Slashdot Mirror
Lyft CEO: Self-Driving Cars Aren't the Future
Nerval's Lobster writes Google, Tesla, Mercedes and others are working hard to build the best self-driving car. But will anyone actually buy them? In a Q&A session at this year's South by Southwest, Lyft CEO Logan Green insisted the answer is "No." But does Green truly believe in this vision, or is he driven (so to speak) by other motivations? It's possible that Green's stance on self-driving cars has to do more with Uber's decision to aggressively fund research into that technology. Uber CEO Travis Kalanick announcing that self-driving cars were the future was something that greatly upset many Uber drivers, and Green may see that spasm of anger as an opportunity to differentiate Lyft in the hearts and minds of the drivers who work for his service. Whether or not Green's vision is genuine, we won't know the outcome for several more years, considering the probable timeframes before self-driving cars hit the road... if ever.
Buggy whip makers said automobiles aren't the future.
That is exactly what we're facing with 'self' driving cars hooked into what is becoming the 'legal' authorization system. Late on your taxes? Guess you're not getting to work.
if the CEO of Uber and the CEO of Lyft both shut the fuck up. These two dimwits never have anything important or interesting to say. These two companies developed an easy way to find a ride share; they didn't invent the damn car. Like Mercedes, Google, or Tesla care what Logan Green thinks.
If Uber is right, and self driving cars are the future - the Uber drivers today can buy one, and send it off driving for Uber while they sit at home instead of driving. Or more likely they can sit inside reading, just to be present as a chaperone for the car in order to prevent their property from being part of a dramatic re-enactment of the Johnny Cab scene in Running Man...
Either way, less work.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
And what does he care about the outcome? A taxi service made up of drivers and a taxi service made up of self-driving cars would still do the same job, get people from points A to B (and any points A.1, A.2, A.3, etc inbetween) and charge them for it.
I have no doubt that there are morons like the Uber CEO who would try self driving cars, but there are morons who take peach pits for cancer.
There won't be self driving cars. Not after the morons learn the hard way that having something dumber than an ant driving a car is a horrible horrible idea.
The only question is, will it take any deaths, or will intelligent people make the decision first?
Uber was just raided for harboring Skynet, after all. Sure, at first it's just staying inside lanes and stopping before you rear-end something; but after the evil-bit flips, the roadways look like Carmageddon minus the reset button.
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
self fighting wars. Hell we don't even need a country, just set out bots to kill people and call that a war.
These cars would be 'herded' off the roadways in the following manner. Ok, you and other rednecks are driving on the freeway and along comes a self driving car. The the rednecks band together to herd the car off the next exit using a box in technique and since the cars would have to avoid accidents at all costs it can be forced onto an exit. Or maybe the rednecks box the car in and incrementally drive faster until they are going 120 mph. The box disintegrates on cue leaving the self driving car to panic.
Could be a lot of fun!
Not a private person, no. Self-driving cars will be bought by public transportation companies to build up fleets of driverless cars.
Are self driving cars the future of transportation? Yes. The only question is how far in the future. Current technology can do many of the tasks of driving a car very well. Lane following is a good example of that. They also do many tasks very poorly. Differentiating someone waving hello from someone trying to warn you of danger is an example. To do the more complex tasks requires great leaps in AI. When will these advances happen? I think it will take at least a few decades. Ever heard of the 80/20 rule? In this case 80% of the challenges can be solved with 20% of the effort. That last 20% is going to take 80% of the effort.
self driving cars? You'll have to take the steering wheel away from my cold, dead palms...iceholes!
Buggy whip makers said automobiles aren't the future.
The relationship of the buggy whip makers to the automobiles can not be compared to the CEO of a competitor to Uber to the driverless automobiles
Both the horses powered vehicles and the automobiles were/are equipped with drivers, the difference is in what's inside
An apples to apples comparison would be comparing that guy to automobiles which flies (rocket powered or some kind of 'levitating cars')
:) just wait till terrorist nerds are programming self driving cars to cause accidents on purpose. It will be fun like battlebots!
I'll tell you what the future is, and the CEOs of Lyft, Uber, etc. know it as well:
Self-driving car-sharing vehicles.
I'm a huge fan of the new car-sharing services that have popped up in recent years. The ones where you simply pick up a car wherever you find it (your iPhone App will show you the nearest ones if you are looking), drive to where you want, and leave it there for the next person to take.
