12 ms·

Driverless Cars Get Green Light in California

141 points by codegeek 14y ago

jamesaguilar 14y ago
It'll be interesting to see whether and how much protectionist BS makes it into the final regulations. I'm all for very strict safety regulations on these vehicles. The first accident caused by one could set the industry back decades, Challenger-style, unless the vehicles are so demonstrably safer that legislators can resist the inevitable panic of their irrational constituents. But I hope any such regulations are driven by the actual need to make the vehicles safe, not by the desire on the part of existing stakeholders to make the vehicles' introduction as painful and difficult as possible.
- ahallock 14y ago
  Existing stakeholders will protect their turf and rely as you say on the 'panic of irrational constituents.' And it would be irrational given the amount of human error already occurring--people falling asleep at the wheel, texting, drunk driving, carelessness, etc. Also, the market will take care of this without State regulations--who would want to purchase a perceived unsafe vehicle?
  - khuey 14y ago
    A large part of the problem is that much of the total risk of driving is borne by people other than the car's occupants. People in other cars, pedestrians on the sidewalk, etc.
  - tobyjsullivan 14y ago
    The one inaccuracy you have here is stating the market will take care of it. It won't because the majority will know these cars are better and safer. The 'irrational constituents' are always a disproportionately powerful minority. That's one difference between free market and politics. Though, even a 'minority' (< 50%) of people considering these cars are safe enough to own would likely be enough to sustain the industry.
- SilasX 14y ago
  Oh, I know! Challenger basically made private spaceship manufacturers and pilots have to hide their faces in public, so vilified were they!
  - jamesaguilar 14y ago
    I don't think there was much of a private space industry then. What I'm referring to is the shift in public perception and the delay that imposed on NASA.
- wwwtyro 14y ago
  > The first accident caused by one could set the industry back decades Unless they deploy to multiple regions, maybe? I imagine some cultures will be much more forgiving of and reasonable about the occasional accident than American culture. If even a single city in the world successfully deployed autoautomobiles, the impact would be so swift, obvious, and desirable that most other societies would follow suit in spite of the loud, irrationally fearful minority. I hope. :)
- neurotech1 14y ago
  The Challenger accident was a very public disaster for NASA. When McDonnell Douglas felt the effects of management complacency resulting in DC-10 crashes, the public perception that the jet was unsafe doomed the company. If a driver-less car has a "minor" accident due to a technical glitch, it wouldn't achieve the same level of notoriety. The Ford/Bridgestone defective tire incident is a classic example of management complacency causing accidents, but because it was a series of accidents without graphic video for the news story, it didn't achieve the same level of public awareness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controversy#Possible_causes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controv... Both Ford and Bridgestone companies were able to "compartmentalize" the fallout and stay in business.
  - jdleesmiller 14y ago
    The 'unintended acceleration' recalls [1] provide a recent example of how things can very easily go the other way (though of course Toyota's still in business). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2010_Toyota_vehicle_recalls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2010_Toyota_vehicle_recall...
nancyhua 14y ago
This is awesome and revolutionary. No more looking for parking spots- just send the car to the nearest garage or back home. Also the cars could coordinate to minimize traffic. So many possibilities!
- ori_b 14y ago
  Not for a while: "The regulations would allow vehicles to operate autonomously, but a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency." Given the current state of the technology, this makes sense. And in the future, we may yet have fully driverless cars, instead of merely autonomous ones. Edit: The way google has been testing these cars, AFAIK, is through a special "experimental vehicle" permit.
  - sparky 14y ago
    What do the regulations allow that's not allowed today? Google has already driven 300k+ miles autonomously, with a driver behind the wheel as a backup operator. Also, what's the benefit to the owner/operator? Are you allowed to pay less attention to the road so you can be doing something else 99% of the time? Are you allowed to talk on the phone? If neither of these is true, then the legislation might put the cars' developers on more sure legal footing, but would appear to negate the primary utility of an autonomous vehicle.
  - MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
    Indeed -- They'll have to be on the road for years before they are allowed to operate without a person inside. I have a few concerns about the short term ramifications. 1) The person behind the wheel can't do work, read, eat, or apply make-up if their primary responsibility is to second-guess the computer. So the most tantalizing benefit of being driven wherever you want is going to have to wait until some future day. 2) A vehicle that obeys the speed limit and makes a full stop at stop signs is going to infuriate some drivers. They should probably avoid matching the speed of adjacent cars when possible, to prevent blocking aggressive drivers that want to pass. These cars are probably going to avoid the fast lane. 3) I can see plenty of scenarios where an autonomous vehicle acts safely but still gets in an accident. Slowing to avoid a collision could result in being rear-ended, or a human driver might merge into the car because he failed to check his blind spot. So there will be accidents. I assume the cars will have to be rigged with video cameras and telemetry to prove that the car's programming was not at fault.
codegeek 14y ago
Imagine the possibilities.
hbbio 14y ago
Imagine your next Über driver.
rbellio 14y ago
I'd love to see other cars in their testing group too. Don't get me wrong, I harbor no ill will towards Prius or their drivers, I just don't fit in them. Public transit with these installed would be fabulous as well. You'd still need someone behind the wheel as backup, but it would be great to have a potentially tireless public transit system.
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  How big are you? The latest Prius is essentially a full-size sedan in terms of the front seat. What kind of car do you prefer? It's hard to imagine that this tech won't be available for all classes of cars once it is sufficiently well tested.
  - rbellio 14y ago
    6'6" and built like an NFL lineman. Last time I got in one, I couldn't sit up straight, my knees were resting on the dash and I couldn't close the door. I'd prefer something in the full size category but would rather it was a van, SUV or truck so I didn't have to squat down so low to get in. I do a lot of outdoors stuff that takes me on some rough roads and I usually have need of hauling and some cargo space.
lunaru 14y ago
Industries that will be disrupted: - Taxi, shuttles, buses and limo services - Truck drivers, Delivery, Food delivery (auxilary: train and air transportation as well) - Insurance industry - Fleet management (time to write an app for managing 1000+ automated self-driving vehicles) - Policing. We won't need the CHP much in the future And that's just from ~20 seconds off the top of my head. I'm glad lawmakers are allowing the future to happen and I hope this puts pressure on other states to join in.
- citricsquid 14y ago
  Please can you explain how each of those will be affected in a big way? I can't think of ways that most would be affected in a real tangible way. I use taxis because I don't own a car (edit: ignore this one, I wasn't thinking straight, hah), my deliveries (groceries, items from online) are manned because there is management of the delivery needed, not because someone needs to drive. I can see how the insurance industry will be affected in a large way though.
  - ChuckMcM 14y ago
    I believe he was implying that the humans would be impacted. Taxis that drive themselves don't get tickets, don't forget to turn on the meter, and don't need to be paid part of the fare. Basically any people moving services are made more economical by removing human labor, insurance risk, and traffic liability. It remains to be seen if those savings can actually be realized of course.
  - rogerbinns 14y ago
    There is no need for the delivery to be manned. The vehicle can pull up, you enter a code and it provides the goods vending machine style. (Note Amazon already has these in several cities.)
    - jacalata 14y ago
      I have no intention of being home every time I get a delivery.
olalonde 14y ago
Does anyone else find it amazing that we have driverless cars but yet, most subways and trains still require drivers/operators?
- dag11 14y ago
  Unlike cars, trains can't stop on a dime if there's an obstruction on tracks. Nor can they swerve to avoid it.
  - sparky 14y ago
    Is this an argument that a human driver is required? To me, it sounds like if there's nothing you can do, the computer's job is much easier, not harder.
  - busted 14y ago
    Unlike humans, computers never get tired from working long hours, can see around corners using various sensors and process the information fast, and can act immediately on instructions from a remote operator.
- silvestrov 14y ago
  The metro in Copenhagen is driverless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro
- DanBC 14y ago
  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains) Docklands light railway, in London, is driverless.
- tobyjsullivan 14y ago
