Yes it is the right thing to do but it is still *illegal*. No officer is going to say publicly that you can drive 75 in a 65 because that would defeat the purpose of the speed limit being 65.
I can't see it being legal for the insurance company to hold the passenger liable for what the automation does, if there even IS a passenger. If I don't pay for insurance in a taxi, limo or bus, no more should I pay for full automation except to cover the property if I expect to have it replaced or repaired. Even more so if the automation kills someone, the passenger should not be convicted of negligence. Any situation where it can be proven that the automation did not handle a situation that a human could have should be the liability of the company selling the automation.
That's perfectly fine. But it will probably be more expensive than on-demand or pre-scheduled transportation services once self-driving cars are a reality.
Sure it will, but so is the bus now. And like I said in the other comment; if I wanted that kind of service I would take a bus which will still be cheaper of the three. I can't see automated services being much less expensive than a taxi however. The cars will cost 4x as expensive, and they will need to satisfy most of the same kind of maintenance standards and have a commercial form of automated insurance. Rally don't see how that will average out to being cheaper just by removing the driver.
Yeah I would say a car with full autonomy should never allow driving over the limit. If there are cars going faster than the limit, the autonomous car should be relegated to the slow lane. That's one gray area that humans can get away with that a computer can't.
Maybe some people live in cities with proper on and off ramps where a semi-trailer can fully merge and not interrupt the flow of traffic, but in some cities it would be impossible for them to get around if they had to do this. My city has many small streets and intersections that are clogged with traffic most of the day and it becomes routine for trucks to push their way in and expect people to slow down to allow for their trailer. It's something that might be enforceable but never will be.
Ok well you wait for 20 minutes for a car every morning or operate on some pre-set schedule. I'd like to keep my own schedule.
Yes I would expect insurance for autonomous cars would drop to around $50 a year since the human is no longer responsible or able to control for anything that happens in a truly autonomous car. Insurance will protect the value of the property and nothing that may happen with it. Passenger not liable.
Ok, but if I was going to set the car to speed I certainly wouldn't want the car logging it. How long before traffic enforcement starts using the log evidence against you in court? Right now it's difficult for them to get a conviction on anything less then 10 over because there are too many variables for it to hold up in court, but if Tesla is going to eliminate the variables then... you'd better just drive the speed limit.
Ownership won't become obsolete until automated car companies can have a car in your driveway five minutes before you open your front door. If people have to wait for a car they'd rather use their own.
I'm not at all convinced that anything will change. Car companies have to be forced by the government to spend $5 on seat belts, they're always going to be looking for the absolute minimum cost to produce economy/midrange vehicles and full automation will never fit into that.
I haven't seen those statistics. Only comparisons for general highway driving. Many of the conditions that people commonly get into accidents in don't work with Autopilot. The one I saw was that 'Autopilot has driven 130 million miles with only 1 accident'. Well, Autopilot only works in the safest of conditions so comparing to highway driving in ALL conditions is apples to oranges.
I'm saying a manual used car at $10K will be more reliable than an automated car at $10K. Probably so much more so that it won't be affordable to buy a used automated car. And these improvements don't trickle down. The only improvements that ever trickled down were antilock brakes, front air bags, and seatbelts. Those only made the cut because the cost of them was low enough that governments could successfully force auto makers to put them in vehicles. You think governments of ten years from now will be able to force automakers to make all their vehicles fully automated? And not in some watered down/cost controlled matter either, but some manner that still performs better than humans? That's not going to happen. Does the Chevy Malibu today have automation that has existed for more then 10 years such as side air bags, automatic wind-shield wipers or road tracking headlights?
Also, let me add one more thing. Not once did I say that Tesla shouldn't market Autopilot vehicles... So in no sense am I really saying they can't save lives. All I'm saying is that they aren't ready for market yet in their current form. They should be tested with trained professionals until they are proven safer than a human and not contributing to problems and then release them. I suspect Tesla sees it as less expensive to use the public as guinea pigs and sadly the almighty dollar often takes precedence over lives.
Ok, first of all, Tesla doesn't have the capacity to even manufacture all the pre-order Model 3s next year. Secondly, you think a $35,000 car is something everyone can afford? That's pretty funny, considering there was recently an article on this very fact; most families can't afford more than $10K on a vehicle. It won't be very smart to buy these vehicles used either. Used luxury vehicles are every bit as unreliable as used economy vehicles. The issue is usually the electronics failing after a certain age.. something that automated cars will have much more of. So right now the choice is more like... do we sacrifice 10 good drivers at the chance of saving 10 bad drivers? I say there is not much benefit.
Personally, I'd rather have a petter picture than a bigger screen. Relatively speaking the TV in my basement comfortable viewing, it is not as big but I can sit closer so for all intents and purposes it balances out. We don't personally go out without the kids but I can see that some people would want to.. but then you're dealing with other people's kids.
Yes and that markup on popcorn! We usually buy the popcorn, sneak some other snacks in and call it even.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been noticing the progression. These days I'm thankful if there is an X somewhere so I can exit without clicking.
Yes it is the right thing to do but it is still *illegal*. No officer is going to say publicly that you can drive 75 in a 65 because that would defeat the purpose of the speed limit being 65.