You have a car when you need it, don't need to bother with it when you don't, you don't need to worry about fuel, inspections, washing it - nothing. And you can take the car you need for today. Good weather? Cabrio. Need to transport something? Bigger trunk. etc.
Main disadvantage? Sometimes there's no car nearby, and of course the usual parking space hunt in the city.
Solution: Self-driving cars. Tap a button on your smartphone, the nearest car comes and picks you up. Just exit it at destination and it'll go away by itself, either finding a parking space or going to the next person who called one. If it's an electric car, it can also go and find a charging station if it wants.
Who needs taxis? Who needs Lyft?
They know this, of course, and they know it's coming.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Yes, Total Recall is right! Thanks for the correction.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I would buy a self-driving car as long as I was not liable should it get into an accident. Then I'd sleep in the back, or (censored), or do work. It would be awesome! And eventually everyone would buy one and wonder why anyone ever cared.
I think that autonomous vehicles will come and go, but they'll be around almost as long as cars with drivers. I'd bet that in the long-long term, urban planning will change such that cars become entirely unnecessary in all but the most remote places. I don't think that we'll ever become so densely populated that the world is one big city, but I'll bet that we'll see large high-rise condos become much much more common, and then it'll be a ride down an elevator to do your shopping and a walk or train ride to school.
It's not that suburbia isn't awesome. It's just the direction I kind of envision things going in. I could be wrong. This sort of radical shift in urban planning would take centuries, to take hold in the west.
the opposite of "really cool."
They're "really cool" in the same way that genital herpes is "really cool".
the intelligence to avoid situations better than say an actually intelligent being?
What the hell are you thinking?
And you know "you are already screwed" situations happen all the time. Putting a damn computer in the driver's seat just insures that we having something insentient, incapable of understanding the situation "making decisions" when those situations happen.
I put "making decisions" in quotes because a moronic machine has no idea that it's making decisions. God.
Do you really think so little of thought that it never occurs to you that it's important?
and software doesn't have it.
Really. I can't believe that all these nerds like to pretend that their toys are actually thinking. They're not. And "self driving cars" won't know that they're driving, won't know what a human is, won't know what a horse is, won't know what ANY OF THE THINGS IN THE ENVIRONMENT ARE. They won't recognize when trillion of possible conditions are strange.
You want something totally insentient DRIVING A CAR?
Are you all insentient yourselves?
Lyft CEO: Self-Driving Cars Aren't the Future
"...I hope."
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
life and death situations. I'm a big fan of A.I. including "strong AI" (means actually sentient) a big enough fan that I know that we're no\where near having competent general A.I. let alone some incompetent version of strong A.I.
Only sentient beings should be allowed to drive. Period.
That's a fact about "self driving vehicles". Now what is supposed to make them worth the risk to every person in society who might be near a road sometime?
I'm really sorry to have to be so direct but that is the dumbest argument I've ever heard.
Driving is not a matter of intelligence. It's a matter of reaction. Sure, intelligence and experience help you anticipate when other drivers are being idiots, but there is very little involved in driving that can not be compensated by reaction time and adhering to proper distances.
The biggest hurdle to take is to correctly measure the surroundings. If you did that via image recognition, then yes, AI would be important. But there is laser, radar, GPS and so many other sensors involved that do nothing more than note distances to targets, location on road etc.
Autonomous driving certainly isn't trivial, but the other thing you have to keep in mind is that your oh so intelligent human drivers are actually driving like morons a lot of the time.
Please stop putting the bar for autonomous driving so high the systems have to practically be perfect the be viable. The moment they are twice as good as a human should be the moment we start switching. And we're not far from that.
Remember how badly the average driver actually drives. And then remember that half of them drive worse than that.
Add on top of that networked driving, where cars coordinate over several hundred meters and you'll see so much potential gain even from non-perfect systems it's staggering.
How about if we make sure that machines can do ordinary tasks before we put them in a position of endangering everyone who goes near a road?
Sure we'll have intelligent machines one day. So we're suppose to have machines driving vehicles some 80 years before they're smart? What idiot thought THAT was a good idea?
The moment something in reality changes, the map is wrong.
The moment there's radio interference, the GPS doesn't work.
