What is the point of "self driving" cars? (best, trucks)

[dkf747]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

This is usually given as accidents per million miles of travel and if the stats from Tesla are to believed they have surpassed the safety of humam drivers. Granted these are only highway miles but there is sparse data for urban driving. The technology can only improve.

I don't think giving up our freedom is worth it.

[CGab]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

Just the opposite. What will sell automated vehicles is that the insurance companies will make manual drivers pay out the wazoo--because manual drivers will be the primary risks.

Write this down and remember you heard it here first: High insurance rates for manual driving will be what sells automated cars.

This will especially be the case as the peak of the Baby Boomers pass into our late 80s.

I beg to differ. I think most large insurance carriers will not even insure an automated vehicle due to the uncertainty of the liability. Think about it, if the vehicle crashes who's to blame? The vehicle maker for a faulty vehicle or the owner as that is who is ultimately insured? I see a lot of problems with this scenario and I think insurance will be very costly for a very long time for one.


And with vehicles these days being recalled for manufacture errors left and right and YEARS beyond issue, I guarantee that insurance companies are not going to give a discount if you have one. It will be outrageous.


As an insurance agent myself, I have asked a few of our carrier reps already what they thought and none of the companies are even willing to consider insuring an automated vehicle for the first ten years after issue. And these are BIG well known A+ rated carriers.

[adriver]

Originally Posted by eaton53

And there will be people who will drive and ride anyway.

I want to see the first guy that goes up to Badass Biker Guy and says... "Well the data says you're an unsafe danger to yourself and others, so you're not going to be able to ride anymore."

911, what is your emergency?
Yeah, we got a stupid guy here that told a biker he can't ride anymore.
He got punched in the face and is laying here unconscious.

Originally Posted by Norne

Exactly. People will un-learn to drive just the way they have largely un-learned to count in the age of computers and pocket calculators.

And the point of self-driving cars... maybe it is just so that people might become even dumber and more idiotic once they do not have to concern themselves with where they are going, the left and right, the traffic signs etc.

By the way, there are already plenty of ways to move yourself around if you are drunk, blind or do not know how to drive. It's called public transportation.

privacy.

Originally Posted by NYCresident2014

Human driving is a waste of time at best and an unnecessarily dangerous act at worse. The best human driver has slower reactions than a mediocre computer, and in a few years time we'll finally start to see the human element starting to be removed from driving.

Just think of what you could do with 1-2 extra hours per day (for those who commute via car). Traffic would be lighter since computerized cars can drive much closer together and people won't be making stupid lane changes/jerky motions/fender benders that make traffic worse. Car sharing become much, much easier. Insurance rates would plummet.

People who cling to driving are like people who cling to libraries over the internet, or "hand made" goods over mass produced. The future is coming whether you like it or not, and it's going to be glorious.

They may be slower, but people can see what other drivers are about to do, what animals are about to do, what is about to happen to or could happen to debris. Its more than just speed, and I have difficulty believing any computer could prepare for ALL situations as well as an intelligent driving human being.

Originally Posted by lvmensch

Unfortunately not really true. The autonomous vehicle simply sees in more dimensions and better than the human being. It can also track vastly more data. And it will note improper readings long before they are human perceptible.

They will see animals that were never visible in the human spectrum.

In any dynamic situation the machine wins hands down. Simply better at implementing physics.

And the machine will almost always chicken out...which is almost always the correct answer. When it is not clear slow down...gets worse stop or go dead slow. There will of course be some contrived state where the only good answer is step on it hard. But even there most humans won't.

Invisible animals? What other dimensions that you think people can not see, will we be able to have people program a car to see?? What about

Originally Posted by Haakon

You think an autonomous car would detect the creek over the road and not cross it? They can't even always identify a truck in their path and get confused crossing bridges.

Ice,
water depth,
fire,
oil spots/slicks
the deer that looks up
that bag that flies across.
the trash that the other car suddenly throws out the window
etc..

Its not just about speed.



Autonomous cars are going to make drinking, doing drugs, and having sex in your car WHILE MOVING much safer.
They are going to make drug deals and smuggling a lot safer for one.
They are going to make robberies more profitable and efficient.
They will let lookie-loos to look as long as they can.
They are going to let you get that extra half hour to an hour of sleep in on your way to work.
They are going to allow you the freedom to go back to; facebook, shaving, makeup, eating, etc..



I see autonomous cars KILLING small town middle America. Most small towns in the middle of nowhere are built right off the interstate. Why wouldn't people just lay back, go to sleep, and let the car drive them right on through?

