Slashdot Mirror
How Google, Tesla, and Uber Could Team Up For the Driverless Taxis of the Future
cartechboy writes "Follow the thinking for a second. Google drops $258 million into the car-taxi app Uber. Google says it will make self-driving cars available within four years, based on its ground-breaking research into self-driving cars. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has spoken with Google about driverless technology for future Tesla vehicles. So, are we watching the assembly of a massive driverless taxi service of the future? Battery-electric vehicles make excellent autonomous taxis (very few moving parts, low per-mile energy cost, and zero noise or emissions) Could Google use some of its cash hoard to buy Tesla outright (making Elon Musk its third largest shareholder in the process), then grab Uber and turn the whole thing into an app? Musk's goal has always been to transform the very nature of transportation. This might just do that."
More at 11.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Why would Musk become the third-largest GOOG shareholder if it was purchased if TSLA was purchased with cash? That doesn't make any sense.
No "JohnnyCab" tag?
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
Some arguments I've heard against driverless taxis/transport services:
1. People will dirty/graffiti/vandalize/steal the vehicles
2. What if it breaks down!!!
3. It'll get lost/not understand directions
4. Somebody will hide on board to attack the next passenger
5. People will do drugs/have sex/sleep in them(see #1)
I'll note that I don't believe any of these are can't be mitigated to the point that driverless taxis are practical, or are at least no more of a problem than manned taxis.
I don't read AC A human right
Will the courts / laws be ready in 4 years?
also one big / bad accident can lead to a big count case / even an order to stop useing the cars till the case can go though so things can get worked out without adding more victims to the penning cases.
Please state the nature of the transportation emergency.
Good-bye
Follow the thinking for a second. Outbox* collects people's mail, scans it, and delivers it to them in "a beautiful digital format". Outbox is located in Austin. Its founder has spoken at Capital Factory. President Obama has also spoken at Capital Factory. President Obama's government runs the Post Office. Clearly, Outbox, Capital Factory, and the President are going to replace the Post Office with Outbox.
Makes as much sense as the OP. Happy Friday!
*(I have no affiliation with them, I just live in Austin and see their silly cars driving around collecting people's mail and wonder why seemingly sane investors gave them money - I think this post answers the question!)
"The problem with Google's current approach is that the sensor system is too expensive" - Musk
He's referring to the expensive Velodyne rotating array of 64 LIDARs found on top of Google's cars. It's a useful device, but it's a research tool, not something that belongs on top of production vehicles.
What's needed is a compact solid-state 3D LIDAR for outdoor use. Advanced Scientific Concepts makes such things, but they're sold to DoD for about $100K each. Typical performance is 300 meter range, 128x128 pixels, 30 FPS. There's no fundamental reason the technology needs to be that expensive; it's just that the things are hand-made at a lab in Santa Barbara, CA. (I visited them a decade ago when we were doing a DARPA Grand Challenge vehicle. Back then, they had the technology working on an optical bench, but didn't have usable hardware yet.) This technology needs to be turned into a mass market product. The current generation Kinect, (which is a true LIDAR, not a trianguation sensor like the previous model) does roughly the same thing, but with a less sensitive sensor and a weaker laser. Eventually somebody will put enough money behind this to get it right.
Imagine a carshare service like Zipcar, but instead of having to make reservations, go to the lot, etc, you open an app, say you need a car, and it just shows up a few minutes later. You run your errands, go home, and the car goes away. And you only pay a (mostly?) flat yearly subscription for the service.
City folk would jump on such an option, and probably even some suburbanites.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
This was the only decent post on this topic. If this actually happens sometime in the indefinite future, the autonomous driver should definitely be modeled on the Doctor.
No, not THAT Doctor, THIS Doctor! http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=the+doctor+voyager&qpvt=the+doctor+voyager&FORM=IGRE
If you can build autonomous cars you can build autonomous robots ( at what point are they the same thing?).
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
It's not as big with driving as it is with brewing beer as a hobby.
Errr... yes, it is.
Having a plastic dog with a wobbling head on your rear shelf is quaint. And not in any danger of becoming illegal.
Cars are often involved in lethal accidents.
Which is the point. Basic laws of causation, really. There is no causal link between "quaint" and "illegal" whatsoever. It just happens that some things happen to be both, just like "red" and "big" have no causal connection, but some things are both.
It's such a sad world where lies and strawman like the ones the GP posted are easier understood than simple truths like a third variable.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org