The moment one of 10^20 things you know about but a machine wouldn't changes, you'd know that something was wrong but a machine wouldn't. Is it really that hard to see that having machine driving before machine intelligence is idiotic?
Population is getting older and the ethical questions regarding letting someone have a driver's licence or take it away at a certain age due to statistical reasons is getting more severe. The answer is in technology, the cars break automatically when needed and automation keep the car in the right lanes. I don't mind taking the extra step to let the car do the driving completely because that would allow me to do something more productive during the voyage. Remember that we will get all kinds of GPS surveillance and automatic speed limits before the transition, driving is not considered fun anymore at that point.
There's a lot of filtering to hide just how inaccurate GPSes are. That doesn't matter when a human is looking at a screen and ignoring it when it's obviously wrong. But it makes a huge difference when an idiotic machine is driving.
Self driving cars operated by the owner are a different situation from that of self driving taxis. The owner and rider interests diverge when those are different people. A self driving taxi has to protect itself from theft & abuse and protect its owner from lawsuits. That mean the person riding in the taxi won't be allowed to arbitrarily stop it, assume manual control, or exit in locations considered by the taxi owner to be unsafe. Putting my car in self driving mode with my average speed 10 mph in gridlock sounds attractive. Getting into a little vehicle capable of traveling to arbitrary locations and trusting it like I would a train takes the early adopter impulse right out of me. Maybe self driving buses would make the transition better.
would make an awesome way to kidnap.
Say there's an earthquake. Or a rockslide. Or an avalanche.
Humans can see if there's a gap in the road. They can see if the road has moved. They can judge unusual conditions.
If the roads are full of machine drivers will have to simply stop, because the machines won't have the judgement to handle the situations.
iCar asap. They can't wait to see a real car driven by a furby! It doesn't matter how dangerous it is.
The first will be the self drive lorries and once we see them not crashing or killing cyclist we will start using them. BUT on the other hand if the do crash....
They might as well asked the CEO of Tim Hortons about the future of undersea exploration.
Lyft CEO doesn't know shit about cars or the automotive industry, why the hell is anyone asking his opinion as if he is an expert?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
That's the future.
A lot more useful than self-driving cars.
In St. Petersburg, Russia subway does actually already have a computer-driven vehicles. The problem there is much simple: there is a single path. All you need is essentially only start/stop commands. Subway carts driving is completely automated. But the person still sits there. Probably for legal and emergency reason. For example if somebody is holding a door, preventing it from closing - initially automated voice would make an announcement: "do not hold the door", if no effect - machinist would yell on PA. I think if you want to have a self-driving car you need to modify the road, not the car, making it more like subway/railroad with all its advantages and disadvantages.
the opposite of "really cool."
They're "really cool" in the same way that genital herpes is "really cool".
And 30,000 lives lost every year is "really cool"? Don't dismiss the power of humans being the wheel to FUCK UP.
do you really want to be in one hurling down the highway at 85MPH (I'm in Utah) and trusting that the automated systems are going to know the difference between a coyote or a tumbleweed?
yes! They can react faster to obstacles than I ever can. (See the automatic braking in many of the 2015 new cars.)
I want self driving cars. They won't be stupid enough to tailgate, their attention won't waver and it'll be superior to humans in just about every condition.
Rush hour traffic will go more smoothly.
Computer flakes out? Like how humans are constantly flaking out: drinking, lack of sleep, talking on cell phones, yakking to their passenger, ....
Self driving cars for the win!
...I plead, please, for no self-driving cars.
Whenever there is doubt about what a driver's intentions are, I look at their face to see whether they have noticed me - whether they're intending to drive on have seen me and are slowing down, waving me across, or whatever. This glance / hand movement is more reliable than checking the instruction of any traffic lights (should there happen to be an) or interpreting a flash of the headlamps or whatever.
With a self-driving car, how do I communicate with the driver? Do I just start walking across the road regardless and cross my fingers that the computer will have seen me? Or must I treat crossing every road now like crossing train tracks: if any car is within sight or sound, even if it could technically "see" me, I now have to assume it cannot?
What intelligence are you referring to? I live in Atlanta and I can say with Certainty there is no intelligence behind the steering wheels here. I hope to see the day when self driving cars are common and it is illegal for humans to drive on the major highways. Then that blond woman who is always On her phone and doing her makeup will no longer be a safety hazard -or that guy in the beamer who thinks the freeway is his and runs everyone off the road. Or the people the somehow end up on the freeway backwards. Etc....