  The SkyTrain in Vancouver has been driverless since it was built in 1986. I don't think any such LTR systems have had drivers since then.
- saint-loup 14y ago
  List of driverless trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains#Completely_driverless_systems_and_lines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains#Compl... Although these are short-range, urban trains.
guimarin 14y ago
I predict that we will have to legislate Driverless as the default state of all vehicles within the coming decade. why? because at greater than 10% penetration of automated vehicles, those people still in 'manual' mode will become more and more reckless.
scarmig 14y ago
What would be potential startups in this space? Besides the obvious "fleet of driverless cars that drive people places." It will be revolutionary, and Google is only going to get a plurality of the profit that comes from it.
- zrail 14y ago
  Curbside delivery. Build a truck that has a bunch of different little cubbies. Load it up and send it around. App on the customer's phone beeps when the truck arrives and gives them a locker number and an unlock code.
- InclinedPlane 14y ago
  "Parkless" cars. You own it, it drops you off and picks you up at work, and spends the rest of the time at your house. Personal local delivery. Your car drives to a lot next to a grocery/department/whatever store. A grocery clerk walks to your car, presses a button on a smartphone app, and loads up your car with your online purchases then your car drives itself home. Same as above except your car/truck is rented out for overnight local deliveries / short-distance freight hauling while you sleep. Use of sensor streams from driverless cars for surveillance, mapping, etc. Installing high-speed municipal wireless data or cellular infrastructure on fleets of roving cars without the necessity of securing right-of-way for fixed structures or ground data lines (e.g. using microwave or open air laser comms for high-bandwidth links to aerial drone stations which then eventually link down to base stations or just form a completely wireless mesh across an entire country/continent).
sukuriant 14y ago
So, as times change ... where will I be allowed to go to drive, myself..? For people that enjoy driving; because, as has already been suggested by this thread, these autonomous cars will probably be very boring on the road. I suppose race-track memberships and racetracks will become more common --- or perhaps they'll be like a horseman's club - a hobby for select members. Maybe the USA could even get a Nürburgring ... or one per region.
- khuey 14y ago
  Sure. We still allow people to fly planes, don't we? I expect that once a drivers license is not a requirement to exist in much of the US that the standards for being allowed to drive will be tightened significantly though.
__jochen__ 14y ago
I welcome our robot overlords. I do wonder, however, who's going to do quality assurance on these cars. The first startup launching MVP driverless cars with a horrible accident record will set back the industry for years.
- nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
  I think that's the whole point of setting out requirements that autonomous vehicles must meet before going into production/sale. Just the same as current car manufacturers have to meet certain safety requirements, in the future manufacturers may have to prove some level of reliability, robustness, and exception handling.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- mayneack 14y ago
  It's possible (but not guaranteed) that the knowledge that any early bad publicity could really sink the extremely large amount of money that the companies have been investing into producing this will motivate them to create safe cars more than any specific regulations as to their safety standards.
tobyjsullivan 14y ago
You just know this will lead to Google Street View getting updated a little more often as the cars get to navigate themselves around constantly. Oh right, except for this: "The regulations would allow vehicles to operate autonomously, but a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency."
- kibwen 14y ago
  "In 2009, Google obtained 3,500 miles of Street View images from driverless cars with minor human intervention.[citation needed]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car
kelliesmithe 14y ago
Wow. Technology is really changing the world now. What's next? Flying automated cars? I cant wait for the next invention! The government/inventors should better make these driverless cars very functional and safe to use since we all know that computers cannot think right away unlike human when it comes to urgent incident situations. http://sommer-solen.dk/cctv-have-en-afskraekken.. http://sommer-solen.dk/cctv-have-en-afskraekken...
ck2 14y ago
Out of curiosity, what happens when someone spray paints the cameras on a car? Because the car will stop if someone jumps in front of it right? So it's a sitting target for a gang to vandalize it.
