Google’s bus crash is changing the conversation around self-driving cars

[bananas]

Last edited Tue Mar 15, 2016, 05:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: The Verge

Amid the nonstop parties, panels, activations, and tacos, Google was dealing with a pronounced shadow hanging over its presence at SXSW this week: the company’s ambitious self-driving car program was responsible for its very first collision back in February. Now the fallout has found its way into nearly every transportation-focused panel discussion here in Austin.

Even with high-flying names like "Autonomous Vehicles Will Remake Cities" and "Autonomous Cars Will Make Us Better Humans," the tone at SXSW’s many forward-looking talks has been more subdued. Self-driving cars may be on the road today — in pilot programs in various sunny, fine-weathered locales. But the most optimistic of technologists are starting to acknowledge that the problem very well may take decades to crack.

"If you read the papers, you’re going to see that it’s maybe three years, maybe 30 years (before self-driving cars arrive)," Chris Urmson, the director of Google’s self-driving car project, said in a high-profile talk on Friday at the Austin Convention Center. "I think it’s a bit of both. This technology is almost certainly going to come out incrementally." It’s a step below the rhetoric he’s used in the past; in September of last year, for instance, Urmson said he hoped his 11-year-old son doesn’t have to get a driver’s license.

<snip>

"For there to be consumer acceptance of these vehicles, they have to be virtually perfect," David Strickland, a former Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), said in a self-driving panel discussion on Sunday.

Strickland oversaw the first policy statement from the NHTSA on autonomous testing on public roads in 2013, and he was speaking here at SXSW on a panel asking whether society is ready for autonomous vehicles — the answer, it turns out, is no. He cited a recent AAA study saying around 75 percent of drivers feel uneasy about using a fully self-driving car, while 60 percent felt comfortable with some form of minor self-driving assistance like automatic braking.

<snip>


Read more: http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/15/11239008/sxsw-2016-google-self-driving-car-program-goals-austin

[nichomachus]

1. Wow -- a minor fender-bender causes this overreaction

In that case, most humans should not be driving. Just look around at the people on the road with you. Most of them are menaces.

[bananas]

2. It's not an overreaction, it's reality catching up to the hype. nt

[whatthehey]

22. Still far far far fewer at fault accidents per mile than human drivers

When do we seal with the "hype" of how good humans are? That would save far more death and destruction.

[Yo_Mama]

27. The last analysis I saw showed that they were involved in accidents at a higher rate.

It seems that humans compensate for each other in various ways, and the self-driving cars aren't doing that.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/10/31/study-self-driving-cars-accidents/74946614/

I'd say the jury is out. Assuming that this is a mature technology is probably not safe.

[sofa king]

4. Prediction:

Within ten years, self-driving cars are discovered to be a reality when a major automaker, seeking better safety ratings, is busted for cars that secretly assert autonomy over bad drivers and then erase their own AI in the event of a crash.

Double points: the phenomenon will be discovered by the handful of people who actually try to drive SUVs off-road, and discover that the computers reset and malfunction after particularly hard days.

[davidthegnome]

3. From my understanding...

Last edited Tue Mar 15, 2016, 07:18 PM - Edit history (1)

Based on statistical analysis, the self driving cars are far more prone to error or accident than human drivers. Now, granted, there will be malfunctions, technical errors and various other things to worry about - but I believe this technology is a huge step in the right direction. Particularly... particularly if we can make all of these cars electric/solar or some kind of hybrid. We could greatly reduce our carbon footprint through that alone, I think.

No technology - especially new technology, is ever perfect, but to me, this stuff is very exciting - and very promising. Also... maybes it's just me, but I hate driving.

On Edit: It seems that these self driving cars actually have a much higher accident rate than conventional vehicles. Human error, however, should also be taken into account, along with the small sample size we have for these self driving vehicles. Nonetheless, I stand corrected. I appreciate the links and the enlightenment regarding this matter. (I have altered my post to accurately reflect new information, so as not to confuse or mislead anyone, only had to actually change one word in the top paragraph).

