Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Driverless Cars Need a Lot More Than Software, Ford CTO Says (axios.com)

Posted by msmash on from the cars-of-future dept.

In an interview, Ken Washington, Ford's Chief Technical Officer, shared company's views on how autonomy will change car design. From an article: The biggest influence will be how the cars are bought, sold and used: "You would design those vehicles differently depending on what business model (is being used). We're working through that business model question right now," he said. The biggest misconceptions about autonomous capabilities is that it's only about software: "People are imagining that the act of doing software for autonomy is all you need to do and then you can just bolt it to the car," he said. "I don't think it's possible to describe what an autonomous vehicle is going to look like," he added.

8 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Translation by burtosis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We are sick and tired of selling value at this price point. We don't easily know where you go in real time, can't divert you to areas we want you to go, or subject you to in vehicle ads, and after only a few years you are off a payment plan. We are going to fix this for you, and likely make it illegal to return to the old model of ownership and privacy rights.

  2. Business model... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The business model should include protecting people and pedestrians at all cost. A car that protects itself while getting everyone killed probably won't have a great used car value.

    1. Re:Business model... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Now if we could only find a way to program human drivers to that standard.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Business model... by clodney · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Shitty 'self driving cars' will fail spectacularly in the marketplace once people truly understand the reality of them: your real freedom taken away, as you're strapped into some machine that you have zero real control over.

      I for one will be very happy to have a machine do the driving for me. I already use adaptive cruise control and traffic jam assist on my commute, and I would happily turn over the drudgery of driving to a machine. I derive no joy from driving, though I know many people who do, and I don't begrudge them that.

      But I question the common perception that self driving cars are going to lead huge drops in car ownership. Right now my golf clubs and gym bag are in my car, and my sunglasses, and my bike rack, and my music collection. And compared to the amount of crap I see in other peoples vechicles, I am the model of tidiness. Music can migrate to my phone, and I can carry my sunglasses easily enough, but how do I call for a car that has a bike rack that fits a recumbent bike? I can take my golf clubs in an uber type car to work, then to the course, then back home, but that is a bunch of schlepping that is easier when I can just leave my clubs in the trunk. What about child seats? Will parents have to provide their own car seats, or count on calling a car that has one or more available?

      None of these things is a showstopper, but if I am already spending money to own my car, why wouldn't I spend money to own my self driving car, that already has my stuff in it? I can see two car families turning into one car families, but I suspect many people will still want to own their own vehicle.

    3. Re:Business model... by swilver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is so simple. The car should save the occupants, just like any normal driver would have done. Trying to take this to some Asimov "donot cause harm" bullshit will practically require cars to be self-aware, at which point cars may not actually want to serve their masters anymore.

  3. The technology simply isn't safe enough yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This rush to deploy driverless vehicles is insanity. Especially after the news of the gentleman who was denogginized by an 18 wheeler through no fault of his own. In response to events like that, Musk and other true believers simply think the concept might need a few more tweaks.

    1. Re:The technology simply isn't safe enough yet by gurps_npc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. Because I can't remember when the last time a human driven car caused a death. Excluding Charllotesville. And Barcelona. Oh, and my Grandmother. Actually it's pretty common. Which explains why you don't think about it.

      Common risks are ignored, while uncommon things get talked about.

      This causes some people to think that ridiculous precautions should be taken to stop the uncommon things while doing nothing to fix the common ones.

      Nope. Driver-less cars, using CURRENT technology would be safer than what we have now.

      But that doesn't mean we shouldn't take a few years to get the tech cheaper and better while we figure out the legal and sociological changes we need to make to support them.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    2. Re:The technology simply isn't safe enough yet by green1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The guy who had "no fault of his own" drove his car in to the side of a semi-truck. That is the very definition of his fault. He didn't apply the brakes, didn't swerve, he drove straight in to the side of a truck.

      And don't claim it was the car's fault. The car was not self driving, you can't buy a self driving car at this point, nobody claimed the car could drive itself, and he had to agree to, and ignore, many warnings that it could not before operating it.

      In response to that incident, Musk did the horribly irresponsible, and illegal, thing, by reaching in to people's previously bought and paid for vehicles without their permission and removing functionality.

      Musk never said that the system in place on that vehicle needed a few more tweaks to achieve self driving, he said that the system on that car was never meant for self driving, and never advertised as such. He also said that future models of the car would include self driving by using different hardware and software. That's not "minor tweaks"

      Of course that said, the system on that "insanely dangerous" vehicle, is already several times safer than your average driver, so even that would be a step in the right direction.

      Unfortunately idiots like you are costing people lives every day by holding back these sorts of advances because people die (even if fewer than would die without them) And worse yet, people like Elon are listening to idiots like you and doing stupid things in response to make their products more dangerous than they were before stupid people complained.