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

As a lawyer who doesn't do personal injury (so I have no axe to grind here) I wonder whether the technology companies creating these not-so-wonderful vehicles will wind up being defendants in every driverless car lawsuit. Unless legislatures (and I suppose this would have to be federal) give immunity for such suits, I can't see this being commercially practical.

I think that will be answered by the success of lawsuits against automobile companies for current safety measures, from seat belts to airbags to lane deviation alerts.


And also, what the government mandates--if the government mandates seatbelts, is the manufacturer liable if the seatbelt operates as designed but happens in a specific case to cause more injury than would have occurred otherwise?


Well, in the case of air bags, we have numerous cases of that very situation...have lawsuits against manufacturers proven effective?

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by CGab

I beg to differ. I think most large insurance carriers will not even insure an automated vehicle due to the uncertainty of the liability. Think about it, if the vehicle crashes who's to blame? The vehicle maker for a faulty vehicle or the owner as that is who is ultimately insured? I see a lot of problems with this scenario and I think insurance will be very costly for a very long time for one.

One word: Airbags.

As an insurance agent myself, I have asked a few of our carrier reps already what they thought and none of the companies are even willing to consider insuring an automated vehicle for the first ten years after issue. And these are BIG well known A+ rated carriers.

They will want to accrue actuarial data so that they can assess risk. That's going to take time, and it will be a continuing process as the technology develops.


But I know an A++ company--the largest auto insurer in the nation--that fully expects eventually to insure automated vehicles in the not-extremely distant future (they use the verb "will"), and is not discounting the possibility of a sudden advance in technology.

[markg91359]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

One word: Airbags.




They will want to accrue actuarial data so that they can assess risk. That's going to take time, and it will be a continuing process as the technology develops.


But I know an A++ company--the largest auto insurer in the nation--that fully expects eventually to insure automated vehicles in the not-extremely distant future (they use the verb "will"), and is not discounting the possibility of a sudden advance in technology.

I believe that the move to self-driving cars will largely occur because of the insurance industry.

I see a day where a "kit" becomes available that can be installed on any automobile and will make that car a self-driving vehicle. Insurance companies may offer to buy this kit for all their customers at no charge and than offer them a 20% discount on premiums for doing so. Most of us lose sight of how many billions of dollars are consumed every year because of property damage and human injuries from car accidents. Its an immense figure.

The insurance industry will be the prime mover in terms of moving the country to autonomous vehicles.

I see huge social dislocation as a result of this. There are well over a million people in this country who make their living driving trucks. Most of them tend not to be highly educated. Many will lack the means to move easily into another job or career. There are long haul drivers and drivers who deliver things around town.

Other jobs will be severely impacted as well. Towing companies and repair shops will have much less to do. There will be less work in the claims department of an insurance company. If these cars do reduce accidents substantially, many people will advocate for the repeal of mandatory insurance laws and they may have a very good point.

I think technological change is inevitable and there are definitely advantages to it. However, no one better imagine for one minute its going to be easy and everyone is going to love it.

Finally, I think there is an issue that concerns the loss of freedom and human autonomy. Many of us enjoy driving and enjoy the independence that it gives us. Losing that independence is going to be very hard on a huge segment of the public. I expect a substantial minority of people to hugely resist the movement towards self-driving vehicles. I expect it to happen anyway.

[Freak80]

To put an even larger share of the economy/wealth under the control of the top 1% by eliminating truck driving and cab driver jobs.

[southernnaturelover]

I still dont see it happening outside of major urban areas. The biggest money makers for the auto industry are full size pickups, and about half of the vehicles on the road where I live are trucks. Of those truck owners, about half of them hunt or fish. Do you really think an autonomous pickup is going to go driving through the woods, or back a boat trailer into the water? And what about people who tow an RV, or horse trailers?

It just ain't gonna happen like some of the city dwellers here think.

[ALA2009]

Be nice to have one with autopilot. Drive a couple times a year from north Texas to Kansas--be nice to sleep/do simthing else when there is nothing but simple highway traffic between OKC and Topeka

[oceangaia]

Originally Posted by CGab

I beg to differ. I think most large insurance carriers will not even insure an automated vehicle due to the uncertainty of the liability. Think about it, if the vehicle crashes who's to blame? The vehicle maker for a faulty vehicle or the owner as that is who is ultimately insured? I see a lot of problems with this scenario and I think insurance will be very costly for a very long time for one.

How is that not to the BENEFIT of insurers? Let's look at a single car accident to keep it simple. Currently, if a vehicle crashes there is no doubt as to the liability of the insurer to pay the covered losses. Whether the driver made a mistake or the accident was unavoidable, the liability is on the driver and thus his insurer. Having an additional party (manufacturer) to blame and go after only reduces the exposure on the driver's insurer. The more doubts you can create as to fault, the more outs you give to the insurer.