Driverless cars could change everything

[DaFace]

Thought this article was cool to think about.

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-28376929

Driverless cars could change everything


For now, it seems like a novelty - cars that can operate independently of human control, safely cruising down streets thanks to an array of sensors and pinpoint GPS navigation.

But if the technology avoids getting crushed by government regulators and product liability lawsuits, writes the Federalist's Dan McLaughlin, it could prompt a cultural shift similar to the early 20th century move away from horses as the primary means of transportation.

First and foremost, he writes, the spread of driverless cars will likely greatly reduce the number of traffic accidents - which currently cost Americans $871b (£510b) a year.

"A truly driverless road would not be accident-free, given the number of accidents that would still be caused by mechanical and computer errors, weather conditions, pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists and sheer random chance," he says. "But it would make the now-routine loss of life and limb on the roads far rarer."

Computer-operated cars would eventually reshape car design, he says, as things like windshields - "a large and vulnerable piece of glass" - become less necessary. Drivers will be able to sit wherever they'd like in their cars, which could make car interiors more like mobile lounges than like cockpits.

The age required to operate a driverless car is likely to drop, he says. There could be an impact on the legal drinking age, as well, as preventing drunk driving was one of the prime justifications for the US-wide setting minimum age to purchase alcohol at 21 years old.

There's other possible economic fallout, McLaughlin contends, such as a restructuring of the auto insurance industry, the obsolescence of taxi drivers and lower ratings for drive-time radio programmes.

The high-tech security state will also get boost, he writes, as GPS-tagged cars will be easier to track, making life difficult for fugitives and car thieves. Police will also be able to move resources away from operations like traffic enforcement.

Of course, he writes, the towns that rely on speed traps to fund their government services will be facing budget shortfalls. Privacy advocates could also get an unexpected boost, he notes, since traffic stops are one of the main justifications for police vehicle searches.

Finally, there's the prospect of the as-yet-unrealised futurist dream of flying cars. With computer-controlled vehicles that strictly follow traffic rules, McLaughlin says, "the potential for three-dimensional roads becomes a lot less scary and more a matter of simply solving the technological challenge".

Where we're going, we may not need roads after all.

[cdcox]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.

[DaFace]

Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.

Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.

[a pp roach]

Just make sure they have bumpers on them..like the bowling alley. Those kind of bumpers. But it sounds like a good idea as long as they're eco friendly.

[DaFace]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.

Perhaps not yet. But Google's car has logged 700k miles with the only accident being rear-ended by a human. It's gonna get there.

[ptlyon]

I COUND DO ANYTHING, ANYTHING FOR YOU

[DaFace]

On the "not so happy" side, this would cause a ton of industries to be completely and totally screwed. Truck drivers immediately come to mind.

[-King-]

I've always thought the cars in iRobot are a pretty good idea of what we'll see in the future. Other than the manual override mode though. No way any they would let you override a car when it's going 100-200 MPH which is what I think the speeds would be like on highways. Maybe on side roads and normal streets, but never on highways IMO.

[cdcox]

Perhaps not yet. But Google's car has logged 700k miles with the only accident being rear-ended by a human. It's gonna get there.

I was actually arguing that if a Google car level effort would be put forward on building a robot golfer, that it would be able to shoot 36 to 45 for 18 holes. Some were saying that the best robot that could be built would struggle to break 100.

[Rain Man]

Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.

Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.

Roadside hotels would go out of business, because all of the cars would have places to sleep. Maybe all of the cars would be small RVs for that matter.

Since you can sleep in the car, more people will take long road trips, which means the lines at Disneyland will get longer.

Pizza delivery will go away because you'll just send your car to pick it up.

Cars could come with buttons with pre-set destinations like "home" and "park" and "office". Dogs could be trained to push those buttons so they can travel around and stick their heads out the window or play in the park any time they want.

[cdcox]

On the downside, cats won't get to live out their dreams:

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mahdarnphm1qhh3b7o1_250.gif

[OldSchool]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.

Google has been running driverless cars for several years now with great success. Wait until they reduce the production costs enough to mass produce these cars/trucks/etc.

[TLO]

They'll have to pry the keys to my Trans Am/Camaro out of my cold dead hands!/ CP

[Lex Luthor]

Where we're going, we may not need roads after all.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1dq17-kXWYA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Buehler445]

The tech is there. Has been for awhile.

The big thing in tractors is that the lawyers won't let a machine run unattended.

I assume that's the way it is with cars also. There's no one to sue if the car crashes itself.

[DaFace]

The tech is there. Has been for awhile.

The big thing in tractors is that the lawyers won't let a machine run unattended.

I assume that's the way it is with cars also. There's no one to sue if the car crashes itself.

Yeah, the regulatory side of it will be the thing that slows it down. Even if they prove that it's 100x safer than having human drivers, people will still be freaked out by having a machine in control like that. And then the issue of liability will get to be really complicated given where we'd be starting from. The entire insurance industry would have to be re-invented in a different form.

[TimeForWasp]

I want one now.

[Bugeater]

Fuck this bullshit. If you're not capable of operating a motor vehicle in a safe and efficient manner you can stay the fuck off the roads.

[The Franchise]

Think of all the parking issues that would get solved.

[Gadzooks]

I cound use this technology. I have a four + hour road trip planned for our family vacation this Thursdee. I'd rather poop and sleep than drive. Although, I'm wary of the potential malfunctions.

[Kidd Lex]

I owned a Toyota Avalon that had radar proximity cruise control, it was unbelievable. I could set the speed and it would slow down and speed up to keep the speed I set or the car length I picked behind traffic. Truly remarkable tech, and it felt impossible to wreck into the back of someone, it would stop the car like an impenetrable cushion of air in front of you.

This technology is light years beyond that, it's already a reality, just have to fight through lobbyist and bureaucratic bs.

[Kman34]

Think of all the parking issues that would get solved.

Think of all the sex you could have on the way to your destination.....

[tooge]

Booty calls would be much more prevalent. Imagine leaving the bar and stumbling into the car and saying "jenny's house".

[Rain Man]

Another really cool thing is that it could replace day care. When you go to work, you just put your kid in the car, turn the air conditioning on, and have the baby take a nice long drive in the country, returning at 5:00.

[KC native]

Another really cool thing is that it could replace day care. When you go to work, you just put your kid in the car, turn the air conditioning on, and have the baby take a nice long drive in the country, returning at 5:00.

Sold.

[KC native]

Jalopnik has had a few columns over driverless cars in the past (I've been busy so haven't been keeping up with the site).

Most of the writers speculate that driving what we think of as normal cars will become an enthusiast hobby similar to karts or track cars.

[InChiefsHeaven]

I wonder how they'd go about "phasing out" old fashioned cars that need drivers. For awhile at least you'd have both kinds, and eventually I'd guess it would become illegal to own a "drivered car".

I'd probably be one of the asshole holdouts...

[Donger]

No more DMV? Sign me up.

[Fish]

http://i61.tinypic.com/2s81gm8.gif

I'm not familiar with that address, would you please repeat the destination?

[Rain Man]

Once they get it perfected, you know what will happen next. They'll start selling different models of cars:

The Baseline BMW X5 - "Gets you where you want to go. Top speed of 30 mph, and you'll always be courteous to other drivers as you remain within the right-hand lane."

The Classic BMW X5 - "With a top speed of over 60 mph, you'll arrive at your destination quickly and safely. The Classic BMW X5 will move to the left lane to pass any and all Baseline vehicles."

The Executive BMW X5 - "This premium model can go up to 90 mph, and will consistently shift lanes to pass slower vehicles. It will also run yellow lights and ooze through stop signs."

The Rich Jerk BMW X5 - "The RJ Model has a top speed of 150 mph. It tailgates, cuts off other drivers, and has an automated middle finger attachment to show your disdain for others. The RJ features built-in communication software that will override Baseline and Classic Vehicles and force them to pull over to the side of the road as you streak by. If you drive an RJ, you'll own the road."

[The Franchise]

The Rich Jerk BMW X5 - "The RJ Model has a top speed of 150 mph. It tailgates, cuts off other drivers, and has an automated middle finger attachment to show your disdain for others. The RJ features built-in communication software that will override Baseline and Classic Vehicles and force them to pull over to the side of the road as you streak by. If you drive an RJ, you'll own the road."

Does it come in apricot?

[Rain Man]

Does it come in apricot?

That's the only color it would come in.

[Beef Supreme]

Driverless cars = The driverless car bomb.

[JakeLV]

Good bye revenue from traffic tickets...

Wait... what's that? Government doesn't easily give up revenue sources and takes steps to cut it off at the knees?

[The Franchise]

Driverless cars = The driverless car bomb.

The Government is already listing that as a reason why we shouldn't move to this.

[beach tribe]

I was actually arguing that if a Google car level effort would be put forward on building a robot golfer, that it would be able to shoot 36 to 45 for 18 holes. Some were saying that the best robot that could be built would struggle to break 100.

Driving a car is infinitely easier than hitting an 80.

[kaplin42]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.

I live in Los Angeles, and let me tell you, it cannot get much worse. The amount of stupid shit I see on my daily commute is staggering. Texting while driving, driving while on the phone, doing 45 in the fast lane on a freeway where the speed limit is 65, making right turns from the far left lane in the middle of heavy traffic. I mean to be honest, a four way stop sign is more than most of the drivers around here can figure out, so I absolutely think that if it could be a really good thing to take the human equation out of driving.

I do believe however that there should be a manual override in case of emergency.

[kaplin42]

**** this bullshit. If you're not capable of operating a motor vehicle in a safe and efficient manner you can stay the **** off the roads.

While I agree with your statement 100%, unfortunately the law doesn't. We have a no texting while driving law here in California, but you can't roll past a police car with out seeing them on their phones.

Being conscious is barely a prerequisite to being given a drivers license.

[KC native]

I live in Los Angeles, and let me tell you, it cannot get much worse. The amount of stupid shit I see on my daily commute is staggering. Texting while driving, driving while on the phone, doing 45 in the fast lane on a freeway where the speed limit is 65, making right turns from the far left lane in the middle of heavy traffic. I mean to be honest, a four way stop sign is more than most of the drivers around here can figure out, so I absolutely think that if it could be a really good thing to take the human equation out of driving.

I do believe however that there should be a manual override in case of emergency.

DFW is the exact same.

[Saulbadguy]

On the "not so happy" side, this would cause a ton of industries to be completely and totally screwed. Truck drivers immediately come to mind.

Fuck them.

[Kman34]

I think I would be a little nervous about the driver-less Semi Truck and Dump truck.

[Valiant]

Hopefully everyone in OP gets one. Finally be able to pass on the left for once.

[Lzen]

Hopefully everyone in the state of Missouri gets one. Finally be able to pass on the left for once.

FYP

[ThaVirus]

Booty calls would be much more prevalent. Imagine leaving the bar and stumbling into the car and saying "jenny's house".


... And all the drunken psycho stalker exes.

*stumbling out of the bar into the car*

"Drive by Jenny's house 14 times."

[Buehler445]

I think I would be a little nervous about the driver-less Semi Truck and Dump truck.

Eh, it takes more look ahead, but I think it's doable.

[Buehler445]

The real problem with all of this is sensor calibration/testing. Our combines allow you to monitor freaking everything. But you still have to get out and check periodically to determine if sensors are working properly. I'm sure they can make it more user friendly, but calibrating the damn gps is substantial. It's not terrible difficult, but there are also some real dumbasses on this earth that feel it requisite to drive. Improper calibration of GPS or collision avoidance would be catastrophic.

Also, if the machine is going to execute unaided driving, some real time kinematic sensors would be necessary. That will require some fairly significant infrastructure and would be expensive in rural areas.

[HolyHandgernade]

Airplanes are in the beginning phases of ADS-B which will eventually self sequence the planes (as long as the ADS-B is functioning and all aircraft are so equipped). I think it would move ahead faster if the vehicles were capable of some sort of hover mode. The next step up from bullet trains, that could overfly interstate routes (although overpasses would be a potential hazard!). I suppose instead of HOV lanes they could institute driver-less vehicle lanes where the speed could be increased until you needed to reintegrate with the normal traffic and off ramps. That would drive sales for commuters.

[kaplin42]

Eh, it takes more look ahead, but I think it's doable.

Would probably be safer than you think. Driver-less trucks don't have drivers that have been awake and on the road for 20 hours. And with Radar and GPS, they could probably be a lot safer than the status quo.

Probably a lot less of this happening. Warning; Terrible Event

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=954_1378470863

Biggest problem with this driver-less thing is that the first accident that happens, people will scream about how unsafe they are, when, as the articles states, currently loss of life and limb is a daily occurrence and no one even blinks an eye at it, and moving to driver-less would have a huge impact on reducing those numbers, but people won't care about that.

[DaFace]

Biggest problem with this driver-less thing is that the first accident that happens, people will scream about how unsafe they are, when, as the articles states, currently loss of life and limb is a daily occurrence and no one even blinks an eye at it, and moving to driver-less would have a huge impact on reducing those numbers, but people won't care about that.

Yep. Humans have an inherent need to blame someone when things go wrong, and even if it's clear that computers care considerably safer than humans, there will still be lots of angst if they can't blame someone.

[Rain Man]

The real problem with all of this is sensor calibration/testing. Our combines allow you to monitor freaking everything. But you still have to get out and check periodically to determine if sensors are working properly. I'm sure they can make it more user friendly, but calibrating the damn gps is substantial. It's not terrible difficult, but there are also some real dumbasses on this earth that feel it requisite to drive. Improper calibration of GPS or collision avoidance would be catastrophic.

