Driverless Cars are you game to try one on?

[dan_bgblue]

I am too much of a control freak to allow my vehicle to drive itself while I am inside it. How about you?

https://mishtalk.com/2016/08/18/uber...roller-skates/

[badrose]

Same here.

[KSRBEvans]

I won't be an early adopter, but I think they have a lot of promise.

BTW, whenever I think of driverless cars I always think about that great cinematic commentary on individual freedom, "Demolition Man" with Sly Stallone and Wesley Snipes:

[Darrell KSR]

It will be a little like me being talked into going on a roller coaster. Scared at first, nauseated, then settled in and enjoyed it.

I won't be an early adopter, either, but a mid-adopter? Yup. It will happen.

[dan_bgblue]

Lets take it a step further. Are you still willing to ride along?

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/...ombat-traffic/

[suncat05]

I was just discussing this with my bride last night. Neither of us are all that interested. If we were going to go that route we'd just hire our own personal drivers. Me, myself, I'm not relinquishing my personal choice to make my own driving decisions.

[Darrell KSR]

Lets take it a step further. Are you still willing to ride along?

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2016/...ombat-traffic/

Yup, after the early adopters get the bugs out.

[kingcat]

A big problem will be people like me, who would be very concerned that a malfunction will affect me and my family on the road.
Nope, my driving would suffer because of it and so would that of most people.
With one's life on the line every day, it will be about as dependable as your iPhone.



That's why it will require targeting a new generation of drivers. The first (inevitable) major malfunction will shelve the idea for a longtime imho.

It's an all or nothing scenario. And, who is at fault in an accident with such a vehicle? Is there strict liability for me?
It will always be the human driver, who may or may not have made the proper human decision.
When that happens my insurance company may reevaluate our current deal...if needs be such....


"Oops, your sensors were temporarily disrupted"..would you like an updated traffic report?

[CitizenBBN]

In the 80s I used to design these systems in my head on long driving trips b/c I so wanted to have one. IMO they are inevitable, but also IMO they will not be 100% for a long time as the variables involved in a true non-guided system are pretty vast.

What I proposed was a system where cars could be automated on interstates and limited access roads. That would be relatively easy b/c you could lay wire or whatever you needed as a baseline along the routes, and the cars would engage and disengage when they get on. Those roads have far fewer variables, I could see it working well.

But in some urban area with cars constantly doing things and people, etc. I'm very dubious. Only if everyone were on the same system where other actions become more predictable would that really be close to 100%.

Now assisted driving I see coming big time, but there have already been reports of problems and there will be a LOT more as this progresses. Maybe not as many as letting people drive themselves, but still a lot.

[kingcat]

What about someone hacking a GPS system or something, and crashing the total driving grid? Law enforcement can disable a vehicles electronics now.

It would seem to be an easy target and a huge soft spot.

One other thing, wouldn't it require sensors to monitor the passengers inside a vehicle?

A valuable tool and unavoidable to make it work. But one that would border on being an invasion of privacy

The good result would be having a sensor find a beer can in your hands, shut the vehicle down, lock your doors, and call the police. Or better yet, find an unregistered weapon.

Presto, no more accusations of targeting or infringement of the constitution.

..that said, it's easy to comprehend the bad.