Google's self-driving car snags first-ever license in Nevada The Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles has issued the first license plates that will allow Google's autonomous cars onto public highways. Nevada is the first state to devise licensing procedures for autonomous vehicles, and Google is the one of the leaders in that field, having hired some of the top talent that took part in …
Is your logic flawed? Using your theory the safest place would be the fast lane as lorries arent allowed in that lane (in the UK anyway). How quickly do you think you could take the handbrake off, engage gear and pull into the hard shoulder before the lorry piled into you. You might have about 1second to achieve it. Plus how would you know that its safer to go that way, when the lorry might swerve that way at the last minute.
I think you are proving the point that humans think they are better drivers than they are...
how much of the general publics wifi data the car slurps as it drives along?
Bugger that! Google knows you went to the asian brothel "Love You Long Time" last week so now gives you asian porn popup ads.
It also knows you were there for five minutes so also offers viagra ads as well
All part of the service
They'll kill us all...
Seriously though, Google don't have a culture of developing safety critical embedded systems, remains to be seen how good these are.
Also, taking the responsibility of driving away from me, but leaving me with the responsibility if it crashes is a cop-out. If the thing runs for miles without incident, do the authorities really expect you to pay attention constantly when there is no incentive to do so? Already there is talk that drivers are less attentive when besieged with myriad driver safety aids (lane deviation sensors, stopping distance sensors linked to auto-braking, etc etc) - if I buy one of these it's because I want to use the travel time more productively.
How about a slimmed-down version here in the UK? Remove the overly stupid thing on the roof and restrict these to just the hard-shoulder of Britains motorways and BOOM, you've got a moving bed.
Imagine, you drive yourself to the motorway, flick a switch and an alarm wakes you up when you reach the right junction.
I've got an even cheaper solution involving a lasso and a Polish truck.
"Google's fleet will have red Nevada license plates with a Greek infinity symbol, intended to alert other drivers that a computer has control of the vehicle."
So, the meaning of the plate is essentially "Warning! Incompetent driver!" (as otherwise there would be nothing to be alerted about)? Great idea! Now all they need to do is start giving them out to people and they can abolish driving schools and exams, think how much money that will save and from how much needless greenhouse gases emission we'll spare our planet. IMO, if it can't pass at least the same test humans do (as individual humans are expected to improve as they gain experience, and this car unless it has some serious supercomputer and AI on board, won't until it's replaced or specifically updated), it's not fit for road.
There's a lot of things out there that cause accidents but we dont stop them altogether as the benefits out weighs the cons (though death is a pretty big con i guess) otherwise we would never have allowed the use of Planes, Cars, Trains, Ships, Mobile Phones (for those that believe it causes cancer), Gas Appliances, anything electrical... The list could go on!
Some will then say "I dont use those things so im not at risk", though you might not use them you could still be injured by then, plane falling out of the sky onto your house, the house next door has a gas explosion, train derails and hits you in the face as your walking on the pavement next to the track.
Lets all stop moaning and get on with life instead of fighting against it, you'll be a lot happier person!
It's interesting that a number of people have made comparison to autopilots here.
From an air transport point of view, autopilots are simply taking load off the pilot(s) who do not have to maintain control over the aeroplane to execute the six manoeuvres that occur in normal flight: straight-and-level flight, level turns, climbing straight, climbing turns, descending straight and descending turns.
There are other systems that are still available. Of course, there are the pilots, who can (usually) override the autopilot and fly manually if required for any reason. There are air traffic control who modify flight plans, e.g. by passing vectors and altitudes to the pilots, who are then either responsible for flying those vectors or to set the autopilot to fly them.
What the autopilot is doing is reducing the workload of the pilot.
There are similar systems for cars that already exist, one of which is of course cruise control, which attempts to maintain a constant speed by varying the throttle position automatically. This is just a very advanced form of the system.
In the aircraft situation, the pilot is ultimately responsible for the safety of the flight, and I can't see it being any different for a car situation: the driver will be ultimately responsible for the safety of the trip.
Autopilots do increase safety (certain procedures can be flown by autopilots that are not allowed by pilots alone) and I have no doubt that this car "autopilot" will also increase safety.
The difference between autopilots in aircraft and cars is that for the most part, autos move in any direction, and at any speed, in a single plane, with all kinds of obstacles to be avoided[1].
Whereas in aircraft (except around airports) are all moving in the same direction & relative speed at any given altitude, with few obstacles[2].
Autopilots for cars is contraindicated ... unless they are on a separate conduit system than the rest of us. Which ain't gonna happen for local. Might happen for long distance, but probably not before my grand-daughter is married, though (she's a year and a half, or thereabouts).
[1] Cats, dawgs[3], bicycleistotards, iFad wielding pedestrians, impaired drivers, folks from blighty in a left-hand-steer car for the first time (and vice-versa, of course!), mopeds, squids on rice-rockets, suicidal teenagers on skates/blades/boards/razors, the postwo/man, delivery drivers unfamiliar with the area, children not properly stowed by their parents, OAPs with pension check in hand driving their one day per month, and (here in Sonoma, anyway) tourists with blinkers on who aren't looking for anything but The Mission or The Barracks or General Vallejo's house or a specific tasting room ... and etc.
[2] The un-avoidable (bird-strike), and avoidable (weather).
[3] I killed a dawg the other day ... The idiot owner was talking to a friend on a corner. The dawg was on one of those fucking awful retract leads. The dawg spotted a squirrel/bunny/cat/whatever on the other side of the road and took off after it. It bounced off the right side of my front bumper with enough force to pull the idiot owner off her feet. I stopped. So did the Cop who was behind me. The idiot ex-dawg-owner wanted the Cop to arrest me. He declined, telling her that it was her fault, not mine. She complained about her own bruises, "caused by [me]". The Cop said "stupidity "should hurt!", and I went on my way ... If you take anything from this story: If you have a retract lead, throw it away & get a proper lead. Ta.
There have been many suggestions in the past that if the railways were removed and replaced with tarmac roads lorries using them would be more efficient than trains for freight.
If these systems are good enough this might genuinely be a workable idea - separate from the human-controlled road system you have a robotised road network with fixed routes running a flexible mix of freight and passengers.
I'd like to know the amount of man hours spent by individuals driving themselves around - its an unproductive activity in itself; people obviously aren't always where they need to be but requiring them to be in control of the process of moving themselves around is a waste if there's a machine that can do it more efficiently.
"I'd like to know the amount of man hours spent by individuals driving themselves around - its an unproductive activity in itself"
Spoken like a true company director... "So what if we are sending you on a 400 mile trip on Sunday to get to a meeting at the other end of the state. We still expect a full days workout of you!"
T O Y O T A ???
Whose cars spectacularly failed a simple 'throttle-by-wire' 'test'???
Not in my lifetime. Still apprehensive to get on an airbus with it's tiny loystick. Christ, before long, the pilots will be controlling it with a Wiii - whatever it's called - soon enough. (Imagine, about to land, and the captain sneezes...)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
