4 ms·

Self driving car approach has to be different because whole idea is different than airplane automation. You want self driving car to be autonomus without need t

by ozim 7y ago

Self driving car approach has to be different because whole idea is different than airplane automation. You want self driving car to be autonomus without need to rely on trained and disciplined human element. End goal is totally different and you cannot make progress to have fully autonomous car if you would come from: "yeah human will be in control all the time, not being stupid or drunk".

nradov 7y ago
It's by no means clear that the end goal and approach should be different. Personally I think that aiming toward level 4-5 autonomous vehicles right now is misguided and unlikely to succeed (outside of a few controlled access roads in limited areas). A better approach would be to require the human driver to actively control the vehicle at all times, but have the computer step in to brake or steer when it detects a high probability of a dangerous situation. Like how auto GCAS works on modern aircraft.
- MR4D 7y ago
  This, completely. A few months ago, I lightly rear-ended a vehicle ahead of me when they stopped at a green light while turning. Legally, I was in the wrong, and it was a stupid mistake. I had looked left to make sure no traffic was coming at the exact moment the person ahead of me stopped. Had either event (my head turning or his breaking) been different by about a second, no accident would have happened. A simple anti-collision system would have prevented this, and saved me some money (and him from some scratches on his bumper). As I have an older car - 2012 model - so this feature wasn't prevalent when I bought it. But my next car will have this capability, if for no other reason than I hate stupid mistakes. This one feature would make my drive to/from work much less stressful (there are a ton of people who will switch lanes in front of you at the last minute and then hit the brakes here in Houston). Add in lane-change warnings, and I think a significant number of accidents could be avoided. They may be small accidents, but a bumper replacement or painting (times 2 - one for each car involved) is easily $1,000, if not more.
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    If you get used to driving a car that actually does this sort of thing well, then the first time you get in a car where it malfunctions or doesn't have the feature, you will have a bad accident because your reflexes will be missing. I got a car that automatically closes the door so you don't have to slam it. Now I keep forgetting to close the door on a normal car properly. It's eliminated my muscle memory in just a few months. Another instance was when I got a car without a clutch interlock. I never would have realized how dependent I was on that until I started it up in gear.
    - MR4D 7y ago
      I agree 100%. To me, I think two possible outcomes will prevail: 1 - All cars add this feature either through regulation or other pressure. 2 - Most cars add this feature, and those that don't see higher accident rates, and therefore higher insurance bills. That should result in those cars being less desirable (and therefore less profitable for the car companies), OR the car companies figure it out and add the missing feature to the rest of their cars. Either way, I think we'll end up there, just not sure of what path we'll go down.
      - perl4ever 7y ago
        "2 - Most cars add this feature, and those that don't see higher accident rates, and therefore higher insurance bills" If you own a car, you will get used to it, so it won't be more dangerous.
- Faark 7y ago
  You just removed the biggest reason to invest into autonomous vehicle tech. Now correct me if this is different in the US, but usually safety tech has to be forced up on drivers by regulators. Especially for commercial vehicles.

by ozim 7y ago

nradov 7y ago

It's by no means clear that the end goal and approach should be different. Personally I think that aiming toward level 4-5 autonomous vehicles right now is misguided and unlikely to succeed (outside of a few controlled access roads in limited areas). A better approach would be to require the human driver to actively control the vehicle at all times, but have the computer step in to brake or steer when it detects a high probability of a dangerous situation. Like how auto GCAS works on modern aircraft.

MR4D 7y ago
This, completely. A few months ago, I lightly rear-ended a vehicle ahead of me when they stopped at a green light while turning. Legally, I was in the wrong, and it was a stupid mistake. I had looked left to make sure no traffic was coming at the exact moment the person ahead of me stopped. Had either event (my head turning or his breaking) been different by about a second, no accident would have happened. A simple anti-collision system would have prevented this, and saved me some money (and him from some scratches on his bumper). As I have an older car - 2012 model - so this feature wasn't prevalent when I bought it. But my next car will have this capability, if for no other reason than I hate stupid mistakes. This one feature would make my drive to/from work much less stressful (there are a ton of people who will switch lanes in front of you at the last minute and then hit the brakes here in Houston). Add in lane-change warnings, and I think a significant number of accidents could be avoided. They may be small accidents, but a bumper replacement or painting (times 2 - one for each car involved) is easily $1,000, if not more.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  If you get used to driving a car that actually does this sort of thing well, then the first time you get in a car where it malfunctions or doesn't have the feature, you will have a bad accident because your reflexes will be missing. I got a car that automatically closes the door so you don't have to slam it. Now I keep forgetting to close the door on a normal car properly. It's eliminated my muscle memory in just a few months. Another instance was when I got a car without a clutch interlock. I never would have realized how dependent I was on that until I started it up in gear.
  - MR4D 7y ago
    I agree 100%. To me, I think two possible outcomes will prevail: 1 - All cars add this feature either through regulation or other pressure. 2 - Most cars add this feature, and those that don't see higher accident rates, and therefore higher insurance bills. That should result in those cars being less desirable (and therefore less profitable for the car companies), OR the car companies figure it out and add the missing feature to the rest of their cars. Either way, I think we'll end up there, just not sure of what path we'll go down.
    - perl4ever 7y ago
      "2 - Most cars add this feature, and those that don't see higher accident rates, and therefore higher insurance bills" If you own a car, you will get used to it, so it won't be more dangerous.
Faark 7y ago
You just removed the biggest reason to invest into autonomous vehicle tech. Now correct me if this is different in the US, but usually safety tech has to be forced up on drivers by regulators. Especially for commercial vehicles.