Slashdot Mirror
The Economic Consequences of Self-Driving Trucks
An anonymous reader writes: Last week we learned that self-driving big-rig trucks were finally being deployed on public roads in Nevada for testing purposes. Experts consider trucking to be ripe for replacement with AI because of the sheer volume of trucks on the road, and the relative simplicity of their routes. But the eventual replacement of truck drivers with autonomous driving systems will have a huge impact on the U.S. economy: there are 3.5 million professional truck drivers, and millions more are employed to support and coordinate them. Yet more people rely on truckers to stay in business — gas stations, motels, and restaurants along trucking routes, to name a few.
Now, that's not to say moving forward with autonomous driving is a bad idea — in 2012, roughly 4,000 people died in accidents with large trucks, and almost all of the accidents were caused by driver error. Saving most of those lives (and countless injuries) is important. But we need to start thinking about how to handle the 10 million people looking for work when the (human) trucking industry falls off a cliff. It's likely we'll see another wave of ghost towns spread across the poor parts of the country, as happened when the interstate highway system changed how long-range transportation worked in the U.S.
Now, that's not to say moving forward with autonomous driving is a bad idea — in 2012, roughly 4,000 people died in accidents with large trucks, and almost all of the accidents were caused by driver error. Saving most of those lives (and countless injuries) is important. But we need to start thinking about how to handle the 10 million people looking for work when the (human) trucking industry falls off a cliff. It's likely we'll see another wave of ghost towns spread across the poor parts of the country, as happened when the interstate highway system changed how long-range transportation worked in the U.S.
As the republicans would say: let the markets sort themselves out.
Some of those unemployed will just kill themselves (some of these will jump in front of an automated truck and hope the AI is as good as a person in not avoiding them). Others will sabotage the trucks, then go to prison (the social system that the republicans approve of). A bunch might start businesses around those trucks. Another bunch will spill into other low-paying markets, like plumbing, cleaning, babysitting, which are already oversubscribed. Some will go on killing sprees targeted towards the managers and owners of those companies that laid them off. The less aggressive and less suicidal bunch will probably go onto some social program (that is not prison) that the republicans disapprove of on grounds of "socialism".
tl;dr; Only a small amount will actually go into business for themselves. The rest will flood other markets (which are already overflowing), and the end result will be socialism and/or violence.
The summary says "in 2012, roughly 4,000 people died in accidents with large trucks, and almost all of the accidents were caused by driver error. Saving most of those lives (and countless injuries) is important." My brother is a truck driver, and from what he has told me, and also what I have seen reported multiple times, and what I have seen myself, the vast majority of accidents involving trucks are caused by car drivers misbehaving around truck. They pull stunts like pulling in front of them at merges then hitting the brakes. An autonomous truck will hit such a car just like a manned truck, so I think the claim that automating the trucks will save most of those lives is wrong.
Your brother is correct. Professional drivers can drive hundreds of thousands of miles per year, while Joe Blow in his Honda may do 15,000. Statistics show that most accidents involving a larger truck are, in fact, the fault of the car. So automating trucking won't help.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
To give a counterexample, I was driving down a long hill that I have driven daily for 20+ years. At the bottom of the hill, right before it went around a curve, I saw cars hitting their brakes, and knew there was probably a traffic jam around the corner, so I started slowing down.
There was a truck driver pretty far behind me, and he didn't bother slowing down until he came around the curve, saw the traffic jam, locked his brakes, and ran off the road, and blamed me for the accident.
I'm a physics major, so I measured the location of where he locked his brakes, and the point he came to a stop. A little high school algebra showed he was moving 80-85 MPH in a 70 MPH zone when he hit his brakes.
For that reason, I subsequently installed a dashcam in my car. It pays for itself the first time some idiot lies and tries to pin the blame on you.
There are no such people. I mean, if there were, then WTF would they do when they go on a trip to a different state? Stand next to the gas pump and act helpless, like a drooling moron?
I went to visit in-laws in Oregon a while back, and was amazed at how much of a pain in the ass getting gas there was. In normal states, you can just get out, pump the gas, pay, and leave. But in Oregon? In Oregon you have to wait in line for fucking ever because they have one guy running around handling all the pumps and there's a line of cars waiting because he can't keep up. People from Oregon say "oh, isn't it great how we don't have to pump our own gas?" No, it really fucking isn't! It's worse!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
It will help SOME. Automatic drivers will not suffer degradations of reaction time due to distractions or getting sleepy. But that might just prompt drivers to be even more risky around trucks because they assume it will always be able to react to whatever stupid shit they pull. (Physics be damned!)
I wouldn't say it's worse than useless. But it may not be the panacea that we expect.
First, I have my doubts about the whole "A.I. Can Handle Anything" theory. Weather, accidents, and construction can create very creative roadways where you will want a driver behind the wheel who'll be able to figure out and work with human beings on the scene (for example, a cop doing traffic control around an accident).
So you'll still want drivers. The question is, how many drivers will you need?
Consider long-haul trucks, which are the ones that are really ripe for automation. They usually have two drivers so that they can run 24 hours at a stretch. I believe--and I may be off--that the rules for these people require that they drive no more than 12 hours. It might be 10 hours, I don't remember. But in any event, the reason you have two drivers is so that you don't have a truck spending 12-14 hours sitting by the side of the road while the single driver sleeps.
You could get rid of one driver right there. A long haul truck with one driver who can sleep for 12 hours and will only be woken up if something weird is going on that the truck can't handle so it pulled off to the side of the road. That's still saving money versus having two drivers and is certainly not "worse than useless."
Perhaps more accurately, the A.I. MUST be able to either handle the situation or decide it can't and bring the vehicle to a safe stop to allow a driver to take over. What it must not do is suddenly buzz and expect the human to instantly take over to avoid a crash. Rule number one, the AI is responsible for the vehicle until the human voluntarily indicates he has taken over, no matter what.