3 ms·
I don't really buy this car-centric view. Don't get me wrong, I also like the idea of self-driving cars very much. But I don't think this will change "everythin
by vog 15y ago
I don't really buy this car-centric view. Don't get me wrong, I also like the idea of self-driving cars very much. But I don't think this will change "everything". Instead, I see a smooth transition towards more and more automated driving.
For example, here in Berlin we have a really good public transportation, which becomes more and more automated every year. In particular, short-distance (as well as long-distance) rails are almost fully automated these days, yet there is still a human sitting in the train's driver's cab for safety reasons.
In other cities like Frankfurt, there are even one or two non-human fully automated short-distance rails. Those are used more in the way we use an elevator, they feel less like trains.
Another example are airplanes, which are driven almost automatically these days, where the pilot is only really required for landing and, again, for safety in unexpected situations.
I think that cars are no different in that regard. There will always be some kind of "driver", although that person will have less and less to do with driving, and more with technical observation, safety, etc.
(As a side note, I think that putting so much emphasis on cars over other types of transportation is some kind of "US thingie". Here in Germany, cars are high valued vehicles, too, but they are generally not a symbol of freedom, independence, etc. Maybe I'm wrong in that regard, but that's my personal explaination of that strange car-centric view on transportation, which leads to so much excitement of self-driving cars, disregarding the amazing progresses in all other areas of transportation.)
- TillE 15y agoThe main problem with cars in the US is suburban sprawl. A large percentage of the population live in places where a car is required to go anywhere. It's a mess, a disaster of urban planning that's probably impossible to fix. In Germany, even in the more rural areas, you can typically walk 15-20 minutes to a town with shops, or get a bus even closer than that. That's not so in much of the US. If you don't live in one of the few walkable cities with decent public transit, you're gonna need a car.
- kamaal 15y ago>>The main problem with cars in the US is suburban sprawl. A large percentage of the population live in places where a car is required to go anywhere. It's a mess, a disaster of urban planning that's probably impossible to fix. If you think US urban planning is in a mess, come to India. I bet these self driven cars can't survive for even minutes on any street. In India, you practically have to chase street dogs, dodge cricket balls, avoid kids playing on the road, find the road in a road of full of potholes, use breath control techniques to escape the stench and lanes are nothing short of mazes which you can't find a way out unless you've lived years in that area. I am not sure if self driven cars can ever work here.
- induscreep 15y agoSounds like a good research problem/job opportunity.
- vgrichina 15y ago> Another example are airplanes, which are driven almost automatically these days, where the pilot is only really required for landing and, again, for safety in unexpected situations. Actually now pilots usually don't land manually unless for training (and so on commercial flights usually only in perfect weather conditions) or when there is some serious problem (like engine not working). BTW, very big part of recent plane crashes was related to human errors in cases which could be handled by autopilot.
- StavrosK 15y agoMaybe we should put autopilot failsafes for the cases when humans malfunction (see the Air France crash).
- lmm 15y agoThe Air France crash happened when the autopilot bailed out on facing a situation it couldn't handle. (And while you can design an autopilot to handle the specific case of the pitot tubes freezing up, there's no better course of action for the general case of "sensor inputs that make no sense according to the autopilot design"). If you automate more that's going to make pilots worse not better at handling the rare situations the autopilot can't handle.
- StavrosK 15y agoThe pitot tubes unfroze after a few seconds, so the autopilot was perfectly capable of working again, but the pilots didn't re-engage it and kept trying manually, causing the end result... My one question is "Who the hell decided that averaging stick inputs is a good idea??
- vog 15y agoGood point. However, I don't think that transportation systems without a human at some point will be accepted by society in the next decade, unless they operate on separate traffic systems (e.g. extra streets, or strictly separated parts of the streets). This may be irrational, but that's another problem.
- ma2rten 15y agoSo basically what you are saying is you don't believe in the self-driving car? As far as I understand, Google already build a car that is completely self-driving without human intervention, so your point is moot. You can't compare the car google is building with semi-automated transportation on rails or in highly regulated air space. It is using completely different technology. Also humans are notoriously bad at supervising technology. I would much rather drive myself, then having to pay attention all the time and step on the break, if my car does something stupid.
- vog 15y ago> So basically what you are saying is you don't believe in the self-driving car No, I think they are certainly possible and I'd love to see some. > You can't compare the car google is building with semi-automated transportation on rails or in highly regulated air space. It is using completely different technology. This discussion was not about technology but about impact. Comparison with other transportation systems which are much more automated right now gives a better impression of the future than unjustified claims about self-driving cars being totally incomparable to anything else.