Also, if the machine is going to execute unaided driving, some real time kinematic sensors would be necessary. That will require some fairly significant infrastructure and would be expensive in rural areas.

That's an interesting point. I wonder if every car would have multiple sensors, and when more than one of them starts disagreeing, the car drives itself to the dealer and gives them your credit card number.

Now that I think about it, they could build maintenance checks into the system. At 3 o'clock in the morning, your car opens the garage door and drives itself in for a checkup once every three months.

[The Franchise]

Would probably be safer than you think. Driver-less trucks don't have drivers that have been awake and on the road for 20 hours. And with Radar and GPS, they could probably be a lot safer than the status quo.

Probably a lot less of this happening. Warning; Terrible Event

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=954_1378470863

Biggest problem with this driver-less thing is that the first accident that happens, people will scream about how unsafe they are, when, as the articles states, currently loss of life and limb is a daily occurrence and no one even blinks an eye at it, and moving to driver-less would have a huge impact on reducing those numbers, but people won't care about that.

Plus you wouldn't have to worry about logging hours with a driver-less semi-truck. You could just make it so they run overnight all at the same time.

[Rain Man]

Plus you wouldn't have to worry about logging hours with a driver-less semi-truck. You could just make it so they run overnight all at the same time.

You could link them up into convoys pretty easily, too. Put them one car length apart and roll them all together. You'd just have to put all braking controls under the first truck.

The occasional wreck would be pretty spectacular, but they'd be rare.

[Zebedee DuBois]

First the robots take our jobs, then they take our hobbies. Now they take our excuses for being late to things.

[teedubya]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.

Self-Driving Cars: Google cars go over 300,000 miles with no accidents.

http://buff.ly/1odFkBv

I'd say the technology is getting pretty close.

[mdchiefsfan]

Car theft would drop dramatically as well. Press the home button on your fob, and it returns to you. Hell report it stolen and the man knows the location of it from its GPS.

[HemiEd]

A bad week for driverless cars. Maybe the AI needs to learn more?

Self-driving car company Cruise cuts its fleet in San Francisco by 50% after a Thursday night accident involving a firetruck; city voted two weeks ago to allow Cruise and Waymo to operate autonomous cars around the clock

San Francisco Robotaxi Expansion: Cruise Crash Injures 1 and Other Mishaps

At least three traffic incidents involving robotaxis occurred in San Francisco this week, according to multiple news and social media reports, shortly after the state granted approval for autonomous vehicle companies to expand their operations throughout the city and start charging money for rides.

One crash Thursday night injured a passenger inside a Cruise driverless car at Polk and Turk streets. The robotaxi was hit by a fire engine as it entered the intersection on a green light at around 10 p.m. Thursday, according to a tweet from Cruise early Friday. The fire engine was on its way to an emergency scene. Cruise's tweet said the injuries were not severe, but the robotaxi passenger was taken to a local hospital.

In a separate blog post, Cruise said their car detected that an emergency vehicle was approaching and began to brake, but was unable to stop before the fire truck crashed into it.

The San Francisco Fire Department declined to comment.

A second crash happened in the Mission at 26th and Mission streets early Friday, according to Cruise and San Francisco police.

In response to the crash, a Cruise spokesperson said, “Last night one of our vehicles was proceeding through a green light at 26th and Mission in San Francisco when it was struck by another vehicle running a red light at a high rate of speed. The AV detected the vehicle and braked, but the other vehicle made contact with our AV. There were no passengers in our AV and the driver of the other vehicle was treated and released at the scene.”

San Francisco police also confirmed the crash and said that they responded to a report of a crash at 26th and Mission at 12:19 a.m. Friday. There, they found an adult male driver, a passenger, and their car as well as an autonomous vehicle. The driver was treated for non-life-threatening injuries by medics, police said.

Police said there was significant damage to both vehicles after the crash and said that the male driver was at fault, but that drugs or alcohol did not appear to be a factor.

Separately, another Cruise vehicle also drove into wet concrete in a construction area and got stuck on Golden Gate Avenue between Fillmore and Steiner streets in the Western Addition on Tuesday, according to SFGATE.

Cruise acknowledged the incident in a tweet Thursday.

There have been other high-profile incidents with Cruise robotaxis prior to this week.

Just a day after the state approved the expansion of robotaxi services in the city, nearly a dozen Cruise vehicles stalled and snarled traffic in San Francisco's North Beach and near Outside Lands music festival. Cruise blamed the music festival for the snafu.

https://sfstandard.com/2023/08/18/cruise-concrete-and-crashes-a-rough-week-for-san-francisco-robotaxis-after-expansion-vote/?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email&utm_placement=newsletter

[DenverChief]

Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.

Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.

Could finally loosen the airlines grip on travel - I'd more likely take a day and a half to travel in a car if I didn't have to constantly pay attention

[HemiEd]

Could finally loosen the airlines grip on travel - I'd more likely take a day and a half to travel in a car if I didn't have to constantly pay attention

Just a thought, but you might want to read the article in the post just above yours.
I probably should have started a new thread but this one had popped up in my search.

[Couch-Potato]

Just a thought, but you might want to read the article in the post just above yours.
I probably should have started a new thread but this one had popped up in my search.

Automatic cars are still the future. The only reason this accident made the news is because it was between an automated vehicle & a manual one. How many manual cars crashed that day across the country?

Consider how much better a calculator performs simple functions relative to a human, and that the AI in this collective swarm of cars is learning at an exponential rate over time while a human's ability to drive deteriorates with experience.

[BuckeyeTheDog]

What am I going to do when the AI driven automatic car always drives through Popeyes and orders me a chicken sandwich?

Joking- but there is so many new ways to make money here- even starting with new free time and decisions to make when you’re in the car. And so so many ways for the government to tax this activity. Trust me, they will more than make up for there loss of revenue from traffic tickets, etc.

[DenverChief]

Just a thought, but you might want to read the article in the post just above yours.
I probably should have started a new thread but this one had popped up in my search.

I was just saying I'm tired of the airlines bullying people around...the whole "hidden city" ticketing thing has me annoyed as hell - I don't do it but why shouldn't people be allowed to do it?

[HemiEd]

I was just saying I'm tired of the airlines bullying people around...the whole "hidden city" ticketing thing has me annoyed as hell - I don't do it but why shouldn't people be allowed to do it?

I see, and understand. I pretty much quit flying years ago due to lack of control. They treat you like a herd of cattle and it is understandable.

We did recently fly to the east coast and the cashless airports were just another reason not to do it for me, damn I was pissed.

I have been driving long distance for years, but now my daily limit has gone down to 600 miles. Our family is spread out all over the country, so I get a lot of practice.

[HemiEd]

Automatic cars are still the future. The only reason this accident made the news is because it was between an automated vehicle & a manual one. How many manual cars crashed that day across the country?

Consider how much better a calculator performs simple functions relative to a human, and that the AI in this collective swarm of cars is learning at an exponential rate over time while a human's ability to drive deteriorates with experience.
Do you think they will ever be able to teach one the difference between wet and dry concrete?

Your calculator comparison is flawed. Math does not change, it is what it is.

Driving conditions? Not so much, too many variables.

So the cab company cut it's fleet in half, just maybe they are getting the picture?

[BWillie]

A bad week for driverless cars. Maybe the AI needs to learn more?

Self-driving car company Cruise cuts its fleet in San Francisco by 50% after a Thursday night accident involving a firetruck; city voted two weeks ago to allow Cruise and Waymo to operate autonomous cars around the clock

San Francisco Robotaxi Expansion: Cruise Crash Injures 1 and Other Mishaps

At least three traffic incidents involving robotaxis occurred in San Francisco this week, according to multiple news and social media reports, shortly after the state granted approval for autonomous vehicle companies to expand their operations throughout the city and start charging money for rides.

One crash Thursday night injured a passenger inside a Cruise driverless car at Polk and Turk streets. The robotaxi was hit by a fire engine as it entered the intersection on a green light at around 10 p.m. Thursday, according to a tweet from Cruise early Friday. The fire engine was on its way to an emergency scene. Cruise's tweet said the injuries were not severe, but the robotaxi passenger was taken to a local hospital.

In a separate blog post, Cruise said their car detected that an emergency vehicle was approaching and began to brake, but was unable to stop before the fire truck crashed into it.

The San Francisco Fire Department declined to comment.

A second crash happened in the Mission at 26th and Mission streets early Friday, according to Cruise and San Francisco police.

In response to the crash, a Cruise spokesperson said, “Last night one of our vehicles was proceeding through a green light at 26th and Mission in San Francisco when it was struck by another vehicle running a red light at a high rate of speed. The AV detected the vehicle and braked, but the other vehicle made contact with our AV. There were no passengers in our AV and the driver of the other vehicle was treated and released at the scene.”

San Francisco police also confirmed the crash and said that they responded to a report of a crash at 26th and Mission at 12:19 a.m. Friday. There, they found an adult male driver, a passenger, and their car as well as an autonomous vehicle. The driver was treated for non-life-threatening injuries by medics, police said.

Police said there was significant damage to both vehicles after the crash and said that the male driver was at fault, but that drugs or alcohol did not appear to be a factor.

Separately, another Cruise vehicle also drove into wet concrete in a construction area and got stuck on Golden Gate Avenue between Fillmore and Steiner streets in the Western Addition on Tuesday, according to SFGATE.

Cruise acknowledged the incident in a tweet Thursday.

There have been other high-profile incidents with Cruise robotaxis prior to this week.

Just a day after the state approved the expansion of robotaxi services in the city, nearly a dozen Cruise vehicles stalled and snarled traffic in San Francisco's North Beach and near Outside Lands music festival. Cruise blamed the music festival for the snafu.

https://sfstandard.com/2023/08/18/cruise-concrete-and-crashes-a-rough-week-for-san-francisco-robotaxis-after-expansion-vote/?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email&utm_placement=newsletter

Cant expect perfection. What we are looking for is safer across the board. Accidents will always happen. The rate of accidents, especially fatal ones is what we are trying to prevent.

[Ming the Merciless]

Do you think they will ever be able to teach one the difference between wet and dry concrete?


yes. already smart transmissions can do a better job of sensing slipping and shifting into all-wheel drive than humans. And, shifting back into 2wd for fuel efficiency.

it's not a matter of IF it is a matter of WHEN.

[DenverChief]

I see, and understand. I pretty much quit flying years ago due to lack of control. They treat you like a herd of cattle and it is understandable.

We did recently fly to the east coast and the cashless airports were just another reason not to do it for me, damn I was pissed.

I have been driving long distance for years, but now my daily limit has gone down to 600 miles. Our family is spread out all over the country, so I get a lot of practice.

I don't mind driving but 800 miles is about my limit. Denver to Vegas and Denver to KC. I have driven all the way to Fresno once - that took a couple of us to complete.

[ChiefaRoo]

Think of all the sex you could have on the way to your destination.....

This is already happening.

[HemiEd]

I don't mind driving but 800 miles is about my limit. Denver to Vegas and Denver to KC. I have driven all the way to Fresno once - that took a couple of us to complete.I get it. Drove from San Jose to Wichita in my 30s non stop, over 1600 then Virginia Beach to Chicago non stop 1000 in my 50s but now 600 is pushing it.

I doubt if I would have been able to relax for 60 seconds in a driverless car on any of these trips.
Do you think you would trust them enough to relax and enjoy the trip like in airplane or bus?

[CasselGotPeedOn]

This is already happening.

Your uncle molesting you doesn't count

[Garcia Bronco]

With human-driven cars we have accidents and crashes that are caused by human error one way or another. With network driverless cars I can wreck all the cars at once

[HemiEd]

With human-driven cars we have accidents and crashes that are caused by human error one way or another. With network driverless cars I can wreck all the cars at onceYou make a great point, just another step towards nefarious control.

It would be interesting to see the percentage of driverless car issues in relation to the number on the road compared to human operated cars with that number on the road.

I am going with the human drivers myself.

[AdolfOliverBush]

Driverless cars will eventually be the norm, and of course many people who grew up with manually-driven cars will be skeptical and fearful even after such fear is unwarranted.

[HemiEd]

Cant expect perfection. What we are looking for is safer across the board. Accidents will always happen. The rate of accidents, especially fatal ones is what we are trying to prevent.



Driverless cars will eventually be the norm, and of course many people who grew up with manually-driven cars will be skeptical and fearful even after such fear is unwarranted.
Instead of bumping this old thread, I actually considered starting a new one in D.C. ROFL

[Katipan]

In theory driverless cars would reduce the douchey accidents like tailgating.

[Chief Pagan]

The test should be whether driverless cars are safer than human driven ones.

But driverless cars could have one tenth the fatality rate and many people would find that unacceptable.

[Chief Pagan]

What am I going to do when the AI driven automatic car always drives through Popeyes and orders me a chicken sandwich?

Joking- but there is so many new ways to make money here- even starting with new free time and decisions to make when you’re in the car. And so so many ways for the government to tax this activity. Trust me, they will more than make up for there loss of revenue from traffic tickets, etc.

This is a concern.

[Chief Pagan]

With human-driven cars we have accidents and crashes that are caused by human error one way or another. With network driverless cars I can wreck all the cars at once

This is a nightmare.

[Chief Pagan]

In theory driverless cars would reduce the douchey accidents like tailgating.

When driverless cars drive 3 miles an hour on icy streets instead of 30 mph, commuters are going to scream and are going to go back to their own dangerously driven cars.

[Chief Pagan]

Actually, if I owned a fleet of driverless cars, I'm not sure I would even rent them out in snowy, icy conditions.

If somebody rear-ends your vehicle, the amount you get paid doesn't cover all the losses. Loss of use of vehicle, employee time to get vehicle repaired etc.

