Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Working On Autonomous Cars: Musk Wants Teslas With Auto-Pilot
cartechboy writes "Do you like driving? Well then, you're going to hate the future, because automakers are racing to beat each other to the starting line of the self-driving car race. By 2020, autonomous vehicles may arrive from Cadillac, Nissan, Volvo, Mercedes, Audi, and even Google. But now Tesla wants to jump into the ring. CEO Elon Musk told the Financial Times that the electric-car maker will build a self-driving car...within three years. You'll note that's much sooner than 2020, which means Tesla would beat other, larger automakers to the punch. For those who fear self-driving cars, Musk said the autonomous Tesla could drive 90 percent of the time, but that in his opinion, a vehicle without a human in the cockpit isn't feasible. Like it or not, our roads will probably be safer because you won't actually be driving — well, OK, that other guy who's texting or talking or drinking a huge coffee or ... you get the idea."
Please focus on making the Models and Model S 2.0 affordable. A vehicle with abase price greater than $50,000 is not affordable and is NOT what you promised when you first announced the Model S pre-order for $5000.
Get the price down! Let Google and MIT develop the self driving tech for you.
KTHNXBYE
I think there will be lots of infrastructure required before we'll see autonomous cars.
Not an engineer, so go nuts...
Wouldn't having a fun to drive car that you don't drive be a little bit pointless?
autopilot for cars so like all the cost of the auto drive system with no real benefits?
unlike a plane you need to ready to to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of auto drive mode. I hope the person who get's hit sues Tesla in that case.
Picture this the vast majority of the cars running this your in manual mode. All the self driving ones get out of your way. The autopilot wont let you rear end or otherwise collide with anybody/thing else but otherwise stays out of your way. Speed limits are vastly increased.
Oddly I think there is a higher chance of the government trying to make more money off of that tech, auto tickets etc.
No sir I dont like it.
Do you like driving? Well then, you're going to hate the future
How so? Do you honestly believe that these cars are, or ever will be, auto driver only?
Mountains of lawyers won't allow that, and they'll all have a little * on the advertisement saying how an adult capable of driving a car must be paying attention at all times.
CEO Elon Musk told the Financial Times that the electric-car maker will build a self-driving car...within three years.
Ahahaha, Uh-huh. Keep saying whatever raises your stock CEO man. Might as well announce that you're going to lower gravity so your cars use less energy too.
With a self-driving car he won't need to worry about the New York Times test driving it incorrectly.
-Darkshadow (There was a thing called Heaven; but all the same they used to drink enormous quantities of alcohol.)
I think autonomous cars will be safer in general because they can avoid accidents caused by fatigue and lack of concentration during long trips or heavy traffic. However, I think that as long as autonomous cars are mixed in with other cars operated by human drivers, there will be the potential for worse accidents of the more extreme kind. For example, an oncoming car suddenly swerving into your lane head-on. I would assume the AI would apply maximum brakes and that's it. A human (especially an experienced driver) could take more extreme action, like going off the side of the road to avoid a head-on collision. That is an option I doubt would be built into an AI system (intentionally wrecking the vehicle to prevent a more extreme accident - what if the AI incorrectly identified a scenario that didn't actually exist and decided to drive off the side of the road?)
If autonomous cars do prove to be as successful and safe as they could potentially be, there will be a hard push to force humans out of the driver's seat. It would start by building or designating high speed roadways that only allow autonomous vehicles. It will continue spreading from there.
Better known as 318230.
I think the owner of such a car should end up paying for accidents through insurance costs, unless a driving algorithm was fundamentally flawed.
But overall, while I don't much like the idea of cars on autopilot, as I like to make eye contact with a driver before, say, crossing the street in a crosswalk, I nonetheless like them better than drunk drivers, of which there are plenty right now. Let's turn it around--maybe we need to think of it as having an autopilot ready to take over (or anyway loudly warn the driver) if its sensors pick up the driver doing something stupid. Let's look for beneficial uses of the sensor array necessary for these cars to navigate...
Shouldn't you be doing something useful?
I'm going to wait for the OCP autodrive car. If they do as good a job as they did with their Enforcement Droid then the future on the roads will be a riot!
So, I hack your spouse's car and you hack my spouse's car, both while we're out of town at conferences where there are no electronic connections.
The perfect crime.
All thanks to "autonomy".
I predict an upsurge in "unexplained accidents".
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Call me old fashioned but to me, cars are meant to be driven. If I want to "be driven" I'll take a taxi, a bus or some other public transportation.
