Driver-less Cars?????

demyansk · Post by **demyansk** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:30 pm

I am watching Tucker Carlson and he's talking to a proponent of driverless cars. Is it a job killer?

Wondering- do you guys like this idea of no one behind the wheel? and then this car kills someone bike riding, on skateboard, blind person, etc.

I don't like the idea but then again, driving on the roads now, almost like driverless, all talking on phones and no one behind the wheel.

bairdlander2 · Post by **bairdlander2** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 11:03 pm

Yes it will take away jobs http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/oilsands-workers-worry-driverless-trucks-will-haul-away-their-jobs-1.3832921

Zap · Post by **Zap** » Thu Dec 22, 2016 11:27 pm

Here are some uncertainties if driverless cars takes hold.
There will be more frequent traffic jams.
They maybe a hazard to truck drivers. meaning the reaction time of these cars will not be as quick as a human.
Trucks are far from being driverless. Cars will be the first. Its just too dangerous having self driving trucks. Being a truck driver I would not trust the truck to safely cover any mountains. I don't think I would sit while it drove me.

Talk about distracted driving!!! If your car is driving you do you really think your going to more attentive? I don'tthink so.!

Pvt_Grunt · Post by **Pvt_Grunt** » Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:04 am

Mines in Australia have had driverless trucks for years now. They are also trailing driverless trains to take the ore to port.

I am sure there will be accidents and deaths from driverless cars, the question is will there be LESS accidents than from cars with drivers?

PipFromSlitherine · Post by **PipFromSlitherine** » Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:15 pm

ORIGINAL: Pvt_Grunt

Mines in Australia have had driverless trucks for years now. They are also trailing driverless trains to take the ore to port.

I am sure there will be accidents and deaths from driverless cars, the question is will there be LESS accidents than from cars with drivers?

Yes.

http://distracteddriving.caa.ca/education/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laiza-kin ... 22196.html

Everyone thinks they are an above average driver [:)]

Cheers

Pip

szmike · Post by **szmike** » Fri Dec 23, 2016 3:34 pm

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

Everyone thinks they are an above average driver [:)]

Cheers

Pip

But I am. [;)]

Frankly good drivers think for themselves and for others and anticipate bad situations before they happen, so they could be avoided. It usually comes with amount of km/miles driven, but some people are hopeless.

Franciscus · Post by **Franciscus** » Fri Dec 23, 2016 4:16 pm

I have no doubt at all that driver-less cars are the way to go.

In a few decades people will look down with amusement mixed with dismay at how once vehicles were actually operated by humans...[:D]

szmike · Post by **szmike** » Sat Dec 24, 2016 8:44 am

I'm not going to buy one ever. I like driving too much.

Zap · Post by **Zap** » Sat Dec 24, 2016 1:16 pm

ORIGINAL: Pvt_Grunt

Mines in Australia have had driverless trucks for years now. They are also trailing driverless trains to take the ore to port.

I am sure there will be accidents and deaths from driverless cars, the question is will there be LESS accidents than from cars with drivers?

Wait till you see the outcry when your in your driverless car and a driverless truck(weighing in at 75,000 pounds) in back of you hits black ice on 6% downgrade!!! Its one thing in the mines(a controlled situation) but a whole different story when your talking about the lives of a family in a SUV.

ezzler · Post by **ezzler** » Sat Dec 24, 2016 1:47 pm

i know someone who is heavily investing their bank's money in all this.
The idea is for driverless vans first. Say depot to depot deliveries. The technology is mostly done. it is quite possible to have the driverless cars today.

The main block seems to be the legal one. Who is responsible if your car crashed into another one. The owner of the car? The 'driver'? A passenger if no one is driving? The software programmers who have to write in the decisions for the code.

IE - A vehicle travels at 30mph. An person steps out - Does the car - run over person? - - swerve to avoid and possibly cause another accident?
- A container falls from a truck in front of driverless car. The car has no software/radar detection to deduce what this block is as it is an 'unrecognised object that has not been programmed for like a cat or dog might have been. Car drives straight into it and occupants injured. Who is to blame? Who is to pay out? Fallen tree.- Bridge collapse etc. rare incidents. but not rare enough not to have a major legal over it all.

i was told its this type of question, and creating the judgements that are obvious to a human that will be the hold up for a good few years.