[DaFace]

Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.

[HemiEd]

Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.
Well said

[Balto]

Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.

It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.

[Chief Pagan]

Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.

Well, driverless cars carrying passengers are an actual thing in SF without a human driver ready to take over.

:hmmm:

I guess you can argue they shouldn't be. Or it's not ready to be deployed by the millions.

I do think some of it will be legal and social. If the standard was just being demonstrably safer than humans it would be one thing, but the standard will be higher than that.

And than as the previously shown article pointed out, they still do occasionally have what might be loosely called common sense problems. Like the best way to navigate construction zones or getting out of the way of emergency vehicles in congested urban environments.

[Otter]

Just wait until I hack into that matrix and start playing GTA with RainMan on his way to the office.

[DaFace]

It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.

And we probably need to start designing roads with driverless in mind. Relying on visual cues gets...messy.

[-King-]

Instead of bumping this old thread, I actually considered starting a new one in D.C. ROFL
It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

On a positive note, I would assume that not a single driverless car has received a DUI.

[HemiEd]

Well, driverless cars carrying passengers are an actual thing in SF without a human driver ready to take over.

:hmmm:

I guess you can argue they shouldn't be. Or it's not ready to be deployed by the millions.

I do think some of it will be legal and social. If the standard was just being demonstrably safer than humans it would be one thing, but the standard will be higher than that.

And than as the previously shown article pointed out, they still do occasionally have what might be loosely called common sense problems. Like the best way to navigate construction zones or getting out of the way of emergency vehicles in congested urban environments.
Did you read post 56 and the article about that very thing. It is current.

[HemiEd]

It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.

If you can't see how it could be, that is on you. LMAO

[Chief Pagan]

And we probably need to start designing roads with driverless in mind. Relying on visual cues gets...messy.

Well sure, if we had special roads that only had driverless cars and were specifically designed for driverless cars.

And bikes and pedestrians were either prohibited, or were at least required to carry transmitters...

That would make it an awful lot easier.

But I don't think it's viable to wait until for that to happen.

I've actually wondered if Japan or South Korea might not get driverless cars on a large scale before the US just because they have a more business friendly environment.

[BWillie]

If you can't see how it could be, that is on you. LMAO

It SHOULDN'T be a political issue. If the data shows it saves lives and reduces accidents then we should further investigate its usage and expand r & d of this industry.

[Megatron96]

Interesting bump. It seems like a lot of AI technologies (driverless cars, ChatGPT, etc.) are able to go from 0% awesome to 95% awesome pretty quickly, but that final 5% is super important yet difficult to achieve.

We've come a long way since this thread in terms of designing cars that can stay in their lanes and not hit anything in front of them, but things are still a little iffy in terms of being able to literally never have an active driver.

I still think we'll get there eventually, but it may still be a bit before we start removing steering wheels from cars.



Lol, I would never buy/ride in a car without human controls; steering wheel, brake/gas pedals. Not a chance in hell.

[chiefzilla1501]

It really does seem like its 100% of cars need to be driverless or it will just always have issues.

Let’s not forget that not all driverless is intended for regular people driving cars. I imagine first it will be used for commercial purposes. Then for non traditional transportation (ie low speed loops). I could also see it being a useful resource in areas where people don’t have many cars. Would imagine private passenger cars are one of the last dominoes to fall. And man, Uber or Lyft would do this in a heartbeat. And even still, I think we’re a very very long way away from any significant adoption of it

[HemiEd]

It SHOULDN'T be a political issue. If the data shows it saves lives and reduces accidents then we should further investigate its usage and expand r & d of this industry.Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.

[Chief Pagan]

Lol, I would never buy/ride in a car without human controls; steering wheel, brake/gas pedals. Not a chance in hell.

Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:

[Chief Pagan]

Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.

There is nothing in post 56 about whether driverless cars have a higher or lower accident rate than human drivers.

They have some 'sillier' accidents, but that doesn't mean more in the big picture.

And not all the companies are the same. My understanding is that Google has a much better track record than some of the other companies.

[Megatron96]

Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:


Lol, never. Doesn't matter, as it's not even legal to do so in the US. It is legal in EUR, and of course they've already had a few fatal crashes using that technology. Geniouses that they are.



Would you ride in a commercial airplane that didn't have pilots? No cockpit either, so even if someone on the plane was a pilot, he couldn't go up and take the controls if something went wrong?

[Chief Pagan]

Lol, never. Doesn't matter, as it's not even legal to do so in the US. It is legal in EUR, and of course they've already had a few fatal crashes using that technology. Geniouses that they are.



Would you ride in a commercial airplane that didn't have pilots? No cockpit either, so even if someone on the plane was a pilot, he couldn't go up and take the controls if something went wrong?

In bad weather, almost zero visibility, it doesn't matter much if there is a pilot or not.

Pilots give people warm fuzzy feelings and I'm sure there will be a couple in the cockpit trying to stay awake for a few more years as the plane essentially does everything for them.

Same thing with a lot of medical surgery in the not too distant future I would expect.

[BWillie]

Ok, I will not take the bait.

ROFL Please, take more of my freedoms away, please!

If you read the article in post 56, I would say they are not quite there yet.

Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

[Megatron96]

In bad weather, almost zero visibility, it doesn't matter much if there is a pilot or not.

Pilots give people warm fuzzy feelings and I'm sure there will be a couple in the cockpit trying to stay awake for a few more years as the plane essentially does everything for them.

Same thing with a lot of medical surgery in the not too distant future I would expect.



Lol, I guess you've never flown an airplane in bad weather. We have these things called instruments. Shockingly, you can actually fly an airplane in zero visibility conditions anywhere in the world.

[HemiEd]

Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

I actually enjoy driving and being in control. Someone not enjoying driving is kind of foreign to me but obviously there are those. My wife hasn't driven in 9 years and we have four vehicles, lol. I like the freedom of knowing I can go when and where I choose.

I can picture it now, electric self driving cars, where you use your implanted body chip to access, controlled by a central government dispatch. The fee being automatically deducted from your account. No cash please.


Have you ever raced? It is a rush like no other in my opinion.

[HemiEd]

There is nothing in post 56 about whether driverless cars have a higher or lower accident rate than human drivers.

They have some 'sillier' accidents, but that doesn't mean more in the big picture.

And not all the companies are the same. My understanding is that Google has a much better track record than some of the other companies.

Quite obviously the percentage of driverless cars compared to standard ones is very small.
But even in this small sample size, the company has already decided to cut it's fleet in half.
Just maybe there is more to it than we are being made aware of?

[HemiEd]

Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

The more I think about it, I am spoiled to living out here off the grid. We have to go to Springfield today and the idiot drivers/traffic always makes me want to go postal.

Please, make them all get driverless cars!:thumb:

[Katipan]

People in L.A. will keep you in your lane out of spite. (Not me, I can drive) Good luck nice polite driverless blinker.

[Gravedigger]

It's not a political issue, it's entirely financial. Big oil won't let it happen, not anytime soon. The politics is just theater, like nobody gives a shit about your gas stove Doris. I personally look at a movie like Minority Report and think that would be a perfect scenario to have. Not the eye scanning thing, but the fact that you could just get in a car and it get you to work safely, without traffic jams, stupid drivers, dealing with a busy gas station, and having to take long stops at traffic lights, I'd be down for it. You're never going to hit zero sum, and the process to get to that though is going to be rough.

[DrunkBassGuitar]

the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.

[DrunkBassGuitar]

Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.

Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.

yeah but like a bus or a train can already do all of those things

[BWillie]

the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.

Wear and tear to roads from leaking oil, gasoline and brake fluid is probably even worse. Its not like a electric sedan is as big of a difference than a car to a semi or even close.

Alos shitty people and bad drivers also cause traffic jam. A driverless society (which I acknowledge will not happen in my lifetime) you would have yo think lower traffic by a ton just due to efficiency.

[LoneWolf]

Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?

[DaFace]

JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?

I mean, I can take a nap if I'm not driving. And I'm a fan of naps more than I am a fan of staring at the car in front of me.

[BWillie]

JFC, you are such a pussy about everything. Fatigued from driving? How difficult is it to operate a vehicle vs. sitting on your ass inside a vehicle still focusing on the road. Do your wee little arms and foot get tired operating that heavy steering wheel and brake pedal?

Its mental fatigue not physical. Notice I said long trips. If you dont think you get mental fatigue the longer you drive you are kidding yourself.

[Rain Man]

Just thinking through it, these things WILL get figured out in the next couple decades. It could happen very quickly, or it may take a while, but it'll get done. The technology is already too close to a reality for it not to happen.

So given that, the implications are incredible to think about. Off the top of my head (and summarizing some from the article and elsewhere), here are a few. These are all, of course, purely theoretical depending on how things work out.

Cars could take kids to and from school on their own, freeing up parents.
People who are visually impaired would have a way to get around much more.efficiently, potentially increasing the portion of blind people who can reasonably work.
Traffic congestion could be reduced dramatically, as human reactions are the cause of a huge amount of it currently.
Drunk driving could be reduced dramatically.
Car sharing could become the norm since you could potentially have a huge fleet of cars-on-demand to show up when you need them.
The elderly could stay mobile much further in their lives, improving longevity and quality of life dramatically.

It's fascinating to consider all the possibilities. If it works perfectly, I think it could be as big of a cultural revolution as the internet.

Excellent point.

yeah but like a bus or a train can already do all of those things

Excellent point.


I think the key is to get irrational humans to drive less, regardless of how that happens.


Why would you WANT to drive in the first place...if you didnt have to. I don't know about you but I HATE driving.

When I go on a long trip and I use auto pilot which still isn't even close to driverless driving....but I feel 1000% less fatigued when I get home.

Excellent point.

Some people enjoy driving, and that's great. I figure there'll always be niches where a human driver is needed.

But I'm right there with you on not enjoying driving. It's a big waste of time. There are times when I'm out in some huge rural area where it's kind of peaceful, but most of my driving is not out in a rural utopia. And while the scenery can be nice, I'd rather see the scenery from a train where I'm not needing to watch the road.

If you think about the number of hours Americans spend driving every year, how many great novels are going unwritten? How many kids' treehouses are going unbuilt? How many lonely housewives are being left unsatisfied? There are a million better ways that that billion hours could be used.

[loochy]

The more I think about it, I am spoiled to living out here off the grid. We have to go to Springfield today and the idiot drivers/traffic always makes me want to go postal.

Please, make them all get driverless cars!:thumb:Lol...the sprawling metropolis of Springfield and its miles of bumper to bumper traffic is sure to send fear through even the most seasoned of drivers.

[LoneWolf]

I mean, I can take a nap if I'm not driving. And I'm a fan of naps more than I am a fan of staring at the car in front of me.

I don't believe you can take a nap if you are on auto pilot. You have to keep your eyes forward and on the road or the vehicle gives you a warning.

If you're on auto pilot, you are basically driving without moving your arms or making all the "exhausting" decisions like "do I stop at this stop sign", "can I make this right turn on a red light", and "do I have enough time to pass this jackass in front of me before my exit."

[LoneWolf]

Its mental fatigue not physical. Notice I said long trips. If you dont think you get mental fatigue the longer you drive you are kidding yourself.

It's not mental fatigue from driving. It's mental fatigue from doing anything for a long period of time. If you are sitting in the drivers seat staring out the window for hours on end, you are going to be mentally fatigued as long as you are awake. At least driving gives you something to keep you occupied.

[Otter]

I lean more towards getting unnecessary drivers off the road through remote work, delivery services, and walking while implementing driver less vehicles as a compliment to the primary solution mentioned above.

There are WAYYYY too many people who just suck at driving that are placing others in danger for no good reason.


BTW: Get off your cell phone. If you were that important that you need 24/7 connectivity you wouldn't be driving.

[HemiEd]

Lol...the sprawling metropolis of Springfield and its miles of bumper to bumper traffic is sure to send fear through even the most seasoned of drivers.

Exactly!:)
I lived in Chicagoland for 18 years and there is no way I could handle that now., Used to travel to NY, LA, Boston etc. by car on business.

But, for the past 9 years, we have lived where a car going by is an event you look up and notice. o:-)

So going to Springfield, is a dramatic change for this old man. Last month at 2:30 in the afternoon I was wondering why everyone in Springfield was out driving instead of working. :cuss:

Have great day!

[HemiEd]

I lean more towards getting unnecessary drivers off the road through remote work, delivery services, and walking while implementing driver less vehicles as a compliment to the primary solution mentioned above.

There are WAYYYY too many people who just suck at driving that are placing others in danger for no good reason.


BTW: Get off your cell phone. If you were that important that you need 24/7 connectivity you wouldn't be driving.Bingo!

On a recent trip we were taking to Indianapolis, a young lady in a mini van wasn't even hiding the fact she was texting/using her phone for many miles on I-44. She was actually holding it up near the rear view mirror like she was facetiming someone doing 75mph.

They should make a device, similar to those breathalyzer interlocks to keep the driver off of their phones.

[Rain Man]

Exactly!:)
I lived in Chicagoland for 18 years and there is no way I could handle that now., Used to travel to NY, LA, Boston etc. by car on business.

But, for the past 9 years, we have lived where a car going by is an event you look up and notice. o:-)

So going to Springfield, is a dramatic change for this old man. Last month at 2:30 in the afternoon I was wondering why everyone in Springfield was out driving instead of working. :cuss:

Have great day!

I recognize that I'm not as good a driver as I used to be, too. I'm still fine, and I've never been at fault in an accident, but I can tell that my skills are declining over time. This is a modern paranoia based on late-night ambulance chaser ads, and I recognize that I'm still a fine driver, but I don't want to at some point get in a crash and get sued because I didn't notice a stop light or something.

