Slashdot Mirror
AAA: 75% Of Drivers Say They Wouldn't Feel Safe In An Autonomous Vehicle (consumerist.com)
kheldan writes: While technology companies and car manufacturers alike are rushing to test their own autonomous vehicles, the average American driver doesn't feel quite comfortable with the idea of riding in a driverless car just yet, according to the results of a recent AAA survey. AAA's survey of 1,800 drivers found that 75% of current drivers say they wouldn't feel safe in a self-driving vehicle. But it's worth noting that 60% of those surveyed said they would like access to some kind of self-driving feature, such as self-parking, lane departure warnings, adaptive cruise control or automatic emergency braking the next time they buy a new car.
When the automobile first arrived on the scene, many of the people who shouted "get a horse" in the wake of a "stink wagon" likely would have expressed a fear of going for a ride in one. We humans tend to be conservative that way; up to a point, it's a survival trait.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Well that's a pretty amazing endorsement of autonomous vehicles, if *already* 25% of the population is accepting of a new technology they haven't yet experienced.
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
l wonder how many of those drivers make me feel unsafe when they are in control of the wheel.
1. Response time is only a small part of the equation.
2. It's not all about what YOU want.
I don't care if it takes twice as long to get anywhere ... as long as I can turn my brain off and do something else I'm happy.
This is why I take transit to work.
This, plus the fact that a lot of the people still driving seem to have turned their brains off as well.
#DeleteChrome
I think you've watched too much sci-fi. Also, there is more to life than safety. Having control over one's transport is a core component of liberal (as in liberty) society.
Even modern airline pilots don't like the idea of not having overrides on their planes.
You should not draw deep conclusions from people that have a financial interest in their opinions. Of course pilots don't think they should be replaced with software. That doesn't really say anything out the merits of the idea.
1. Response time is only a small part of the equation.
Actually, response time is a pretty big part of the equation. Even a one second faster response can avoid many accidents, and greatly reduce the severity of others. Only situational awareness is more important, and computers win there too.
That's not the point. This isn't about replacing cars with trains or living in rat warrens where overpriced crap is shipped in (by truck drivers no less). This is about replacing self driving cars with 'autonomous' ones. Just because you would be happy with 35Mph doesn't mean the rest of us should slow down and lose liberty because you want to be lazy. If you don't want to drive, pay someone to drive or move to the rat warren nearest you.
There's a reason we still put humans behind the controls of already mostly automated vehicles. Even there, look what happens to airline pilots: they get bored, drink, fall asleep, and when something does go wrong they're not in a condition to deal with it. Same thing with train operators, and that solution only has to deal with a fixed path. Since ground-based free-roving is much more complex than air or track, I have strong doubts about these ever being safer. Maybe if/when quantum computing really takes off and sensor tech is better than it is now...
Being in the minority does not make one's position invalid.
That's not the point. This isn't about replacing cars with trains or living in rat warrens where overpriced crap is shipped in (by truck drivers no less). This is about replacing self driving cars with 'autonomous' ones. Just because you would be happy with 35Mph doesn't mean the rest of us should slow down and lose liberty because you want to be lazy. If you don't want to drive, pay someone to drive or move to the rat warren nearest you.
There's a reason we still put humans behind the controls of already mostly automated vehicles. Even there, look what happens to airline pilots: they get bored, drink, fall asleep, and when something does go wrong they're not in a condition to deal with it. Same thing with train operators, and that solution only has to deal with a fixed path. Since ground-based free-roving is much more complex than air or track, I have strong doubts about these ever being safer. Maybe if/when quantum computing really takes off and sensor tech is better than it is now...
Your individual freedom ends just before my bumper, so if self-driving cars result in a significant decrease in accidents, I have little sympathy for your desire to be able to T-bone my car in an intersection and kill my family when you missed the stop sign because you sneezed.
I said that *I* would be willing to buy a 35mph self driving car, I don't expect you to, but when self-driving cars can drive the speed limit on roads of all types (and perhaps even reduce congestion through better traffic management), then driving your own car will be a novelty that only a few holdouts like you will want.
The media age of AAA members is 54 years old, in the 15 - 20 years before self driving cars reach that level of driving, most of those members will be too old to drive safely (and ironically, they'll be happy for the freedom afforded to them through self-driving cars)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Encryption can be a matter of public health. Putting a back door into it might save lives. A back door should be required. Just like vaccines. Of course, there will be people who want to retain their liberties but they'll have to stay off the public infrastructure with their old fashioned rights - if you can imagine such a thing. How quaint!
Yup. That's what you sound like. The only thing you skipped was "think of the children!"
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Holy fuck dude. "Some people don't use their rights. They lead fulfilling lives. I'll decide what rights you have and how you use them - because I'm a coward."
Again, why not just add, "Think of the children!!!" I sure as hell hope you don't have children. I'm sure as hell you'll find a way to keep justifying this to yourself. Now it's a matter of pride and it's not like you're going to actually stop wanting to take other people's ability to appreciate their freedoms. Never mind that this system can't work without it being monitored...