Personally i find it odd that people are so panicky. Almost 31,000 people are killed in human driven cars each year just in the USA.
of course there will be accidents with driverless cars. But there will be fewer, not more. The cars won't exceed the speed limit. Will always leave an appropriate gap. Will obey all the road signs. Know where they are going. aren't on the phone and shouting at the talk radio. They won't be drunk or stoned. They know how big a parking space is and how to get in and out of it. won't run out of fuel or operate if the warning lights are flashing. they will drive appropriately for the weather conditions.
And if the mum is yelling at the kids to pack it in, she won't simultaneously be trying to pay attention to the road.

Zap · Post by **Zap** » Sat Dec 24, 2016 4:25 pm

Its not panic I believe its just being practical. You can put things on the drawing board of how It should work and do testing but its not as close to happening as some may think. The obstacles will be actual situations where the planning missed something will require rethinking.

demyansk · Post by **demyansk** » Sat Dec 24, 2016 9:11 pm

I think it would be better to ban social media by a driver. It's getting real bad, 30 years ago we survived without a phone in the car and I still don't have one. It's just bad when they are going 65 mph in the left lane, call comes in and down to 50 mph and a swerve, and the call is about nonsense.

szmike · Post by **szmike** » Sun Dec 25, 2016 8:41 pm

ORIGINAL: Zap

The obstacles will be actual situations where the planning missed something will require rethinking.

you can't plan every situation possible into program, and if you could, it would be still cheaper to have a driver. [8D] oh, and what about terrorists with electronic jammers.... [:'(]

demyansk · Post by **demyansk** » Sun Dec 25, 2016 9:30 pm

Good one Mike

Pvt_Grunt · Post by **Pvt_Grunt** » Mon Dec 26, 2016 5:48 pm

ORIGINAL: Zap

ORIGINAL: Pvt_Grunt

Mines in Australia have had driverless trucks for years now. They are also trailing driverless trains to take the ore to port.

I am sure there will be accidents and deaths from driverless cars, the question is will there be LESS accidents than from cars with drivers?

Wait till you see the outcry when your in your driverless car and a driverless truck(weighing in at 75,000 pounds) in back of you hits black ice on 6% downgrade!!! Its one thing in the mines(a controlled situation) but a whole different story when your talking about the lives of a family in a SUV.

I'm not ready to get in the passenger seat with a computer driving just yet either. My point is there is situations where robots are ideal, mines have no civilian traffic, Vancouver BC has a driverless train system etc.

Just because a new tech can change something, dont fall for the argument that it will change EVERYTHING overnight. They will slowly take over some tasks where they are ideal.

Another example is electric cars. People argue that "I cant go on my 10 day desert trek in an electric vehicle, so therefore they are useless". They are not intended for that task (yet) but they are ideal for many city bound commuters, so they will be successful without replacing EVERY petrol powered vehicle.

AbwehrX · Post by **AbwehrX** » Mon Dec 26, 2016 6:05 pm

There needs to be a separate road for this. I dont want to be anywhere near them.

AbwehrX · Post by **AbwehrX** » Mon Dec 26, 2016 6:06 pm

Driverless/drone tanks & ships is a novel idea however. [:D][:'(]

Zap · Post by **Zap** » Tue Dec 27, 2016 2:58 pm

A point to be made about driverless cars should be you will be sitting in the driver seat and are supposed to be attentive(and takeover) when the computer system fails or doesn't react quickly enough. Who will be attentive? My guess people in the driver seat will not be attentive at all(human nature). Drinking coffee, daydreaming, sightseeing, fiddling around, gabbing with someone in the back seat, will be what people are going to be doing.

gazdadude · Post by **gazdadude** » Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:01 am

I think it dangerous the possibility of a software failure scares me

Talon_XBMCX · Post by **Talon_XBMCX** » Sat Dec 31, 2016 10:28 am

ORIGINAL: gazdadude

I think it dangerous the possibility of a software failure scares me

Sure could give new meaning to the "blue screen of death"!

I enjoy driving too much to give it up to a computer.

Driver-less Cars?????

Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????

RE: Driver-less Cars?????