- erikpukinskis 14y ago
  How is that different than slashing someone's tires? Where do you live, Rio de Janeiro? I don't think there's a city in the U.S. where "random disabling car vandalization for fun by gangs" is actually a thing.
welp 14y ago
Whether or not you believe in the climate crisis or global warming, I strongly recommend all proponents of driverless cars to read The Energy Glut[1] in order to get a good idea of one potential scenario of how America will end up if every man and his dog can use a car to get anywhere. If anything, the studies which are referenced in the book are rather hard to ignore. As a quick example of the sort of thinking in this book: more cars on the road means that there will be fewer people willing to risk being outdoors anywhere near a road (i.e. most residential areas in this day and age), resulting in higher levels of obesity. As more people become obese, fewer people are willing to walk or cycle ever-decreasing distances, so they get a car -- increasing the number of cars on the road. After that, we enter a rather vicious circle. The average weight of the world population will increase rather quickly, and we will end up like the people in Wall-E. I'd rather ride my bike, but thanks for the offer. [1] http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/the-energy-glut http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/the-energy-glut
- Lost_BiomedE 14y ago
  If the cars were safer and more aware of pedestrians, like what we have seen from google car demos, I would be much more confident crossing the street, etc.
  - welp 14y ago
    That depends, I would be more than happy if they were limited to 20mph. If they were limited to something more like 40mph, I would just make kids stay the hell away from roads: http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm That said, I would be interested in seeing how driverless cars perform at stopping in the case of sudden and unexpected obstacles compared to human drivers?
- MordinSolus 14y ago
  Then let them be obese. It is not my responsibility to make sure other people don't get fat. We shouldn't stifle innovation (if that's what you're getting at) because we're scared that people will get.. even more fat. And isn't obesity more about diet than it is exercise anyway?
arthurrr 14y ago
I don't see this being disruptive at all. I think they will be adopted in industrial applications, such as self driving dump trucks on mine sites, where humans are not riding in the vehicle, and where there will be significant cost savings. There is also the human factor. People aren't going to give up their livelihood quietly, and people won't be willing to trust their life to a computer. Also, who's going to control these vehicles, government? Does that mean that the government has the power to redirect a car to anywhere they please, depending on the passenger, who has been identified by facial recognition? Trains/trams/buses are proven, already exist, and are a much better solution for public transport.
- mayneack 14y ago
  Does the driver have to be awake? Sleeping and driving can become the new texting and driving.
enraged_camel 14y ago
Isn't it a requirement for "driverless" cars to still have someone who can take over control of the car during emergencies? I mean, the Google cars that were driving had someone sitting in the passenger seat, I thought. I don't think we'll see truly robotic cars anytime soon.
squonk 14y ago
I keep imagining the technology used with recreational vehicles. Spend a day as a tourist in Chicago. Hop in the RV and go to sleep. Wake up in Memphis. Visit Elvis, enjoy waffles & fried chicken, then hit the hay and wake up the next day in Orlando. No down time.
nradov 14y ago
This is the big reason why high-speed rail in CA is a terrible idea and destined to become an expensive white elephant. Driverless cars will start to become available just about the time that the rail line is complete, after the inevitable lawsuits, engineering problems, and construction delays. Why would I buy a train ticket to LA and then deal with getting from the train station to my final destination when my car can drive me directly door to door?
lr--rw-rwx 14y ago
Ok, driverless cars are cool, because they have this robot touch which is appealing to computer scientists. Furthermore, we will get there eventually, as they will drive saver and (without a driver) will decrease the costs for transport and logistics industries. But does it affect the average human? It just strikes me how many anecdotes I read in connection with selfdriving cars ala' "calling the car to pick me up from work". Assuming that most HN users are from the US I can just conclude that public transport is really bad and people do not use their bike there. E.g. most people here (Europe) just do not need the service of a car in their daily life. So in the end it's a logic step, but I do not think that it makes sense to actually buy a self-driving car for yourself.