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
I think the owner of such a car should end up paying for accidents through insurance costs, unless a driving algorithm was fundamentally flawed.
The common public won't accept that. If I buy a self-driving car, there is no way I'm doing to (directly) pay if it crashes while it does the driving.
From the common person's perspective, a self-driving car should be no different than hiring a taxi. Get in and state the destination, then don't care about the details of how it gets there.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
People are incompetent and inattentive enough as it is while driving. It's enough that the great majority of unintended acceleration incidents are clearly driver error, and yet look at all the litigation that issue inspired.
This is going to be a mess. It's going to be awfully tempting for people to pay even less attention to what is going on than they do already, and it will lead to huge problems even if there are no technical issues. And there probably will be technical issues. There will be stupid people engaging the system in inappropriate situations as if it was some kind of "super cruise control" they can engage and forget. They'll sit back and drink their coffee while they watch videos or read their e-books. While I'm sure that this system has great potential in the future eventually, it's probably going to be the irresponsible and incompetent drivers and their lawyers that will keep us from having nice things.
The point is to make it 100%, so the 'driver' becomes an actual passenger and doesn't have to pay attention to traffic at all.
The common public will accept it as soon as the autopilot becomes statistically safer than a human driver and results in lower insurance premiums.
autopilot for cars so like all the cost of the auto drive system with no real benefits?
unlike a plane you need to ready to to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of auto drive mode. I hope the person who get's hit sues Tesla in that case.
Speak for yourself. I'd love to more thoroughly pay attention to calls and texts when commuting and would love a service where it goes auto-pilot for 90% of my commute which is in the left-most lane of an interstate (going whatever is the safe max for that stretch of the road).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
unlike a plane you need to ready to to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of auto drive mode.
Only a complete retard would think that it works this way. It doesn't just "kick out" of auto drive. It will always make a best effort to drive safely. There are, however, certain situations, such as dirt roads and construction areas, where it will recommend the human take over. If the human fails to do so, the car will continue to drive safely, or pull over and stop.
There have been some things in the news lately about airplane pilots relying too much on the autopilot. There's a point where you get lulled into complacency. You're not engaged as much. You fall into a trap where that 1:10,000 need for manual comes along and you aren't ready.
This looks like an ongoing research topic for planes, where automation is much more mature. It might turn out to be an all-or-nothing process. When you're engaged in driving and a dear runs out, you brake. When you're watching TV while the car drives and the autopilot disengages before a curve because of a database error, you have to go from half-asleep to full on alert. That might turn out to be a much more difficult task for a human. The thing will have to have a lot of 9s. It'll be awesome for drunks and blind people though.
Good! Competition and disturbance in the market place!
Traditional automotive companies (insert $BRAND here) with their tier ones (insert $PARTS manufacturer here) are really slow and work in ancient ways. From SW perspective their release and testing cycles are horribly long and more aimed at keeping the status quo of slow improvements and model face lifts. They could be faster but are resisting the changes. And no, they are not slow because they for example test safety critical SW well. They are just really slow and cumbersome with their Autosar etc SW development models and tools.
Hopefully Google and Tesla, and Chinese manufacturers will challenge them!
Requirements:
-Auto piloted
-Not using gasoline
Solution :
A horse.
I forsee a not-so-far-off time when it will actually be illegal to manually drive your car unless under some kind of emergency.
A few years after that, the mechanisms that allow a person to drive a car will not even be included in new cars.
As a classic car hobbyist who enjoys driving, that whole possibility scares me a lot.
If an O2 sensor can randomly fail after couple years, just imagine the level of maintenance required to keep the vast array of sensors required for self-driving cars safe. You WILL be responsible for the well being of your car, and the insurance will do everything in their power to point the lack of maintenance to sue you.
Tomorrow is another day...
Going on the assumption that the computer and sensor package required to make a self-driving car would use a negligible amount of electricity, and maybe even use a separate battery pack, a self-driving electric car would likely handle accelerating and deceleration more efficiently thereby increasing the range over a human driver. Just a guess though.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
bucket trucks and other stuff like that will need manual mode or auto drive with drive any where and park any where.
From the common person's perspective, a self-driving car should be no different than hiring a taxi. Get in and state the destination, then don't care about the details of how it gets there.
Except you don't own the taxi--the owner of the taxi pays the insurance and passes it along to you in the fare. What you are describing is more like Zipcar. But iIf you own the self-driving car you are responsible for the insurance as much as the owner of a taxi or Zipcar is. However you dice it, though, the person sitting in the back seat staring at his iPhone benefiting from the self-driving car is the one who will ultimately pay, either through insurance or the price of the vehicle or through registration fees if it comes to that.