On a serious note I do not believe humans are very good at handling complex and rapidly changing situations like dense traffic on freeways. I will be more the comfortable letting a computer handle it.
And we shall call them AutoPods. The problem with car-sharing is people are just plain ole' nasty and gross. If I wanted to ride share then I would just ride in taxis. And as much as a cabbie tries to keep their taxi clean, it's still something icky. Whether it's the smells, stains, organic matter of varying sorts, or the degrees of filth, people will not be embracing the utopic car-sharing vision. Because if a cabbie can't keep their taxi clean, what makes you think the average person will too?
I think car manufacturers will become more like telecom carriers and make more commodity like cars expecting people to trade up every two to three years. (This might coincide with battery longevity.) Then you are locked into a subscription based model similar to car leases now. The car manufacturers could get into the insurance game just as easy as they transitioned into the maintenance and warranty parts. I have been with my telecom and insurance carrier for over 25 years. I get insanely great rates. Why not with car manufacturers? Cars would then need to be made to be more modular so that it can be taken part, cleaned, refurbished and made into next years model. Many car components carry over from year to year in many makes and models.
There things that can happen with auto drive cars that fall under criminal liability and criminal courts.
I have a friend who is epileptic who would really benefit from this, there are times that she simply can't drive. Her roommate has fibromyalgia, and there are times she's almost immobilized by pain. Me, I'd want one as the two out of state places that I go to the most are 500 and 620 miles away, I'd LOVE the ability to pilot the car to the interstate then sit back with a book.
The problem is idiot American drivers. I've been accident-free for over 20 years now, but having worked for a police department and helped develop a database for tracking car accidents, I definitely appreciate the infinite diversity of the idiots out there on the road.
When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
Road rage. Won't happen with self-driving cars. Also, gang-bangers will have a harder time doing drive-by shootings, car jackings, etc.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
The biggest hurdle to take is to correctly measure the surroundings. If you did that via image recognition, then yes, AI would be important. But there is laser, radar, GPS and so many other sensors involved that do nothing more than note distances to targets, location on road etc.
And this is impossible IMO. On a busy road you are only centimetres from other vehicles doing 60km/h, 120km/h for oncoming traffic. A human accepts that the car next to him probably won't change lanes suddenly and crash, so accepts the risk knowing that there is a chance it could happen. A computer needs AI to decide which of those risks are acceptable. When you come around a slight bend and a car is coming straight at you, you know they are likely to miss (still might hit, but that is the risk you accept) because of the bend in the road means the driver will veer past you. How does a computer work whether that is an acceptable risk, or an actual impending collision which requires emergency braking? The public road has too many variables. Too many risks that a human accepts that a computer won't be allowed to.
Man with stake in business driving people places claims new technology that would obviate said business aren't the future! News at 11.
The fact you are comparing the processing power of a self-driving car to a SunPlus SPC81A shows you're not even bothered in having a rational, adult discussion. You've made your mind up and no amount of evidence will dissuade you from vomiting up paranoid, incorrect nonsense for all to see, as if somehow everyone else won't instantly realise you are a grade-A muppet.
Anti: blah, blah, blah, self-driving cars will never be good enough, they're unsafe, they don't think!!!!!1111 Panic!!!1111
Pro: Yes, they're wonderful and never distracted and will be better than puppies and rainbows!!!!!11111
It's really simple. People who want it to work are trying to make it work. If you antis are right, they won't be good enough and they'll never be much more than a curiosity. If you pros are right, they'll be provably better and the anti argument will be simply refuted by saying "Look at the data."
Pepsi CEO: Water is not the future.
This argument reminds me of the arguments I heard about seat belts (e.g. I want to be thrown clear in a crash, Don't want to drown trying to unbuckle, etc.) Children are run down pretty regularly, so are dogs. In many, if not most, of those cases the car could have been stopped safely if 1) the human driver reacted faster / wasn't distracted and 2) the driver was traveling at a speed safe for context and conditions.
I assume the statistic that 90% of automobile accidents are caused by human error is correct. The automated cars of the near future won't be perfect -- but they will outperform humans as drivers by a large margin.