141 points by codegeek 14y ago

It'll be interesting to see whether and how much protectionist BS makes it into the final regulations. I'm all for very strict safety regulations on these vehicles. The first accident caused by one could set the industry back decades, Challenger-style, unless the vehicles are so demonstrably safer that legislators can resist the inevitable panic of their irrational constituents. But I hope any such regulations are driven by the actual need to make the vehicles safe, not by the desire on the part of existing stakeholders to make the vehicles' introduction as painful and difficult as possible.

ahallock 14y ago
Existing stakeholders will protect their turf and rely as you say on the 'panic of irrational constituents.' And it would be irrational given the amount of human error already occurring--people falling asleep at the wheel, texting, drunk driving, carelessness, etc. Also, the market will take care of this without State regulations--who would want to purchase a perceived unsafe vehicle?
- khuey 14y ago
  A large part of the problem is that much of the total risk of driving is borne by people other than the car's occupants. People in other cars, pedestrians on the sidewalk, etc.
- tobyjsullivan 14y ago
  The one inaccuracy you have here is stating the market will take care of it. It won't because the majority will know these cars are better and safer. The 'irrational constituents' are always a disproportionately powerful minority. That's one difference between free market and politics. Though, even a 'minority' (< 50%) of people considering these cars are safe enough to own would likely be enough to sustain the industry.
SilasX 14y ago
Oh, I know! Challenger basically made private spaceship manufacturers and pilots have to hide their faces in public, so vilified were they!
- jamesaguilar 14y ago
  I don't think there was much of a private space industry then. What I'm referring to is the shift in public perception and the delay that imposed on NASA.
wwwtyro 14y ago
> The first accident caused by one could set the industry back decades Unless they deploy to multiple regions, maybe? I imagine some cultures will be much more forgiving of and reasonable about the occasional accident than American culture. If even a single city in the world successfully deployed autoautomobiles, the impact would be so swift, obvious, and desirable that most other societies would follow suit in spite of the loud, irrationally fearful minority. I hope. :)
neurotech1 14y ago
The Challenger accident was a very public disaster for NASA. When McDonnell Douglas felt the effects of management complacency resulting in DC-10 crashes, the public perception that the jet was unsafe doomed the company. If a driver-less car has a "minor" accident due to a technical glitch, it wouldn't achieve the same level of notoriety. The Ford/Bridgestone defective tire incident is a classic example of management complacency causing accidents, but because it was a series of accidents without graphic video for the news story, it didn't achieve the same level of public awareness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controversy#Possible_causes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controv... Both Ford and Bridgestone companies were able to "compartmentalize" the fallout and stay in business.
- jdleesmiller 14y ago
  The 'unintended acceleration' recalls [1] provide a recent example of how things can very easily go the other way (though of course Toyota's still in business). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2010_Toyota_vehicle_recalls http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009–2010_Toyota_vehicle_recall...

nancyhua 14y ago

This is awesome and revolutionary. No more looking for parking spots- just send the car to the nearest garage or back home. Also the cars could coordinate to minimize traffic. So many possibilities!

ori_b 14y ago
Not for a while: "The regulations would allow vehicles to operate autonomously, but a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency." Given the current state of the technology, this makes sense. And in the future, we may yet have fully driverless cars, instead of merely autonomous ones. Edit: The way google has been testing these cars, AFAIK, is through a special "experimental vehicle" permit.
- sparky 14y ago
  What do the regulations allow that's not allowed today? Google has already driven 300k+ miles autonomously, with a driver behind the wheel as a backup operator. Also, what's the benefit to the owner/operator? Are you allowed to pay less attention to the road so you can be doing something else 99% of the time? Are you allowed to talk on the phone? If neither of these is true, then the legislation might put the cars' developers on more sure legal footing, but would appear to negate the primary utility of an autonomous vehicle.
- MiguelHudnandez 14y ago
  Indeed -- They'll have to be on the road for years before they are allowed to operate without a person inside. I have a few concerns about the short term ramifications. 1) The person behind the wheel can't do work, read, eat, or apply make-up if their primary responsibility is to second-guess the computer. So the most tantalizing benefit of being driven wherever you want is going to have to wait until some future day. 2) A vehicle that obeys the speed limit and makes a full stop at stop signs is going to infuriate some drivers. They should probably avoid matching the speed of adjacent cars when possible, to prevent blocking aggressive drivers that want to pass. These cars are probably going to avoid the fast lane. 3) I can see plenty of scenarios where an autonomous vehicle acts safely but still gets in an accident. Slowing to avoid a collision could result in being rear-ended, or a human driver might merge into the car because he failed to check his blind spot. So there will be accidents. I assume the cars will have to be rigged with video cameras and telemetry to prove that the car's programming was not at fault.

