Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wake up people. You all really like the idea of losing all interaction and ability to do anything where all you have to do is chew your food. (nevermind, I bet you want your food in some pill form so one swallow and you can be back on your couch playing some kind of virtual reality game instead of going outside and taking part in real reality. Just where exactly do you draw the line.
No, I don't see the future going the route of full automation because people are still going to want to live. These are just some stupid ideas being developed and then having internet wannabe techs throwing in their own stupid dreams (other peoples nightmares) to see just how far they can move till they are living in a Jetson's cartoon.
Think of all the cars in Houston that could have been saved last year, if those cars had AI technology coupled with big bro. Every time there's a pending flood event, big bro sends out an alert to all AI cars below a certain elevation, to drive themselves to the nearest high ground immediately. Michael might be asleep and not know that big bro just saved his car, until he wakes up the next morning and gets the message from Kit that he's safe and sound, sitting on top a hill 8 blocks away and asking you in a text if it's safe to come back home. Let's say there's a tornado warning and your car is parked on the street with no protection, same deal, the car gets a warning that it's in the direct path of a tornado and to leave at once, it honks it's horn and attempts to signal you by phone, if no reply, then if you have pre authorized it to do so in such emergencies, it drives 5 miles away and parks under a bridge or something. Same thing with hail alerts, tsunamis, urban rioting......the alerts are given and the cars escape if the owner does not respond.
Yep! Sounds like a dream. Really thought out. Now what about the poor owner who is left behind and now can't escape the flood, tornado, riot, etc... because big brother just sent his car to safety without him?
Of course you are. The generation of vehicles 10 years from now will give you no option. You are going to be faced with an electric drive where all the commands to the motors which drive the wheels will come from the computer. At this point it is inevitable. And it is likely they will do away with the wheel and peddles.
I am I suspect older than you but I am also conversant with the technology involved by roughly 60 years of experience. And I hate to force you out of your man cave...but you are not going to get to display your prowess by how neatly you place the boat.
10 years from now? Wake up! I'll probably putting a down payment on a big diesel powered 4x4 that I will be driving 100% and launching my boat myself by knowing that I will know how far back I can put it before I risk putting the trailer tires over the ledge. I will also be driving it out on the beaches to go surf fishing and out in corn fields to put out/pick up decoys, blinds and game\. Oh, BTW, I will also be driving it on the roads.
And BTW, no need to force me out of my man cave as I don't have one. I still do things and enjoy my hobbies, work and past times out side. No VR and video games for me.
AI cars are all about more government control. Cities will prohibit cars in certain areas and/or at certain times. And then other powers will intervene. Maybe the mayor does not want cars driving in front of his/her house, etc..
I live in an area of the U.S. that averages 124 inches of snow a year (that is over 10 feet of snow!). Driving in snow and ice is not for the faint-hearted. The difference in the quality of the roads after yet another snow dump varies greatly. Some roads may be snow packed, some may have 5-6" of slush and salt, some may actually be paved to the pavement, and some roads haven't been paved at all.
Will AI driven cars be able to drive "safely" in a snow/ice environment? From November to April the roads where I live have a good chance of being snow covered. If a driverless car can drive me around the snow covered roads (including into parking lots which may have a foot of snow here and there) than I am all for such vehicles as long as there is always an option for the driver to take control should the need arise.
Have they tested AI vehicles in real snowy conditions? Would one have to get out of one's car every so often to wipe the snow, slush, sleet, ice from the controls on top of the car? That would be irritating.
What would be nice, is if car makers would make front windshields have de-icers built in like they do for back windshields. Why is that so hard? This past week I had to blow my heat at full blast to get my front windshield defrosted (after a .25" of ice) and it was still not defrosted after 15 minutes (including me scraping at it with an ice scraper). The back windshield melted the ice within 10 minutes with the de-icer turned on. They make heated mirrors, why not heated windows?
Whatever. I hope the new driverless cars are required to be AWD vehicles.
Just playing devil's advocate here but...is this not the case any time you're a passenger in a vehicle? Riding shotgun, sitting backseat, on a bus, in an Uber, etc? Unless you're constantly thinking "At any moment I may have to grab the wheel from whatever imbecile is piloting this death wagon!"
I have occasionally taken over for a driver in adverse conditions when she felt I could handle it better, and in a few instances when a driver was intoxicated and I wasn't.
Lucky for us you're just some know-nothing on city data and won't decide the fate of driverless cars.
The idea behind the automobile is not freedom. It's moving things/individuals from point A to point B in less time or over longer distances.
This response is oddly hostile considering the subject matter being discussed. I only claim to have influence over the fate of driverless cars in my own household, and I won't be adopting the technology for my own family if there are not backup controls for humans in case of emergency or human whim.
Here's an idea, instead of owning a car, why not rent from the grid for 50 cents a mile? Every neighborhood would have a car lot nearby with lots of different models of cars, trucks, jeeps, SUV's, compacts, sports cars ect ect. Whatever mood you're in that day, is what you get. Just call in to your local lot, and a car drives itself to your house and picks you up. You could pick a different car everyday, lol. No more car payments, just pay as you go. Insurance rates would be the same for everyone, because no more goofball drivers behind the wheel. The insurance rates would drastically lower for everyone, because almost no accidents would ever occur when you take human error out of the equation. Instant alerts and real time feedback to drivers behind you when you hit fog or an ice patch, so 30 cars don't pile up before they can get the road closed. Would there even be a need for road signs and traffic signals? Not really, if everyone had a driverless car connected to the data grid, under computer control.
No way Jose. I have kids and my minivan is loaded up with their crap. No way I'm transferring all their stuff from a vehicle back in to the house and then in to a new vehicle every day. And a couple of them are still using car seats too. Plus I live out in the boonies. That would only be practical in a city or densely populated suburb, among childless people. Even some childless people use their vehicles for storage though.
For most people, it is pretty difficult to grasp tomorrow's needs, wants, culture, technology, and infrastructure in light of today's needs, wants, culture, technology, and infrastructure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia
And I hate to burst your little bubble but things change and time moves on, with you or without you. Car manufacturers are not spending billions of dollars developing driverless car technology for no reason. Life will not be the same in 2040 as it was in 2000. Kick and scream about the government or people all you want, you will change with it or be left behind. Eventually you and your Luddite views will die.
Again I don't understand the hostility considering the subject matter, but I am not objecting to the idea of AI driven cars I am objecting to AI controlled cars without human backup controls, especially in the early stages of development. There is a big push to make this transition completely and near instantaneously as soon as possible. I'm not sure what the big hurry is. I also don't like the collective ownership model some people are pushing. Seems there is another agenda in play in those cases that have little to do with car or AI technology itself. Perhaps this other agenda is behind the hostility, because it doesn't make sense otherwise.
It's like anything else. If you want it, fine. If you don't, well, that's OK too.
It's the MANDATORY part that is a problem.
Everything moves from new/trendy, to voluntary/"hey you can pick, we don't mind," to MANDATORY/"you must do as we say this is the only option" when people are still choosing not to do it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