I'm not going to change your mind, your ego is not willing to step aside. However, maybe you can consider not breeding or something. Unlike you, I won't force you to not breed. I'll just ask you nicely, for the sake of humanity.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Holy fuck dude. "Some people don't use their rights. They lead fulfilling lives. I'll decide what rights you have and how you use them - because I'm a coward."
Wow, have built quite the strawman, haven't you? There's a big difference between your "rights" and letting a car drive for you. Driving isn't even a right, it's a privilege, tell a judge that takes away your license for DUI that he's violating your constitutional right to drive, and he'll laugh you out of the court.
Again, why not just add, "Think of the children!!!" I sure as hell hope you don't have children. I'm sure as hell you'll find a way to keep justifying this to yourself. Now it's a matter of pride and it's not like you're going to actually stop wanting to take other people's ability to appreciate their freedoms. Never mind that this system can't work without it being monitored...
I do have children, but don't worry, they are all grown up so I can't poison them with my crazy thinking anymore. Neither one has a car because they both live in World Class cities with adequate transit (NYC & Paris)
I'm not going to change your mind, your ego is not willing to step aside. However, maybe you can consider not breeding or something. Unlike you, I won't force you to not breed. I'll just ask you nicely, for the sake of humanity.
People are just not good drivers, surely you can admit to that? 30,000 driving deaths a year, 30% of them due to DUI alone. The driving fatality is falling and will fall even further as manufacturers add more automatic features like collision avoidance, blind spot checking, pedestrian warnings, lane keeping, etc. You won't even notice that you bought a self-driving car because it's not going to be a revolution, it's going to be a slow-evolution.
Reaction time is nearly insignificant if you're driving properly and using situational awareness to ensure you don't need to rely on reaction time. You're on a public highway, drive like it.
I'm reminded of a kid in here who posted a couple of weeks ago. He was happily pointing out that a good driver will always be hitting their brakes and turning sharply. That's the exact opposite of the truth.
I kind of hate to do this but I'm going to do the whole appeal to authority thing. I've driven professionally. I was initially trained in that capacity by the US Government. I've since taken countless additional courses - and can drive most anything with wheels. I can even get a loaded double-clutching 21 speed dump up to speed and control it when it gets there. I've taken dozens (and dozens more) courses for on and off-track driving. I rally on an amateur circuit when I've time. I've spent about two weeks in Germany taking classroom instruction and then hiring a coach and renting exotics and done a pile of laps on Nurburgring. I can go on - and I will, if you want. I've even taken advanced asset protection courses, can parallel park a truck and trailer (with a water-bowl attached) - that'd be about 72' long, by the way which is shorter than some of what you see on the road but still pretty long. It was not a sleeper cab or anything. Like I said, I can go on...
At any rate, the initial sentence isn't entirely accurate. Yes, reaction time is important but no - it shouldn't be. It's very seldom important if you're doing your job. In all but the rarest of rarest events, the primary reason for an accident is that someone was driving too fast for the conditions. (Before folks argue with that, reread it.) I dare say, I'm actually able to speak as an authoritative source on this. I'm not that binary, really. Reaction time is important but it needn't be (shouldn't be) nearly as important as you make it out to be - not if you're doing what you can to drive safely. Of course, it helps if others are also driving safely. What are the chances of that?
And yes, I know you're not alone on the road but you can take many steps to mitigate risks. If you see someone driving like an idiot, move away from them. Be alert not just to the vehicles around you but to how they're driving. Keep a good margin of safety between you and the other vehicles and reaction time becomes less and less important.
I do speed, don't get me wrong. I just save it for track day or a rally. I don't drive slow, not by any means. I have zero at-fault accidents on my record - I have been hit from the rear by an idiot in Boston. If you've driven in Boston, you'd understand that there are some really shitty drivers. I was stopped at a light and had been there for at least 30 seconds. I do have one speeding ticket but it has been off my record for a very long time. I got it in 1978 (I think?). I have zero moving violations. I have had three parking tickets, two of which were because someone else had borrowed my car, I'm still liable. The remaining one was mine. The sign was rather complicated including days of the week, hours, etc... It's my fault, I should have not parked there unless I understood the sign.
So, no... Reaction time isn't really that important. It certainly shouldn't be and even if it is, due to circumstances beyond your control, there are ways to mitigate that and have more time to react and maneuver safely in the event of an emergency situation. You should ALWAYS have room and time to bring yourself to a complete stop without hitting any possible obstructions, regardless. That's your job as a driver. I'm well aware that others can make this a problem and that there are things beyond your control. It is not as binary as it could be and sometimes shit happens.
It is incumbent on the driver to be in full control of their vehicle at all times. Full control means the ability to stop safely. If you're doing a panic stop, you're doing it wrong. (And, of course, there are exceptions to that. But it's generally true - even if
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
You are assuming that having the car drive for you is taking away your liberty, when that has yet to be illustrated. You still get to go to your chosen destination, only safer. You are arguing like the car will refuse to drive, or only drive to a re-education camp or something.
How about the liberty of others to not be killed by some terribly-driving lunatic? It's not about being scared, but taking sensible steps to reduce avoidable death and destruction.
While I don't always agree with you, usually you make reasoned arguments. This time it's just crude emotion - you might want to figure out if you are arguing with your heart or your brain.