10 ms·

Robot cars on public roads? California says yes

267 points by vectorbunny 14y ago

eslachance 14y ago
I'm very glad to see that this is spreading. It would have been really annoying for Google to perfect their car and then have nowhere to drive it because of silly legislations. It wouldn't be the first time senators were afraid of change...
- OstiaAntica 14y ago
  It isn't "fear" of change, it is that political systems get captured by status quo interest groups that fight against change.
  - heretohelp 14y ago
    Where's the anti-robot car lobby? I doubt most cabbies are even aware of this. Further, I would submit that this is mostly due to the legislators themselves.
    - d4mi3n 14y ago
      I imagine the teamster's don't like the idea. Insurance companies and similar businesses may also have a bone to pick with the idea.
      - fghh45sdfhr3 14y ago
        I'm hoping insurance companies are for self driving cars. I also expect a very serious conflict between teamsters and companies like UPS and FedEx, which employ a lot of drivers.
        weaksauce 14y ago
        I think that fedex and ups will use them only for the long haul driving and still employ a lot of drivers at the last mile delivery points.
        bathat 14y ago
        As an interesting side-note, FedEx was buying adds a while ago complaining about the "Brown Bailout." Apparently there was some to-do about how UPS's pilots were part of the teamster's union (or its drivers were part of the pilot's union--I don't remember--in any case, FedEx didn't like it). For that reason, I wonder if we'll see a third player (maybe Amazon) enter the local delivery market because it doesn't have to deal with legacy contracts with the teamsters.
    - ihsw 14y ago
      The anti-robot truck lobby will probably come out in full force soon. A trucker that doesn't have to 1) eat 2) sleep 3) experience fatigue -- this trucker is vastly superior. There is already a lot of analytics measuring truck performance, metrics which would make autonomous trucks very feasible.
      - maxerickson 14y ago
        Freight prices are low enough that I saw a company complaining that they can't afford the insurance on inexperienced drivers. So it at least has the potential to be a short term problem.
      - run4yourlives 14y ago
        And this is the true market for robotic vehicles (at least at the outset). Transport trucks spend hours on interstates between points going in relatively straight lines, at relatively low traffic times. The trucking industry will be dead 5-10 years after robot trucks start appearing on the road. EDIT: Sorry "trucking industry" should be in quotes, as yes, by this I mean the idea of people driving trucks, which is 90% of the "industry". The actual industry itself isn't going anywhere, agreed. My fault in the miscommunication.
        fghh45sdfhr3 14y ago
        Not so much the industry as trucker as a profession. Trucks will be all over the place, just not driven by humans. And then there's all the service stops which now offer food, etc for truckers. I expect few of them will successful transition to serve tourists exclusively.
        arrrg 14y ago
        The industry will be just fine. It's just the truck driver profession that will die. The existing actors, however, might well be unable to drive that transition and they might consequently die and be replaced by other, new actors.
        camiller 14y ago
        I'm pretty sure that long-haul truckers are well under half the truck driving profession. Pay attention to the number of semi-trucks delivering food and other products to schools / restaurants / convenience stores etc. Oh and those drivers have to unload the shipments as well. I don't think the truck industry will disappear, but there will be a shift in the mix of long-haul vs. short-haul truckers.
  - vectorbunny 14y ago
    See Chris Paine's 2006 documentary 'Who Killed the Electric Car?' for background on the politics of transportation in California. Hopefully Google will be up to task.
  - kemiller 14y ago
    I don't know that it's just that. Car and driver ran a fearmongering editorial about it in their most recent issue. ("We can't trust them with our credit cards and now they want us to trust them to drop little Sally off at the pool?") There will definitely be grassroots backlash. My guess is that comfort with this as a concept will be generational, as are lots of things. I like the idea a lot, but I also will miss driving. I doubt my daughter will miss driving in the slightest.
    - nitrogen 14y ago
      I doubt my daughter will miss driving in the slightest. I don't think anybody will miss driving in traffic, but until there's some other way to experience the combined sense of control, shifting G-forces, and the world streaming by, manual driving on sparsely populated roads will always be desirable.
      - kemiller 14y ago
        Preaching to the choir. :) But my point is that I doubt she will have experienced enough of that to miss it.
