet or something, but that won't make the car useless when that component is useless, and you could easily upgrade around it - the same way that you can put a "mechless" ehad unit with bluetooth or a modern EMS with CANbus into a car from the '80s.

Gadgets that are made obsolete after a short time are sold to people who don't have any desire to own them longer than that. The iPhone 5 is passé when the iPhone 6 comes out, if the owner hasn't badly damaged it already - it's a fashion accessory as well as a phone. If you're using a phone more than 4 years old you're missing a lot of useful features because computing moves at warp speed compared to cars - on my 6+ year old phone I'm missing 802.11n/ac, BTv4/BLE, NFC, a super-pretty screen and a multicore CPU. I stick to it for the software. Automotive technology moves at a geological pace compared to most others. Look at the Tesla S, it's a very modern car with self-driving features, it could even be upgraded to a fully autonomous car. There's no planned obsolescence built into it - quite the opposite in fact, it's the most futureproof car ever made.

Storz wrote:

Nick (LUCAS) Comstock wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

Bingo. Nanny state over reach through incrementalism.

So in addition to bitching about it on the interwebs, what are your plans?

alfadriver wrote:

Storz wrote:

Nick (LUCAS) Comstock wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

Bingo. Nanny state over reach through incrementalism.

So in addition to bitching about it on the interwebs, what are your plans?

Is this not a car discussion board? The only thing we can do is not purchase them right?

Joe Gearin wrote: It's amazing to me how much trust people put in the engineers / manufacturers of these cars.

As opposed to the humans driving around right now?

One of the doom and gloom points raised may well be one of the best points possible. What happens when something goes wrong with a magic Google car? If it's programmed to pull over when there's a problem, that's a wonderful improvement over what so many human drivers do while on the road!

GameboyRMH--- just so you know, I'm still using an iPhone 3s. I also still am using an original iPad. I have no desire to upgrade either. They are both obsolete--- neither can use any new apps. I'd still be using my old Apple laptop if a power cord was still available.....it's not. Although Ebay may have one....

The Tesla is an automobile produced by an automobile company. Their business model is different than the tech industry. (although the two are coming together) The Google car is an automobile built by a tech company. Regardless if the tech exists to keep it viable for the long term, chances are they won't offer that option. Planned obsolescence is the tech industry's business model.

At least that's where I see this going. Of course, I've be wrong before!

The thing about autonomous cars for me is that they remove the ability to do less than legal activities. This is going to be a good or bad thing depending on what kind of driver you are.

Like to do 5-10 over the limit? They will be annoying, but you'll probably learn to live with it.

Like to do big old smokey burnouts and drag race from light to light? Yeah, you really wont like them. But that should be kept to a race track anyway.

Like to corner carve some curvy mountain roads at 7+/10s? Again, you aren't going to like autonomous cars, but you shouldn't be doing that stuff on a public road anyway. Get to a track.

Like to go sight seeing and traveling to your destinations, get drunk at a bar and then need to work in the morning? You are going to love an autonomous car. (as long as its not running apple maps :P)

Joe Gearin wrote: The Tesla is an automobile produced by an automobile company. Their business model is different than the tech industry. (although the two are coming together) The Google car is an automobile built by a tech company. Regardless if the tech exists to keep it viable for the long term, chances are they won't offer that option. Planned obsolescence is the tech industry's business model. At least that's where I see this going. Of course, I've be wrong before!

Actual planned obsolescence is rare in the tech industry. It can seem that it's common if you just want to run your old apps and get the kids off your lawn and Apple and Microsoft certainly do it, but they're the exception rather than the rule. Google mostly does web services and just a few bits of hardware, but they don't seem to be interested in planned obsolescence from what I've seen so far.

alfadriver wrote:

Storz wrote:

Nick (LUCAS) Comstock wrote: In reply to foxtrapper: If you don't believe the end game is to completely eliminate you being allowed to drive or ride anything you are kidding yourself.

Bingo. Nanny state over reach through incrementalism.

So in addition to bitching about it on the interwebs, what are your plans?

Just because I don't have all the answers means I'm not entitled to an opinion? Ok.

In reply to Nick (LUCAS) Comstock:

Whatever makes you feel better.

Seems like constantly being pissed off is exhausting.

I'm neither thrilled or terrified of the driverless car. While I don't want one I know at least 5 people that need one for their own safety (and others around them should be happy too). The issue I see is that 3 of those 5 don't have the funds to buy a new FiST much less what I presume will be a premium for a well sorted autonomous vehicle. For a traditional car their problem is solved by buying an older car. Sure the thing may have a stalling issues from an old TPS sensor, Malfunctioning AC, have a broken window switch and inoperable cruise control. But those systems aren't required for the vehicle to work. Given their financial situations they may never get fixed. In an autonomous car breakdowns in the sensors and switches may be downright catastrophic.so what is the real market for a 5 or 10 year old model? Where this leaves me is that I don't think that it will be possible to force out traditional cars. They will exist as a standard option probably past my expiration date. Fingers crossed I'm right.

If the LIDAR in an autonomous car breaks down, it'll slam the brakes automatically (and maybe send a V2V alert to nearby cars so they can start slamming their brakes early), it's the only safe thing to do.

The additional parts needed for an autonomous car are getting surprisingly cheap, solid-state LIDAR units with a 120deg FOV are just $250 now, down from well above the price of a midrange car a couple years ago, when they were huge spinning-mirror contraptions.

In reply to alfadriver:

I'm not nor have I been pissed of about anything. I have an opinion, I shared it on a discussion forum. That is all.

Joe Gearin wrote: It's amazing to me how much trust people put in the engineers / manufacturers of these cars. Will they be safer than human driven cars? Maybe, probably, but we don't know yet. Preliminary indications appear to be yes, but we're dealing with a tiny, tiny sample size. There are also millions of situations that these autonomous cars haven't dealt with yet....we'll see. One thing I think is certain. Regardless of how much you grow to love your fancy new autonomous car, it will be obsolete in 3-4 years. Just like those precious hand-held devices that need to be updated, or replaced every few years, these cars will be the same-----it's the tech industry's business model. The days of $1K beaters will be gone. Just as an Apple II is now totally unusable, the first automated cars will phase out within a few years, and you'll be forced to drive another, newer, more better robot car. It's the disposable society model that drives the tech sector. This sort of thinking repulses me. I see the acceptance of these similar to this----- If you enjoy shopping at the Apple store, you will probably like, even love your new automotive overlords. If-- like me, you'd rather drive a railroad spike through your head than enter an Apple store---- autonomous cars probably aren't for you. I see these things spreading first in major cities, then out into the hinterland. Looks like I'll be digging a hole in the side of a mountain and living off the grid. I hear Montana is nice. I understand why lovers of tech are looking forward to this brave new (computer driven) world. It's just not for me. As Joe Walsh once sang, I'm an analog guy living in a digital world. Get off my lawn!

I can see it going this way, but the fact that cars will be tech objects that become obsolete much faster will probably just result in fewer people actually owning their cars and ride-sharing services becoming more and more popular. Especially in densely populated urban areas. Think of how few New Yorkers currently own a vehicle and expand that several times. The car companies are already prepping for this. A few have recently started referring to themselves as "mobility" companies instead of car companies.

I'll just say, if I worked in the city I would be so excited about sitting back and reading a book (or napping) during my commute.

^^ you can do that already on a bus or train.

Joe Gearin wrote: ^^ you can do that already on a bus or train.

True. I should have included, "In my personal space without some lady's baby vomiting on my trousers"