5 ms·

Self driving cars are only going to work where not only every vehicle has sensors that communicate with each other but also the roads themselves will have to be

Self driving cars are only going to work where not only every vehicle has sensors that communicate with each other but also the roads themselves will have to be retrofitted with sensors. The only two places self driving cars have a future are: 1. Planned communities which ban the use of personal cars inside that community. 2. An interstate highway system where there is a special lane dedicated to self driving cars. If google is serious about self driving cars, they need to buy or build a town... or use this one. http://theweek.com/article/index/219043/the-ghost-town-being-built-as-a-science-experiment http://theweek.com/article/index/219043/the-ghost-town-being... [edit] The best hope for self driving vehicles is as an anti-social public(or public-ish) transportation system.

w-m 13y ago
What makes you think that? Self driving cars don't need to communicate with each other to function well, as the Google car shows. Retrofitting all roads with sensors is just not an option. You can't fit all the small dirt road in the country with sensors, and neither can you have a car that refuses to go on because it can't talk to the road.
- hugh4life 13y ago
  You're not going to be using a self driving car on a dirt road... and as someone that lives in the country, there is no way I would trust a self driving car in areas where there are jolting transitions between pavement and gravel roads.
  - w-m 13y ago
    You might have to let go of your belief that humans are any good at driving. What ever humans do - reading the map, studying the surroundings, estimating the pavement/conditions, building on experience - a machine (with the right sensors, carefully designed algorithms and testing) can do much, much better.
  - loup-vaillant 13y ago
    How do you know where there is gravel? Why do you think software can't know it as well? Actually, how do you face any particular situation X? Why do you think the machine can't handle situation X? Can't handle every situation, you say? Then just put the sensor's on manually driven cars, and build a corpus. It won't be foolproof, but I bet my arm it can be much more reliable than a human being. --- Your objections only work with current technology. One day, you will see that self driving cars have less accident than human driven cars. And soon you will be faced with a tough choice: let the car drive for you, or pay more money.
lawn 13y ago
Why do you assume self driving cars have to communicate with other cars to be effective? The cars already have sensors far more advanced than us humans have. And why would the roads need sensors? I do believe it would benefit self driving cars to have areas where only they are allowed, and in the future I foresee that being the case as the cars can drive faster and closer together if not driven by a human. But this shouldn't be a necessity when cars gets more advanced. Progress is fast and if history has showed us anything it's that history is impossible to predict. About 100 years ago flight was thought as an impossibility until the Wright brothers proved us wrong and look where we are today. In 100 years what role will self driving cars have? I'm certainly leaning toward it being mainstream, even considered normal, to see them everywhere. Then again, some would say we would have flying cars by then.
- Siecje 13y ago
  If there are three cars beside each other A B C Car A is driven by a human and steers into car B. If car B could communicate with car C it could ask it to move over (or slow down) so that it (car B) can move out of the way of car A.
  - lawn 13y ago
    Oh yes, if cars would communicate they would behave better. But they don't have to do that to be effective. If A B C are all driven by humans, C could move over or slow down if it sees that B is steering into it. But self driving cars could do that as well. That self driving cars could communicate is an argument for the self driving car, not against it as the parent made it out be.
Daniel_Newby 13y ago
We have working self-driving cars today, and they need no special infrastructure. Detecting painted lane markings and other vehicles are the easy parts of the data processing system. Furthermore, special infrastructure is unacceptably vulnerable to deliberate disruption. A system that depended on radio communication could be gridlocked with a modified $50 microwave oven.
- Siecje 13y ago
  What if you can't detect the painted lines on the road, because of snow?
  - IanCal 13y ago
    Just like humans, these cars will look at multiple things. If they can see the lines then it helps, if not that doesn't mean they can't drive. They know the road and where they are, they can see what's around them and how fast they're travelling. For humans to beat machines at driving, we need to consider situations that require complex reasoning that humans are good at. Essentially, for any "But what would they do if X" you need to say what humans need to do, and why it's a complex task.
  - w-m 13y ago
    There's many other indicators like reflectors, the snow condition, trails from other cars, snow height, ... Whatever you can use to find out where the road is supposed to be, the self-driving car can use as well.
  - Daniel_Newby 13y ago
    The other responses are good. There will also probably be databases of landmarks like buildings and light poles that can be used to make a centimeter-accurate visual positioning system.

