Will you trust autonomous car to drive you?

http://gizmodo.com/how-to-teach-an-autonomous-car-to-drive-1694725874

Humans come equipped with a multitude of useful faculties to control a car: We’ve eyes and ears to sense the world around us; a fast-paced brain to process those inputs; and, for the most part, a strong sense of memory which allows us to drive the many roads we know well with great confidence. But there’s a world of difference between the way we see the world and the way a computer does. “You could program a car to drive simply by putting in the rules straight from a DMV handbook,” suggests Katelin Jabbari from Google’s self-driving car team. “But that doesn’t account for 99 percent of the things we encounter on the roads. How softly should I break? How quickly should I take a turn?” Recreating those skills using digital sensors and silicon chips is possible—it just isn’t easy.

Click to expand...

Spotted the problem with this article right away...

.. a fast-paced brain to process those inputs

Click to expand...

Right there... That's a big assumption..
Have you seen the people texting/talking on their phones/<other distracted behavior> on the roads??
I would MUCH rather have a computer driving them around!!!

desiv

I believe in the future autonomous driving will be possible, but as of now I am not sure if the technology is there trust computer to drive me around.

Given where I live I find it hard to imagine an autonomous car being able to safely negotiate the roads around here. [Would I trust it on narrow mountain roads with sheer dropoffs and no guard rails? Not a chance!]

But I suppose it could function adequately on well-marked freeways in the fairly near future. I do wonder how it will handle things like potholes, rocks/debris, and animals on the road, however.

as of today:

Warning: Traffic-Aware Cruise Control is for guidance purposes only and is not a collision warning or avoidance system. It is the driver's responsibility to stay alert, drive safely, and be in control of the vehicle at all times. Failure to do so can result in serious injury or death.
Warning: Do not use Traffic-Aware Cruise Control on city streets due to inevitably changing traffic conditions and the presence of bicycles and pedestrians.
Warning: Traffic-Aware Cruise Control has limited ability to detect vehicles merging into your lane at close distances.
Warning: Do not use Traffic-Aware Cruise Control on winding roads with sharp curves. Traffic-Aware Cruise Control does not adapt driving speed based on road conditions.
Warning: Do not use Traffic-Aware Cruise Control on icy or slippery road surfaces, or when weather conditions (such as heavy rain, snow, fog, etc.) make it unsuitable to drive at a consistent speed. Traffic-Aware Cruise Control does not adapt driving speed based on road and driving conditions.

Click to expand...

Autopilot doesn't have to be perfect, just safer than the average human being.

Autopilots are already safer than the average human being in real-world, public test road conditions.

Nvidia's drive system coming out later this year will be the tipping point, in my opinion, where driverless cars become safer than humans in 99.9%+ of driving situations, roads, and conditions today.

eloder said:

Nvidia's drive system coming out later this year...

Click to expand...

I don't know..
I do have some hesitance with a gaming company making this technology..
What if I accidentally put it in "Need for Speed" mode..
Or worse, GTA? :shock: :lol:

But basically I agree.. People who think autonomous systems have a LONG way to go are WAY overrating existing driver ability..

desiv

dgpcolorado said:

Given where I live I find it hard to imagine an autonomous car being able to safely negotiate the roads around here. [Would I trust it on narrow mountain roads with sheer dropoffs and no guard rails? Not a chance!]

But I suppose it could function adequately on well-marked freeways in the fairly near future. I do wonder how it will handle things like potholes, rocks/debris, and animals on the road, however.

Click to expand...

Having similar thoughts...I wonder if it comes with a ghetto street mode?

Will you trust autonomous car to drive you?

Click to expand...

I don't trust myself to drive. Easily distracted and other issues. One of the reasons I bicycle to work.

I'll know it is safer when insurance rates drop for a self-driving car (and raise for a human driven car). I really believe insurance will be the tipping point.
I'd love a self-driving car, as long as there is an over-ride mode, but again perhaps insurance won't cover that.

Maybe not yet - TACC fails to brake at red light. Almost accident.
https://youtu.be/0X2ftEXG7IE

EdmondLeaf said:

Maybe not yet - TACC fails to brake at red light. Almost accident.https://youtu.be/0X2ftEXG7IE

Click to expand...

Good one. Thanks for posting.

I would love one. When I go out I tend to drink too much, so best to get me off the wheel.

Not for me. However I would take adaptive cruise control.

EdmondLeaf said:

Maybe not yet - TACC fails to brake at red light. Almost accident.
https://youtu.be/0X2ftEXG7IE

Click to expand...

TACC specifically warns you not to use it in city streets and warns that it's not designed to stop you in city traffic. The fact that it does most of the time, doesn't make it an autonomous driver.

Systems like Google's Lidar and Nvidia's Drive Px use a much larger and more advanced suite of sensors which is why they can actually work for autopilot (they can actually tell you what objects are in a real-time rendered 3d environment, whereas things like TACC and emergency brakes just sense objects approaching you too quickly from the front).

The question comes what happens when someone evil does "bad things" to them.

For instance. Lots of these systems are using radar for range detection. What happens when someone decides to jam the radar frequencies (by accident or on purpose). How is the car going to respond when one of its sensors are rendered useless due to situation like this. It really doesn't matter what kind of sensor they use. A camera can be blinded by chrome on the vehicle in front of it.

Its not just technological evil people..... How many of you remember the car alarms that would talk when someone tampered with the car. How many cars were tampered with just to hear that voice? The same will apply to these cars. Someone will know they can swerve and because you are driving a specific model car that your car will respond.

My other fear involves something computers do very poorly. The human aspect of driving. For instance I would rather hit a car than a person. How can we be certain that the cars will be ready to make decisions like that.

Another example. The choice between hitting a motorcyclist and hitting a hummer. Its an easy decision for a human.

There is a lot more to driving than simply staying in a lane and not hitting the car in front of you.

Travis said:

A camera can be blinded by chrome on the vehicle in front of it..

Click to expand...

So can a person (or blinded by approaching blue-ishi annoying headlight upgrades, etc.).
Or an evil person could use a laser.. They are on-line cheap now..

They'll make em as safe as they can, but some things people will just do...
That's what laws are for.. ;-)

desiv

I have seen Google self-driving cars on the road for a couple of years around here. I am a fan and can't wait for them to hit the mainstream. They have come such a very long way towards reality since the DARPA Challenge from about 10 years ago.

Via ABG:

Self-driving cars involved in accidents in California

Click to expand...

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/05/11/self-driving-cars-involved-accidents-california/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Part quote:

Four of the nearly 50 self-driving cars now rolling around California have gotten into accidents since September, when the state began issuing permits for companies to test them on public roads.

Two accidents happened while the cars were in control. In the other two a human was driving, a person familiar with the accident reports told The Associated Press. All four accidents involved speeds of less than 10 mph.

Three involved Lexus SUVs that Google outfitted with sensors and computing power in its aggressive effort to develop autonomous driving, a goal the tech giant shares with traditional automakers. Parts supplier Delphi Automotive had the other accident with one of its two test vehicles.

Google and Delphi said their cars were not at fault in any accidents, which the companies said were minor. Five other companies have testing permits. In response to questions from the AP, all said they had no accidents. In all, 48 cars are licensed to test on public roads.

Since September, any accident must be reported to the state Department of Motor Vehicles. The agency said there have been four, but would not comment about fault or anything else, citing California law that collision reports are confidential.

Click to expand...

It's going to be a slow process.

The primary impetus for autonomous cars is that driving is now viewed as an unbearable amount of time for a consciousness to spend outside of a smartphone.