The sensors and programming used in the self driving cars will continue to improve (at a much faster rate than human drivers improve -- if they do at all). Black ice is "invisible" to most drivers. Is it invisible in the infrared? Could wheel sensors detect minute slippage and compensate faster than a human? Could networked self driving cars warn each other of such conditions as they are encountered?
It is true that specially designed roads would also improve self driving cars, but even on today's roads they will be superior to human drivers.
I'm really sorry to have to be so direct but that is the dumbest argument I've ever heard.
Driving is not a matter of intelligence. It's a matter of reaction. Sure, intelligence and experience help you anticipate when other drivers are being idiots, but there is very little involved in driving that can not be compensated by reaction time and adhering to proper distances.
actually extracting raw enviornment data is fairly trivial compared to the interpretation, fusion, and implementation problems. When sensor data conflicts, or sensors become dirty, its things get hard. But how do you know if that bicycle is going to stop when its trajectory intersects with your vehicle? People make eye contact to make sure the cyclist sees you - simply running them over for a minor infraction is not a solution, nor is applying the brakes every time any pedestrian or cyclist is near
The biggest hurdle to take is to correctly measure the surroundings. If you did that via image recognition, then yes, AI would be important. But there is laser, radar, GPS and so many other sensors involved that do nothing more than note distances to targets, location on road etc.
as above this is the most trivial thing - if that was all that it took it would be already solved
Autonomous driving certainly isn't trivial, but the other thing you have to keep in mind is that your oh so intelligent human drivers are actually driving like morons a lot of the time.
Please stop putting the bar for autonomous driving so high the systems have to practically be perfect the be viable. The moment they are twice as good as a human should be the moment we start switching. And we're not far from that.
Remember how badly the average driver actually drives. And then remember that half of them drive worse than that.
Add on top of that networked driving, where cars coordinate over several hundred meters and you'll see so much potential gain even from non-perfect systems it's staggering.
With 50 different brands, car nuts screaming the government is taking away their freedom, etc. We will never have cooperative piloting on general roads. It's pretty obvious you have never worked with this technology.
You say that as if this isn't already a solved problem. There are loads of autonomous vehicles already successfully navigating the public roads in general traffic. This technology is so far along that companies like Nvidia have off-the-shelf autonomous car kits on the market, ready for carmakers to integrate into their vehicles.
Your rant sounds like the guy in 1906 saying that travelling faster than 35 mph was impossible as the Stanley Steamer screams past at 120 mph in the background.
We will see businesses insist upon self driving cars. The local pizza joint has huge issues with delivery. The liability as well as the expense create too much demand for self driving vehicles. Imagine a machine making your pizza and another machine boxing that pizza and loading it into an autonomous vehicle for delivery. A human might need to come in a few minutes a day to be certain that all is well but the entire business can be automated with zero labor expenses. Then imagine insurance companies pushing for self driving cars. After all the great risk to their profits is not sheet metal but wounded mortals. So the local grocery store can pull your order, slam it to your debit card and your autonomous vehicle can pull into the loading bay and bring it home to you. Reduced exposure to driver and passenger injuries will cause insurance companies to push for self driving vehicles. The grocery stores will love it as they will need far less cashiers and they won't even need top display the products to the public. Frankly businesses could care less about the public or what the public wants or needs. Businesses care about money and money says that cars and trucks without humans are far more profitable. Imagine Fed X or UPS doing their thing without human drivers.
I think it's clear from his posts that Cafe Alpha has emotional problems and isn't much of a thinker. You can't fix stupid or willful-ignorance.
Dave420 tossing names? Try this http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Evolve enough to backup your b.s. Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Driving A.I. is pretty advanced today, but not ready for widespread use. That is a temporary state. Someday it will be ready, and when its competence can be demonstrated, it will be adopted. It is just a matter of time.
Maybe that time is as near as tomorrow, but it is not today.
You've no valid arguments do you, Dave420? Nope -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
You're not clever! You're a troll who RAN Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Get a job.
Full disclosure: I worked in software as a developer for a decade for multiple companies.
It bothers me immensely that every statement promoting self-driving cars on Slashdot is treated with optimistic fervor (see the post on the Tesla CEO's statement, which doesn't include any reference to how his company might benefit from such a transition), while statements against it are treated with derision.