That's perfectly fine. But it will probably be more expensive than on-demand or pre-scheduled transportation services once self-driving cars are a reality.
Sure it will, but so is the bus now. And like I said in the other comment; if I wanted that kind of service I would take a bus which will still be cheaper of the three. I can't see automated services being much less expensive than a taxi however. The cars will cost 4x as expensive, and they will need to satisfy most of the same kind of maintenance standards and have a commercial form of automated insurance. Rally don't see how that will average out to being cheaper just by removing the driver.
So what? Apple has always tried to promote themselves as an American company while shipping most labor overseas. They can pay the damn tax.
Yeah I would say a car with full autonomy should never allow driving over the limit. If there are cars going faster than the limit, the autonomous car should be relegated to the slow lane. That's one gray area that humans can get away with that a computer can't.
Maybe some people live in cities with proper on and off ramps where a semi-trailer can fully merge and not interrupt the flow of traffic, but in some cities it would be impossible for them to get around if they had to do this. My city has many small streets and intersections that are clogged with traffic most of the day and it becomes routine for trucks to push their way in and expect people to slow down to allow for their trailer. It's something that might be enforceable but never will be.
Like really, if I wanted to travel like this I would take the bus now.
Ok well you wait for 20 minutes for a car every morning or operate on some pre-set schedule. I'd like to keep my own schedule.
Yes I would expect insurance for autonomous cars would drop to around $50 a year since the human is no longer responsible or able to control for anything that happens in a truly autonomous car. Insurance will protect the value of the property and nothing that may happen with it. Passenger not liable.
If Autopilot is going to create accidents for people, then those people's families deserve to be compensated. I don't care what the net effect is.
Ok, but if I was going to set the car to speed I certainly wouldn't want the car logging it. How long before traffic enforcement starts using the log evidence against you in court? Right now it's difficult for them to get a conviction on anything less then 10 over because there are too many variables for it to hold up in court, but if Tesla is going to eliminate the variables then... you'd better just drive the speed limit.
Ownership won't become obsolete until automated car companies can have a car in your driveway five minutes before you open your front door. If people have to wait for a car they'd rather use their own.
Where did the speed instruction come from? The driver's foot on the pedal?
That's another thing. The speeding. Autopilot breaks the law and LOGS IT.
I'm not at all convinced that anything will change. Car companies have to be forced by the government to spend $5 on seat belts, they're always going to be looking for the absolute minimum cost to produce economy/midrange vehicles and full automation will never fit into that.
No one cares about the death in Florida. People are too convinced that autonomous cars will save lives.
The fact is, getting people to eat right and exercise regularly would save more lives then automated cars ever could. Why not focus on that?
Yet one person died, and who knows how many more.
I just don't see you making the case that the benefits in the end will be worth the damage.
I've been to the biggest ones in the city that I live in... Maybe if I lived in a major center it would be different but I don't.
Already answered this one in other comments.
I haven't seen those statistics. Only comparisons for general highway driving. Many of the conditions that people commonly get into accidents in don't work with Autopilot. The one I saw was that 'Autopilot has driven 130 million miles with only 1 accident'. Well, Autopilot only works in the safest of conditions so comparing to highway driving in ALL conditions is apples to oranges.
I'm saying a manual used car at $10K will be more reliable than an automated car at $10K. Probably so much more so that it won't be affordable to buy a used automated car. And these improvements don't trickle down. The only improvements that ever trickled down were antilock brakes, front air bags, and seatbelts. Those only made the cut because the cost of them was low enough that governments could successfully force auto makers to put them in vehicles. You think governments of ten years from now will be able to force automakers to make all their vehicles fully automated? And not in some watered down/cost controlled matter either, but some manner that still performs better than humans? That's not going to happen. Does the Chevy Malibu today have automation that has existed for more then 10 years such as side air bags, automatic wind-shield wipers or road tracking headlights?
Also, let me add one more thing. Not once did I say that Tesla shouldn't market Autopilot vehicles... So in no sense am I really saying they can't save lives. All I'm saying is that they aren't ready for market yet in their current form. They should be tested with trained professionals until they are proven safer than a human and not contributing to problems and then release them. I suspect Tesla sees it as less expensive to use the public as guinea pigs and sadly the almighty dollar often takes precedence over lives.
Ok, first of all, Tesla doesn't have the capacity to even manufacture all the pre-order Model 3s next year. Secondly, you think a $35,000 car is something everyone can afford? That's pretty funny, considering there was recently an article on this very fact; most families can't afford more than $10K on a vehicle. It won't be very smart to buy these vehicles used either. Used luxury vehicles are every bit as unreliable as used economy vehicles. The issue is usually the electronics failing after a certain age.. something that automated cars will have much more of. So right now the choice is more like... do we sacrifice 10 good drivers at the chance of saving 10 bad drivers? I say there is not much benefit.
Personally, I'd rather have a petter picture than a bigger screen. Relatively speaking the TV in my basement comfortable viewing, it is not as big but I can sit closer so for all intents and purposes it balances out. We don't personally go out without the kids but I can see that some people would want to.. but then you're dealing with other people's kids.
Yes and that markup on popcorn! We usually buy the popcorn, sneak some other snacks in and call it even.