[Lzen]

It's weird that some people think this is a political issue.

There are political factors in many things; most things, actually. There are gray areas when it comes to things like this. That's why sometimes I hate that we have to post certain things in DC. Sometimes, I would like a good, vibrant discussion with many different viewpoints. But I know that certain subjects will get relegated to DC no matter what. :(

[Lzen]

On a positive note, I would assume that not a single driverless car has received a DUI.

All joking aside, that is probably one of the main selling points on something like this. But I would argue that distractions such as cell phones present a much bigger danger.

[Lzen]

Would you ride in a plane being flown/landed on auto-pilot?

:hmmm:

Apples and oranges.

[Lzen]

the problem with driverless cars and electric cars is that like they don't really solve any problems. like if your gripe is traffic then just making some cars electric or driverless doesn't change the number of cars on the road. it'd be like outlawing suvs and saying you can only drive compacts, it's still the same number of cars the cars are just different. the only way to really fix that problem is to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.

if the complaint is environmental/climate related then all electric cars do is just move the emissions of a car from the tailpipe to the powergrid, the carbon savings from a tesla from an ICE is about the same as a subcompact to an SUV. plus electric vehicles are massively heavy so that's more wear and tear on roads (the electric hummer weighs like 10,000 lbs lol) and you have to consider the environmental impact of batteries which isn't nothing.

I get your point about the number of cars being the same but I think you're missing one element. Driverless cars would be able to make traffic flow much more smoothly. No idiots who hold up traffic because they don't know how to hit the gas to get up to the flow of traffic. Or no idiots who are afraid to enter the roundabout.

Now, this is all assuming that the software is good and works well. My fear is that there are bugs in the software or that they are able to be hacked. Just think of the havoc one could wreak if all cars were driverless and they could be hacked. That's scary.

[Lzen]

Wear and tear to roads from leaking oil, gasoline and brake fluid is probably even worse. Its not like a electric sedan is as big of a difference than a car to a semi or even close.

Alos shitty people and bad drivers also cause traffic jam. A driverless society (which I acknowledge will not happen in my lifetime) you would have yo think lower traffic by a ton just due to efficiency.

Uhhh......nope. The wear and tear on the roads (at least here in the midwest) has A LOT to do with salt on the roads in the winter.

[Dante84]

All joking aside, that is probably one of the main selling points on something like this. But I would argue that distractions such as cell phones present a much bigger danger.

Human error in general is the cause of 90%+ of car accidents.

Take the human out of the equation, and accidents go down substantially.

[Dante84]

Check out Zoox (https://zoox.com/vehicle/).

[Rain Man]

Check out Zoox (https://zoox.com/vehicle/).

I want one of those. That's going to be my next car if they come available.

[Lzen]

Human error in general is the cause of 90%+ of car accidents.

Take the human out of the equation, and accidents go down substantially.

Oh, I know that. I regularly see articles of crashes around the state of Kansas. One thing that stands out is how often someone goes off the road and then overcorrects which in turn causes them to lose control and crash.

I'm open to driverless cars. I really like the idea when it comes to all the idiots on the road these days. Though for me personally, I will probably stick to driving myself for now. ;)

[SithCeNtZ]

Now, this is all assuming that the software is good and works well. My fear is that there are bugs in the software or that they are able to be hacked. Just think of the havoc one could wreak if all cars were driverless and they could be hacked. That's scary.

Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.

[HemiEd]

I recognize that I'm not as good a driver as I used to be, too. I'm still fine, and I've never been at fault in an accident, but I can tell that my skills are declining over time. This is a modern paranoia based on late-night ambulance chaser ads, and I recognize that I'm still a fine driver, but I don't want to at some point get in a crash and get sued because I didn't notice a stop light or something.

Sounds like you are on it and I understand your concern. Have you started driving slower? Do you carry an extra umbrella rider for those unforseen possiblities? I have been for years and the peace of mind seems worth it.

Funny thing, when driving our Prius, it just doesn't have the power to fly up the hills like a v8 car and I am not intentionally driving 5mph under the speed limit when ascending the hills, but the guys in their lifted F250 trucks do get a little impatient, to put it mildly. The other three are all v8s and it's never an issue.

[Rain Man]

Sounds like you are on it and I understand your concern. Have you started driving slower? Do you carry an extra umbrella rider for those unforseen possiblities? I have been for years and the peace of mind seems worth it.

Funny thing, when driving our Prius, it just doesn't have the power to fly up the hills like a v8 car and I am not intentionally driving 5mph under the speed limit when ascending the hills, but the guys in their lifted F250 trucks do get a little impatient, to put it mildly. The other three are all v8s and it's never an issue.

I actually just don't drive much any more, other than a big annual business trip. But I kind of think about it now and try to be more attentive when I do drive.

I've got an umbrella policy on my homeowner's insurance. Would that cover a driving claim? I hadn't thought about it before, but it seems like it would.

[HemiEd]

I actually just don't drive much any more, other than a big annual business trip. But I kind of think about it now and try to be more attentive when I do drive.

I've got an umbrella policy on my homeowner's insurance. Would that cover a driving claim? I hadn't thought about it before, but it seems like it would.

I am fairly confident that it covers you, or at least I hope it does, under any circumstance you may be involved in.
I asked that very question to my agent and he told me ours did.
Might be worth a phone call?

[HemiEd]

Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.


Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty certain these driverless cars are networked (blue toothed, internet, whatever you want to call it), especially the cab company referenced in post 56 from San Francisco. I can not imagine any possibility of them turning a fleet of driverless cars loose without a central dispatch control.

Can you?

However, your normal consumer owned car, has a self contained, non networked computer. You would need to plug into it to hack it, similar to the service code reader.

Thus, the possibility of hacking driverless cars would be a very real possibility.

[Rain Man]

I am fairly confident that it covers you, or at least I hope it does, under any circumstance you may be involved in.
I asked that very question to my agent and he told me ours did.
Might be worth a phone call?

I bet it is. As I think about it, the umbrella policy isn't part of my homeowner coverage. It's a separate thing that's just billed on the same invoice each year.

[|Zach|]

to reduce the number of cars on the road and the only really effective way to do that is basically making biking, walking and public transportation more convenient than driving. And doing that basically requires changing how we've built cities and towns for the last like 70 years in north america.


It really is a shame that every single civic and city planning decision is made with cars as the first priority. Great cities plagued by surface parking lot after surface parking lot.

[|Zach|]

Not having to drive would be a dream. Literally life changing.

I have come to dislike it in the past 5 or so years. So many chances for bad and annoying things to happen that can cause people to get hurt or a ton of money come out of my pocket.

I would not need to drive a whole lot of my work commute was not 30-45 mins one day I can get away with most stuff being walkable or public transit adjacent during stretches off of days.

[jdubya]

Driverless car honked at my son while he was crossing the street in SF in a crosswalk.

3 driverless cars were stalled and blocking 2 of 4 lanes in the middle of SF a few weeks ago causing tons of havoc

[Chief Pagan]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty certain these driverless cars are networked (blue toothed, internet, whatever you want to call it), especially the cab company referenced in post 56 from San Francisco. I can not imagine any possibility of them turning a fleet of driverless cars loose without a central dispatch control.

Can you?

However, your normal consumer owned car, has a self contained, non networked computer. You would need to plug into it to hack it, similar to the service code reader.

Thus, the possibility of hacking driverless cars would be a very real possibility.

I generally think that some point in the future driverless cars will be an improvement over human drivers. But yes, if there are millions of Waymo Google cars or Uber driverless cars or any on demand driverless car service...

Yes, the network being hacked is one of those unlikely, but high risk scenarios that need to be taken seriously.

Having millions of cars being ordered to crash simultaneously is the Hollywood movie scenario.

But even just a situation where a hack shuts down tens of millions of cars that commuters count on every day would be serious.

The idea that any network that is online is 100 percent secure is laughable.

[HemiEd]

I bet it is. As I think about it, the umbrella policy isn't part of my homeowner coverage. It's a separate thing that's just billed on the same invoice each year.
Excellent!:thumb:

Not having to drive would be a dream. Literally life changing.

I have come to dislike it in the past 5 or so years. So many chances for bad and annoying things to happen that can cause people to get hurt or a ton of money come out of my pocket.

I would not need to drive a whole lot of my work commute was not 30-45 mins one day I can get away with most stuff being walkable or public transit adjacent during stretches off of days.Up in the Chicago suberb I lived in for 18 years, I would ride my bicycle when the weather permitted, then just wheel it right into my office. It was kind of nice and only a little over a half a mile so I wouldn't get all sweaty on the way.

Then there is the other extreme like China, if I remember correctly, where you basically live at the factory, almost like a prison.

I guess it is the choice you make on where you want to live.

[HemiEd]

Driverless car honked at my son while he was crossing the street in SF in a crosswalk.

3 driverless cars were stalled and blocking 2 of 4 lanes in the middle of SF a few weeks ago causing tons of havoc

That has gotta be kind of surreal experiencing that. Had he seen one before?

Have you?

[Rain Man]

That has gotta be kind of surreal experiencing that. Had he seen one before?

Have you?

I haven't seen a driverless car on the road yet, or a person relaxing with an autopilot. Maybe I've been near them and haven't noticed.

[philfree]

I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.

[|Zach|]

I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.

You have an animated gif with a busty female who has the face of a child in your signature. Nobody is taking man lessons from you.

[Chief Pagan]

I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.

I work from home, but even so...

Spend enough time on California highways where 70 mph traffic is 4 or more lanes wide, only a couple of car lengths apart, and then moments later, you're stuck in grid lock.

Yes, I'd rather just be on my phone/tablet than behind the wheel.

[philfree]

You have an animated gif with a busty female who has the face of a child in your signature. Nobody is taking man lessons from you.

That gif is awesome and It's an image of my wife. Blond, green eyes and boobs!

Now fuck off you big fat poosy!

[|Zach|]

That gif is awesome and It's an image of my wife. Blond, green eyes and boobs!

Now **** off you big fat poosy!

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/HP7mtfNa1E4CEqNbNL" width="480" height="400" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe>

[HemiEd]

I haven't seen a driverless car on the road yet, or a person relaxing with an autopilot. Maybe I've been near them and haven't noticed.

Me neither, I would imagine my reaction would be "what the fuck?!"

[mr. tegu]

Instead of driverless cars what we need to invest in is hover cars. That would solve basically every problem. No more wear and tear on infrastructure and accidents would no longer be a big problem. A couple of hover cars hitting each other would just cause a reaction where each bounces or spins in some direction with no real damage besides maybe some dents.

[Lzen]

Two things here. The first is that yes, there will probably always be a bug, or something capable of going wrong. People are going to have to get over it and realise that a random software bug is still far less of a chance of death than a random drunk driver or some idiot who runs a red light. We can't let perfection be the enemy of better than what we have.

The second is that the hacking thing is completely nonsensical and a boogeyman from movies and TV shows. Basically every car today sold is mainly powered by a computer. Most modern safety functions of a car like adaptive cruise control and brake detection warnings are already run by a computer. Is there a massive wave of mysterious deaths due to cars doing random things? Of course not. Why would these magical hackers not be causing mayhem right now when it's certainly easier to do it today than it will be in a likely very highly regulated and monitored system 20 years from now? It's because "hacking" as people think of in the movies doesn't exist in this context. No one can upload a virus to your car and turn it into a death machine or else scorned ex-lovers would clearly resort to that rather than burying a body in a field somewhere with evidence all around.

The comparison you used is not exactly correct. They are making cars now that they can use GPS to track you. Is this a way to hack? Is there another way for someone to hack in and gain control? I don't know but maybe. Your argument still has not convinced me. But I do agree that more driverless cars probably means fewer crashes because some idiot thought their phone was more important than, you know, actually paying attention to the road.

[Teak]

I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.

[BWillie]

I prefer to drive myself. I enjoy making good time and beating the clock on long trips and I think there are times I can do things in my car that a computer wouldn't let me do. A self-driving feature that gives me a choice would make sense for me maybe but in the end I probably wouldn't use it much. Maybe when I'm 75 years old. Driving equals freedom and somehow I think a self driving car would take away from that.

I think it's weird that some people(men) don't like to drive. Driving is such a man thing to do.

Being a good driver is all about having a big dick.

[Rain Man]

I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.

Are you comfortable with the self-driving on the highway? Or do you feel like you have to be just as alert as if you're driving? Can you read a book?

I've never driven or been a passenger in a car that does this stuff. I'm curious about how I would adjust.

[BWillie]

Are you comfortable with the self-driving on the highway? Or do you feel like you have to be just as alert as if you're driving? Can you read a book?

I've never driven or been a passenger in a car that does this stuff. I'm curious about how I would adjust.

I do NOT have FSD and only have AP2. I read, fiddle with my phone. There is a little hack I do so I dont get the nag but as long as its an interstate with lines (all interstates have good lines, some sketchy highways dont) and no construction I can dick off quite a bit. You can easily tell after a while what roads will give it trouble and its obvious when the car wants you to take over.

[loochy]

I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.


So is it trustworthy enough to sit back and really enjoy some road head instead of trying to focus on not crashing?

[Rain Man]

I do NOT have FSD and only have AP2. I read, fiddle with my phone. There is a little hack I do so I dont get the nag but as long as its an interstate with lines (all interstates have good lines, some sketchy highways dont) and no construction I can dick off quite a bit. You can easily tell after a while what roads will give it trouble and its obvious when the car wants you to take over.

Interesting.

My dream is to just get in the car and read a book and eat a sandwich and look dreamily out the window. It seems like maybe we're not quite there yet.