I, for one, am terrified of a self-driving car. The thought of an industry that brought us the blue screen of death for 10 years (Microsoft), antennas that don't work when you hold a phone the way you're supposed to hold it (Apple), arbitrary dissolution of major platforms like Google Reader (Google), and the horrible user interfaces that have plagued the entire history of open source, actually controlling that two-thousand pound death machine that Elon Musk refers to is frightening to say the least.
Bugs are considered a given and acceptable in the software industry. Ask anyone in the software industry to comment on QA people and the best comments you will get are begrudging necessariness, while most will pile on the sarcastic derision and question the very existence of the department as a waste. The industry seems to think that it's okay for the user base to figure out what's wrong and get back to them.
Compare that to aviation, where every misstep is considered catastrophic and in need of a massive campaign to find and fix the problem. Substantial money and effort go into finding problems and solving them. Why? Because people die when something goes wrong on a plane. Until the software industry grows up and starts treating their products as something that needs to be bulletproof before delivery, I don't them anywhere near a car.
> Remember how badly the average driver actually drives.
But that's not me! I'm the perfect driver! Everyone else is an idiot!
This is why the switch will be difficult. People wont switch until driverless cars are better than their mental image of their own driving skills. So, mostly never.
...what about motorcycles and other vehicles that don't fit the "car" mold? And here's hoping they don't allow M$ Windows, it would give a whole new meaning to the 'Blue Screen of Death'!
Although I believe self driving cars will come and sooner than later. I do believe we will see a more significant uptake in other markets.
1. The first place where I see self driving cars is in industry where laying train track are impractical. Self driving vehicles that can pickup and drop off equipment and raw materials in mines comes to mind.
2. Truck that drive themselves. No need for a truck driver simply buy a self driving truck and have it do your deliveries for you. The major liability and costs of a truck driver simply disapear.
3. Insurance: Lets be honest insurance companies will very soon realise that self driving cars are simply safer so insurance premiums will be considrably cheaper on self driving vehicles.
Etc. Etc.
Yes there will be resistance but like everything it will eventually be addopted. How many of you still take the stairs rather than the lift in case the computer driving the lift somehow crashes.
Build a better system than apk did here (you can't) http://slashdot.org/comments.p... since you're running from a completely fair challenge put to you vs. your trolling talk big crap (but nothing we can see that you've ever done better, loser).
I love the idea of self driving cars but its never going to happen. The first hurdle is Revenue specifically the government self driving means no,tickets,no DUI's,etc. So that is a huge loss to the coffers of government as a whole. The second issue is can a self driving car handle or react to a non self driving car or changing road conditions such as Ice or snow? It would be nice though to start you work day in your car on the way to work knocking out that first hour normally lost in traffic. or have a few at a party without any worries of getting home safe and sound but if it can't generate revenue or fill the financial gap then I doubt it will ever become a reality.
Thanks, APK! Off your meds again?
modeling? How about if we wait until we all have experience that computers are good at the basics before we assume that they can safely drive cars?
And APK = guy with serious mental health issues who needs help but doesn't realise it.
That doesn't stand up too well vs. you trolling apk + running here http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Dave420 that's the best you've got? R O T F L M A O @ U & so is everyone else reading.
And one of these days, I'll take a picture of a road I use going to or from my home on the occasions when I drive: 3 lanes wide, parked cars in one lane, no center stripe, oh, and did I mention that buses use this street? No, a self-driving car will have smoke coming out of its ears....
On the other hand, self-driving. They're going to be *really* expensive. For less money than that, couldn't you use existing methods of getting somewhere without having to drive? There is this thing called "public transportation", as well as this business called "taxis", and all your fares, over the estimated lifetime of a self-driving car are probably a *lot* less than you'd spend on the car.
Oh, and how safe will you feel knowing there are 5 and 10 year old self-driving cars, some years from now, many bought used, whose owners may, or may not have had the recall upgrades applied?
mark
You seem like an escaped, cowardly-yet-aggressive mental patient.
95% of driving might be mundane, but an alarming number of people where I live seem incapable of doing that 95%. The number of times I've seen someone on the side of the road that have run into a telephone pole. Daily I see at least 1 car that can't stay in a lane. Definitely multiple times a day that people just doesn't use their turn signals at all, and I know some of them. People driving through stop signs and red lights.
