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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 ;)

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.

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.

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.

These predictions seem to mostly come from ride share services.

When ALL vehicles on the road are automated.
In theory they will interconnect and eliminate accident, injury and death.

At what point and under what authority are the remaining millions of NON automated vehicles declared illegal and obsolete and who compensates those owners for the value of their assets.

I checked the value of a used 2011 Nissan Leaf recently. With 43k miles, it's worth $5500. Basically $5k annual depreciation. Not many can afford that kind of cost per mile, regardless of the fuel source.

Not worth the replacement battery cost, so figure worth scrap.

One glitch away from automated mass murder.

Predictions of an automated traffic system, with the replacement of every one of the 600 million vehicles on a planetary scale, with flawless interfacing of every one of those 600 million vehicles.

50-100 years at a cost approaching the current worldwide accumulated debt.

Who wants to voulenteer to be the last casualty in the next war?

Automated systems involving mass transit of large numbers of people have multiple redundancies to prevent a simple failed connection from becoming something that becomes a mass casualty event.

As a transitional system, I doubt it will ever be implemented. I DO believe mass transit may replace the current infrastructure with various levels of movement based on proximity. The current vehicle designs use far too much materials and other resources for their purpose and many better alternatives exist.

Oliver, in war, they call fewer deaths "acceptable losses".

This will happen, maybe quicker than expected, maybe longer, regardless of anyone's opinions, incredible changes are happening. I mean we didn't think someone racist who threatened to ban 1,600,000,000 people for no apparent reason other than their religious beliefs could ever be supported by a Nation and elected President, but hey, it's a strange World sometimes.

You're right. Human drivers won't disappear overnight. Elon Musk says from the introduction of self-driving cars it'll take about 20 years to shakeout all the legacy, human controlled cars.

The new battle cry is "You can have my human controlled car when you can pry it from my cold dead hands." That's assuming you can get to my body with the Jaws of Life after a major car accident.

In the event of a detected mathematically unavoidable collision, I predict self-driving cars will deploy EXTERNAL airbags to provide an additional energy absorbing cushion. Perhaps, in some cases, undercarriage airbags forceful enough to leap your car high enough to allow a colliding car to pass beneath you.

Yep. You're right, Paul. The ripple effect of self-driving cars will affect MANY industries; car body repair, taxi/truck driving jobs, medical care, funeral services, and many more.

Interesting time to be alive. When horses were about to be displaced by cars the internet forums at that time were likely talking about the same thing.

Paul, that was a nice, veiled confession. Hope you feel better now. :D

I'm NOT racist. I hate everybody equally!

Elon Musk is glad to sell you a car. Just fork over 100 grand and accept 10 grand a year in depreciation, if you're lucky.

You're too kind. I think the depreciation on ALL electric cars is steeper.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, you can buy a 2011 Leaf for USD5.9k and 2013 Tesla S for USD43k.

Depreciation of electric cars was discussed in another topic. It's steep at the minute as battery development is happening quick, so much like smart phones, what seems awesome today will soon be yesterday's news. If you look at what Renault did with the Zoe recently, they managed to increase the range to an official 250, pretty much double, without changing the size or shape. This kind of thing will continue, in another few years a 500 mile range will be average, and battery leasing will take away the initial expensive purchase and fear of replacement for most people in a few years down the line. This business model is popular here with the Zoe and Leaf, and as battery costs fall, so will leasing costs.

Hope they offer a battery purchase, as well as leasing option. Don't want to trade paying the petrol company to now having to pay the "battery company", so to speak.

Plus, while an old car battery may not be viable for the vehicle, it will still have enough utility to use for home energy storage, such as charging during off-peak pricing hours and discharging into the household during peak pricing hours.

The new battle cry is "You can have my old car battery when you can pry it off the wall of my home."

Gee, Paul, I just noticed you're only getting 34.6 mpg with your Peugeot diesel. Are you not trying very hard?

Yes the option to buy instead of lease is there, but apparently leasing is more popular. If you buy it, then you are responsible for replacement, if you keep the car that long. Leasing will help depreciation, as some people are put off buying an older ev from fear of having to replace the battery.

You didn't see my new thread? I've upgraded to a hot hatch GTI with 270 bhp, what a car this is!

Appropriate post in a thread on automated vehicles?

Another appropriate post on an automated vehicle thread?

More appropriate than talking about depreciation of electric vehicles lol.