Ford Touts Self-driving Car, Launches Global Mobility Experiments

An anonymous reader writes in with news about Ford's latest automobile technology unveiled at CES. "Ford showcased the semi-autonomous vehicles it has on the road at CES and gave attendees a glimpse into fully autonomous vehicles now in development. The carmaker also announced a series of experiments with drivers around the globe to test its vehicle-to-vehicle connectivity, autonomous cars and the use of big data collected from vehicles. The company said a fully autonomous Ford Fusion Hybrid research vehicle is undergoing road testing now. The vehicle relies on the same semi-autonomous technology used in Ford vehicles today, while adding four LiDAR (light, radar) sensors to generate a real-time 3D map of the surrounding environment."

Comments

If a Ford FAV crashes into a Google FAV...

[Press2ToContinue]

... do the programmers get the blame?

Re:If a Ford FAV crashes into a Google FAV...

[Lumpy]

Elon shoots them with a particle beam from his power suit.

Can see this in tourist boulevards or retirees

[WillAffleckUW]

Don't think this is a good idea anywhere kids or bikes might be, but maybe in retirement communities with low speed limits or tourist boulevards where the street goes slowly.

Drove a Ford Hybrid (2014) just last month, like some of their rear cameras and parking computers, but even so, they have blind spots.

Re:Can see this in tourist boulevards or retirees

[gl4ss]

doesn't make sense. you can see it being operated in the exact places where unexpected is to be happening and where a human could react fast enough due to slow speeds.

it's not dense traffic where you would want it. it's the highway. when you're going 80mph the car can react faster than you in a meaningful way(to a moose, a stopping truck or whatever).

Re:Can see this in tourist boulevards or retirees

[bitingduck]

doesn't make sense. you can see it being operated in the exact places where unexpected is to be happening and where a human could react fast enough due to slow speeds.

it's not dense traffic where you would want it. it's the highway. when you're going 80mph the car can react faster than you in a meaningful way(to a moose, a stopping truck or whatever).

You'd want it in dense, slow traffic. Go drive the LA freeways at rush hour some time- stop and go traffic that creeps along with the cars just a few feet apart. It takes a lot of attention to drive in, but it really shouldn't be hard for a robot car to do. There's some lane changing (which is what slows traffic down- people trying to find spaces to get to the exit or merge on) but everything is very predictable. The autonomous car can safely drive closer to other cars, will have less lag before moving when the car in front moves (or stops) and can better negotiate lane changes with other autonomous cars because it isn't limited by the viewing angle, reaction times, and interpretations of other drivers to detect indications of what they're trying to do.

When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

Why does anyone need a self-driving car? What is the obvious technical or economic advantage of not having a human driver?

This is all about rich people creating playthings because that's the only reason this is even being discussed.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Anonymous Coward]

Surely you are joking?

hmm... i don't know... perhaps:

1. Automate the entire long haul transport industry
2. Cars spend 95% of the time parked. Wouldn't you like the ability to be earning the income of a taxi for the 8 hours+ your car is currently parked at work each day
3. Eventually less accidents (take out the emotional / distracted / drug influenced drivers).
4. Will change entire transport industry, as companies can combine the public transport efficiencies of mass transit and the flexibility of taxis to get you the last mile, so not everyone feels the need to drive an empty car everywhere.
5 ... seriously do I need to keep going?:

You sir are either a troll or an idiot.

Now bring me my autonomous car!

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[BarbaraHudson]

Why does anyone need a self-driving car? What is the obvious technical or economic advantage of not having a human driver?

This is all about rich people creating playthings because that's the only reason this is even being discussed.

How about people with physical handicaps, such as really bad vision? Do you want them driving? Or the folks who, no matter how old they get, won't give up driving even though they're a danger to everyone, including themselves? Or used by under-age kids to get to a friend's place? Or someone who just now realizes they've drunk too much and wants to get home safely?

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Balthisar]

My driver costs my company about 2000 RMB per month (plus overtime), so there's a good economic advantage to not having to pay him to drive me and my family around.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[ShanghaiBill]

Why does anyone need a self-driving car?

1. They are likely to be far safer.
2. They use road space much more efficiently, increasing the carrying capacity by a factor of five.
3. Many people, due to age or disability, can't drive.
4. They decrease costs for companies that pay people to drive.
5. They make public transportation much more affordable and accessible, by replacing big fix-route buses with small flex-route vans
6. Some people just don't like to drive, and would rather snooze or catch up on email.

