3 ms·
The "easiest" (read: least difficult) to automate would be long-haul, between cities. But, we have an "automated" system for that, it's called railroads, where
by rossdavidh 7y ago
The "easiest" (read: least difficult) to automate would be long-haul, between cities. But, we have an "automated" system for that, it's called railroads, where one driver can steer dozens or hundreds of cars.
The hardest to automate is in-city driving, where the environment is much more complicated to parse, and there are many more kinds of fellow-users (pedestrians, bicyclists, etc.). So, naturally, that's where they went first, because it's not about what makes engineering sense, it's about what gets the "dumb money" to invest.
- huntertwo 7y agoPerhaps a city is more complicated because of the environmental hazards you mention, but I'd imagine it's easier to outfit a city with self-driving friendly sensors or lanes than those long-haul routes. In the article, it says this is how China is approaching the problem. I personally believe a society with autonomous cars and regular cars sharing normal roads is a pipe dream in both a technical and political sense.
- gmadsen 7y agocargo by rail is actually pretty expensive. A fleet of autonomous trucks driving interstates would definitely be more cost effective