[Teak]

To be fair I've seen head being given for years before Auto Pilot.
I don't try and avoid having to answer to the need to let AP know I am there. But I do get to see a lot more scenery.

[Katipan]

Is it really road head if there's no danger of crashing? You're just in your mobile lazy boy.

[HemiEd]

I have a Y Tesla and Full Self Driving (FSD) beta. Like lots of cars today, I can get on the interstate and the car will drive itself as long as I stay on the interstate. This is not FSD beta. All Teslas are capable of doing this. It does make long drives a lot more comfortable. It will slow down and pass with whatever speed you want to set and if a Navigation point is set it will drive from entry on Interstates to off ramp from Interstates.
FSD beta tries to put this freedom on regular driving in town and country roads. I do use it on routes I know because I am aware of where it will have troubles. But in city driving it is nice because it stops at stop signs and proceeds with right of way, at stop lights and goes on green and slows or stops for cars in front of me turning or stopping at intersections. Stop and go driving is less stressful.
It does not do as well on country roads or highways with slightly skewed intersection meeting. It will not recognize entry roads to destinations as not part of highways. It has problems with stopped emergency vehicles and associated human directions at such scenes.
But I have seen lots of improvement over the year. I am concerned that my particular car may not have the resolution and cpu power to actually get to a practical level of self driving. It is not GPS dependent at all and the visual and processing power has to be on board for Tesla's implementation.

Interesting post. Sounds like it still needs human supervision or at least an owner/rider that is paying attention.

[philfree]

Being a good driver is all about having a big dick.

Same goes for being a good putter.

[Teak]

Interesting post. Sounds like it still needs human supervision or at least an owner/rider that is paying attention.

Let's take one at a time. The skewed intersections sees FSD slow to make a left turn even with no on coming traffic. It fiddles looking for the entry onto the new road more so if the intersection has islands or acute angle. It finally gets these right but if you have traffic behind you they may see your hesitant motions as someone who needs a horn to encourage getting it done. One needs a "new driver" bumper sticker to explain this.

The failure to distinguish highway exits say into churches or malls with turn lanes would be helped greatly if mandated painted arrows on the road very early in the lane. I think with self driving cars you need mandates on highly visible lane markings on the roads to guide decisions.

Emergency flashing should be a case with the car expecting some kind of human intervention.

Except for the emergency vehicle incidents, in town these problems almost disappear.

Is it still early, yes but the success rate will increase exponentially with practice. You can't get rid of all accidents but you will see lower incidents and of lessor severity than with humans well within 2 years.

[HemiEd]

Let's take one at a time. The skewed intersections sees FSD slow to make a left turn even with no on coming traffic. It fiddles looking for the entry onto the new road more so if the intersection has islands or acute angle. It finally gets these right but if you have traffic behind you they may see your hesitant motions as someone who needs a horn to encourage getting it done. One needs a "new driver" bumper sticker to explain this.

The failure to distinguish highway exits say into churches or malls with turn lanes would be helped greatly if mandated painted arrows on the road very early in the lane. I think with self driving cars you need mandates on highly visible lane markings on the roads to guide decisions.

Emergency flashing should be a case with the car expecting some kind of human intervention.

Except for the emergency vehicle incidents, in town these problems almost disappear.

Is it still early, yes but the success rate will increase exponentially with practice. You can't get rid of all accidents but you will see lower incidents and of lessor severity than with humans well within 2 years.

Great post, thank you for the non-predjudiced information. Interesting indeed.

I had to drive from Branson West to Branson today, and the entire 7-8 miles was just recently paved/blacktopped. It normally has 3 lanes on most of it, but that was all indistinguishable, as they had not striped it yet.

I caught myself wondering what a driverless car would do, as everyone, including myself, was hesitant in trying to figure out where our lanes were.
Turn markings, nope, none of that. I am not aware of any accidents with all human drivers.

[HemiEd]

DMV shuts down Cruise robotaxis in San Francisco over safety concerns

The California Department of Motor Vehicles on Tuesday shut down problem-plagued Cruise autonomous taxis in San Francisco, saying the vehicles, involved in several troubling incidents, presented an “unreasonable risk to the public.”

“This is a wake-up call to Cruise to pay closer attention to road safety,” said Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor Phil Koopman, who likened the company’s robotaxis to “teenage drivers not displaying good judgment.”

San Francisco has become a proving ground for driverless taxi technology, with Cruise and Google spinoff Waymo testing out their vehicles on public roads. But Cruise’s robotaxis in particular have come under fire from city officials over their propensity to stop and snarl traffic and obstruct emergency vehicles.

Removal of Cruise’s driverless taxis from San Francisco’s roads comes as officials in other Bay Area cities closely watch the technology’s roll-out. Decisions on where the vehicles are ultimately deployed remains under the authority of state regulators. San Jose has said all it can do is hope to build positive relationships with robotaxi companies, and Oakland officials have told the utilities commission they know their city “may be next” for deployment.

To get its permits back for testing and deploying driverless taxis with no human backup, Cruise would have to provide the DMV with information about “how it has addressed the deficiencies that led to the suspensions,” the agency said.

Since August, when the state Public Utilities Commission gave General Motors’ Cruise a green light to take paid fares, there have been numerous reports of the cars’ obstructing emergency vehicles and bottlenecking traffic. San Francisco Board of Supervisors president Aaron Peskin at the time described the autonomous technology on public roads as “a recipe for death” and said the vehicles were “not ready for prime time.”

https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/10/24/dmv-shuts-down-cruise-robo-taxis-in-san-francisco-saying-company-misled-on-safety/

[HemiEd]

California DMV revokes operating permit for driverless car company after pedestrian collision

The California Department of Motor Vehicles announced Tuesday that it is suspending Cruise LLC’s permit to operate its autonomous vehicles without a test driver present. The company, which is owned by General Motors, was operating a fleet of robotaxis in San Francisco. The decision is effective immediately. This marks the second time that the DMV has suspended a driverless testing permit, a DMV spokesperson said. “Public safety remains the California DMV’s top priority, and the department’s autonomous vehicle regulations provide a framework to facilitate the safe testing and deployment of this technology on California public roads. When there is an unreasonable risk to public safety, the DMV can immediately suspend or revoke permits. There is no set time for a suspension,” the DMV said in a statement. The agency said that it has provided Cruise with the steps needed to reinstate the permit to operate, “which the DMV will not approve until the company has fulfilled the requirements to the department’s satisfaction.” The decision does not affect the company’s ability to test vehicles with a safety driver. Cruise and Waymo, owned by Alphabet, both run driverless cars in San Francisco.



Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article280950413.html#storylink=cpy

[AdolfOliverBush]

“This is a wake-up call to Cruise to pay closer attention to road safety,” said Carnegie Mellon University engineering professor Phil Koopman, who likened the company’s robotaxis to “teenage drivers not displaying good judgment.”

I see those daily, and nobody is banning them from the roads.

[Clyde Frog]

I’m glad they got blocked, even if it was temporary. Those cars became a nuisance. They were everywhere and with how congested SF streets are w Hipster Lance Armstrongs and double parked delivery trucks/ dashers /Ubers etc. they would block streets for minutes at a time trying to figure out safe passage through minor hazards.

It was ok when there were a few of them here and there but that shit got out of hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chief Pagan]

I see those daily, and nobody is banning them from the roads.

One of the big problems that I've been predicting for years, is the standard for driverless cars.

As a society, I figured driverless cars would have to be vastly superior to human drivers before they were accepted.

If driverless cars had one-tenth the accident and fatality rate, they would still be prohibited or sued out of existence.

Now I'm not claiming they are even that good yet.

But I still expect to see widespread adoption in other countries before the US.

[HemiEd]

I’m glad they got blocked, even if it was temporary. Those cars became a nuisance. They were everywhere and with how congested SF streets are w Hipster Lance Armstrongs and double parked delivery trucks/ dashers /Ubers etc. they would block streets for minutes at a time trying to figure out safe passage through minor hazards.

It was ok when there were a few of them here and there but that shit got out of hand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like first hand experience, thank you for sharing.

Hopefully they will get this problem figured out soon before they release too many more of these vehicles.

I wonder if these vehicles stop and gawk at homeless people shitting in the streets?

[AdolfOliverBush]

One of the big problems that I've been predicting for years, is the standard for driverless cars.

As a society, I figured driverless cars would have to be vastly superior to human drivers before they were accepted.

If driverless cars had one-tenth the accident and fatality rate, they would still be prohibited or sued out of existence.

Now I'm not claiming they are even that good yet.

But I still expect to see widespread adoption in other countries before the US.

Agreed, I think one of the biggest hurdles for driverless cars will be cars with drivers, because people can be unpredictable and stupid, for lack of better words. Human drivers aren't going to mesh well with autonomous vehicles.

[Chief Pagan]

On the interstate, absolutely true.

For urban environments, you have to add in bikes and jaywalking pedestrians.

And really dense urban environments like SF and NYC have additional issues.

On 'side streets', there are so many double parked delivery trucks, for instance, you sometimes have use the oncoming lane of traffic to go around them.

So there is no way to follow the letter of the law, and sometimes it's not clear if the oncoming traffic is going to wait for you.

If you want to wait for a huge gap in oncoming traffic, you can wait a long time.

If it was all driverless, it would be easier.

If people's Bluetooth, smartphones broadcast their location as a pedestrian, bicyclist, that would help a little bit.

[DaFace]

Well, I'm excited to give Waymo a try when I visit Phoenix in a month or so. :)

[BEAVER]

That the DMV will be the final word about some technological fix for these myriad issues is somewhat worrisome. Not an organization that I would turn to for technological knowledge or progress. Ever.

But I'm sure this will work out fine.

[Clyde Frog]

Sounds like first hand experience, thank you for sharing.

Hopefully they will get this problem figured out soon before they release too many more of these vehicles.

I wonder if these vehicles stop and gawk at homeless people shitting in the streets?


Unfortunately for me it is first hand experience.

The problem for Cruise is the only way for them to get it figured out is running them “in the wild”.

Lol. Shit, used needles, tranq zombies, sidewalk tent suburbs with full on living room set ups including a couch and lamps on night tables all plugged into the city grid. The homeless rule entire swaths of the city now. It’s going to take something major to ever stop this place from being a extreme, far left liberal shithole. It’s so far gone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kiimo]

Let's be honest the driving age at 14 is an absolute joke it should probably be 18 at the youngest and probably more like 21


they never should have given me a license at 15 I was a danger to everyone around me

[HemiEd]

Unfortunately for me it is first hand experience.

The problem for Cruise is the only way for them to get it figured out is running them “in the wild”.

Lol. Shit, used needles, tranq zombies, sidewalk tent suburbs with full on living room set ups including a couch and lamps on night tables all plugged into the city grid. The homeless rule entire swaths of the city now. It’s going to take something major to ever stop this place from being a extreme, far left liberal shithole. It’s so far gone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Such a sad deal, I was shocked at walking up on a guy shitting between two cars when I was there at a convention a long time ago, sounds like it has just gotten worse.

[HemiEd]

Well, I'm excited to give Waymo a try when I visit Phoenix in a month or so. :)

Hopefully it will be an experience you look back on with nothing but joy.

[R Clark]

Let's be honest the driving age at 14 is an absolute joke it should probably be 18 at the youngest and probably more like 21


they never should have given me a license at 15 I was a danger to everyone around me

Speak for yourself, we weren’t all no driving dipshits like you. I grew up in the country where we had to drive at 14 yrs old

[HemiEd]

Just have to share: After spending a few days this last week with my PHd, 50 year old, Scientist daughter, she told me she hopes to able to purchase a self driving car for her next vehicle. :D Change is going to happen whether I like it or not.

[DaFace]

Just have to share: After spending a few days this last week with my PHd, 50 year old, Scientist daughter, she told me she hopes to able to purchase a self driving car for her next vehicle. :D Change is going to happen whether I like it or not.

At this point, I don't really even think that's a straightforward statement. We've learned in the past 10 years or so that "self-driving" is a spectrum, not a definition. I would imagine that a majority of mid-tier or higher cars sold today have at least adaptive cruise control and/or lane control. That's all my 2021 Rav4 Prime has, but it certainly can drive itself on the highway if the rules are "stay in lane and don't hit the car in front of you."

Teslas add a few additional steps to that - more advanced versions of the above, change lanes with just the push of the turn signal, stopping at stop lights/signs, etc.

Beyond that, there really aren't any options that are truly ready for prime time, and it seems like the growth curve has been flattening out in terms of tangible progress. Everything that's out there is really only able to adapt to a specific geographic area, and the ones that can do more than that (Tesla's FSD) still can't handle a lot of fringe scenarios (weird road construction markings, for example).

I do think things will get there, but it's going to take longer than everyone was thinking a few years ago. So for the forseeable future, the question is going to be what self-driving features a car has rather than whether it is "self-driving."

[Buehler445]

Let's be honest the driving age at 14 is an absolute joke it should probably be 18 at the youngest and probably more like 21


they never should have given me a license at 15 I was a danger to everyone around me

I started driving at 8. My parents made me drive all the way across the state and into KC at 14. I was good to go.

[JohnnyV13]

The problem driverless cars ran into is the limits of AI. Yes, AI can do a good job emulating human decision-making, but when you run into a weakness it hits a quandry and can't come up with reasonable work-arounds on the fly. Instead, it brick walls and as in the above OP, will created congestion trying to deal with minor hazards that aren't in its programming.

