Autonomous cars: Atlanta's transportation future? (2014, layoffs, living in)

[primaltech]

I think Level 3 is the immediate sweet spot in that list. Level 3 I imagine is like autopilot in a plane, where it's driving itself, but the driver is still present and alert enough to manage things. If we can get every vehicle on the roads to be a Level 3 or up, we can start to really collectively reap a lot of the immediate benefits of automation. (But we'd still have stop lights.)

I think everything being Level 5 may be 100 years off. Hard to say. But when we do get to that point, combined with ditching the model of private vehicle ownership/maintenance, then cars and transit will finally blend and merge together as one thing.

Having the road system be transformed into a gigantic PRT transit system (which also handles freight transport, like a railroad), is just an amazing thing to think about. And it wouldn't replace rail and it wouldn't replace buses, it will just be integrated together. Autonomous BRT's would be going around everywhere on the main roads, mixed with the PRT system.

The one thing that we could replace (that everyone would love to see disappear), is all the parking, particularly in the cities.

A lot of great possibilities in store, long term. But I think having the road system become a regional transit system would be the biggest transportation win that Atlanta could ever dream of.

[arjay57]

Thanks for these videos, primaltech.

[cqholt]

In the era of self-driving cars, a scary but otherwise uneventful car crash can be huge news. This was the case in Tempe, Arizona, on Friday, when an Uber self-driving car was hit so hard that it rolled onto its side. There were no serious injuries reported.

Uber has grounded its fleet of self-driving cars in Arizona as a result, a spokeswoman for the company told me. “We are continuing to look into this incident, and can confirm we had no backseat passengers in the vehicle,” an Uber spokesperson said in a statement provided to The Atlantic. Uber also suspended testing of its self-driving vehicles in Pittsburgh and San Francisco “for the day, and possibly longer,” The New York Times reported.

https://www.citylab.com/tech/2017/03...g-cars/520911/

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

https://www.citylab.com/tech/2017/03...g-cars/520911/

I wonder why folks omit this part of the incident?

...police in Tempe say Uber wasn’t to blame for what happened. A human-driven vehicle failed to yield at a traffic signal, and collided with the Uber SUV, police said in local news reports.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I wonder why folks omit this part of the incident?

Isn't this going to be an issue with AVs in the future? I mean not everyone is going to switch at once.

[primaltech]

There are something like 30,000+ car accidents in the U.S. every single day. 90+ people are killed in car accidents every single day, which adds up to over 30,000 fatalities per year. That's a lot of dead people.

Yes, there will be a long transition and development period, and humans will still be manually driving at least some of the cars on the road for a long time, but when we move to all AV's, I bet we can get that number down to 300 accidents a day, or 300 deaths a year. Literally 100 times better, at least.

With the monkeys driving instead of the machines, we have ten 9/11's worth of loss of life every year on the roads. I think AV tech will see us destroy that mark someday, and that will be with even a lot more people and cars on the roads.

People sharing articles about how one crash suggests that AV's are not safe, reminds me of the people sharing articles about one violent crime on MARTA as if it suggested that MARTA isn't safe. Nonsense!

[samiwas1]

Originally Posted by primaltech

There are something like 30,000+ car accidents in the U.S. every single day. 90+ people are killed in car accidents every single day, which adds up to over 30,000 fatalities per year. That's a lot of dead people.

Sure. It is. And when you compare it to the number of people who drive each day, and the distances they drive, it's honestly pretty surprising that it's not more.

People sharing articles about how one crash suggests that AV's are not safe, reminds me of the people sharing articles about one violent crime on MARTA as if it suggested that MARTA isn't safe. Nonsense!

Or those folks talking about gun safety!! Oh, wait...

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by primaltech

There are something like 30,000+ car accidents in the U.S. every single day. 90+ people are killed in car accidents every single day, which adds up to over 30,000 fatalities per year. That's a lot of dead people.

Yes, there will be a long transition and development period, and humans will still be manually driving at least some of the cars on the road for a long time, but when we move to all AV's, I bet we can get that number down to 300 accidents a day, or 300 deaths a year. Literally 100 times better, at least.

With the monkeys driving instead of the machines, we have ten 9/11's worth of loss of life every year on the roads. I think AV tech will see us destroy that mark someday, and that will be with even a lot more people and cars on the roads.

People sharing articles about how one crash suggests that AV's are not safe, reminds me of the people sharing articles about one violent crime on MARTA as if it suggested that MARTA isn't safe. Nonsense!

I did not mention AVs were not safe, in fact they are still being tested. No one was hurt in this crash. These are the issues that will plaque AVs for decades.

[Midpack]

Originally Posted by jsvh

Level 4 is already here, you can buy cars with it today. I think Level 5 is not that far off. Multiple companies are testing it today. I think they will be available somewhere in the US in 5 years, available most places in the US in 10 years, and pick up a double-digit percentage of trips within 20 years.

Who is selling SAE level 4 cars? No one that I know of. I hope you're not suggesting Tesla has achieved level 4, they aren't even close yet. They talk about their autopilot and EAP more than any other SDC team, but their technology is only fully autonomous part of the time. You'll note Tesla has been very careful to not publish any reference to their SAE or NHTSA level capability, even more vague since the May 2016 fatality that shouldn't have happened even with a level 3 car.

Tesla is averaging a pitiful 3 miles between disengagements (driver has to take over) as compared to Waymo (Google) now at over 5,000 miles between disengagements. Waymo capable cars are not yet available.

Ford and Volvo are shooting for level 4 cars for sale in 2021. Most experts say level 5 cars are still 10-12 years away. And they say we may be 30 years from a time when fully autonomous cars are in a majority on the road.

So which level is Tesla’s autopilot? Interestingly, that’s a matter of some dispute. Tesla bills the system as an example of Level 2 automation, albeit a more advanced version than any other on the market today. It combines adaptive cruise control, automatic steering, automatic lane changes, and automatic emergency steering, which combine to do just about everything the driver would normally do under routine highway conditions. (One exception: You still have to flip the turn signal if you want it to change lanes.) Yet Tesla’s software requires drivers to agree that they’ll “remain engaged and aware” and keep their hands on the steering wheel while using autopilot. In the event of an accident, they’re still responsible.

Is Tesla’s style of autopilot a bad idea? Volvo, Google, and others think so.

[Midpack]

Originally Posted by primaltech

I think Level 3 is the immediate sweet spot in that list. Level 3 I imagine is like autopilot in a plane, where it's driving itself, but the driver is still present and alert enough to manage things. If we can get every vehicle on the roads to be a Level 3 or up, we can start to really collectively reap a lot of the immediate benefits of automation. (But we'd still have stop lights.)

You probably know several of the major SDC groups (Ford, Volvo, Waymo) have decided to skip level 3 as they consider it too dangerous to sell to the public, they're going from level 2 directly to level 4. They say level 3 is unworkable because too many drivers will become too uninvolved/distracted/complacent to react when the car wants the driver to take over, and may even make matters worse trying to react in a split second. Imagine cruising along not paying attention, and trying to take over in an fatal accident situation with a few seconds, or less, to act...

http://www.motortrend.com/news/ford-...iverless-cars/