  - tthomas48 14y ago
    Or that the people who can see the benefits never show up to try to convince anyone.
  - Mvandenbergh 14y ago
    Of course Google has a lot more influence in the California legislature than any car manufacturer. I'm not sure you could get this passed in Michigan or Detroit.
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  Yes, imagine that you were going to revolutionize the way people get around. And then cities around the country made it illegal to use your revolutionary device on the sidewalk. [1] I'm still waiting to see what the opposition is going to do when they get organized. If you thought Uber was a threat to cabs, they don't hold a candle to a fleet of self driving cars with an NFC payment option. [1] Which was of course a challenge for the Segway
  - jquery 14y ago
    As someone with bad knees, for whom a bicycle isn't an option, this is enormously frustrating. What a disgrace.
    - hnriot 14y ago
      The impact on your knees from riding a Segway would also make them a big challenge I'm afraid. That said, it wasn't legislation that made Segway fail.
      - ChuckMcM 14y ago
        "That said, it wasn't legislation that made Segway fail." True, but it was pretty contributory. For much of its 'early adopter' period people had no idea whether or not they would get a ticket for riding one on the sidewalk, and then later the knew that they would in most places. That certainly mitigated sales significantly. Similarly if self driving cars were available today and you could only 'legally' use them in California and Nevada in self driving mode, and they were "probably" going to be illegal most everywhere else, that would make it hard to sell them.
        mattmanser 14y ago
        I ditched my car and have walked everywhere for the last 5 years, I must honestly say I'm glad they didn't take off. People riding bikes on pavements and people in their motorized chairs are annoying and dangerous enough. Sometimes governments actually get it right.
- hnriot 14y ago
  Senators want to get re-elected. That's pretty much their only fear. So if robot cars. Ring wealth to their districts they will be all for them, until the first accident that kills someone. Of course human drivers kill people all the time too, but that won't matter. We should have put the tech into the mars rover.
juiceandjuice 14y ago
I've seen google's robotic cars already driven on the 280, specifically the Lexus SUV.
Sharma 14y ago
Alright! New field of hacking,security and development will emerge now. People will try to hack, other people will try to make it secure and some of us will work on developing fancy apps for these vehicles.
- camiller 14y ago
  Mario Kart IRL?
lunchbox 14y ago
How is this different from what happened in May? http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/21/business/la-fi-autos-driverless-20120522 http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/21/business/la-fi-autos... "California Senate passes bill for self-driving cars"
- hypersoar 14y ago
  It has now gone through both houses of the legislature, presumably after the bill from May went through reconciliation. It is on its way to the governor, who, given its apparent lack of controversy, is likely to sign it.
- mikeyouse 14y ago
  Legislature is an iterative process-- The votes: Senate Floor (08/29/2012), Assembly Floor (08/28/2012), Assembly Floor (08/24/2012), Assembly Committee (08/16/2012), Assembly Committee (07/02/2012), Senate Floor (05/21/2012), Senate Committee (04/10/2012) The senate approved a version in May, and sent it to the Assembly. The Assembly added some markup. Only in the last week did the Senate and Assembly vote on the same bill, which is the process needed to send a bill to the governor. (Full history here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1298&sess=CUR&house=B&author=padilla http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1...)
- 001sky 14y ago
  California legislators have sent a bill to the governor’s desk - Not yet signed. So not yet law. Still.
tolos 14y ago
Have there been any studies on whether people actually want autonomous cars (a quick google search only shows one: http://www.alpineautotrans.com/?p=326 http://www.alpineautotrans.com/?p=326)? I think it's a good idea, and I bet most people on HN would agree, but what's the downside? How many people in the general public would trust a robot driver? Can you still speed -- if you're late for work -- if you need emergency medical care? Can you take manual control of the vehicle -- would that raise insurance rates if you did so? How many people in the general public would be ok with that?
- tomsaffell 14y ago
  A robot-driven version of my personal car (and how I use it today), is moderately appealing. But as a stepping stone to a future where an autonomous robot-driven (flying?) cab pulls up curbside, picks me up, and smoothly, safely speeds me through a city where the absence of any manually driven vehicles allows for safer more efficient use of road-space, well, that's very exciting to me.