w-m 13y ago

What makes you think that? Self driving cars don't need to communicate with each other to function well, as the Google car shows. Retrofitting all roads with sensors is just not an option. You can't fit all the small dirt road in the country with sensors, and neither can you have a car that refuses to go on because it can't talk to the road.

hugh4life 13y ago
You're not going to be using a self driving car on a dirt road... and as someone that lives in the country, there is no way I would trust a self driving car in areas where there are jolting transitions between pavement and gravel roads.
- w-m 13y ago
  You might have to let go of your belief that humans are any good at driving. What ever humans do - reading the map, studying the surroundings, estimating the pavement/conditions, building on experience - a machine (with the right sensors, carefully designed algorithms and testing) can do much, much better.
- loup-vaillant 13y ago
  How do you know where there is gravel? Why do you think software can't know it as well? Actually, how do you face any particular situation X? Why do you think the machine can't handle situation X? Can't handle every situation, you say? Then just put the sensor's on manually driven cars, and build a corpus. It won't be foolproof, but I bet my arm it can be much more reliable than a human being. --- Your objections only work with current technology. One day, you will see that self driving cars have less accident than human driven cars. And soon you will be faced with a tough choice: let the car drive for you, or pay more money.

lawn 13y ago

Why do you assume self driving cars have to communicate with other cars to be effective? The cars already have sensors far more advanced than us humans have. And why would the roads need sensors? I do believe it would benefit self driving cars to have areas where only they are allowed, and in the future I foresee that being the case as the cars can drive faster and closer together if not driven by a human. But this shouldn't be a necessity when cars gets more advanced. Progress is fast and if history has showed us anything it's that history is impossible to predict. About 100 years ago flight was thought as an impossibility until the Wright brothers proved us wrong and look where we are today. In 100 years what role will self driving cars have? I'm certainly leaning toward it being mainstream, even considered normal, to see them everywhere. Then again, some would say we would have flying cars by then.

Siecje 13y ago
If there are three cars beside each other A B C Car A is driven by a human and steers into car B. If car B could communicate with car C it could ask it to move over (or slow down) so that it (car B) can move out of the way of car A.
- lawn 13y ago
  Oh yes, if cars would communicate they would behave better. But they don't have to do that to be effective. If A B C are all driven by humans, C could move over or slow down if it sees that B is steering into it. But self driving cars could do that as well. That self driving cars could communicate is an argument for the self driving car, not against it as the parent made it out be.

Daniel_Newby 13y ago

We have working self-driving cars today, and they need no special infrastructure. Detecting painted lane markings and other vehicles are the easy parts of the data processing system. Furthermore, special infrastructure is unacceptably vulnerable to deliberate disruption. A system that depended on radio communication could be gridlocked with a modified $50 microwave oven.

Siecje 13y ago
What if you can't detect the painted lines on the road, because of snow?
- IanCal 13y ago
  Just like humans, these cars will look at multiple things. If they can see the lines then it helps, if not that doesn't mean they can't drive. They know the road and where they are, they can see what's around them and how fast they're travelling. For humans to beat machines at driving, we need to consider situations that require complex reasoning that humans are good at. Essentially, for any "But what would they do if X" you need to say what humans need to do, and why it's a complex task.
- w-m 13y ago
  There's many other indicators like reflectors, the snow condition, trails from other cars, snow height, ... Whatever you can use to find out where the road is supposed to be, the self-driving car can use as well.
- Daniel_Newby 13y ago
  The other responses are good. There will also probably be databases of landmarks like buildings and light poles that can be used to make a centimeter-accurate visual positioning system.