[HemiEd]

At this point, I don't really even think that's a straightforward statement. We've learned in the past 10 years or so that "self-driving" is a spectrum, not a definition. I would imagine that a majority of mid-tier or higher cars sold today have at least adaptive cruise control and/or lane control. That's all my 2021 Rav4 Prime has, but it certainly can drive itself on the highway if the rules are "stay in lane and don't hit the car in front of you."

Teslas add a few additional steps to that - more advanced versions of the above, change lanes with just the push of the turn signal, stopping at stop lights/signs, etc.

Beyond that, there really aren't any options that are truly ready for prime time, and it seems like the growth curve has been flattening out in terms of tangible progress. Everything that's out there is really only able to adapt to a specific geographic area, and the ones that can do more than that (Tesla's FSD) still can't handle a lot of fringe scenarios (weird road construction markings, for example).

I do think things will get there, but it's going to take longer than everyone was thinking a few years ago. So for the forseeable future, the question is going to be what self-driving features a car has rather than whether it is "self-driving."
You make good points.

I was talking to my SIL on this visit and he said he had rented a rental car on their vacation that would over ride his steering some on the lane control when passing an eighteen wheeler. Is that the "adaptive cruise control" you referenced?

Also, another feature some of these new vehicles have that I have noticed on rental cars, the motor will shut off when at a stop light/sign. That can not be good for the engine long term but I bet it really helps in those big traffic jams in metropolitan areas.

[Bearcat]

You make good points.

I was talking to my SIL on this visit and he said he had rented a rental car on their vacation that would over ride his steering some on the lane control when passing an eighteen wheeler. Is that the "adaptive cruise control" you referenced?

Also, another feature some of these new vehicles have that I have noticed on rental cars, the motor will shut off when at a stop light/sign. That can not be good for the engine long term but I bet it really helps in those big traffic jams in metropolitan areas.

I can set my cruise control to automatically slow down within 1-3 car lengths of a vehicle in front of me... so if I have cruise set to 70, it'll brake as it approaches a slower vehicle and then automatically speed up when you change lanes.

You can also set it to automatically change lanes whenever you turn on the blinker, and also set it so it'll stay within the lanes (it also complains if you take your hands off the wheel).

There's been a time or two where it'll override steering a bit, so I don't use it much... and once where it slammed the brakes on the highway thinking I was about to hit something, but nothing was in my lane at all (and fortunately no one behind me).

The last car I owned had the auto stop/start thing, but only for eco mode.. my current one does it all the time and don't think there's a way to disable it..... if you slow down just right though, it won't turn off. It's impressively seamless though when it does start up, even though I also wonder about long term effects.

[Strongside]

You make good points.

I was talking to my SIL on this visit and he said he had rented a rental car on their vacation that would over ride his steering some on the lane control when passing an eighteen wheeler. Is that the "adaptive cruise control" you referenced?

Also, another feature some of these new vehicles have that I have noticed on rental cars, the motor will shut off when at a stop light/sign. That can not be good for the engine long term but I bet it really helps in those big traffic jams in metropolitan areas.

My F150 starts and stops the engine at stop lights.

120k miles and never an issue.

[HemiEd]

I can set my cruise control to automatically slow down within 1-3 car lengths of a vehicle in front of me... so if I have cruise set to 70, it'll brake as it approaches a slower vehicle and then automatically speed up when you change lanes.

You can also set it to automatically change lanes whenever you turn on the blinker, and also set it so it'll stay within the lanes (it also complains if you take your hands off the wheel).

There's been a time or two where it'll override steering a bit, so I don't use it much... and once where it slammed the brakes on the highway thinking I was about to hit something, but nothing was in my lane at all (and fortunately no one behind me).

The last car I owned had the auto stop/start thing, but only for eco mode.. my current one does it all the time and don't think there's a way to disable it..... if you slow down just right though, it won't turn off. It's impressively seamless though when it does start up, even though I also wonder about long term effects.
Wow, this stuff is a lot farther along than I thought. I am surprised by most of this.



My F150 starts and stops the engine at stop lights.

120k miles and never an issue.

That is pretty good for a Ford. :D

All kidding aside, on startups, the engine oil has to get picked up and circulated by the oil pump, thus the most critical wear time on an engine.

I will not be owning a car/truck that does this, but fortunately I put myself in a position not to have to.

[CapsLockKey]

Was in SF last month for a conference, and yes those things were all over the place. I found it hilarious when one of them stopped right over top of a huge crosswalk at a red light and 100s of conference goers couldn't safely cross the street because this driverless "smart" car couldn't comprehend a very visibly marked crosswalk. Meanwhile all the cars with actual drivers were where they were supposed to be.

[DaFace]

I can set my cruise control to automatically slow down within 1-3 car lengths of a vehicle in front of me... so if I have cruise set to 70, it'll brake as it approaches a slower vehicle and then automatically speed up when you change lanes.

You can also set it to automatically change lanes whenever you turn on the blinker, and also set it so it'll stay within the lanes (it also complains if you take your hands off the wheel).

There's been a time or two where it'll override steering a bit, so I don't use it much... and once where it slammed the brakes on the highway thinking I was about to hit something, but nothing was in my lane at all (and fortunately no one behind me).

The last car I owned had the auto stop/start thing, but only for eco mode.. my current one does it all the time and don't think there's a way to disable it..... if you slow down just right though, it won't turn off. It's impressively seamless though when it does start up, even though I also wonder about long term effects.

Adaptive cruise control + lane assistance = game changer if you're in heavy traffic

As for the engine shut off thing, that's becoming pretty common as a fuel efficiency improvement measure. They don't us a normal starter, so the typical logic on wear and tear doesn't really apply.

[CapsLockKey]

Adaptive cruise control + lane assistance = game changer if you're in heavy traffic



As for the engine shut off thing, that's becoming pretty common as a fuel efficiency improvement measure. They don't us a normal starter, so the typical logic on wear and tear doesn't really apply.The auto shut off thing is a cheap trick by auto manufacturers to get around the new fuel efficiency standards. I personally find it annoying when driving in town so I bought an auto stop delete device specific to my car make off Amazon for $40 that turns that feature off when you start the car so you don't have to keep pushing the button. I haven't noticed any difference in my fuel usage.

[Fish]

According to entities like SAE and AAA, auto start/stop systems can save anywhere from 5-15% on fuel consumption, depending on the scenario. They use what is called an EFB battery (Enhanced Flooded Battery) that is considerably more reliable for providing instant power, and they provide about twice as many charging cycles as a conventional battery.

[DaFace]

The auto shut off thing is a cheap trick by auto manufacturers to get around the new fuel efficiency standards. I personally find it annoying when driving in town so I bought an auto stop delete device specific to my car make off Amazon for $40 that turns that feature off when you start the car so you don't have to keep pushing the button. I haven't noticed any difference in my fuel usage.

Yours made you press a button to turn on again every time you stop? All of the ones I've seen automatically start the engine again when you press the accelerator.

[BEAVER]

I can set my cruise control to automatically slow down within 1-3 car lengths of a vehicle in front of me... so if I have cruise set to 70, it'll brake as it approaches a slower vehicle and then automatically speed up when you change lanes.

You can also set it to automatically change lanes whenever you turn on the blinker, and also set it so it'll stay within the lanes (it also complains if you take your hands off the wheel).

There's been a time or two where it'll override steering a bit, so I don't use it much... and once where it slammed the brakes on the highway thinking I was about to hit something, but nothing was in my lane at all (and fortunately no one behind me).

The last car I owned had the auto stop/start thing, but only for eco mode.. my current one does it all the time and don't think there's a way to disable it..... if you slow down just right though, it won't turn off. It's impressively seamless though when it does start up, even though I also wonder about long term effects.

My Pickup (2020 GMC) has all that stuff. Collision avoidance - adaptive whatever - lane assist - I turned it all off except the HUD alert for collision. I just can't deal with my steering wheel doing anything without my input.

The seat will also vibrate if you look to be running into something - I had turn that off because my girlfriend kept trying to run into things.

[Eleazar]

Yours made you press a button to turn on again every time you stop? All of the ones I've seen automatically start the engine again when you press the accelerator.

Not only this, but that shutoff at stop light feature has been around for 10 years or more, it isn’t anything new

[CapsLockKey]

Yours made you press a button to turn on again every time you stop? All of the ones I've seen automatically start the engine again when you press the accelerator.No there is a button to disable to the auto stop function and most cars that have that should have a similar button. Usually has an icon with an A with a circular arrow around it. It just resets to on every time you start the car so you can't keep it off all the time. The device I put in basically makes it like you pressed the button when you turn on the car so you don't have to deal with it anymore.

[Chief Pagan]

You make good points.

I was talking to my SIL on this visit and he said he had rented a rental car on their vacation that would over ride his steering some on the lane control when passing an eighteen wheeler. Is that the "adaptive cruise control" you referenced?

Also, another feature some of these new vehicles have that I have noticed on rental cars, the motor will shut off when at a stop light/sign. That can not be good for the engine long term but I bet it really helps in those big traffic jams in metropolitan areas.

My understanding, most of the damage is from starting a cold engine. If the engine is still hot and the oil is still spread around, it isn't an issue.

[Bearcat]

No there is a button to disable to the auto stop function and most cars that have that should have a similar button. Usually has an icon with an A with a circular arrow around it. It just resets to on every time you start the car so you can't keep it off all the time. The device I put in basically makes it like you pressed the button when you turn on the car so you don't have to deal with it anymore.

Yeah, my last car had it... if I accidentally put it into eco mode (and that was the only way it ever went into eco mode), it would enable the auto start even after I switched back drive modes.

I could probably root kit my current vehicle once it's out of warranty to disable it, but it's barely even noticeable and easy to let off the brake a bit to get it to start again.

[Rain Man]

I had a rental car on a long road trip a while back, and it took me a bit to figure out the adaptive cruise control because I'd never seen it. I'd be on the highway cruising along and then I'd notice that I was going five miles under the speed limit for some reason. I eventually figured out that it was because there was a pokey person ahead of me, and so I would slow down to start a pokey parade with them. I had to switch lanes to get back up to speed.

But it made me wonder - if everyone had that same system, could you end up with a big pokey parade of dozens of cars if people didn't notice and pass? It seems like it.

[Rain Man]

For most of my life, I think a bigger issue than self-driving may be not owning a car. Self-driving only really would affect me on longer road trips since I'd probably be actively monitoring in my normal urban driving.

But if we found ourselves in a world where a bunch of driverless cars prowl around and I order them up on an as-needed basis, then I won't own a car. And if I don't own a car, I have an empty garage, and I'm either renting it out to an old-school car owner or more likely I'm converting it into an ADU and making notable rental income.

I think this trend is happening at a perfect time for me to generate retirement income and also not be a dangerous old codger on the road.

[Chief Pagan]

Non-ownership, self-driving cars could be really transformative.

If you are no longer buying a car based on: well sometimes I need to carry five people and all this stuff and drive it up in the mountains and since I own it, it's part of my identity so I should get a big ass SUV/Truck etc.

I usually work from home and to the extent I ever commute, it is only about 15 minutes. But if I had some commute that was pushing up against an hour or something, and I was being picked up in a single occupancy vehicle (which is a separate discussion). It really only needs to have a single seat that folds back flat like a first class airline, but the car could be relatively small since it only needs to hold one person and not much stuff. I would plan on sleeping, nodding off in the morning. On the way back home, would probably recline back and spend it on my phone/tablet like I would on a plane.

For going to the grocery store or something involving family, yea you would order something larger. But unless the ride sharing is actually, like going to involve sharing rides, a lot of cars could both be small but have one, large comfortable seat.

The thing that worries me about the on demand car, is it not actually being there when I really want it. Like when there is a forest fire or flood, I want to have a car in my driveway that is mine, that I know I can drive away in. Not a 'sorry, we aren't going to drive any of our cars into that to pick you up'.

[Rain Man]

Non-ownership, self-driving cars could be really transformative.

If you are no longer buying a car based on: well sometimes I need to carry five people and all this stuff and drive it up in the mountains and since I own it, it's part of my identity so I should get a big ass SUV/Truck etc.

I usually work from home and to the extent I ever commute, it is only about 15 minutes. But if I had some commute that was pushing up against an hour or something, and I was being picked up in a single occupancy vehicle (which is a separate discussion). It really only needs to have a single seat that folds back flat like a first class airline, but the car could be relatively small since it only needs to hold one person and not much stuff. I would plan on sleeping, nodding off in the morning. On the way back home, would probably recline back and spend it on my phone/tablet like I would on a plane.

For going to the grocery store or something involving family, yea you would order something larger. But unless the ride sharing is actually, like going to involve sharing rides, a lot of cars could both be small but have one, large comfortable seat.

The thing that worries me about the on demand car, is it not actually being there when I really want it. Like when there is a forest fire or flood, I want to have a car in my driveway that is mine, that I know I can drive away in. Not a 'sorry, we aren't going to drive any of our cars into that to pick you up'.

Having my own car would also be really good if I slice my hand open cutting watermelon and need to get to an emergency room. But I guess we already have vehicles for that situation, and we call them ambulances.

So yeah, maybe it's big disasters that are the impetus for that. But in that case maybe you keep a scooter in the garage.

The life you're describing seems awesome. And you're right - you could have different sizes of autonomous vehicles that you can call if you're one-person commuting or going out to dinner with the wife or needing to bring drywall home from the store.

I'd also be thrilled to have a self-driving car for long road trips. It would be even better than a train because I could pull over at will.

This needs to happen.

[Graystoke]

This technology is going to line up with me aging perfectly.
My kids won’t have to have the discussion about should Dad quit driving.

[mr. tegu]

Yours made you press a button to turn on again every time you stop? All of the ones I've seen automatically start the engine again when you press the accelerator.