[nichomachus]

6. Facts will never overcome the pearl clutching nt

[bananas]

9. No, the statistics show they are more prone to accidents than humans.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/13/10759424/google-self-driving-car-accidents-driver-disengagements

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/10/31/study-self-driving-cars-accidents/74946614/

[davidthegnome]

12. My mistake, I think.

The data appears to be somewhat mixed. We are also though, comparing apples and oranges, to some extent. There's a very small number of self driving cars on the road, while there are hundreds of millions of conventional vehicles. There does seem to be a much higher accident rate than with conventional vehicles, but given the respective numbers, human error, etc. the overall data would seem to remain somewhat inconclusive.

Of course this technology will need to be tweaked, fiddled around with, for years to come. There will, I suspect, be issues with it in the decades to come. However, of the number of accidents these cars have gotten into none have (yet) resulted in fatalities. The conclusion of your second link...

"The bottom line: Even though self-driving vehicles were not at fault in any crashes they were involved in and that injuries have of lower severity than for conventional cars, it appears they are getting in more accidents given their numbers."

Anyhow, I continue to find this new technology amazing and extremely fascinating. Given how many people drive under conditions of anger, stress, intoxication - and so on and so forth... with further development and improvement I believe that these autonomous vehicles will prove to be not only safer for us all, but will likely result in fewer road fatalities, greater overall peace of mind for the average vehicle owner, more leisure time - and so much more. There are many applications to which this technology can be put.

Yes, it has problems, but the technology is really very exciting. I would love to get in one of these vehicles and experience it for myself.

[whatthehey]

23. What data so you have that shows them AT FAULT more than human drivers?

That's the important thing.

[davidthegnome]

24. None.

I have no argument with self driving cars, with this amazing technology or it's growth. I was responding to an inaccurate statement/argument I had made (that had been shown to be inaccurate) and clarifying for the sake of honesty. It seems (and again, correct me if I am wrong) that it tends to be human drivers at fault more than the technology itself.

I really... really... really want one of these cars! I'm way too poor to probably ever get one, but it would be so awesome. I really don't like driving, too many angry people on the road, too much stress, too much danger, too much everything, really. I'd like to say I'm this macho dude who has no fear, but, uhm, I hate driving, hate it, because it scares the crap out of me. Unfortunately it is necessary for me, living in an area with no public transportation or even a taxi service - but I am prone to high anxiety to begin with, so, driving is definitely I would much rather avoid if I could.

[HuckleB]

5. These vehicles do nothing to bring life back to a human scale.

Somehow, that reality is missing from discussions, and it's forcing the continuation of a resource suck that we should be working to be move away from...

[davidthegnome]

13. Not sure if I accurately understand your point.

Are you suggesting that we need more, rather than less human involvement with our vehicles? I mean - that we should be driving cars ourselves rather than allowing technology to do so for us?

Also, in regards to the resource suck:

"A recent report by the Intelligent Transportation Society of America projects that so-called intelligent transportation systems (ITS) could achieve a 2 to 4 percent reduction in oil consumption and related greenhouse gas emissions each year over the next 10 years as these technologies percolate into the market."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/self-driving-cars-could-cut-greenhouse-gas-pollution/


No offense or disrespect intended - but this technology is there to be used. If it can make life easier, better, more comfortable and so on - in addition to possibly significantly reducing oil consumption and related greenhouse gas emissions... why not take full advantage of it?

I understand that lots of people don't trust the self driving cars for various reasons, but the technology itself is, I think, pretty incredible. There is great potential here to do good things not just for the human race, but for the planet as well.

[HuckleB]

16. If we chose to create lives that need lengthy daily commutes...

... And those commutes are on an individual basis, we are wasting massive resources, no matte the context.

