I think it'll be mainstream, but people enjoy driving so I'd have thought that they'll co-exist - probably with just better developed safety override features that exist now, e.g. if you're the car detects you being a maniac or a crash coming. Someone said '50 years'... I'd be very surprised if they're not mainstream by 2025/2030 or sooner.
There are some pretty well developed plans out there for this in the industry, even as far as the idea that you go to work and your driverless car goes around picking up Uber fares during the day using the app.
I think it'll be mainstream, but people enjoy driving so I'd have thought that they'll co-exist - probably with just better developed safety override features that exist now, e.g. if you're the car detects you being a maniac or a crash coming. Someone said '50 years'... I'd be very surprised if they're not mainstream by 2025/2030 or sooner.
There are some pretty well developed plans out there for this in the industry, even as far as the idea that you go to work and your driverless car goes around picking up Uber fares during the day using the app.
I think the issue is that they can't co-exist - how would my driven car communicate with a driverless car?
I think it'll be mainstream, but people enjoy driving so I'd have thought that they'll co-exist - probably with just better developed safety override features that exist now, e.g. if you're the car detects you being a maniac or a crash coming. Someone said '50 years'... I'd be very surprised if they're not mainstream by 2025/2030 or sooner.
There are some pretty well developed plans out there for this in the industry, even as far as the idea that you go to work and your driverless car goes around picking up Uber fares during the day using the app.
I think the issue is that they can't co-exist - how would my driven car communicate with a driverless car?
Same as you do now - two fingers out the window and a verbal four letter protest.
Just needs the roads adapted. I've got traffic assist on my Audi and it can steer itself on any road with clear lane markings, maintains a safe distance behind car in front in cruise control and stops and starts itself in traffic, brakes automatically and reduces speed approaching bends, road junctions and roundabouts and stops if a pedestrian steps into the road. Reads speed signs and can limit car to that speed if you choose. Not perfect, sometimes picks up pedestrians still on the pavement, but everything can be overridden in real time.
Came across a cyclist the other night riding along a country road with no lights and the car picked it up and braked before I realised he was there.
You do realise that car is going to take over your life and do away with you, don't you?
I presume driverless cars from BMW will have a built in function that allows them to drive 5mm from the car in front and flash their lights when on motorways?
Not only that, but all cars over a certain price will only use the inner lanes on a motorway for getting on and off, otherwise they'll be in the outside lane even when all the other lanes are empty.
I think in some cities it may work but I have concerns over the 'morals' of the control system.
If the car is in a situation where it has to serve to avoid a pedestrian that stepped out in front of it. However if it swerves left it will hit a group of old ladies at a bus stop. If it swerves right it will avoid the pedestrian and the bus stop but will drive into a wall possibly killing the people in the car. How does it make that decision? Does it value the life of the owner above others or does it treat all life equally?
I think it would be programmed to brake as hard as it could but stay in a straight line. However, this does highlight the need for pedestrians to be controlled by robots, too. Better still, get rid of the pedestrians and the drivers, and just have the cars driving themselves on otherwise empty streets.
I think driverless cars are inevitable, though probably not for a few decades. Once a certain threshold of % driverless cars on the road I can quickly see non-autonomous cars being banned. There'll be all these robot cars talking to each other, forming trains on motorways to get aerodynamic efficiencies, etc. and a human simply won't be able to drive in that traffic without slowing all the robot cars down.
If you're a petrol head it'll be a similar situation to owning a horse. You'll garage it somewhere, trailer it (behind a robot car) to a track and then drive it to your hearts content.
The question will become what happens to buses and trains. Presumably you'll pay per trip to use a robot car rather than having one sitting outside your house not in use. So maybe robot buses will just be cheaper per trip than robot cars. Train is another issue, if robot cars make our roads more efficient and there isn't parking to worry about (the car will just drive itself off to the next user), then why would you get a train to work instead of a robot car that goes door to door?
In a city like London where transport infrastructure (especially roads) date back centuries, you will face the same problem that the Tube does namely that nobody would build the system that way today (given the technology we now have) but we are stuck with either ongoing complex ad hoc improvements (eg. Crossrail, Jubilee Line extension), or an unrealistic total overhaul which would effectively grind the city to a halt.