  - gnaritas 14y ago
    > A robot-driven version of my personal car (and how I use it today), is moderately appealing. Really... you wouldn't find never having to park again very appealing? Having your car pick you up somewhere, or go get serviced while you're shopping?
    - roc 14y ago
      Take a trip down to the nearest suburban elementary school to see whether "getting dropped off and picked up at the door" necessarily translates to "never having to park again". In many situations, you won't have to hunt for a spot. And that'll be great. But for an awful lot of trips, you'll wind up walking just as far due the line-up of cars. Or waiting an awfully long time. Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely sold on an autonomous car for its other benefits. But the auto-parking/pickup bit is ... overstated in its applicability.
      - 14y ago
farinasa 14y ago
I personally can't wait to read a book on the way to work.
- jarek 14y ago
  > I personally can't wait to read a book on the way to work. Yes, what wondrous technology it must be that enables this!
yonran 14y ago
Previous discussions of earlier versions of the bill: in March: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3688267 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3688267, and in May: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4010297 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4010297 Current bill text: http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_1298_bill_20120824_amended_asm_v93.html http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_129... What seems to have changed since May: - The California DMV will set safety rules before 2015 instead of waiting for NHTSA to allow production use, - The manufacturer must apply to the DMV before production use. - Cars must record sensor data for 30s before every collision. What I don’t like about the bill is that it requires an operator to be able to take manual control of the vehicle at any time. I’d imagine that as autonomous vehicles develop in the coming years, this restriction will have to be removed.
- columbo 14y ago
  > What I don’t like about the bill is that it requires an operator to be able to take manual control of the vehicle at any time. I'd feel very strange being in a car without a manual override of some sort. Maybe in 10 years and only if the vast majority of cars are self driven it will be a different story. I can't imagine trying to drive through Chicago hoping that my little robot driver is aware of the two tow-trucks weaving through traffic behind me at 90mph.
  - abruzzi 14y ago
    10 years seems optimistic to me. If autonomous vehicles take off, I doubt they'll hit majority in less than 30 years, 50 more likely. These probably won't even be purchasable for 10 years.
- tommi 14y ago
  The manual control at any time is actually a feature I want to have. It doesn't have to be the current style steering wheel, stick and pedals but maybe something else like a joystick.
- cm127 14y ago
  I think I understand your complaint. If people can take control, i.e. take responsibility, then it's imperative to show evidence they were in control if something were to go wrong. This will always be tricky because even Toyota a couple of years ago had trouble defending against alleged bugs that turned out to be completely untrue.
sslayer 14y ago
I'm surprised we haven't heard from Hoffa.
Jun8 14y ago
This is fantastic! The adoption could be very fast, e.g. if insurance companies give benefits if you drive a self-driving car. One current roadblock is the price of the system: the LIDAR (the thing on the top of the car in the picture) retails for ~$75K currently. There should be significant volume to drive the price down. But a lot of people would buy them for prestige, too (e.g. many early Prius adopters), so if the cost of the system can be reduced to perhaps $4K-$5K levels people will seriously think about this.
- sv123 14y ago
  If everybody had a self-driving car, would insurance be obsolete?
  - cygwin98 14y ago
    Not so fast. What if a moose or a deer hits the car?
    - sv123 14y ago
      If things like that are all insurance is used for then it should be about 1/100th of the current cost I guess.
      - MPSimmons 14y ago
        >it SHOULD be about 1/100th of the current cost Yes, it should be. However do you think that insurance companies are going to allow that? They'll form the insurance-equivalent of the RIAA before that happens.
        SoftwareMaven 14y ago
        I highly doubt that. Insurance companies don't represent a "precious resource" (aka celebrities), so it would be easy for somebody to come in underneath them. Besides, insurance companies make money on the difference between rates and claims. If claims fall significantly, rates can, too, yet the insurance companies can still take home the same sized paycheck.
Reltair 14y ago