I don't disagree with you that the common public won't accept it. I also don't yet believe that these are ready for the common public either.
Shouldn't you be doing something useful?
Only a complete retard would think that it works this way. It doesn't just "kick out" of auto drive. It will always make a best effort to drive safely. There are, however, certain situations, such as dirt roads and construction areas, where it will recommend the human take over. If the human fails to do so, the car will continue to drive safely, or pull over and stop.
what if something like happens where it needs to make a move now and can't just keep driving safety as is?
Like something falling off the truck in front of you?
Let's say there is kid / baby on the road and car thinks it just an squirrel and just keeps driving safely over it?
They should really add adaptive cruise control to the Model S first before they get Autonomous (Cruise) control to the car.
Perhaps it's just because I'm old enough to know that I'm not, never have been and never will be the great driver that I once thought I was. I also know that driving is the most dangerous thing that I do on a regular basis, it being so easy to make a fatal mistake. In addition, most commutes are pretty boring; I usually wish I could spend the time reading something instead. The idea of having my own personal chauffeur is also appealing for other reasons, such as if I drink too much, or perhaps it would eventually even be possible for the vehicle to drop me off in one place and then park itself somewhere else (although society would then have to develop laws for dealing with driverless vehicles). Another major advantage is that filling the roads with autonomous vehicles may also prove to be the ultimate solution to the problem of traffic jams.
The challenges involved in the creation of auto-pilots that we can all trust involve safety, security and privacy. First, no one is going to entrust their life to such a system unless it proves to be safe. Moreover, human psychology will undoubtedly require that the auto-pilot be much safer and more efficient driver than the owner of the vehicle can ever hope to be, or else they probably won't want to use it.
Second: security. For example, back-door access and remote control. It's one thing for a malevolent third party to take advantage of your computer, but the idea that anyone might be able to take advantage of your vehicle while you're in it seems completely unacceptable to me. One theory about the recent death of investigative journalist Michael Hastings is that someone gained remote control over his car (at least the accelerator and breaks), which according to eyewitnesses seemed completely out of control just before he crashed. I can imagine even more sinister things involving a car with a real auto-pilot, for instance a remote control kidnapping where the victims are locked into their own vehicles and then driven to an unknown destination.
Third: privacy. I would just hate the idea that my vehicle's manufacturer was also working happily with, for example, intelligence agencies to use my car to spy on me, or marketing companies to more effectively target me with advertising. Just because you own a vehicle with an auto-pilot does not mean that you should expect to have your rights trampled upon.
The beginning of a solution for all of this would be for the vehicle manufacturers to collaborate on as open source project for the auto-pilot and vehicle communications software. In my view that approach would certainly lead to better safety, security and privacy, but somehow I don't think it will work out like that.
Aren't you already responsible for the maintenance of your car? Besides, once self-driving cars become affordable, they will make taxis a lot cheaper, to the point where it will be more cost effective using automated taxis than it will be owning your own car, then the taxi company can worry about the maintenance.
For me, as a "manual" driver, I can't put my blinker on and look into your eyes to communicate that I really need to move over and exit the freeway.
For me, with a self driving car, the damned thing might start letting everyone and their mother in law get in front of me.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Tesla sells toys for wealthy people.
The way forward is not in toys for the wealthy few, but in changes which
will embrace the transportation needs of the masses. This is a much more difficult
problem and it won't be Musk who solves it.
For those who fear self-driving cars, Musk said the autonomous Tesla could drive 90 percent of the time, but that in his opinion, a vehicle without a human in the cockpit isn't feasible yet.
FTFY.
It's only a matter of time before vision and human prediction algorithms become adept enough to completely replace human drivers. Far before that happens, I expect to see automated vehicle only (AVO) lanes with significantly higher speed limits.
...isn't feasible"
Agreed. But then what's the point? The human-driver still has to be 100% involved, because:
- 10% of the situations can't be handled by the auto-driver
- the auto-driver can't identify all instances when the human-driver is needed
- the 10% when the human-driver has to take over can happen at any time
If driving is safer overall, insurance rates even for manual drivers will fall. Gas will fall in price if used more efficiently. It will also be safer to drive manually because of less idiots on the road.
It's good for everybody. If the freedom to drive a car is taken away it will be because of some government regulation (as usual). Your insurance company will be more than happy to make increased profits off you if you're a manual driver. And you can be happy to pay less premiums. Win-win.