Mine starts as soon as you let off the break. Also it only goes off if you press the break pedal all the way. There is a spot where you apply the break and it doesn’t shut off. 2022 Honda Ridgeline so I assume this is how all new Hondas are.

[mr. tegu]

I cannot possibly imagine relying on a car to come get me for my daily activities. I don’t always plan ahead to go to the store or park or whatever. So the idea of ordering a car and waiting on it multiple times a day just sounds awful.

[suzzer99]

Being behind the adaptive cruise control people set to three car lengths is super annoying in LA, where everyone drives 80 bumper to bumper. Cars keep getting into the gap, which makes the adaptive car slow down, repeat ad nauseum.

Teslas used to always do this. I haven't seen it as much lately. I think the drivers got tired of it too.

[DaFace]

I cannot possibly imagine relying on a car to come get me for my daily activities. I don’t always plan ahead to go to the store or park or whatever. So the idea of ordering a car and waiting on it multiple times a day just sounds awful.

In the short-term, sure. I can imagine a distant future, though, where a majority of cars on the road aren't owned by an individual, and it would presumably be rare for you to have to wait for more than a couple of minutes for a ride.

Just think about how much lost "productivity" cars have today just sitting on the side of the road, in parking lots, or in garages. If cars are instead constantly moving and picking people up when they're needed, everything becomes more efficient.

Obviously that's just a vision, and I can't really see us getting to that point in the next decade unless someone makes another breakthrough, but I bet that's where we'll get to eventually.

[DaFace]

Being behind the adaptive cruise control people set to three car lengths is super annoying in LA, where everyone drives 80 bumper to bumper. Cars keep getting into the gap, which makes the adaptive car slow down, repeat ad nauseum.

Teslas used to always do this. I haven't seen it as much lately. I think the drivers got tired of it too.

And yet I bet you'd still get to your destination within a minute of when you would have otherwise. Drivers dramatically overestimate the amount of time they can save by swerving around slower drivers in traffic.

For me, I find it's far less stressful to just calm down and let the car deal with all of the stuff like that. I'll sacrifice a minute or two of commute time for that.

[Rain Man]

In the short-term, sure. I can imagine a distant future, though, where a majority of cars on the road aren't owned by an individual, and it would presumably be rare for you to have to wait for more than a couple of minutes for a ride.

Just think about how much lost "productivity" cars have today just sitting on the side of the road, in parking lots, or in garages. If cars are instead constantly moving and picking people up when they're needed, everything becomes more efficient.

Obviously that's just a vision, and I can't really see us getting to that point in the next decade unless someone makes another breakthrough, but I bet that's where we'll get to eventually.


There's car productivity and there's people productivity. Look at all of the people driving on I-70 across western Kansas with their eyes half-glazed. With self-driving cars they could be reading a book or knitting or learning how to use a band saw instead of staring at the car ahead of them.

[DaFace]

There's car productivity and there's people productivity. Look at all of the people driving on I-70 across western Kansas with their eyes half-glazed. With self-driving cars they could be reading a book or knitting or learning how to use a band saw instead of staring at the car ahead of them.

Seems legit.

https://i.imgur.com/CQJxYM5.jpg

(but DALL-E 3 apparently doesn't know what a band saw is)

[Bearcat]

I hope that guy donates blood.



(that was a vein joke, not power-tools-in-a-moving-van joke.... either works though, I guess)

[Chief Pagan]

And yet I bet you'd still get to your destination within a minute of when you would have otherwise. Drivers dramatically overestimate the amount of time they can save by swerving around slower drivers in traffic.

For me, I find it's far less stressful to just calm down and let the car deal with all of the stuff like that. I'll sacrifice a minute or two of commute time for that.

I don't necessarily feel that I save time by tailgating someone driving 75 on the freeway. But if you are the only vehicle with a gap, it does seem that you can get a large stream of vehicles taking advantage of the gap to swerve into that space which doesn't always feel safer or less stressful than tailgating?

But if I was napping in a driverless car, I guess I would be okay with it.

Or better yet, if all the cars were driverless.

[HemiEd]

For those interested in these self driving cars, you might enjoy the series on Prime called "Upload." :D

[seamonster]

Driverless cars drive slower than 96 year old asian women. No thanks.

[HemiEd]

Driverless cars drive slower than 96 year old asian women. No thanks.

:LOL: That visual made me actually laugh, thanks.

[Pablo]

It's been 9 years. Have driverless cars changed anything yet?

[El Lobo Gordo]

It's been 9 years. Have driverless cars changed anything yet?

Technology is allowing cops to shut your car off while you driving it.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/chevrolet-app-turns-off-vehicle-involved-in-janesville-police-chase/ar-AA1jWBYZ

[Chief Pagan]

Driverless cars drive slower than 96 year old asian women. No thanks.

Just wait until they deploy driverless cars in an environment that has snowy streets or even just possible icy spots and the cars decide the safe travel speed is 5mph or something like that.

Commuters will love that one.

[HemiEd]

Just wait until they deploy driverless cars in an environment that has snowy streets or even just possible icy spots and the cars decide the safe travel speed is 5mph or something like that.

Commuters will love that one.

That is a great point. Maybe they will will have AI drones flying above to give instructions?

[Rain Man]

Just wait until they deploy driverless cars in an environment that has snowy streets or even just possible icy spots and the cars decide the safe travel speed is 5mph or something like that.

Commuters will love that one.

It's not a driverless car thing, but they tried an experiment here in Colorado a few years back that I thought was interesting. As background, going to ski resorts is kind of a hassle because you're by default driving in mountains in snowy weather. They essentially had all of the vehicles follow a lead car (government car) at constant speed with no passing. In essence, they turned the normal traffic into somewhat of an autonomous train, and I presume that had the intent of not gumming up traffic with people moving different speeds and constant lane shifting, and therefore either giving everyone a higher average speed or lower crashes. I didn't hear about the results, but presume that it wasn't effective since it wasn't adopted as a normal strategy.

[Chief Pagan]

Without googling it, I would hazard to guess that even if traffic flowed somewhat reasonably well and crashes were reduced, the high testosterone guys in their vehicles with the oversized knobby tires went ballistic and that was that.

Just like some significant percentage of commuters will when driverless cars encounter the threat of snowy, icy streets and reduce speed to a crawl.

Or it may be that the fleets of driverless cars will find it unprofitable to put their cars in harm's way of human drivers when the streets are that dangerous and if you thought you were going to work that day...

Sorry, no cars are available.

[HemiEd]

Cruise slashes 24% of self-driving car workforce in sweeping layoffs
Cruise, the GM self-driving car subsidiary, is laying off 900 workers to slash costs and revamp the company, TechCrunch exclusively learned


https://techcrunch.com/2023/12/14/cruise-slashes-24-of-self-driving-car-workforce-in-sweeping-layoffs/?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email&utm_placement=newsletter

[threebag]

They'll have to pry the keys to my Trans Am/Camaro out of my cold dead hands!/ CP

I have both, 78 TA and an 88 IROC Z

*No mullet

[DaFace]

Well, I'm excited to give Waymo a try when I visit Phoenix in a month or so. :)

Forgot about this thread until it was bumped, but here's my video of my Waymo ride in Phoenix. It had a little trouble figuring out how to get out of a one-way parking lot that dead ended into a valet stand, but once it got on the road, I was surprised with how fluid it seemed. Zippy acceleration, no issues changing lanes, even made a right turn on red.

<iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/zmja5v" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
(this video will expire in 2 days, so you're not crazy if it's not working)

I still wouldn't predict they'll be common any time soon, but it was a much smoother ride than I was expecting, especially compared to videos of Tesla drivers trying out FSD mode.

[Saulbadguy]

Forgot about this thread until it was bumped, but here's my video of my Waymo ride in Phoenix. It had a little trouble figuring out how to get out of a one-way parking lot that dead ended into a valet stand, but once it got on the road, I was surprised with how fluid it seemed. Zippy acceleration, no issues changing lanes, even made a right turn on red.

<iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/zmja5v" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
(this video will expire in 2 days, so you're not crazy if it's not working)

I still wouldn't predict they'll be common any time soon, but it was a much smoother ride than I was expecting, especially compared to videos of Tesla drivers trying out FSD mode.

That's pretty cool, thanks for the video.

Did you experience any anxiety sitting in the back like that with no control? I think I would for a bit.

[DaFace]

That's pretty cool, thanks for the video.

Did you experience any anxiety sitting in the back like that with no control? I think I would for a bit.

The biggest issue was just that it kind of got stuck in the valet parking, and it was definitely a little awkward having the valet guy looking at us because we were in his way while we couldn't do anything about it. They have a help button that you can call, and a rep can take over remotely, but the car got it figured out after a minute or two.

Once it was on the road, it was a pretty normal ride. Definitely no safety-related anxiety.

[HemiEd]

Driverless cars covered 5x more test miles in California in 2023

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 2 (Reuters) - (This Feb. 2 story has been corrected to remove the word ‘Chinese’ from paragraph 9)
Completely driverless vehicles traveled nearly 3.3 million miles in California last year, over five times the previous year's total, even as concerns rose in the wake of a Cruise robotaxi accident, state data on vehicle testing released on Friday showed.
General Motors' (GM.N), opens new tab Cruise and Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab Waymo accounted for the bulk of the miles - 63% and 36% respectively - recorded without a safety driver, according to the state's department of motor vehicles (DMV).

Taxis with empty driver's seats have become common in the San Francisco area. The Cruise accident, in which an autonomous vehicle hit and dragged a pedestrian 20 feet (6.1 meters), sparked a public outcry and prompted the company to halt operations across the country.
Autonomous tests with a safety driver rose to 5.7 million miles from 5.1 million, DMV data from Dec. 1, 2022 to Nov. 30, 2023 showed.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/driverless-cars-covered-5x-more-test-miles-california-2023-2024-02-02/?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email&utm_placement=newsletter

[Hoover]

Impossible. If a robot golfer can't break par, there is no way it will ever be able to drive a car as well as a human.
LOL

While I agree, I would say that the autonomous cars could be an improvement. There are some awful drivers out there. Distracted driving is rampant.

[Ming the Merciless]

I cannot possibly imagine relying on a car to come get me for my daily activities. I don’t always plan ahead to go to the store or park or whatever. So the idea of ordering a car and waiting on it multiple times a day just sounds awful.


The main issue will be cost.


It will be FAR cheaper to order your car a couple times a day than to own a car and pay for it just to have it sit around for 20 hours a day.


Ordering cars will get faster , cheaper and easier. Most people are not going to choose to pay for a car or two full time when they can just order and use them as needed.


Just my thoughts... main issue: cost


When the cost of driverless is far less than owning, thats when people will start switching.

[scho63]

I did Waymo for the first time in my life two weeks ago with a client. It was weird as hell having no one drive the car but I felt 100% safe.

They even called into the car when I took my seat belt off in the back seat as it was strangling me and I couldn't adjust it. Jaguars suck!

The only downside is they stay at speed limit and EVERYOME passed us by!

[Buehler445]

The tech is there. Has been for awhile.

The big thing in tractors is that the lawyers won't let a machine run unattended.

I assume that's the way it is with cars also. There's no one to sue if the car crashes itself.

So Deere is rolling out some autonomous stuff. It is a REALLY small scale, and I think it is still a LONG way from widespread adoption, but I gotta eat some crow there.

They're doing it different than I thought they would, apparently they're using cameras to determine collision avoidance. They have a massive amount of sensors for some of the other stuff, but I think the cameras are doing the heavy lifting for the liability protection. I don't know the mechanics of what it's doing, but that is a massive amount of computing they're doing.

Obviously Deere has an army of lawyers, so they're on it, but it looks like it's happening.

And as should be a shock to nobody, I appear to have been wrong.

[DaFace]

The main issue will be cost.


It will be FAR cheaper to order your car a couple times a day than to own a car and pay for it just to have it sit around for 20 hours a day.


Ordering cars will get faster , cheaper and easier. Most people are not going to choose to pay for a car or two full time when they can just order and use them as needed.


Just my thoughts... main issue: cost


When the cost of driverless is far less than owning, thats when people will start switching.

Maybe. Convenience goes a long way as well, though. If you actually think through how much people spend on cars - $500 car payments are pretty common plus maintenance and fuel. Compare that with calling an Uber a couple of times a day at $10-$15 per ride, and the cost equation isn't really that far off for many people even with drivers.

However, having to wait 5-10 minutes every time you need a ride? That kind of starts to suck.

[Ming the Merciless]

Maybe. Convenience goes a long way as well, though. If you actually think through how much people spend on cars - $500 car payments are pretty common plus maintenance and fuel. Compare that with calling an Uber a couple of times a day at $10-$15 per ride, and the cost equation isn't really that far off for many people even with drivers.

However, having to wait 5-10 minutes every time you need a ride? That kind of starts to suck.


Im talking about total costs.


The models that I have seen are something like this:


You join a club/group and pay a monthly fee to be able to use 1, 2 or 3 different kinds of vehicles. (A pickup, a sedan, a minivan for example, so multiply the total costs!). You get so many hours over a month, and if you go over you can pay extra.


But the savings will be there. No insurance, No maintenance, No fuel costs etc. Paying for part of a car in a group will absolutely be cheaper than paying for a whole car that sits around most of the time. Plus you will have more options for different types of vehicles.


I dont think people will pay MORE for the "convienience" of not having a car right at their house (so I agree with you on that) .. But you bet your ass people will join clubs where you pay LESS for having access to more kinds of cars and no insurance/gas/oil changes/ repairs ! (and be willing to wait 10 min)


Also, obviously not EVERYONE will do this. Guys like me who need a truck for work, probably will have a work truck at home. Or people who drive more than allowed by group ownership etc, or maybe as a luxury or status symbol.