codegeek 14y ago

Imagine the possibilities.

hbbio 14y ago

Imagine your next Über driver.

rbellio 14y ago

I'd love to see other cars in their testing group too. Don't get me wrong, I harbor no ill will towards Prius or their drivers, I just don't fit in them. Public transit with these installed would be fabulous as well. You'd still need someone behind the wheel as backup, but it would be great to have a potentially tireless public transit system.

jamesaguilar 14y ago
How big are you? The latest Prius is essentially a full-size sedan in terms of the front seat. What kind of car do you prefer? It's hard to imagine that this tech won't be available for all classes of cars once it is sufficiently well tested.
- rbellio 14y ago
  6'6" and built like an NFL lineman. Last time I got in one, I couldn't sit up straight, my knees were resting on the dash and I couldn't close the door. I'd prefer something in the full size category but would rather it was a van, SUV or truck so I didn't have to squat down so low to get in. I do a lot of outdoors stuff that takes me on some rough roads and I usually have need of hauling and some cargo space.

lunaru 14y ago

Industries that will be disrupted: - Taxi, shuttles, buses and limo services - Truck drivers, Delivery, Food delivery (auxilary: train and air transportation as well) - Insurance industry - Fleet management (time to write an app for managing 1000+ automated self-driving vehicles) - Policing. We won't need the CHP much in the future And that's just from ~20 seconds off the top of my head. I'm glad lawmakers are allowing the future to happen and I hope this puts pressure on other states to join in.

citricsquid 14y ago
Please can you explain how each of those will be affected in a big way? I can't think of ways that most would be affected in a real tangible way. I use taxis because I don't own a car (edit: ignore this one, I wasn't thinking straight, hah), my deliveries (groceries, items from online) are manned because there is management of the delivery needed, not because someone needs to drive. I can see how the insurance industry will be affected in a large way though.
- ChuckMcM 14y ago
  I believe he was implying that the humans would be impacted. Taxis that drive themselves don't get tickets, don't forget to turn on the meter, and don't need to be paid part of the fare. Basically any people moving services are made more economical by removing human labor, insurance risk, and traffic liability. It remains to be seen if those savings can actually be realized of course.
- rogerbinns 14y ago
  There is no need for the delivery to be manned. The vehicle can pull up, you enter a code and it provides the goods vending machine style. (Note Amazon already has these in several cities.)
  - jacalata 14y ago
    I have no intention of being home every time I get a delivery.

olalonde 14y ago

Does anyone else find it amazing that we have driverless cars but yet, most subways and trains still require drivers/operators?

dag11 14y ago
Unlike cars, trains can't stop on a dime if there's an obstruction on tracks. Nor can they swerve to avoid it.
- sparky 14y ago
  Is this an argument that a human driver is required? To me, it sounds like if there's nothing you can do, the computer's job is much easier, not harder.
- busted 14y ago
  Unlike humans, computers never get tired from working long hours, can see around corners using various sensors and process the information fast, and can act immediately on instructions from a remote operator.
silvestrov 14y ago
The metro in Copenhagen is driverless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_Metro
DanBC 14y ago
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains) Docklands light railway, in London, is driverless.
tobyjsullivan 14y ago
The SkyTrain in Vancouver has been driverless since it was built in 1986. I don't think any such LTR systems have had drivers since then.
saint-loup 14y ago
List of driverless trains http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains#Completely_driverless_systems_and_lines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_driverless_trains#Compl... Although these are short-range, urban trains.