[hedgehog]

21. People aremoving to huge metro centers because that's

where the jobs are. Then they end up living 20 or 30 miles from city centers to find affordable housing - in an unwalkable suburb. Until we crack that nut, urban transport will be an oxymoron.

[Chan790]

25. That's a smart growth and transit-oriented-development issue...not a personal-automotive one

Cars, whether self-driving or human controlled, are not part of the solution to that except in so far as we can find effective ways to push people out of cars and other personal transit and into mass-transit.

[chapdrum]

7. Another of Google's noble and useful contributions

to the commonweal.

What sheer bs.

This is also the search engine company that sends probes into space.

[DCBob]

8. And how is this surprising?

There are just too many variables involved in driving on a busy congested highway for a software program to deal with in a safe manner.

[Paladin]

10. Autonomous vehicles will be available sooner, rather than later.

There is an enormous amount of money to be made off of them. Our legions of elderly citizens can't drive those 4-door Buicks forever.

I think reliable self-driving cars will be on the roads in five years. Looking forward to it.

[houston16revival]

11. Engineering hype

is all about capital and riches

I remember about 1994 National Semiconductor announced there would be
all the electronics of a computer on one silicon chip. NSM stock skyrocketed.

It's now 22 years later and we're still waiting.

[rickford66]

14. Your digital watch has more computing power than the Apollo computer.

[Humanist_Activist]

15. Uhm, that came true, several times since then...

Theybare called systems-on-a-chip, I believe there may even be some .x86 compatible ones. There are quite a few you can buy for about 5 to 15 dollars that are chipped versions of old video game consoles.

[Chan790]

26. Also, Raspberry Pi and Arduino.

Anybody with the programming skill and desire can basically make a computerized just-about-anything reasonably...I made a sous-vide cooker that self-regulates the temperature accurately 6/sec. to within 0.5°F for under $30. Such units go for $300-400.

[Humanist_Activist]

28. So many possibilities, thinking about making my nephew a retrogame console...

no development experience required. My biggest problem is actually going to be kid proofing it, I may make a custom designed games console case that's going to be exponentially bigger than the Raspberry Pi itself. Those things are tiny.

[PersonNumber503602]

19. Subtle sarcasm?

[Nye Bevan]

17. Anyone who thinks that their 11-year old son will not need to get a drivers license is delusional.

How, for example, is a driverless car going to decipher the wild gesticulations of the traffic cop outside my kids' school?

[ohnoyoudidnt]

18. I wouldn't so quickly dismiss the possibility.

The hand signals of traffic officers are pretty clear to me. Waving forward to move, or a palm forward to stop are pretty simple signals that a computer should be able to read. There are clearly some obstacles to overcome. It will take time and there will be more accidents and maybe fatalities before the technology is almost prefect, but I think self-driving cars are the future.

[47of74]

20. I tested a Tesla with autopilot last week

I was in the St. Louis area visiting my sister, brother in law, and their feline kiddos. As there is a Tesla store down there I took the opportunity to stop there and salivate over the Teslas there. I was able to take this Model S with autopilot on a test drive.



The salesperson had me take the car up on to I-170 for a bit. I had to keep my hands close by to the wheel while autopilot was engaged and focus on the road in case there was a need to stop abruptly. If I wanted to switch lanes that was something I had to do myself, the autopilot isn't smart enough to go around slower moving vehicles. Plus it's dependent on the line markers on the road, so when it's raining like it was that day it didn't work as well. I got a little nervous because it seemed to be almost to the point of drifting into an adjacent lane, especially on curves.

I think there's promise in the technology but it's still very early on.

[Humanist_Activist]

29. St. Louis sucks at marking lanes, period, hell when it rains or snows, everyone...

ends up drifting because the lines aren't obvious, and with all the repairs and construction, there's so much discoloration and unevenness, this area would be the ultimate test for any automated driving system on roads.

You have poorly marked lanes, turn lanes that are abrupt, same for entrance and exit ramps, etc.