Yes! Driving in traffic is mind-numbing. It also doesn't help that traffic seems to be getting worse in the bay area.
- rayiner 14y ago
  But think about how convenient your self-driving car will be when you're sitting in traffic!
tocomment 14y ago
Does anyone know how a self driving car would potentially handle scenarios like: 1. A traffic light being out and cop is directing traffic? (Would it have to learn hand gestures?) 2. Stopping at a guard booth. 3. Crossing a solid yellow line to pass a stopped car or a garbage truck?
- Anm 14y ago
  The last time I read the legislation (sorry, didn't have the time now), it still requires a licensed driver to be at the wheel and at the ready to take over. I presume this sort of intermediate step will help the developers gradually transition to these type of exceptional real-world scenarios.
  - noblethrasher 14y ago
    Also, autonomous cars will eventually obviate the need for a traffic cop in the aforementioned scenario.
    - Cushman 14y ago
      Or indeed the traffic light itself.
- RedwoodCity 14y ago
  Perhaps in the future a group of people will have the job of moving cars that have gone into failsafe mode, and no one else will have to drive. Take the case of elevators, originally they had manual operators who needed to make sure that they leveled out on a given floor so people could safely get on and off. Today elevators function on their own with users simply requesting their desired location. Every now and then they do get stuck, which requires calling in a certified technician to move the elevator, help trapped passengers, diagnose and repair problems before returning the elevator to service. A well designed control system will have a good fail safe, but having to wait two hours for the closest technician to arrive because a branch has fallen accross the road would be annoying.
- bfrs 14y ago
russell 14y ago
I've been rear-ended 7 times in the past 5 years. I'll be glad when everyone else has self-driving cars. (My GF says I drive too fast and stop too quickly. She's probably right, although 3 of those times I was moving at less than walking speed.)
- aphyr 14y ago
  7 times sounds atypical; perhaps by changing your driving behavior you could reduce your risk. You might try decelerating slowly, keeping 2-4 seconds of following distance, checking your rear-view while braking, and leaving extra space in front of your vehicle at a stop--moving forward as cars come in behind.
  - mparlane 14y ago
    Don't be so logical. You sound like my defensive driving instructor! Killjoy! :( sarcasm intended
- baq 14y ago
  you should try racing (real-race-track variety racing) with something expendable, you'll learn to remember there might be people behind you very quickly.
- raldi 14y ago
  7 different roads?
chintan 14y ago
I'm pretty sure you'll have to sign a 'terms & waiver' document similar to the one before Sky Diving.
sigzero 14y ago
I love to drive in any kind of traffic. No thanks on the robot car. I want to remain in control.
base698 14y ago
Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes all have semi autonomous features on the horizon. http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/cadillac-super-cruise/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/cadillac-super-cruise/ http://www.insideline.com/audi/audi-previews-traffic-jam-assistant-at-2012-ces.html http://www.insideline.com/audi/audi-previews-traffic-jam-ass... http://www.itnews.com.au/News/296907,rio-tinto-prepares-mine-for-driverless-trucks.aspx http://www.itnews.com.au/News/296907,rio-tinto-prepares-mine...
- Devilboy 14y ago
  Autonomous trucks are already used in mines in Australia. They are apparently more reliable than humans, because they never drive too fast, they never drive too close to the edges, and of course they never get tired or distracted.
bsbechtel 14y ago
What the hell happens when hackers manage to hijack control of these thing going down the highway?
andreer 14y ago
I'm all for this, but I'm a bit miffed about the terminology: autonomous/robot/self-driving cars. "Autopilot" is shorter, simpler and well-established - and IMHO more accurate, as long asa human driver ready to take over at any time is still required.
beedogs 14y ago
Good. The first thing they should do is force anyone over 75 years of age to use them. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/fourteen-injured-in-crash-involving-motorist-100.html http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/fourteen-injur...
AndrewKemendo 14y ago
I can see it now: a Lidar and autonomous system integrated on my Tesla S.
olalonde 14y ago
On a related note, does anyone have an idea on how Google plans to commercialize their technology?
rynes 14y ago
From the view of some consumers (I might be one,) a car may be considered to be a black box that is used to transport someone/something(s) from point A to point B. I do not automatically assume that it is always better to instrument a machine to control such a box rather than having a qualified person control it.