guimarin 14y ago

I predict that we will have to legislate Driverless as the default state of all vehicles within the coming decade. why? because at greater than 10% penetration of automated vehicles, those people still in 'manual' mode will become more and more reckless.

scarmig 14y ago

What would be potential startups in this space? Besides the obvious "fleet of driverless cars that drive people places." It will be revolutionary, and Google is only going to get a plurality of the profit that comes from it.

zrail 14y ago
Curbside delivery. Build a truck that has a bunch of different little cubbies. Load it up and send it around. App on the customer's phone beeps when the truck arrives and gives them a locker number and an unlock code.
InclinedPlane 14y ago
"Parkless" cars. You own it, it drops you off and picks you up at work, and spends the rest of the time at your house. Personal local delivery. Your car drives to a lot next to a grocery/department/whatever store. A grocery clerk walks to your car, presses a button on a smartphone app, and loads up your car with your online purchases then your car drives itself home. Same as above except your car/truck is rented out for overnight local deliveries / short-distance freight hauling while you sleep. Use of sensor streams from driverless cars for surveillance, mapping, etc. Installing high-speed municipal wireless data or cellular infrastructure on fleets of roving cars without the necessity of securing right-of-way for fixed structures or ground data lines (e.g. using microwave or open air laser comms for high-bandwidth links to aerial drone stations which then eventually link down to base stations or just form a completely wireless mesh across an entire country/continent).

sukuriant 14y ago

So, as times change ... where will I be allowed to go to drive, myself..? For people that enjoy driving; because, as has already been suggested by this thread, these autonomous cars will probably be very boring on the road. I suppose race-track memberships and racetracks will become more common --- or perhaps they'll be like a horseman's club - a hobby for select members. Maybe the USA could even get a Nürburgring ... or one per region.

khuey 14y ago
Sure. We still allow people to fly planes, don't we? I expect that once a drivers license is not a requirement to exist in much of the US that the standards for being allowed to drive will be tightened significantly though.

__jochen__ 14y ago

I welcome our robot overlords. I do wonder, however, who's going to do quality assurance on these cars. The first startup launching MVP driverless cars with a horrible accident record will set back the industry for years.

nuclear_eclipse 14y ago
I think that's the whole point of setting out requirements that autonomous vehicles must meet before going into production/sale. Just the same as current car manufacturers have to meet certain safety requirements, in the future manufacturers may have to prove some level of reliability, robustness, and exception handling.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
mayneack 14y ago
It's possible (but not guaranteed) that the knowledge that any early bad publicity could really sink the extremely large amount of money that the companies have been investing into producing this will motivate them to create safe cars more than any specific regulations as to their safety standards.

tobyjsullivan 14y ago

You just know this will lead to Google Street View getting updated a little more often as the cars get to navigate themselves around constantly. Oh right, except for this: "The regulations would allow vehicles to operate autonomously, but a licensed driver would still need to sit behind the wheel to serve as a backup operator in case of emergency."

kibwen 14y ago
"In 2009, Google obtained 3,500 miles of Street View images from driverless cars with minor human intervention.[citation needed]" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_driverless_car

kelliesmithe 14y ago

Wow. Technology is really changing the world now. What's next? Flying automated cars? I cant wait for the next invention! The government/inventors should better make these driverless cars very functional and safe to use since we all know that computers cannot think right away unlike human when it comes to urgent incident situations. http://sommer-solen.dk/cctv-have-en-afskraekken.. http://sommer-solen.dk/cctv-have-en-afskraekken...

ck2 14y ago

Out of curiosity, what happens when someone spray paints the cameras on a car? Because the car will stop if someone jumps in front of it right? So it's a sitting target for a gang to vandalize it.