This is all about rich people creating playthings

The first generation will certainly be for evil "rich people", but with mass production the cost should fall so they are similar in price to other cars. Sensors and actuators are not particularly expensive. Once you factor in insurance premiums, SDCs are likely to be cheaper than HDCs.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[angel'o'sphere]

A week ago I drove from my hometown to Paris. Took me over 6h. I was driving myself. So I stopped somewhere and stayed a night in a hotel. A self driving car had let me work on my laptop and I had taken a nap instead of a stop in a hotel.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Firethorn]

What is the obvious technical or economic advantage of not having a human driver?

How about preventing some of the 43k deaths, $164.2B in damages caused by car accidents a year? Give a car enough sensors and the right programming and it shouldn't hit stuff. If it doesn't hit stuff, no damage. Note: I'm not even demanding NO accidents, just reduced. Half the rate or something. I'd expect the car to be excellent in preventing accidents via 'fast twitch' responses, but lousier in avoiding obvious but unusual events (something getting ready to fall onto the highway, for example).

Get it good enough, and now you're increasing the mobility of the disabled who can't currently drive themselves. Not to mention those who don't have a license due to DUI or just being a bad driver. Heck, now I can take a nap or read on the way to/from work. Or that long trip.

Package delivery/pickup doesn't need a dedicated driver. Reduces costs.

Taxis don't need a person anymore, reducing costs, and even your personal vehicle could pick you up at the door while parking in a remote(cheap) lot.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[cascadingstylesheet]

3. Many people, due to age or disability, can't drive.

This is the one I like. My wife has a medical condition that keeps her from driving. Man would she love to just jump in the car and go somewhere when she wants to.

That said, I'm enough of a realist to have some anxiety about where this is going. There are people who would just love to have us limited to perfectly tracked, remotely shut-down-able little eggshells that can only go where they are allowed to go.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[R3d M3rcury]

Basically, what you are saying is that you like to drive. I don't blame you, by the way. In certain situations and environments, I like to drive, too. I used to not be a big fan of driving, but when I started having a long commute, I decide I would spend money on a car that I wanted to be in and wanted to drive. It was worth it when I spent an hour and a half in the car five days a week.

On the other hand, consider some of the advantages--the "idiots who are afraid of using the road" are the ones who won't be driving. Their autonomous car will probably be going faster than the little old lady in the green Valiant. Also there will be fewer idiot tourists flashing across three lanes because, "Oops! There's my exit!"

The lying about using traffic as an excuse is pretty well dead anyway. If somebody really cares that much, they can get traffic conditions along your route now for whatever times they need.

Personally, though, I see most cars having the "Auto-drive"/"Self-drive" switch (a la Demolition Man) for environments where autonomous driving may not be ideal.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Your.Master]

I can't believe nobody has mentioned this, but "daily commute", even when it's not all that long, is consistently among the most hated timesinks. I don't think results like this are terribly surprising: http://www.economist.com/blogs.... A technical and economic advantage is you can do something else while "driving" between home and work, without taking on the compromises of public transit (which may not be available at all, may take a long time or be beholden to a schedule that's incompatible with your lifestyle, or may otherwise be unpleasant).

I can't *wait* to have a self-driving car.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[ShanghaiBill]

At the moment they are nowhere near as safe because they cant handle unknown situations.

Not true. SDCs have already been driven millions of miles on public roads. Their safety record is better than humans. They may not handle all unknown situations, but that is more than compensated by not driving drunk, falling asleep, or texting on a cellphone.

A robot needs the same braking distance at 60 KPH as a human.

No they don't. A human needs a second or more to make a decision and move their foot to the brake pedal. A computer needs 10 milliseconds.

Computers will have to collect information and make decisions in the same amount of time ... In that time they've still travelled as far as a human would.

This is just flat out wrong. SDCs aren't some hypothetical concept. They have driven millions of miles, and they react far faster than humans.

Because they may be required to take control of the vehicle if the automated systems fail, they still wont be able to drive themselves.

A human fallback will be a temporary requirement. After a few years, it will no longer be required. After a decade or so, it will be forbidden, since human drivers will be considered too dangerous for public roads.

Then you have public transport or taxis.

Public transport changes my commute from a 20 minute drive to a 60 minute bus ride plus a 15 minute walk from the bus stop to my office. A 20 minute taxi ride costs more than some people earn in a day.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Livius]

There are lots of uses for a car or other vehicle that safely drives itself.

For some reason, there are people who keep using 'self-driving' to mean something that sort of drives itself some of the time on some roads in some conditions, which is not the same thing.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Mr Z]

You needed to stay overnight somewhere for a mere 6hr drive? I usually reserve that for drives over twice that long.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Kjella]

There are lots of uses for a car or other vehicle that safely drives itself. For some reason, there are people who keep using 'self-driving' to mean something that sort of drives itself some of the time on some roads in some conditions, which is not the same thing.