267 points by vectorbunny 14y ago

I'm very glad to see that this is spreading. It would have been really annoying for Google to perfect their car and then have nowhere to drive it because of silly legislations. It wouldn't be the first time senators were afraid of change...

OstiaAntica 14y ago
It isn't "fear" of change, it is that political systems get captured by status quo interest groups that fight against change.
- heretohelp 14y ago
  Where's the anti-robot car lobby? I doubt most cabbies are even aware of this. Further, I would submit that this is mostly due to the legislators themselves.
  - d4mi3n 14y ago
    I imagine the teamster's don't like the idea. Insurance companies and similar businesses may also have a bone to pick with the idea.
    - fghh45sdfhr3 14y ago
      I'm hoping insurance companies are for self driving cars. I also expect a very serious conflict between teamsters and companies like UPS and FedEx, which employ a lot of drivers.
      - weaksauce 14y ago
        I think that fedex and ups will use them only for the long haul driving and still employ a lot of drivers at the last mile delivery points.
      - bathat 14y ago
        As an interesting side-note, FedEx was buying adds a while ago complaining about the "Brown Bailout." Apparently there was some to-do about how UPS's pilots were part of the teamster's union (or its drivers were part of the pilot's union--I don't remember--in any case, FedEx didn't like it). For that reason, I wonder if we'll see a third player (maybe Amazon) enter the local delivery market because it doesn't have to deal with legacy contracts with the teamsters.
  - ihsw 14y ago
    The anti-robot truck lobby will probably come out in full force soon. A trucker that doesn't have to 1) eat 2) sleep 3) experience fatigue -- this trucker is vastly superior. There is already a lot of analytics measuring truck performance, metrics which would make autonomous trucks very feasible.
    - maxerickson 14y ago
      Freight prices are low enough that I saw a company complaining that they can't afford the insurance on inexperienced drivers. So it at least has the potential to be a short term problem.
    - run4yourlives 14y ago
      And this is the true market for robotic vehicles (at least at the outset). Transport trucks spend hours on interstates between points going in relatively straight lines, at relatively low traffic times. The trucking industry will be dead 5-10 years after robot trucks start appearing on the road. EDIT: Sorry "trucking industry" should be in quotes, as yes, by this I mean the idea of people driving trucks, which is 90% of the "industry". The actual industry itself isn't going anywhere, agreed. My fault in the miscommunication.
      - fghh45sdfhr3 14y ago
        Not so much the industry as trucker as a profession. Trucks will be all over the place, just not driven by humans. And then there's all the service stops which now offer food, etc for truckers. I expect few of them will successful transition to serve tourists exclusively.
      - arrrg 14y ago
        The industry will be just fine. It's just the truck driver profession that will die. The existing actors, however, might well be unable to drive that transition and they might consequently die and be replaced by other, new actors.
      - camiller 14y ago
        I'm pretty sure that long-haul truckers are well under half the truck driving profession. Pay attention to the number of semi-trucks delivering food and other products to schools / restaurants / convenience stores etc. Oh and those drivers have to unload the shipments as well. I don't think the truck industry will disappear, but there will be a shift in the mix of long-haul vs. short-haul truckers.
- vectorbunny 14y ago
  See Chris Paine's 2006 documentary 'Who Killed the Electric Car?' for background on the politics of transportation in California. Hopefully Google will be up to task.
- kemiller 14y ago
  I don't know that it's just that. Car and driver ran a fearmongering editorial about it in their most recent issue. ("We can't trust them with our credit cards and now they want us to trust them to drop little Sally off at the pool?") There will definitely be grassroots backlash. My guess is that comfort with this as a concept will be generational, as are lots of things. I like the idea a lot, but I also will miss driving. I doubt my daughter will miss driving in the slightest.
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    I doubt my daughter will miss driving in the slightest. I don't think anybody will miss driving in traffic, but until there's some other way to experience the combined sense of control, shifting G-forces, and the world streaming by, manual driving on sparsely populated roads will always be desirable.
    - kemiller 14y ago
      Preaching to the choir. :) But my point is that I doubt she will have experienced enough of that to miss it.
- tthomas48 14y ago
  Or that the people who can see the benefits never show up to try to convince anyone.
- Mvandenbergh 14y ago
  Of course Google has a lot more influence in the California legislature than any car manufacturer. I'm not sure you could get this passed in Michigan or Detroit.
ChuckMcM 14y ago
Yes, imagine that you were going to revolutionize the way people get around. And then cities around the country made it illegal to use your revolutionary device on the sidewalk. [1] I'm still waiting to see what the opposition is going to do when they get organized. If you thought Uber was a threat to cabs, they don't hold a candle to a fleet of self driving cars with an NFC payment option. [1] Which was of course a challenge for the Segway
- jquery 14y ago
  As someone with bad knees, for whom a bicycle isn't an option, this is enormously frustrating. What a disgrace.
  - hnriot 14y ago
    The impact on your knees from riding a Segway would also make them a big challenge I'm afraid. That said, it wasn't legislation that made Segway fail.
    - ChuckMcM 14y ago
      "That said, it wasn't legislation that made Segway fail." True, but it was pretty contributory. For much of its 'early adopter' period people had no idea whether or not they would get a ticket for riding one on the sidewalk, and then later the knew that they would in most places. That certainly mitigated sales significantly. Similarly if self driving cars were available today and you could only 'legally' use them in California and Nevada in self driving mode, and they were "probably" going to be illegal most everywhere else, that would make it hard to sell them.
      - mattmanser 14y ago
        I ditched my car and have walked everywhere for the last 5 years, I must honestly say I'm glad they didn't take off. People riding bikes on pavements and people in their motorized chairs are annoying and dangerous enough. Sometimes governments actually get it right.
hnriot 14y ago
Senators want to get re-elected. That's pretty much their only fear. So if robot cars. Ring wealth to their districts they will be all for them, until the first accident that kills someone. Of course human drivers kill people all the time too, but that won't matter. We should have put the tech into the mars rover.