Likewise the infrastructure required for driverless cars in the crooked streets of London will be much too burdensome whereas it will be relatively cheap/easy in some newer cities in say the US or Asia.
I call it 'first mover disadvantage', though it served us well for a very long time.
I think in some cities it may work but I have concerns over the 'morals' of the control system.
If the car is in a situation where it has to serve to avoid a pedestrian that stepped out in front of it. However if it swerves left it will hit a group of old ladies at a bus stop. If it swerves right it will avoid the pedestrian and the bus stop but will drive into a wall possibly killing the people in the car. How does it make that decision? Does it value the life of the owner above others or does it treat all life equally?
We need some laws to govern this. Perhaps... three laws will suffice:
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
There. Faultless. Nothing can go wrong now.
Arent they the rules from the film... iRobot starring Will Smith?
Canal boats were hopeless before they built canals. Trains struggled without railway tracks.
Driverless cars will be hopeless until they build driverless tracks. It will be another form of transport bearing little resemblance to a car, they will be plastic pods with pre set destinations, running on rubber roads bursting with microchips alongside boats, trains, buses, trams, bycycles and cars automatically regulated to speed limits.
Canal boats were hopeless before they built canals. Trains struggled without railway tracks.
Driverless cars will be hopeless until they build driverless tracks. It will be another form of transport bearing little resemblance to a car, they will be plastic pods with pre set destinations, running on rubber roads bursting with microchips alongside boats, trains, buses, trams, bycycles and cars automatically regulated to speed limits.
If anyone wants a little flavour of driverless cars then try out the 'Pod parking' at Heathrow T5.
Canal boats were hopeless before they built canals. Trains struggled without railway tracks.
Driverless cars will be hopeless until they build driverless tracks. It will be another form of transport bearing little resemblance to a car, they will be plastic pods with pre set destinations, running on rubber roads bursting with microchips alongside boats, trains, buses, trams, bycycles and cars automatically regulated to speed limits.
If anyone wants a little flavour of driverless cars then try out the 'Pod parking' at Heathrow T5.
Or get a lift off someone with a left hand drive car.
Just needs the roads adapted. I've got traffic assist on my Audi and it can steer itself on any road with clear lane markings, maintains a safe distance behind car in front in cruise control and stops and starts itself in traffic, brakes automatically and reduces speed approaching bends, road junctions and roundabouts and stops if a pedestrian steps into the road. Reads speed signs and can limit car to that speed if you choose. Not perfect, sometimes picks up pedestrians still on the pavement, but everything can be overridden in real time.
Came across a cyclist the other night riding along a country road with no lights and the car picked it up and braked before I realised he was there.
To be honest I don't even think this is a discussion. Driverless cars are a forgone conclusion. In the end it will simply be too expensive for anyone to actually drive themselves. Driverless will be the norm and statistically safer.
To be honest I don't even think this is a discussion. Driverless cars are a forgone conclusion. In the end it will simply be too expensive for anyone to actually drive themselves. Driverless will be the norm and statistically safer.
I think the issue is how you introduce them rather than any technological issues. I presume the way in would be driverless cars that could also be driven. Then when enough driverless cars on the road, ban driving! I bet you still won't be allowed to drink, even if you are not driving it! I enjoy driving but if done properly, the roads could be made much safer.
Came across a cyclist the other night riding along a country road with no lights and the car picked it up and swerved to run him over before I realised he was there.
I'm pretty sure I read Uber are already using 'driverless' cars in San Francisco. I say 'driverless' as they car can drive itslelf, however for legal reasons it still needs someone sitting behind the wheel.
As someone who lives in a country where no one can drive, they can't come quick enough.
Obviously from a personal viewpoint I hope this never happens. Driverless vehicles would be an economic disaster. I'd hate to guess how many people work for a living by driving like myself. Taxis, mini cabs, lorries, vans, buses, motorcycle messengers, emergency services etc..... That's a hell of a lot of unemployed people!! No taxes incoming, more benefits to be paid out. Add to that no taxation from fuel. I doubt any country could afford to allow driverless vehicles
Obviously from a personal viewpoint I hope this never happens. Driverless vehicles would be an economic disaster. I'd hate to guess how many people work for a living by driving like myself. Taxis, mini cabs, lorries, vans, buses, motorcycle messengers, emergency services etc..... That's a hell of a lot of unemployed people!! No taxes incoming, more benefits to be paid out. Add to that no taxation from fuel. I doubt any country could afford to allow driverless vehicles
I fear you are wrong. I'm fairly confident that people working in manufacturing, mining, steel, farming, dockyards bank clerks etc etc all said the same. Not for the reason of relocation abroad for cheaper labour but for the good old reason of mechanisation. Progress will not be contained.