It will also be cooler to know how to drive, like it's cool to know how to ride a horse.
In soviet amerika the cars drive you, where it wants, when it wants. Land of the free? no more. Land of the forever non-responsible adult-child? Soon in a city near you!
Is it a valid legacy for your children? Is satisfiying a sense of living in sci-fi movie so important you actually want to surrender your freedom of movement? Modern cars can alreay be shut down from distance by LEO, imagine if they can lock the doors and drive you direct to gitmo like camps? America os the only advanced country willing to let go of international laws and treaties to favor the rich and powerful. Wake-up and reclaim your life "We The People". You are worth it and able to live a fulfilling life free of nanny state.
Tomorrow is another day...
Like something falling off the truck in front of you?
It is funny that people bring up examples where split second response, and accurate steering control are crucial. These are exactly the situations where autonomous systems are the strongest, and will do better than a human 99% of the time.
It is absolutely possible.
He is just changing the bar to set expectation he can meet in 3 years.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Auto-Pilot .vs. Intelli-Systems
Tesla .vs. Edison all over again
The common people will accept it when they realize they can facebook while driving. You might get cheaper insurance, but the car will be more expensive.
A baby on a road w/ a 90 mph speed limit at a spot where it can't be seen until it's 50m away? Not likely. The rest of the post is interesting.
I like imagining what will happen as the robotic tech becomes more common and insurance companies price the safety into their actuarial tables for autos that can't be operated manually. Over time, manual operation could become so expensive that no one opts for a street legal car that can be driven by hand.
Someday states might outlaw manually driven autos on public streets altogether.
if she isn't complaining about my driving??
I really don't think that in the future, cars will be individually fully autonomous. I think that cars will form groups or networks depending on where they are, a group is a horde of cars with one "mind" and THIS is what's going to be fully autonomous.
With the help of the internet and sensors, all cars of a network will go at the same speed, keeping the same distance between each others.
Cars of a network will be in a snake formation, so as soon as a car detects a moving object that they identify, all the cars will slow down at the same speed, stop, or the line (the group) can be split in two if an object cut it, the whole line also be led by the first car into doing an S to avoid an obstacle on the road. Imagine, you will be able to cross the road as a pedestrian without even looking and the entire line of cars will slow down at the same speed or split, the "flow" will adjust perfectly.
Also, if a car comes from an overpass and wants to fit into the group that is tacking the line on the highway, the group will immediately adjust the speed and split so the car can have a place in the line.
Then don't buy one. Get a grip, sparky.
I think if self driving does arrive it would have to be enabled only on certain stretches of roads where conditions are relatively constant and predictable, and the rest of the time it would have to revert to a driver's assist mode. Driver assist would be things like maintaining safe distance from the car in front, braking assist, collision avoidance, skid control, parallel park etc. Still useful stuff but still requiring a human to drive.
I really don't see 100% self drive capability being at all viable in any foreseeable time frame.
In a plane, too, the pilots need to be ready to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of autopilot mode. Especially during automatic landings. We still use autopilot for most of the flight, though, it makes our life a lot easier and gives us time to focus on other tasks, like getting weather reports and things like that.
Until one accident involving a malfunction of an automatic car is shown on Fox News.
If these car autopilots are anything like airplane autopilots, they WILL just kick out of auto drive. I sure hope they can do better, but there will always be rare malfunctions that result in sudden loss of the autopilot.
Of course, cars do have the advantage that they can just stop where they are.
I think Auto pilot for plane is good ideas.
Because it is easier as there is not too much factor compared to cars/ road.
and Plane pilot also higher cost compared to cars driver
I'd be happy if I could at least get a system which drives itself on highways. The majority of time spent in my vehicle on long trips is on the highway anyway - if I could drop the wheel during that time to do something more meaningful, I'd take it in a heartbeat.
I've recently installed a cruise control system on my car, and it was one of the best purchases I've ever done. Worrying about the speed you're driving seems to be a small matter until you try cruise control. Then you realise how much more relaxing driving long distances is.
The one thing I wish is that the cruise control know the distance to the car in front of me, and automatically adjust my speed if the other guy is going slower, to keep a safe distance. This type of technology is already common on expensive cars for automatic braking.
Then I guess the next step would be if it would "see" the lane lines and adjust the steering wheel to always keep me in the centre of the lane. The sensors for this also exist already on expensive cars to warn you when you start drifting outside of the road.