I think the former and latter is much closer than you think and one in certainly on the way to the other. The big hurdle is creating a car where you're absolved from the legal responsibility of driving, if it still requires a legally fit and licensed driver to available and if it's only valid when it's sunny and dry on pre-approved roads at first that's the big leap. The reason it's the big leap is that this means the car must be able to determine itself when it's unfit to drive, it can't just suddenly throw the control back you at a moment's notice. That I might optionally hit the brakes and take the wheel as an emergency override because the car missed something is probably good particularly at first, as long as it's not legally required that I must. I don't think I'd be able to take my eyes of the road the first few times my computer drives me.

From there it will quickly expand to handle more and more roads in more and more conditions. They'll get data from manual interventions if you choose to share them, but if you're in an autonomous car already I don't see why not and work towards handling more and more situations itself. Once you get a high enough rate of intervention-free driving they can lobby to say let's create no-license cars that treat software failure like hardware failure, if the self-driving doesn't work you need road assistance. Sure that'll suck, but there's enough people who can't legally drive where it would still be a lot better than the alternatives. I just think we need to get it off the ground first and there the big seller is liberating commute time. I get in the car to work and can read the news or mail or play Angry Birds and watch YouTube while the car drives itself. That's the early wins to support the late wins.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

Oh, look an AC calls me a troll!

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

3. Many people, due to age or disability, can't drive.

This is the one I like. My wife has a medical condition that keeps her from driving. Man would she love to just jump in the car and go somewhere when she wants to.

She already has this option, It's called a taxi.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

Yet again another believer in something that does not exist.

SDCs have already been driven millions of miles on public roads. Their safety record is better than humans. They may not handle all unknown situations, but that is more than compensated by not driving drunk, falling asleep, or texting on a cellphone.

And the reality could hardly be different

...what Google is working on may instead result in the automotive equivalent of the Apple Newton, what one Web commenter called a “timid, skittish robot car whose inferior level of intelligence becomes a daily annoyance.” To be able to handle the everyday stresses and strains of the real driving world, the Google car will require a computer with a level of intelligence that machines won’t have for many years, if ever.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

Or you could have got the train. They're really fast in France.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

The daily commute is a timesink, but I work from home. Did you never consider that that would be far less expensive and problematical than a self-driving car?

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[DiamondGeezer]

In order to achieve anything like that, everyone would be compelled to have a self-driving car and all current cars would be scrapped. Good luck with getting that to happen in America.

The problem is not simply the behavior of the driver, its the behavior of everything else. One way you could reduce the carnage would be to insist on alcohol and other drug tests before the engine can be switched on. Another would be to address the huge numbers of truck drivers hopped up on amphetamines and other substances to keep them awake to drive crap around the country for people to buy.

I've yet to see a test of what happens with a self-driving car when it has a tire blow-out at 60 mph. I suspect it won't be pretty. Or what happens when it encounters an accident or incident involving the police.

Then there is the problem of liability. If an SDC hits another - who is responsible?

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[drkim]

Why does anyone need a self-driving car?

This is possibly the weirdest argument against self-driving cars - and yet it pops up time and again on this topic.

What if I told you I would pay for a chauffeur driven limousine for you? It would pick you up every morning and take you to and from work. You could shave, or sleep, or surf the net while he took you to work. He would drop you at the door, and you'd never again have to look for parking.

If you wanted to go to a club or party, you could get as toasted as you like and your chauffeur would drive you home safely.

Now, just replace "chauffeur driven limousine" with "self-driving car".

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Neil Boekend]

Not all work can be done from home.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Toshito]

2. They use road space much more efficiently, increasing the carrying capacity by a factor of five.

When you have forced everyone to abandon their regular car and motorcycles... Seriously, this increase in capacity won't be possible until 100% of the vehicles on the road are autonomous. We're talking about at least 30 to 40 years before that happens.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[RingDev]

I had to take a taxi from the airport to my house once.

It cost as much a my last car payment.

If you live in a major metro area, and you're trying to get to some place in the same major metro area, yeah, taxis are an option.

If you live in the country, or you want to get from one metro area to another, frequent taxi service is not realistic.

-Rick

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Anonymous Coward]

In order to achieve anything like that, everyone would be compelled to have a self-driving car and all current cars would be scrapped.