According to local statistics most accidents are caused by drugs and failures to follow traffic rules. Our police keep on going on about how speed kills and there are articles in the paper quite frequently about how these people were racing, or just driving really fast. The thing I find funny about these articles is that usually they will have the smallest line about them being way over on their blood alcohol level, high on heroin, or stoned on marijana, but they really try to downplay these parts.
Right now self driving cars would stop the majority of accidents.
How about that 5%? Well as more self driving cars would get on the road, that 5% would probably shrink to less than 1%, depending on the area. Plus there are already real time algorithms for detecting moving objects, coupled with multiple cameras the car can see things like deer and children much sooner than humans and react to them.
The main problems will be in the transition where there are still human drivers doing really stupid things and the self driving cars. We humans are affected by lack of sleep, by drugs, but not getting enough vitamins, distractions, tunnel vision, bad driving habits, missing signage, having two eyes facing one direction at a time, and sometimes just pure stupidity.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
How does it feel to be someone's obviously mentally ill AC stalker? Is it a satisfying life?
See subject & "see Dave run", hahahaha -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... so let's see YOU try prove apk wrong + build something better than he has, shall we, instead of your trolling and running, ok? Never will happen or you would've done it long ago, and clearly, you can't. This is the price of your bigmouth do nothing trolling, worm, given right back to you and it's priceless seeing you "Run", Forrest, lol!
You pathetically ran from a fair challenge Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p... what's the matter? Can't backup your bullshit, bullshitter?? Yes, obviously! Downmodding last time I posted this too??? Please, lmao @ u, big talking trolling dolt!
Dave420 sockpuppet: Why'sh Dave420 running here http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after trolling apk and showing he's too incompetent and weak in computing to back up his trolling against valid facts apk posted? Nothing. You must be his sockpuppet. Am I right?? Odds are yes. You toss names just like DO NOTHING Dave420 the "ne'er-do-well" troll does after all!
See subject & Dave420 ran here you sockpuppet http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
See subject & read ALL about it folks http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
See subject & read ALL about it folks http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and all Dave420 the hypocrite has is 'arguing from emotion' and name tossing illogical ad hominem attacks vs. facts apk put out that shut stupid Dave up easily as always, lol!
See subject Dave420 & for the rest of us, this http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and suddenly you can't say anymore, now can you? Nope. Saw your post history and all you have is calling apk names now. Sad, sad, sad on your part, troll.
Why downmod this when I posted it before Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ? Oh, we KNOW why (it shows your true colors, yellow, you little cowardly troll do nothing worthwhile zero that you clearly are).
Why keep running from this Dave420? We KNOW why http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Why run from this ya trolling little shitweasel? We know why http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and it's simply because you're a shitweasel big talking but done zero "ne'er-do-well" (and YOU know it. We all do, based on your results = zero).
See subject, keep running: There's no help for you forrest http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Humans see you run from a fair challenge Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p... and it is HILARIOUS to see you run like a bitch, ya trollin whimp! Trying to hide it with sockpuppet downmods too?? LOL, don't worry - I can just repost it endlessly and watch you burn up your modpoints trying to hide your fuckups! It's classic and BIG humor and nobody deserves it like you do, whimp.
See subject: Now THAT's hilarious + apk spanking you http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
You've got delusions of grandeur of being a psychiatric pro that's licensed (of course, you're not, so I wonder if libel is escapable by those with your "delicate condition" (lol)?).
Hah.
The moment the switch will start is when folks can demonstrate no congestion due to rubbernecking because some crazy event is happening within view of the driver. ( Police, Elvis sighting, Alien Abduction, construction, whatever )
I DREAM of the day that bumper to bumper gridlock is gone because the lead idiots up front are too busy tweeting about some crazy accident they see instead of ignoring it and driving on. :|
I don't know why folks trash the technology so quickly. Consider how many people die in auto-accidents today. As long as accidents involving automated driving numbers human driver numbers, then it's already a better solution.
See subject: Trying to hide it (see Dave420's post history & it's obvious). Dave420 downmodded a few dozen times by sockpuppets and when those ran dry from his sockpuppets, only then is when he started his weak ad hominem attack based bullshit like all trolls do only to find out he can't outlast apk's unlimited ac posting ability and apk just came over the top of his downmods posting it again & again. It is hilarious but more hilarious how Dave420 = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" and stfu and ran vs. apk's points of fact dumbass Dave420 can't validly technically overcome.