[scho63]

Waymo was cheaper than Lyft and Uber by about 25%

[Hoover]

Im talking about total costs.


The models that I have seen are something like this:


You join a club/group and pay a monthly fee to be able to use 1, 2 or 3 different kinds of vehicles. (A pickup, a sedan, a minivan for example, so multiply the total costs!). You get so many hours over a month, and if you go over you can pay extra.


But the savings will be there. No insurance, No maintenance, No fuel costs etc. Paying for part of a car in a group will absolutely be cheaper than paying for a whole car that sits around most of the time. Plus you will have more options for different types of vehicles.


I dont think people will pay MORE for the "convienience" of not having a car right at their house (so I agree with you on that) .. But you bet your ass people will join clubs where you pay LESS for having access to more kinds of cars and no insurance/gas/oil changes/ repairs ! (and be willing to wait 10 min)


Also, obviously not EVERYONE will do this. Guys like me who need a truck for work, probably will have a work truck at home. Or people who drive more than allowed by group ownership etc, or maybe as a luxury or status symbol.

This is probably the next logical step.

I'm a tight ass when it comes to cars. I'd love to have a nice vehicle in the garage but I just can't justify the expense. My two cars are both over ten years old one both over 100k miles, one is over 210k. Have not had a car payment for 8 years now.

The ONLY time I wish I had something different is when we are going on a trip of some sort. A subscription service would be great for that. Still think I'd want to have something sitting in the garage, but maybe that plus a subscription would be great.

[UK_Chief]

Too late for Pat Senior?

[Buehler445]

Woof. I didn't realize it was this bad. I haven't taken the time to see the legitimacy of what he's saying, but it's bad.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2DOd4RLNeT4?si=QpdH6U5_PFTj3Uav" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Otter]

Woof. I didn't realize it was this bad. I haven't taken the time to see the legitimacy of what he's saying, but it's bad.

<iframe style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255) !important; border: 1px solid rgb(236, 147, 41) !important; min-width: 220px !important; min-height: 210px !important; max-height: 600px !important; pointer-events: all !important; z-index: 999 !important; width: 558px !important; height: 313px !important;" srcdoc="<html><head><style>html, body { color: #303030 !important; height: 100% !important; overflow: hidden !important; } #btn-once-05735436064191298 { border: 2px solid #f06a0a !important; background-color: #f06a0a !important; color: #fefefe !important; } #btn-site-07297908569241454 { border: 2px solid #333 !important; background-color: #fefefe !important; color: #333 !important; } #btn-once-05735436064191298:hover { background-color: #fefefe !important; color: #333 !important; } #btn-site-07297908569241454:hover { background-color: #fefefe !important; border: 2px solid #f06a0a !important; } #ico-help-05457992054663334, #ico-close-0531571187297286 { position: absolute; right: 4px; top: 4px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; } #ico-close-0531571187297286 { left: 4px; width: 20px; } #ico-help-05457992054663334:before, #ico-close-0531571187297286:before { border: 2px solid; border-radius: 50%; display: inline-flex; justify-content: center; align-items: center; color: #555; content: '?'; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, avenir next, avenir, segoe ui, liberation sans, Ubuntu, helvetica neue, helvetica, Cantarell, roboto, noto, arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-weight: bold; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; -moz-osx-font-smoothing: grayscale; padding: 1px; height: 1em; width: 1em; } #ico-close-0531571187297286:before { border: 0; content: '✕'; padding: 4px; } #ico-help-05457992054663334:hover:before, #ico-close-0531571187297286:hover:before { color: #ec9329; } a { text-decoration: underline; color: black; } a:hover { color: #ec9329; } @media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) { :root { color-scheme: dark; } body { background-color: #333 !important; color: #ddd !important; } a, a:visited { color: #ddd !important; } a:hover { color: #f06a0a !important; } #ico-help-05457992054663334:before, #ico-close-0531571187297286:before { color: #aaa; } #btn-site-07297908569241454 { background-color: #333 !important; border: solid 2px #ddd !important; color: #ddd !important; } #btn-once-05735436064191298:hover, #btn-site-07297908569241454:hover { background-color: #333 !important; color: #ddd !important; } }</style></head><body style=&quot;margin:0&quot;>Privacy Badger has replaced this YouTube widget (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/&quot;https://www.youtube.com/embed/2DOd4RLNeT4?si=QpdH6U5_PFTj3Uav&quot;)
[/URL][URL="https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/&quot;https://privacybadger.org/#How-does-Privacy-Badger-handle-social-media-widgets&quot;"] (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/&quot;javascript:void(0)&quot;)
<button id=&quot;btn-once-05735436064191298&quot; style=&quot;transition: background-color 0.25s ease-out 0s, border-color 0.25s ease-out 0s, color 0.25s ease-out 0s !important; border-radius: 3px !important; cursor: pointer !important; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, avenir next, avenir, segoe ui, liberation sans, Ubuntu, helvetica neue, helvetica, Cantarell, roboto, noto, arial, sans-serif !important; font-size: 14px !important; font-weight: bold !important; line-height: 16px !important; padding: 10px !important; margin: 4px !important; width: 70% !important; max-width: 280px !important;&quot;>Allow once</button><button id=&quot;btn-site-07297908569241454&quot; style=&quot;transition: background-color 0.25s ease-out 0s, border-color 0.25s ease-out 0s, color 0.25s ease-out 0s !important; border-radius: 3px !important; cursor: pointer !important; font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, avenir next, avenir, segoe ui, liberation sans, Ubuntu, helvetica neue, helvetica, Cantarell, roboto, noto, arial, sans-serif !important; font-size: 14px !important; font-weight: bold !important; line-height: 16px !important; padding: 10px !important; margin: 4px !important; width: 70% !important; max-width: 280px !important;&quot;>Always allow on this site</button>

</body></html>"></iframe>


What's up with that dude's left eyebrow?

[Chief Pagan]

Sorry, your Telsa is a POS.

Fixed the click bait title for you.

[Frazod]

Woof. I didn't realize it was this bad. I haven't taken the time to see the legitimacy of what he's saying, but it's bad.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2DOd4RLNeT4?si=QpdH6U5_PFTj3Uav" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Good Lord. Perhaps Musk should change the company name from Tesla to Skynet.

[HemiEd]

This article is covering "driver assist" but I thought it might be relevant and interesting in this thread.

Almost No One Makes a Good Driver Assistance System, Report Says
Your driver assistants are letting you down.

A report released by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) Tuesday examined the safety of 14 driver-assistance products from various automakers. The results were dismal: only one car, Toyota’s Lexus LS, notched an “acceptable” rating. The GMC Sierra and Nissan Ariya managed to nab “marginal” scores, while the rest — including driver-assistance poster child Tesla — were deemed “poor.” The report’s individual assessments were pretty withering, but potentially more damaging was the overall conclusion that driver-assistance systems do nothing to improve safety.

The Insurance Man Cometh
The IIHS’ main safety concerns stemmed from a lack of driver engagement. Driver-assistance systems can pretty much drive your car, but they’re not fully self-driving systems. Drivers need to be ready to take control of their vehicles at any time — and in the IIHS’ view, the systems themselves should enforce that level of engagement. “Many vehicles don’t adequately monitor whether the driver is looking at the road or prepared to take control,” Alexandra Mueller, a senior research scientist at the IIHS, said in a statement. “Many lack attention reminders that come soon enough and are forceful enough to rouse a driver whose mind is wandering,” she added.

This isn’t really a smoking gun, since automakers with driver-assistance systems can assert that it’s the driver’s responsibility to remain attentive. However, bullish automakers like to maintain that self-driving vehicles are in fact safer than those driven by fallible humans. The IIHS study hints otherwise:

IIHS President David Harkey said in a statement that there is “little evidence [partial automation] makes driving safer,” and added: “As many high-profile crashes have illustrated, it can introduce new risks when systems lack the appropriate safeguards.”
Harkey told Reuters that his statement leaned on insurance claims data. "We have been able to look at vehicles with and without these (systems) and determine there is no reduction in claims as a result of these more advanced systems," he said.
Lithium Lining: The IIHS wasn’t totally raining on automated driving’s parade; the report looked at how each system performed in a variety of criteria, and none were universally bad. “No single system did well across the board, but in each category at least one system performed well,” Starkey said in a statement. “That means the fixes are readily available and, in some cases, may be accomplished with nothing more than a simple software update.” The report was completed before Tesla’s most recent software update in December, so improvements may already have been made there. We hope, anyway.

Written by Isobel Asher Hamilton

[BWillie]

Good news. I found a way to beat 2024 Tesla Autopilot

[mlyonsd]

Bought the wife a new Subaru in Jan with all the safety features including driver assist. We call driver assist Jesus take the wheel mode and I find it annoying. The car tends to wander a little as it looks for the lane lines. It also doesn't like you driving with only one hand. It will eventually flash a warning on the dash and if you don't obey it will then sound a beep alarm.

Separately it has a lane warning system that will attempt to keep you in your lane. If you go to pass someone it will kick in if you don't turn on your blinker.

The forward looking avoidance system is nice with one exception. If you have the cruise set and you slowly catch up to a car going 1 or 2 mph slower it will lower your speed and keep you at a pre-selected distance until you change lanes to pass. The few times I've driven it I all of a sudden I'm going 77 instead of 80 because I caught up to a slower car.

I think I'll eventually get used to it even though I will hardly ever drive it. The wife loves the car.

[HemiEd]

Bought the wife a new Subaru in Jan with all the safety features including driver assist. We call driver assist Jesus take the wheel mode and I find it annoying. The car tends to wander a little as it looks for the lane lines. It also doesn't like you driving with only one hand. It will eventually flash a warning on the dash and if you don't obey it will then sound a beep alarm.

Separately it has a lane warning system that will attempt to keep you in your lane. If you go to pass someone it will kick in if you don't turn on your blinker.

The forward looking avoidance system is nice with one exception. If you have the cruise set and you slowly catch up to a car going 1 or 2 mph slower it will lower your speed and keep you at a pre-selected distance until you change lanes to pass. The few times I've driven it I all of a sudden I'm going 77 instead of 80 because I caught up to a slower car.

I think I'll eventually get used to it even though I will hardly ever drive it. The wife loves the car.

Very interesting, thanks for sharing that

I would probably be cussing and yelling at the car like I do other idiot drivers now.

[Chief Pagan]

Bought the wife a new Subaru in Jan with all the safety features including driver assist. We call driver assist Jesus take the wheel mode and I find it annoying. The car tends to wander a little as it looks for the lane lines. It also doesn't like you driving with only one hand. It will eventually flash a warning on the dash and if you don't obey it will then sound a beep alarm.

Separately it has a lane warning system that will attempt to keep you in your lane. If you go to pass someone it will kick in if you don't turn on your blinker.

The forward looking avoidance system is nice with one exception. If you have the cruise set and you slowly catch up to a car going 1 or 2 mph slower it will lower your speed and keep you at a pre-selected distance until you change lanes to pass. The few times I've driven it I all of a sudden I'm going 77 instead of 80 because I caught up to a slower car.

I think I'll eventually get used to it even though I will hardly ever drive it. The wife loves the car.

That would probably be enough to make me turn the system off.

[El Lobo Gordo]

That would probably be enough to make me turn the system off.

I've thought about turning off the system. It is annoying and you never really get used to it. I have left it on because I keep thinking one day it might save my ass.

[suzzer99]

Separately it has a lane warning system that will attempt to keep you in your lane. If you go to pass someone it will kick in if you don't turn on your blinker.

Every rental car I've driven for the past few years does this. It's annoying. But then I figured I should be signaling anyway, so I just gave in.

[HemiEd]

Every rental car I've driven for the past few years does this. It's annoying. But then I figured I should be signaling anyway, so I just gave in.

That is just automatic for me, even on these back roads with no other traffic.

I used to say, up in New England/Boston that nobody uses turn signals because they would giving away their intentions. They are just crazy aggressive drivers.

[stevieray]

That is just automatic for me, even on these back roads with no other traffic.

I used to say, up in New England/Boston that nobody uses turn signals because they would giving away their intentions. They are just crazy aggressive drivers.

People turning on their turn signal one second before they turn is annoying as hell.

Too many lazy drivers.

[HemiEd]

People turning on their turn signal one second before they turn is annoying as hell.

Too many lazy drivers.

For sure. And then you have some old folks that signal a mile ahead of the intended turn.

I have been thinking about those Boston drivers off and on today since my post as it used to be a real issue to deal with about one or two weeks a year .

Up there, it is competitive driving so to speak. If you can advance one spot in traffic by not letting the rest know what you are doing, it is a win! Surprise attack!

Maybe this driver assist was designed with them in mind?

[suzzer99]

I go the other way in normal LA commuter traffic (idiot weekend traffic is a whole different story). I signal when there's a gap and basically force them to be a dick to not let me in. 19 times out of 20 they slow down to let you get in.

[mlyonsd]

Every rental car I've driven for the past few years does this. It's annoying. But then I figured I should be signaling anyway, so I just gave in.Yeah I've been surprised by dick drivers enough I started religiously using my blinkers years ago.

[Katipan]

Blinkers are a declaration of intent, not a request for permission.

[Otter]

I've been in 4 accidents in my life (one of them almost took me out) and none of them were remotely my fault and every one of them involved a woman driver. If these things can prevent women from driving I'm all in.


Women are horrible drivers. Nothing anyone will say will convince me otherwise. I'd take a drunk driving man over a sober woman.