Everyone? All? You're seriously claiming that in order to have fewer accidents, we'd need to replace every single car? We wouldn't have even one less accident if even one non-autonomous car remained on the road? Would that one last human driver spend every waking moment Grand Theft Auto-ing his way down sidewalks to make up the difference or something? And if you concede that we'd get a reduction from all cars but one, why not all cars but two? Why not only half of the cars being SD? Why not only 10%?

The problem is not simply the behavior of the driver, its the behavior of everything else

Nirvana Fallacy. Just because SDC's don't solve every other problem with driving doesn't mean they can't solve some of them.

One way you could reduce the carnage would be to insist on alcohol and other drug tests before the engine can be switched on.

You mock a strawman you constructed wherein every non-automated car is replaced with an automated one, yet at the same time you suggest that it's feasible to forcibly retrofit every existing car with not only a breathalyzer, but also whatever non-existent drug sensor you're imagining that can test for cocaine, marijuana, LSD, methamphetamines, and several other things I've forgotten - all in a handful of seconds and without the need for the driver to piss in a cup every time they want to start the car?

You really don't think your ideas through, do you?

Another would be to address the huge numbers of truck drivers hopped up on amphetamines and other substances to keep them awake to drive crap around the country for people to buy.

"Another way to solve this problem would be to solve the problem! Betcha never thought of that!"

I've yet to see a test of what happens with a self-driving car when it has a tire blow-out at 60 mph. I suspect it won't be pretty.

What makes you think that such obvious scenarios won't be tested before the cars are put on the market? And what makes you think the SDC wouldn't be able to handle it, anyway?

Or what happens when it encounters an accident or incident involving the police.

Again, what's special about these scenarios that magically render the car incapable of navigating around obstacles and/or pulling over to a safe area?

Then there is the problem of liability. If an SDC hits another - who is responsible?

This is the only valid question you've asked so far, but there's no reason why it can't be answered. Laws and regulations can be modified to accomodate new technology, and it happens all the time.

Do you really think that you've thought of an obvious show-stopper that was missed by everyone at Google, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, Tesla, and probably other large companies with armies of engineers and lawyers on their payrolls? Because you haven't, won't, and can't.

Tell you what, though, I'll throw you a bone here by posting anonymously. Now you can use that as an excuse to avoid addressing the actual topic, by pretending that it somehow matters whether I have a cute little nickname at the top of my post. You're welcome.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Firethorn]

In order to achieve anything like that, everyone would be compelled to have a self-driving car and all current cars would be scrapped. Good luck with getting that to happen in America.

First, give us about 20 years. Average car 'life expectancy' is around 13. After some point people will end up driving their classic cars on tracks, but even without that the autodrive systems they're working on can be on the road with non-AI cars. You just need the 'vast majority'.

Besides that, insisting on alcohol and drug tests is missing 'most' of the problem. 'Only' 35-40% of fatal crashes involved(not necessarily caused by) alcohol, and while I'm sure other drugs contribute as well, I do not believe that they pass the 50% mark. You still have to worry about those driving distracted, tired, old, young, mad, and just bad.

No, the 'fix' isn't drug testing. The 'fix' is to get rid of the driver.

I've yet to see a test of what happens with a self-driving car when it has a tire blow-out at 60 mph. I suspect it won't be pretty. Or what happens when it encounters an accident or incident involving the police.

Is there any reason to believe that they wouldn't assess this and program in the proper, yet counter-intuitive, course of action? As for accident/incident/construction - do you have any idea of how many accidents have been caused by human drivers rubbernecking? The police throw out their lights and such, the car recognizes that something's up, and it does what's necessary. Well, google apparently still has some work to do on getting it's system to recognize and work with cones correctly, but they're working on it.

Then there is the problem of liability. If an SDC hits another - who is responsible?

Assuming it hasn't been improperly modified but has been properly maintained, and wasn't 'set up' like being put on a slick ramp, or caused by 'act of nature' like an earthquake or tsunami, I'd generally point to the manufacturer of the striking SDC. Remember my first criteria for a SDC is 'doesn't hit stuff'. From what I've seen, it looks like they have that pretty well covered, better than humans. The problem they have right now is that they can get 'stuck' where they can't see a safe way out so they don't move. Improper pathing that can get them stuck, etc...

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Enfixed]

I agree with the AC, your post looks like a short sighted (idiot) or troll comment to me. The 33,561 people in the U.S. that died in 2012 from an automobile related incident and their families would probably be pro self-driving car.