See subject (hence Dave420's weak illogical ad hominem attack now): His whole post history today is full of his downmods of where it's pointed out Dave420 trolled, and ran when he can't prove apk wrong. However, when the downmods suddenly stop and Dave420 comes out with these weak bs replies (tired, worn-out & weak like he is)? You know it's the truth in the subject. He ran outta sockpuppet modpoints and RAN like a trolling shitweasel he is from apk, here http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Dave420 proved it yet again today, here http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Get the fuck off the road! YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM! Stop playing Barney Fucking Fife. It's not your job to sit in the left lane and block traffic to enforce what you think the speed limit should be- even if it is 10 over. We got shit to do!
Please stop spamming the forum with your silly crusade. You've managed to become far more irritating than anything he's done. At least Dave stays on topic and his posts aren't made entirely of ad hominem. Trolls accusing trolls of being trolls. Yawn.
"Eat your words" Dave420 or prove me wrong http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (which you've failed TONS of times @ & you always ran from that completely FAIR challenge to you, just like the trolling weasel you clearly are...)
* Tell us: How do those words of yours taste flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat" & washed down with your foot in your mouth ramming them down your throat? R O T F L M A O...
APK
P.S.=> You called me ALL KINDS of names: Well, since you're technically incompetent & the above link will just prove it again? Live up to a fair challenge put to you (of course, a TROLL WEASEL like yourself never has, or will - & as usual, I win - getting to make a FOOL out of you publicly, yet again also, "bonus"... lol!)... apk
"Eat your words" Dave420 or prove me wrong http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (which you've failed TONS of times @ & you always ran from that completely FAIR challenge to you, just like the trolling weasel you clearly are...)
* Tell us: How do those words of yours taste flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat" & washed down with your foot in your mouth ramming them down your throat? R O T F L M A O...
APK
P.S.=> You called me ALL KINDS of names: Well, since you're technically incompetent & the above link will just prove it again? Live up to a fair challenge put to you (of course, a TROLL WEASEL like yourself never has, or will - & as usual, I win - getting to make a FOOL out of you publicly, yet again also, "bonus"... lol!)... apk
"Eat your words" Dave420 or prove me wrong http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (which you've failed TONS of times @ & you always ran from that completely FAIR challenge to you, just like the trolling weasel you clearly are...)
* Tell us: How do those words of yours taste flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat" & washed down with your foot in your mouth ramming them down your throat? R O T F L M A O...
APK
P.S.=> You called me ALL KINDS of names: Well, since you're technically incompetent & the above link will just prove it again? Live up to a fair challenge put to you (of course, a TROLL WEASEL like yourself never has, or will - & as usual, I win - getting to make a FOOL out of you publicly, yet again also, "bonus"... lol!)... apk
"Eat your words" Dave420 or prove me wrong http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (which you've failed TONS of times @ & you always ran from that completely FAIR challenge to you, just like the trolling weasel you clearly are...)
* Tell us: How do those words of yours taste flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat" & washed down with your foot in your mouth ramming them down your throat? R O T F L M A O...
APK
P.S.=> You called me ALL KINDS of names: Well, since you're technically incompetent & the above link will just prove it again? Live up to a fair challenge put to you (of course, a TROLL WEASEL like yourself never has, or will - & as usual, I win - getting to make a FOOL out of you publicly, yet again also, "bonus"... lol!)... apk
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Your mouth's full of your words you're eating http://slashdot.org/comments.p... after you were fairly called out and RAN. You *really* need to change your diet Dave420! Eating your words != GOOD NUTRITION!
Tell us, how does eating your words taste flavored with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat rammed down your throat since your foot's in your mouth?
Above all else: Get some manners, Dave420 - it's NOT POLITE to talk w/ your mouth full (lmao) of those words of yours you're eating, hahahaha.
(Amazing you can still talk your gibberish bullshit, actually, considering your mouth's full as you "eat your words" (lmao))
Riding in a vehicle, where the one in control is not themselves in the vehicle with you, is probably not the best decision you could make. 8-)
The problem hasn't been solved because I can't buy one and use it today. Marketing hype and vapourware, is different from a solution.