This is the path I always envisioned towards eventual fully autonomous cars, but it seems most projects I've seen are trying to go for the full monty. I wonder if there's a reason for that.
How many accidents are the result of some sort of mechanical failure? Hint its much more than none. It has in fact killed people. We have court cases on it. One case i know of, a tire blowout resulted in a head on crash with 4 killed and only one survivor. The court case cleared the survivor (driver of the car with the blowout). I personally had the breaks fail on my car, and narrowly missed getting t boned by a truck.
The Grey Goo disaster happened 3 billion years ago. This rock is covered in self replicating machines!
When true autonomous vehicles emerge (as in no-driver needed) I think the shipping companies are going to change in a big way.
;) ) The nice part of this is that they can send these vehicles into areas that are hard to normally patrol. (I live within a couple hours of a very large city, so yes there are plenty of areas like that.)
So step 1, fully autonomous vehicles are very possible. If the vehicle gets in trouble it can "call" to say "hey, I'm stuck for whatever reason at GPS coords X" and I'm pretty sure this will be VERY rare.
Step 2, They will need to be able to automatically fuel themselves. This has basically already been solved. There won't need to be a station on every corner though, it will go and get fuel (of whatever type) by itself when you are not using it.
The shipping companies will completely change. When I can "send" a vehicle to a specific address without a driver, and I really don't care how long that vehicle stays there (I'm not paying it hourly.) And that vehicle can call a customer to say "I'm in your driveway, come get your package." Well, that changes things big time. In fact, lets say I run "Big Company X" I can offer Express shipping where I plop the package in my own vehicle as soon as the order is processed and it immediately drives out to your place.
Public safety will change big time. Fire: the firemen hop in the truck if they are at the firehouse. If they are not, they go directly to the fire, the truck(s) meet them there. Ambulances the same thing. Oh, you have a second hurt person that we didn't know about, another ambulance fires up immediately and makes it's way to you. Police could send autonomous vehicles on patrol that use video and audio sensors to "detect" disturbances (gunshots, domestics, grass that is too long
And these are the things I can think of in just a few minutes. Like someone said, we are only scratching the surface of how this will change society. Like the internet, this can completely change a large portion of society.
Buy a $20,000 car and then pay $20k/year to have it driven by a chauffeur, its still cheaper than a Tesla.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Heck, 90 percent of my driving miles already use my car's autopilot feature; cruise control. Give me lane-following combined with the ability to target an ideal speed while dealing with the traffic in front of me and all those highway miles are pretty much covered. Next step, let me flip on a turn signal and my car will change lanes safely. Ideally, in the direction that I indicated.
Seriously. [though I'll take mod +funny too] Buick drivers (typically elderly) would benefit greatly from this technology as it would grant them improved safety and autonomy. And society as a whole would benefit as the elderly with autodrive would present fewer road hazards, and would be able to stay out of assisted living for a longer time thus helping to keep the cost of assisted living down.
And within 30 years, I'll need cars to do the driving for ME!
I can't wait.
The whole point behind autonomous cars is to take the human (error, misjudgment, irrationality, lack of reflexes) factor OUT of driving. The release of self-driving cars from multiple vendors can only impact (no pun intended) automobile owners in a positive way, ensuring that the most error-free, pleasurable experience. Just like other technologies, the best tech will "win". I fear, however, the inevitable "100,000 units recall due to autonomy malfunction" headlines... While we're taking humans away from being behind the wheel, there are still humans building and programming the mobile death-traps. Let's hope competition errs on the side of caution from all players involved.
Just not with you, when you have to pay all those other things as well.
But they have the decency to do so in the safety of their own homes and not attempt to impress everyone around them with their leet skillz.
There are people who love to drive cars in a demolition derby, but they go to a special place to do their hobby, just like everyone else who has a hobby that takes a lot of space.
You can do the same.
I think the owner of such a car should end up paying for accidents through insurance costs, unless a driving algorithm was fundamentally flawed.
The common public won't accept that. If I buy a self-driving car, there is no way I'm doing to (directly) pay if it crashes while it does the driving.
From the common person's perspective, a self-driving car should be no different than hiring a taxi. Get in and state the destination, then don't care about the details of how it gets there.
Oh, trust me, you'll be paying all right... with those $500/month insurance premiums on your car because the insurance company doesn't want the liability for a computer program, and big companies like GM/Ford/Toyota/BMW can afford better lawyers than you can (a lot harder to get money out of, and if you do it'll cost a lot to do it).