They are trialling a driverless bus in South Perth for three months it allows 11 people on and goes a max 25 kms
Wasn't aware of this. I await to hear the news report where It drove through someone's front room, which seems to be a favourite pastime of the perth drivers over here.
Currently 4% of road miles travelled worldwide are by private hire taxis. By 2030 this is forecast to be 25% and much of that will be driverless runs delivered by the likes of Uber.
This implies that in urban centres people won't need their own cars. The demand for privately owned vehicles and parking spaces might drop by 80%?
And these may well be LPG or electric providing a cure for urban polution. Death rates on the roads will drop, accident rates will drop and therefore insurance premiums should drop.
And the driverless private hire vehicles are already being pilotted across the globe. Uber leads the race but Alphabet, Apple and Volvo are all giving it a crack.
As an aside it should be possible to put trackers and immobilisers on all vehicles to prevent stolen and uninsured vehicles going anywhere.
Of course there will be a Luddite style movement opposing change. Ideally their energies can be utilised to ensure the highest standards of safety?
And this type of innovation is bound to be repeated across many areas of modern living over the next 15 years or so.
As for London, it's a global capital city. One should check Saddiq Khan's policy statements rather than the A-Z map to understand the landscape. Or take a look at the link below:
Comments
There are some pretty well developed plans out there for this in the industry, even as far as the idea that you go to work and your driverless car goes around picking up Uber fares during the day using the app.
If you're a petrol head it'll be a similar situation to owning a horse. You'll garage it somewhere, trailer it (behind a robot car) to a track and then drive it to your hearts content.
The question will become what happens to buses and trains. Presumably you'll pay per trip to use a robot car rather than having one sitting outside your house not in use. So maybe robot buses will just be cheaper per trip than robot cars. Train is another issue, if robot cars make our roads more efficient and there isn't parking to worry about (the car will just drive itself off to the next user), then why would you get a train to work instead of a robot car that goes door to door?
Likewise the infrastructure required for driverless cars in the crooked streets of London will be much too burdensome whereas it will be relatively cheap/easy in some newer cities in say the US or Asia.
I call it 'first mover disadvantage', though it served us well for a very long time.
Driverless cars will be hopeless until they build driverless tracks. It will be another form of transport bearing little resemblance to a car, they will be plastic pods with pre set destinations, running on rubber roads bursting with microchips alongside boats, trains, buses, trams, bycycles and cars automatically regulated to speed limits.
BUT, have to say, that is one of the funniest things I've seen in a long while. Thank you.
As someone who lives in a country where no one can drive, they can't come quick enough.
We were all meant to be driving electric cars by now yet still can't get enough battery life to get to Cornwall or Lake District
Unless the cars can run on their own without any drivers or passengers, I think the whole thing is a pointless gimmick.
But the idea of millions of cars with no one in them running around London looking for somewhere to park is quite disturbing!
This implies that in urban centres people won't need their own cars. The demand for privately owned vehicles and parking spaces might drop by 80%?
And these may well be LPG or electric providing a cure for urban polution. Death rates on the roads will drop, accident rates will drop and therefore insurance premiums should drop.
And the driverless private hire vehicles are already being pilotted across the globe. Uber leads the race but Alphabet, Apple and Volvo are all giving it a crack.
As an aside it should be possible to put trackers and immobilisers on all vehicles to prevent stolen and uninsured vehicles going anywhere.
Of course there will be a Luddite style movement opposing change. Ideally their energies can be utilised to ensure the highest standards of safety?
And this type of innovation is bound to be repeated across many areas of modern living over the next 15 years or so.
As for London, it's a global capital city. One should check Saddiq Khan's policy statements rather than the A-Z map to understand the landscape. Or take a look at the link below:
driverless-future.com