erikpukinskis 14y ago
How is that different than slashing someone's tires? Where do you live, Rio de Janeiro? I don't think there's a city in the U.S. where "random disabling car vandalization for fun by gangs" is actually a thing.

welp 14y ago

Whether or not you believe in the climate crisis or global warming, I strongly recommend all proponents of driverless cars to read The Energy Glut[1] in order to get a good idea of one potential scenario of how America will end up if every man and his dog can use a car to get anywhere. If anything, the studies which are referenced in the book are rather hard to ignore. As a quick example of the sort of thinking in this book: more cars on the road means that there will be fewer people willing to risk being outdoors anywhere near a road (i.e. most residential areas in this day and age), resulting in higher levels of obesity. As more people become obese, fewer people are willing to walk or cycle ever-decreasing distances, so they get a car -- increasing the number of cars on the road. After that, we enter a rather vicious circle. The average weight of the world population will increase rather quickly, and we will end up like the people in Wall-E. I'd rather ride my bike, but thanks for the offer. [1] http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/the-energy-glut http://zedbooks.co.uk/paperback/the-energy-glut

Lost_BiomedE 14y ago
If the cars were safer and more aware of pedestrians, like what we have seen from google car demos, I would be much more confident crossing the street, etc.
- welp 14y ago
  That depends, I would be more than happy if they were limited to 20mph. If they were limited to something more like 40mph, I would just make kids stay the hell away from roads: http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm http://humantransport.org/sidewalks/SpeedKills.htm That said, I would be interested in seeing how driverless cars perform at stopping in the case of sudden and unexpected obstacles compared to human drivers?
MordinSolus 14y ago
Then let them be obese. It is not my responsibility to make sure other people don't get fat. We shouldn't stifle innovation (if that's what you're getting at) because we're scared that people will get.. even more fat. And isn't obesity more about diet than it is exercise anyway?

arthurrr 14y ago

I don't see this being disruptive at all. I think they will be adopted in industrial applications, such as self driving dump trucks on mine sites, where humans are not riding in the vehicle, and where there will be significant cost savings. There is also the human factor. People aren't going to give up their livelihood quietly, and people won't be willing to trust their life to a computer. Also, who's going to control these vehicles, government? Does that mean that the government has the power to redirect a car to anywhere they please, depending on the passenger, who has been identified by facial recognition? Trains/trams/buses are proven, already exist, and are a much better solution for public transport.

mayneack 14y ago
Does the driver have to be awake? Sleeping and driving can become the new texting and driving.

enraged_camel 14y ago

Isn't it a requirement for "driverless" cars to still have someone who can take over control of the car during emergencies? I mean, the Google cars that were driving had someone sitting in the passenger seat, I thought. I don't think we'll see truly robotic cars anytime soon.

squonk 14y ago

I keep imagining the technology used with recreational vehicles. Spend a day as a tourist in Chicago. Hop in the RV and go to sleep. Wake up in Memphis. Visit Elvis, enjoy waffles & fried chicken, then hit the hay and wake up the next day in Orlando. No down time.

nradov 14y ago

This is the big reason why high-speed rail in CA is a terrible idea and destined to become an expensive white elephant. Driverless cars will start to become available just about the time that the rail line is complete, after the inevitable lawsuits, engineering problems, and construction delays. Why would I buy a train ticket to LA and then deal with getting from the train station to my final destination when my car can drive me directly door to door?

lr--rw-rwx 14y ago

Ok, driverless cars are cool, because they have this robot touch which is appealing to computer scientists. Furthermore, we will get there eventually, as they will drive saver and (without a driver) will decrease the costs for transport and logistics industries. But does it affect the average human? It just strikes me how many anecdotes I read in connection with selfdriving cars ala' "calling the car to pick me up from work". Assuming that most HN users are from the US I can just conclude that public transport is really bad and people do not use their bike there. E.g. most people here (Europe) just do not need the service of a car in their daily life. So in the end it's a logic step, but I do not think that it makes sense to actually buy a self-driving car for yourself.