Fuelly Forums

Fuelly Forums (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/)
-   General Discussion (Off-Topic) (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/)
-   -   Lyft co-founder says human drivers to be illegal in America (http://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/lyft-co-founder-says-human-drivers-to-be-illegal-in-america-19045.html)

ChewChewTrain 12-15-2016 03:45 PM

Lyft co-founder says human drivers to be illegal in America
 
Interesting predictions about autonomous car's societal ramifications.

Do you agree?

Raining like crazy in the San Francisco Bay Area right now. Who has snow?

Lyft co-founder says human drivers could be soon be illegal in America - SFGate

OliverGT 12-16-2016 01:52 AM

I would agree that autonomous cars are on their way, but it does raise an ethical question.

At the moment people are killed every day by bad drivers, there is no doubt that people will also be killed by autonomous drivers, we have already had the Tesla death for example.


So, how many deaths caused by machines driving cars is acceptable?


I'll give you my answer, if there are measurably less deaths being caused by machines driving cars than humans driving cars then that is acceptable to me.

Oliver.

cuts_off_prius 12-17-2016 10:55 PM

I get the benefits of self-driving cars and would love to see them used for the elderly, the handicapped and such, but I always find it funny when they assume ALL human drivers will simply disappear just like that without a fight. Very autocratic, these people pushing self-driving cars are.

Draigflag 12-18-2016 12:21 AM

Computers will always be safer than humans, they can make thousands of decisions in a second, have superior reaction times and let's not forget the lidar systems they use can see 360 degrees in every direction with no blind spots, unlike a human than can only see about 180 and who's view is obstructed by large parts of the car. Computers don't need medication, they don't get hangovers or get tired, they don't sneeze and they don't get distracted by noisy children. They also don't get road rage. Tesla has already proven how safe autopilot is with only 2 or 3 fatalities in hundreds of millions of miles.

SteveMak 12-18-2016 09:02 AM

Paint me skeptical, but I don't believe the US government's primary concern is the well-being of its citizens. I wouldn't be surprised if this idea of "illegal human drivers" was promoted by the U.S. auto industry in the belief that it'll result in a huge car sales boom (short-sighted) as people are required by law to replace their existing vehicles with autonomous ones.

On the topic of bleating "safety," just take a look at the US gun crime rate, and deaths by firearms (intentional and accidental), and note that it exceeds by far that of any other at-peace nation on the planet, and ask yourself, "how can US law allow this to be?" Then note who profits from it (US gun-manufacturers), and who promotes this state (massive lobbyists' efforts, funded by the US gun-manufacturers), and it all makes sense.

It's just business. And then there's the spin on it.

Draigflag 12-18-2016 10:07 AM

And of the 55,147 incidents, 14,306 deaths, and 29,367 injuries in the US this year, think of all that money spent on funerals, life long medical treatment, medication etc etc. Murder is a very profitable business ;)

R.I.D.E. 12-18-2016 06:35 PM

Based on the recent stats with the life expectancy dropping in the US maybe the best solution would be to outlaw obesity and PCs as well as hand held devices that have turned many into blobs absorbed in their own little virtual worlds.

At 95 Pop's last traffic offense was 60 years ago. He was t-boned in 1973 by a driver who ran a red light. Not sure how a driverless car would be able to anticipate anything, only react to situations within specific parameters.

I want to see an automated car avoid a head on collision, making virtually instant decisions, based on intuition and experience, or avoiding getting hit in the rear end waiting at a traffic light.

Who does the victim sue when the offender is not human.

SteveMak 12-18-2016 07:26 PM

R.I.D.E.: Conceptually, the biggest benefit with autonomous vehicles isn't just being in one; it's when all vehicles on the road are autonomous, and they all have vehicle-to-vehicle communications. In theory, this gives each autonomous vehicle incredible situational awareness.

Here's an example, with all vehicle's being autonomous:
  • Vehicle A is heading northbound at 30 mph on Smith Ave.
  • Vehicle B is heading southbound at 30 mph on Smith Ave. They are approaching each other.
  • A child runs out in front of Vehicle A
  • Vehicle A quickly assesses it cannot stop in time to prevent hitting the child. It is also aware that it cannot swerve into oncoming traffic to avoid hitting the child. It also knows the sidewalk is also occupied.
  • Vehicle A broadcasts its situation, and according to predefined rules, Vehicle B acknowledges.
  • Vehicle B, southbound, hits its brakes and swerves onto the CLEAR (southbound) sidewalk, thereby clearing the southbound lane.
  • Vehicle A, northbound, received Vehicle B's revised telemetry, and now knows that the southbound lane is clear of traffic.
  • Vehicle A swerves into the CLEAR southbound lane to avoid hitting the child
All this awareness and decisions happen in about 100 milliseconds. Nobody is injured. A child's life is saved, all due to two autonomous cars working together to make correct split-second decisions, and being fully aware of each other's intentions.

Aircraft already have rules like this when they are on an imminent collision course: This plane dives and that plane ascends, all based on their initial headings. These collision avoidance systems work remarkably well in aircraft (not a single air-to-air collision has happened since the systems have been installed, AND when pilots did not manually override the system).

In theory, when all cars on the road are autonomous and "talking" with each other, then they can prevent virtually any incident. That's the theory, at least.

Draigflag 12-18-2016 11:14 PM

What most people don't realise is that autonomous vehicles are already being used on smaller scales in airports, car factories etc and have been for years. They are networked so they know where each and every vehicle is, they follow lines painted on factory floors, just like regular cars do in a way, and they have advanced sensors that detect objects/humans in a 360 degree field.

Before slating the technology, ask yourself about the quality of driving you saw on the road last time you drove, the mistakes you saw, and lets face it, it's hard to make a journey without seeing something stupid, were down to driver error/stupidity. Computers make very few errors, and are far from stupid. Your average SAT NAV has up to 9 satellites connected at any given time, giving pinpoint GPS accuracy too.

trollbait 12-19-2016 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveMak (Post 192037)
Paint me skeptical, but I don't believe the US government's primary concern is the well-being of its citizens. I wouldn't be surprised if this idea of "illegal human drivers" was promoted by the U.S. auto industry in the belief that it'll result in a huge car sales boom (short-sighted) as people are required by law to replace their existing vehicles with autonomous ones.

On the topic of bleating "safety," just take a look at the US gun crime rate, and deaths by firearms (intentional and accidental), and note that it exceeds by far that of any other at-peace nation on the planet, and ask yourself, "how can US law allow this to be?" Then note who profits from it (US gun-manufacturers), and who promotes this state (massive lobbyists' efforts, funded by the US gun-manufacturers), and it all makes sense.

It's just business. And then there's the spin on it.

These predictions seem to mostly come from ride share services.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:01 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.