Slashdot Mirror


Many People Still Don't Want To Ride in Self-driving Cars, Survey Finds (cnbc.com)

A lot of people may still have serious reservations about riding in fully autonomous vehicles, a new survey from Gartner indicates. From a report: The Gartner Consumer Trends in Automotive people surveyed about 1,500 people in the United States and Germany from April through May, and found that 55 percent of the people they spoke to would not ride in a fully autonomous car. However, just over 70 percent would ride in a car that was partially autonomous. Gartner defined partially autonomous vehicles as those that could drive autonomously, but allow a driver to retake control of the car if needed. Advocates of autonomous driving have said the technology will actually make driving safer, since statistics indicate human behavior is the major cause of most auto crashes. But many consumers familiar with the tendency of other electronic devices to sometimes malfunction or perform erratically still seem to have trouble accepting the idea of being held in a vehicle that could fail.

13 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. Reasons by arth1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not just about safety, but expediency and what happens if something goes wrong. Do you want to risk being stuck for hours because there's no driver that can drive you around the branch in the road? Do you want to be delayed to a meeting because it will put safety above all other concerns and stop or slow down whenever in doubt?

    1. Re:Reasons by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      [...] and what happens if something goes wrong.

      The self-driving car pulls to the side of the road, comes to a complete stop, request your AAA membership to call for a tow, and then calls Uber or Lyft to pick you up.

    2. Re:Reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The automated Uber of Lyft car shows up, running the same software. It senses the same condition that made the previous vehicle wig-out, pulls to the side of the road, comes to a complete stop, requests the owner's AAA membership to call for a tow, and then calls Uber or Lyft to pick you up.

    3. Re:Reasons by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you want to risk being stuck for hours because there's no driver that can drive you around the branch in the road?

      Even as old and feeble as I am, I can get out and move the branch myself, if need be. And if the branch is too big for me to move manually, it's probably not something I'm going to be driving around if I'm in a normal car.

      Do you want to be delayed to a meeting because it will put safety above all other concerns and stop or slow down whenever in doubt?

      Yes, I think I do. MY safety is way more important to me than your meeting is....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Reasons by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Funny

      If a branch in the road will cause the car to completely shut down, no, I'm not missing a meeting for that shit.

      If a branch in the road will cause the car to completely shut down, then there is no way in heck that they will available to the general public.

      My wife has a Tesla with autopilot. It doesn't stop when the road branches. It knows which branch to take by using a super advanced technology known to navigation experts as a "map".

      Knowing which fork in the road to take is a solved problem.

    5. Re:Reasons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, each car keeps getting towed away so there's only 1-3 Uber cars there at any given time. I think it's time to start investing in towing companies! Actually, I'll make an app that lets anyone with a hitch on their car sign up to be a potential tower. While you're driving along, it'll alert you to anyone nearby who needs to be towed. If you're in an area with towing companies than the service is free. Once those are gone, I'll charge you a monthly subscriptions and a per use fee.

  2. Aircraft yes, automobile no by Baron_Yam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aircraft have well-defined places to take off and land, with very strictly enforced rules. In transit there is nothing like trying to weave through unmarked construction with cyclists and pedestrians trying to cross your path without warning.

    There's more to worry about with the craft control itself, but that's where computers excel.

    I'd get in a pilotless plane long before I'd be a passenger in a driverless car.

  3. Totally irrelevant by MSBob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The world will change whether people who enjoy driving like it or not. Just like nobody today insists on riding in an assisted elevator those people will have to adapt. Over time the pressures of technology will make human driven cars more expensive to own because of the higher insurance rates, having to add more mechanical steering components etc. Even just individual vehicle ownership may become very expensive because car sharing services will likely become extremely prevalent and efficient. Owning a vehicle outright will make very little economic sense. There will always be a market for manually operated cars but those cars are likely going to get relegated to race tracks and that market will probably be as big as the market for chariots today. And yes, chariots are still a thing and there is a chariot racing track not far from my place. And it's being used daily. But needless to say the people who go there don't ride chariots to the office in the morning.

    --
    Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
  4. If you live in Florida by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You'll be totally okay with self-driving cars. We have some of the highest insurance rates in the nation because of the number of old people, functional alcoholics, and drug users behind the wheel. I will totally trust AI over my fellow drivers here.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  5. New technology by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would bet that this is common for new technologies. I remember the early 1990s when a lot of people didn't like the idea of carrying a cell phone. I remember in the 2000s, few people saw the value of smartphones. I knew several people who weren't sure about Netflix streaming, and thought the idea of cord-cutting was absurd. A lot of those people have now cancelled their cable.

    Of course people are unsure about self-driving cars. Give it enough time for them to be common, and to have a proven safety record. The results of that survey will change.

    1. Re:New technology by MSBob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yep, I once built an unsupervised learning algorithm for discovering vulnerabilities in a network topology. It was always over 95% accurate with most errors being false positives. When I wrote it ten years ago nobody wanted it. Now they are all over it and very little of that code has changed since. The security admins just came around.

      --
      Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
    2. Re:New technology by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      I would bet that this is common for new technologies. I remember the early 1990s when a lot of people didn't like the idea of carrying a cell phone. I remember in the 2000s, few people saw the value of smartphones. I knew several people who weren't sure about Netflix streaming, and thought the idea of cord-cutting was absurd. A lot of those people have now cancelled their cable. Of course people are unsure about self-driving cars. Give it enough time for them to be common, and to have a proven safety record. The results of that survey will change.

      I just remember that video from the first pre-alpha test with non-project Google employees where the guy goes rummaging through his backpack for a charger or something for the longest time while the car is speeding down the highway. That's when they figured the path to full autonomy is not through taking away more and more responsibilities, either the car is driving or you are. Presumably it was a huge fan of the project to volunteer but it took only hours or possibly even less from being handed an extremely experimental system to blindly trusting it with his life.

      To be honest, in low speed driving I'm more concerned about liability and hurting soft targets than personal danger. With all the crumble zones, airbags, seat belt and so on a crash could get expensive and pedestrians, cyclists, bikers etc. might get hurt but I'm unlikely to sustain any major injury to myself. I know a friend of mine who "only" cracked a rib in a pretty solid crash but the car was a wreck. Also traffic tickets of various kinds. So daily commute that is mostly trickling my way through 20-30 mph zones with traffic slowing it down further? No doubt the car is driving the moment I can let it.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:New technology by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Informative

      Most people who answered this question have no knowledge allowing them to make an informed decision on this question. A good portion of them have never even thought about the question. Some of them weren't even sure what an autonomous vehicle is.

      All of these people came up with an opinion, because it was asked of them on the spot. This is the kind of opinion that will change when the wind changes.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."