juiceandjuice 14y ago

I've seen google's robotic cars already driven on the 280, specifically the Lexus SUV.

Sharma 14y ago

Alright! New field of hacking,security and development will emerge now. People will try to hack, other people will try to make it secure and some of us will work on developing fancy apps for these vehicles.

camiller 14y ago
Mario Kart IRL?

lunchbox 14y ago

How is this different from what happened in May? http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/21/business/la-fi-autos-driverless-20120522 http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/21/business/la-fi-autos... "California Senate passes bill for self-driving cars"

hypersoar 14y ago
It has now gone through both houses of the legislature, presumably after the bill from May went through reconciliation. It is on its way to the governor, who, given its apparent lack of controversy, is likely to sign it.
mikeyouse 14y ago
Legislature is an iterative process-- The votes: Senate Floor (08/29/2012), Assembly Floor (08/28/2012), Assembly Floor (08/24/2012), Assembly Committee (08/16/2012), Assembly Committee (07/02/2012), Senate Floor (05/21/2012), Senate Committee (04/10/2012) The senate approved a version in May, and sent it to the Assembly. The Assembly added some markup. Only in the last week did the Senate and Assembly vote on the same bill, which is the process needed to send a bill to the governor. (Full history here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1298&sess=CUR&house=B&author=padilla http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_1...)
001sky 14y ago
California legislators have sent a bill to the governor’s desk - Not yet signed. So not yet law. Still.

tolos 14y ago

Have there been any studies on whether people actually want autonomous cars (a quick google search only shows one: http://www.alpineautotrans.com/?p=326 http://www.alpineautotrans.com/?p=326)? I think it's a good idea, and I bet most people on HN would agree, but what's the downside? How many people in the general public would trust a robot driver? Can you still speed -- if you're late for work -- if you need emergency medical care? Can you take manual control of the vehicle -- would that raise insurance rates if you did so? How many people in the general public would be ok with that?