We can discuss (argue about) the various merits of self-driving cars all day long but I'll make it simple: I trust a computer to do complex repetitive math all day long and not make a mistake where I would expect multiple screw ups from a human. Take that same concept and apply it to a car. Will there be issues still, yes... just a whole lot less.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[angel'o'sphere]

That is what I usually do, but we needed the car for some stuff to do :D

From my hometown to the heart of Paris is exactly 3h. (And train is usually cheaper than going by car anyway)

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[angel'o'sphere]

No, not *need* but the situation called for it ... it was late at night, foggy and snowing. I would had arrived in Paris around 2:30 at night, so I stopped (especially as for some stupid reason most truck stopes where closed, except for the coffee machine area).

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Mr Z]

Ah, that makes sense. Inclement weather is 2x - 3x as stressful to drive through, and certainly much more dangerous. I doubt an autonomous car would have been great in those conditions either, though.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[angel'o'sphere]

A single automated car likely not, as many other drivers kept speeding (while I tried to have a reasonable speed) ... however I believe if half of the cars would have been automatic, the rest had adapted to a "normal speed" under this conditions. You easily could drive about 80km/h but many even ignored the 110km/h (dry road) to 130km/h (wet road) speed limit (and due to the fog + snow) I considered 110km/h to fast (and I was a bit tired).

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Mr Z]

Self driving cars rely on a sensor array (short-range RADAR, long-range RADAR, LIDAR, SONAR, stereo and infrared cameras, temperature and accelerometer feedback) to build their world model. I admit I'm not a sensor expert myself, so I'm not really sure how degraded those sensor inputs would be in fog and snow. Obviously the thermometer and accelerometer would be fine, but each of the others would experience degraded range.

The self-driving car may end up going a bit slower than 80km/h to avoid out-driving its ability to look ahead. Depth computed from stereo vision I imagine would be heavily impacted, as fog isn't completely uniform. I'm not sure how LIDAR would perform. RADAR may be OK, as we're able to track planes through clouds just fine.

I also wonder how lane detection even has a chance in snow, unless the roads have been cleared, or there are clear lane ruts from previous cars. Having grown up in snowy Michigan, I know human drivers often get the lane boundaries wrong after a heavy snow. :-)

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[angel'o'sphere]

Well, in this case the road was "clear" as the snow did melt immediately (road was till to warm) nevertheless the risk of "ice" here and there was given. Imagine snow melting and freezing a few yards further again.

Lane detection on a highway is easy as you have a barrier on one side and poles on the other, actually you have poles on both sides.

But you are right about "ordinary" roads, especially if the snow is really high and the poles are completely covered. In Switzerland they put down extra poles which are simply long wooden rods with a colored tip (they get pressed into the snow when it is high enough and get removed in spring)

I guess LIDAR is problematic in snow and fog, depending on wavelength ofc.

Re:When will this stupid crap-o-rama end?

[Mr Z]

Well, in this case the road was "clear" as the snow did melt immediately (road was till to warm) nevertheless the risk of "ice" here and there was given. Imagine snow melting and freezing a few yards further again.

I'm all too familiar with that, having grown up in snow. We called that slick ice that results from melting and refreezing "black ice." It was especially bad in areas with wind blowing snow over the road, as that snow would obscure the ice.

Lane detection on a highway is easy as you have a barrier on one side and poles on the other, actually you have poles on both sides.

Ah. Many of our highways here lack barriers and poles, instead just using large grassy areas to divide the highway from the surrounding environment, such as this. Those same highways can be up to 3 lanes wide. I've driven on I-94 (recently the site of a 90-car pileup) in conditions where drivers created 2 lanes out of the 3 that exist, because there wasn't any real reference to go by to find the lanes.

And yet...

[Lumpy]

They cant handle traffic on 696 or 96 in Detroit. Ford, I'll be impressed if they can self drive in detroit from Southfield to Downriver at 5:00pm.

Bigger Question

[SuperKendall]

Where can I pay to watch that?

All those robot fighting shows got way too boring. Time to step it up a notch with contests for self-driving cars. Self-driving races, self driving demolition derbies... etc.

Marketing Deluxe !

[Anonymous Coward]

What will happen is the purpose of cars won't be vehicles for humans to use for transportation. The car will be a giant marketing spigot, and Fords big product will be "big rich premium data".

LIDAR

[Mr Z]

LIDAR stands for Laser Infrared Detection and Ranging. Why does the summary say "(light, radar)" after LIDAR? RADAR uses radio waves, not infrared laser.

(And yes, Mr. Pedantic, I realize radio waves and infrared light waves are both electromagnetic waves. But, our mechanisms for detecting things in the radar band vs. the infrared light band are quite different, so the distinction is meaningful.)