tomsaffell 14y ago
A robot-driven version of my personal car (and how I use it today), is moderately appealing. But as a stepping stone to a future where an autonomous robot-driven (flying?) cab pulls up curbside, picks me up, and smoothly, safely speeds me through a city where the absence of any manually driven vehicles allows for safer more efficient use of road-space, well, that's very exciting to me.
- gnaritas 14y ago
  > A robot-driven version of my personal car (and how I use it today), is moderately appealing. Really... you wouldn't find never having to park again very appealing? Having your car pick you up somewhere, or go get serviced while you're shopping?
  - roc 14y ago
    Take a trip down to the nearest suburban elementary school to see whether "getting dropped off and picked up at the door" necessarily translates to "never having to park again". In many situations, you won't have to hunt for a spot. And that'll be great. But for an awful lot of trips, you'll wind up walking just as far due the line-up of cars. Or waiting an awfully long time. Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely sold on an autonomous car for its other benefits. But the auto-parking/pickup bit is ... overstated in its applicability.
    - 14y ago

farinasa 14y ago

I personally can't wait to read a book on the way to work.

jarek 14y ago
> I personally can't wait to read a book on the way to work. Yes, what wondrous technology it must be that enables this!

yonran 14y ago

Previous discussions of earlier versions of the bill: in March: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3688267 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3688267, and in May: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4010297 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4010297 Current bill text: http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_1298_bill_20120824_amended_asm_v93.html http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/sen/sb_1251-1300/sb_129... What seems to have changed since May: - The California DMV will set safety rules before 2015 instead of waiting for NHTSA to allow production use, - The manufacturer must apply to the DMV before production use. - Cars must record sensor data for 30s before every collision. What I don’t like about the bill is that it requires an operator to be able to take manual control of the vehicle at any time. I’d imagine that as autonomous vehicles develop in the coming years, this restriction will have to be removed.

columbo 14y ago
> What I don’t like about the bill is that it requires an operator to be able to take manual control of the vehicle at any time. I'd feel very strange being in a car without a manual override of some sort. Maybe in 10 years and only if the vast majority of cars are self driven it will be a different story. I can't imagine trying to drive through Chicago hoping that my little robot driver is aware of the two tow-trucks weaving through traffic behind me at 90mph.
- abruzzi 14y ago
  10 years seems optimistic to me. If autonomous vehicles take off, I doubt they'll hit majority in less than 30 years, 50 more likely. These probably won't even be purchasable for 10 years.
tommi 14y ago
The manual control at any time is actually a feature I want to have. It doesn't have to be the current style steering wheel, stick and pedals but maybe something else like a joystick.
cm127 14y ago
I think I understand your complaint. If people can take control, i.e. take responsibility, then it's imperative to show evidence they were in control if something were to go wrong. This will always be tricky because even Toyota a couple of years ago had trouble defending against alleged bugs that turned out to be completely untrue.

sslayer 14y ago

I'm surprised we haven't heard from Hoffa.

Jun8 14y ago

This is fantastic! The adoption could be very fast, e.g. if insurance companies give benefits if you drive a self-driving car. One current roadblock is the price of the system: the LIDAR (the thing on the top of the car in the picture) retails for ~$75K currently. There should be significant volume to drive the price down. But a lot of people would buy them for prestige, too (e.g. many early Prius adopters), so if the cost of the system can be reduced to perhaps $4K-$5K levels people will seriously think about this.

sv123 14y ago
If everybody had a self-driving car, would insurance be obsolete?
- cygwin98 14y ago
  Not so fast. What if a moose or a deer hits the car?
  - sv123 14y ago
    If things like that are all insurance is used for then it should be about 1/100th of the current cost I guess.
    - MPSimmons 14y ago
      >it SHOULD be about 1/100th of the current cost Yes, it should be. However do you think that insurance companies are going to allow that? They'll form the insurance-equivalent of the RIAA before that happens.
      - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
        I highly doubt that. Insurance companies don't represent a "precious resource" (aka celebrities), so it would be easy for somebody to come in underneath them. Besides, insurance companies make money on the difference between rates and claims. If claims fall significantly, rates can, too, yet the insurance companies can still take home the same sized paycheck.

Reltair 14y ago

Yes! Driving in traffic is mind-numbing. It also doesn't help that traffic seems to be getting worse in the bay area.

rayiner 14y ago
But think about how convenient your self-driving car will be when you're sitting in traffic!

tocomment 14y ago

Does anyone know how a self driving car would potentially handle scenarios like: 1. A traffic light being out and cop is directing traffic? (Would it have to learn hand gestures?) 2. Stopping at a guard booth. 3. Crossing a solid yellow line to pass a stopped car or a garbage truck?

Anm 14y ago
The last time I read the legislation (sorry, didn't have the time now), it still requires a licensed driver to be at the wheel and at the ready to take over. I presume this sort of intermediate step will help the developers gradually transition to these type of exceptional real-world scenarios.
- noblethrasher 14y ago
  Also, autonomous cars will eventually obviate the need for a traffic cop in the aforementioned scenario.
  - Cushman 14y ago
    Or indeed the traffic light itself.
RedwoodCity 14y ago
Perhaps in the future a group of people will have the job of moving cars that have gone into failsafe mode, and no one else will have to drive. Take the case of elevators, originally they had manual operators who needed to make sure that they leveled out on a given floor so people could safely get on and off. Today elevators function on their own with users simply requesting their desired location. Every now and then they do get stuck, which requires calling in a certified technician to move the elevator, help trapped passengers, diagnose and repair problems before returning the elevator to service. A well designed control system will have a good fail safe, but having to wait two hours for the closest technician to arrive because a branch has fallen accross the road would be annoying.
bfrs 14y ago

russell 14y ago

I've been rear-ended 7 times in the past 5 years. I'll be glad when everyone else has self-driving cars. (My GF says I drive too fast and stop too quickly. She's probably right, although 3 of those times I was moving at less than walking speed.)

aphyr 14y ago
7 times sounds atypical; perhaps by changing your driving behavior you could reduce your risk. You might try decelerating slowly, keeping 2-4 seconds of following distance, checking your rear-view while braking, and leaving extra space in front of your vehicle at a stop--moving forward as cars come in behind.
- mparlane 14y ago
  Don't be so logical. You sound like my defensive driving instructor! Killjoy! :( sarcasm intended
baq 14y ago
you should try racing (real-race-track variety racing) with something expendable, you'll learn to remember there might be people behind you very quickly.
raldi 14y ago
7 different roads?

chintan 14y ago

I'm pretty sure you'll have to sign a 'terms & waiver' document similar to the one before Sky Diving.

sigzero 14y ago

I love to drive in any kind of traffic. No thanks on the robot car. I want to remain in control.

base698 14y ago

Audi, Cadillac, and Mercedes all have semi autonomous features on the horizon. http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/cadillac-super-cruise/ http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/cadillac-super-cruise/ http://www.insideline.com/audi/audi-previews-traffic-jam-assistant-at-2012-ces.html http://www.insideline.com/audi/audi-previews-traffic-jam-ass... http://www.itnews.com.au/News/296907,rio-tinto-prepares-mine-for-driverless-trucks.aspx http://www.itnews.com.au/News/296907,rio-tinto-prepares-mine...

Devilboy 14y ago
Autonomous trucks are already used in mines in Australia. They are apparently more reliable than humans, because they never drive too fast, they never drive too close to the edges, and of course they never get tired or distracted.

bsbechtel 14y ago

What the hell happens when hackers manage to hijack control of these thing going down the highway?

andreer 14y ago

I'm all for this, but I'm a bit miffed about the terminology: autonomous/robot/self-driving cars. "Autopilot" is shorter, simpler and well-established - and IMHO more accurate, as long asa human driver ready to take over at any time is still required.

beedogs 14y ago

Good. The first thing they should do is force anyone over 75 years of age to use them. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/fourteen-injured-in-crash-involving-motorist-100.html http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/08/fourteen-injur...

AndrewKemendo 14y ago

I can see it now: a Lidar and autonomous system integrated on my Tesla S.

olalonde 14y ago

On a related note, does anyone have an idea on how Google plans to commercialize their technology?

rynes 14y ago

From the view of some consumers (I might be one,) a car may be considered to be a black box that is used to transport someone/something(s) from point A to point B. I do not automatically assume that it is always better to instrument a machine to control such a box rather than having a qualified person control it.