MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: GooooMarquette on March 19, 2018, 04:33:39 PM
-
I know they will eventually become a common thing, but this is one example of why they will likely take longer than some think. And yes - I know that distracted drivers probably killed 50 pedestrians today...but IMHO people will always be more afraid of the new danger than the one they're used to....
http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/19/technology/uber-autonomous-car-fatal-crash/index.html
-
I saw this earlier, and all I can think is that there's going to be more to this story.
Even though the car was in "autonomous" mode, there was still a person in the car, and I believe by law, if there's a person in the car, that person must still be able to take full control of the vehicle at any time.
So this wasn't just a runaway vehicle plowing down pedestrians... something was going on that both the vehicle and the driver did not heed any warnings (or were not able to react in time).
-
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by humans on their phone while driving: 472
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by robocar: 1
I welcome our robot overlords.
-
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by humans on their phone while driving: 472
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by robocar: 1
I welcome our robot overlords.
I understand what you're saying, but one has to go by percentages to do an apples/apples comparison, no?
What was the total number of cars driven by humans while they were using their phones? What was the total of robocars on the road?
If there were 500K cars on the road last year in which a human used the phone while driving (and that number is probably low), and 472 pedestrian died in accidents involving humans who were on the phone while driving, that is 1 pedestrian death per 1,059 on-phone-while-driving incidents.
If there were only 200 robocars on the road during the exact same span (and I have no idea if there were 1/10th that many or 10x that many), and 1 pedestrian died in an accident involving a robocar, that is 1 pedestrian death per 200 robocar trips. Or whatever the numbers are.
I am not making any kind of opinion on the goodness or badness of robocars. Just stating that the 472 and 1 figures weren't really an accurate measure.
Need something like ePD%! I'm all about advanced stats!!!
-
You know what makes the 472 figure really screwy? I made it up.
I have zero doubt that robocars are safer per million miles driven. That is likely true in 2018, and assuredly in 2028.
I'm not sure a robocar is in my future, but I sure want all you other schlubs to have one. I want all the 16-22 year old idiots to have one. And the 75 year olds. Not to mention Nancy going to work putting makeup on while driving. And Steven, on his way to work responding to his important emails.
Hey, all these test cars should have cameras rolling constantly, right? Sure would love to see the footage of this accident. (Minus the grisly bits.)
-
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by humans on their phone while driving: 472
2018 Pedestrian Deaths caused by robocar: 1
I welcome our robot overlords.
How many robocars out there? 1000? How many humans driving cars? 250 million?
No doubt robocars will be safer in the long run, but one item I have heard is that the cars / technology have trouble at times anticipating the unpredictable where a human can use human instincts to react. Maybe a better way to put it, humans will commit more accidents in situations where the auto car will commit very few, the mundane situations and normal rules of the road type situations. But the non-normal situation which is so difficult to anticipate or program for is the achilles heel at this point.
-
Not surprised it was Uber software. They have spent far less time developing than Google. They're rushing to market because they're sunk if they don't.
-
You know what makes the 472 figure really screwy? I made it up.
I have zero doubt that robocars are safer per million miles driven. That is likely true in 2018, and assuredly in 2028.
I'm not sure a robocar is in my future, but I sure want all you other schlubs to have one. I want all the 16-22 year old idiots to have one. And the 75 year olds. Not to mention Nancy going to work putting makeup on while driving. And Steven, on his way to work responding to his important emails.
Hey, all these test cars should have cameras rolling constantly, right? Sure would love to see the footage of this accident. (Minus the grisly bits.)
But will the drive-thru at Arby's need redesigning to accomodate robocars?
-
But will the drive-thru at Arby's need redesigning to accomodate robocars?
Arby's will have a fleet of self driving BnC delivery cars. Soon.
-
Jaywalking, no matter the hour of the day, can be deadly.
-
Arby's will have a fleet of self driving BnC delivery cars. Soon.
I need another way for Arbys to destroy me.
-
You know what makes the 472 figure really screwy? I made it up.
I have zero doubt that robocars are safer per million miles driven. That is likely true in 2018, and assuredly in 2028.
I'm not sure a robocar is in my future, but I sure want all you other schlubs to have one. I want all the 16-22 year old idiots to have one. And the 75 year olds. Not to mention Nancy going to work putting makeup on while driving. And Steven, on his way to work responding to his important emails.
Hey, all these test cars should have cameras rolling constantly, right? Sure would love to see the footage of this accident. (Minus the grisly bits.)
This schlub resembles that remark! I haven't driven while putting on my makeup in over a year!!!
-
I'm not sure a robocar is in my future, but I sure want all you other schlubs to have one. I want all the 16-22 year old idiots to have one. And the 75 year olds. Not to mention Nancy going to work putting makeup on while driving. And Steven, on his way to work responding to his important emails.
I was once on an early morning bike ride when I saw a high school or college age girl driving (likely to school) looking down at an open textbook propped up on the steering wheel.
-
I was once on an early morning bike ride when I saw a high school or college age girl driving (likely to school) looking down at an open textbook propped up on the steering wheel.
Sounds like a fine, studious young lady. Probably class valedictorian.
It's called multi-tasking!
-
You know what makes the 472 figure really screwy? I made it up.
I have zero doubt that robocars are safer per million miles driven. That is likely true in 2018, and assuredly in 2028.
I'm not sure a robocar is in my future, but I sure want all you other schlubs to have one. I want all the 16-22 year old idiots to have one. And the 75 year olds. Not to mention Nancy going to work putting makeup on while driving. And Steven, on his way to work responding to his important emails.
Hey, all these test cars should have cameras rolling constantly, right? Sure would love to see the footage of this accident. (Minus the grisly bits.)
This is actually one of the problems with defending autonomous: if you look at deaths per miles driven it will be hard for autonomous vehicles to meet or beat the current status quo of human drivers. How much of an increase is something we're willing to accept and plan that autonomous can meet or beat that metric in the future?
-
This is actually one of the problems with defending autonomous: if you look at deaths per miles driven it will be hard for autonomous vehicles to meet or beat the current status quo of human drivers. How much of an increase is something we're willing to accept and plan that autonomous can meet or beat that metric in the future?
I'm curious why you think that. Actually, I think the opposite is true, and that's one of the main reasons I think autonomous will come faster than many are expecting. Human beings are really inattentive and pretty horrible drivers.
-
I'm curious why you think that. Actually, I think the opposite is true, and that's one of the main reasons I think autonomous will come faster than many are expecting. Human beings are really inattentive and pretty horrible drivers.
Every human other than me, that is.
One of the fun things about us humans is that we all think the other person is the bad driver.
My 92-year-old father-in-law was still driving until just a couple of years ago, and he was convinced he was the only person who knew how to drive. Whenever he saw an accident, he'd say something like, "I guess dat lady screwed up." Didn't matter if it was a man or a woman, he always assumed it was "dat lady." (Dat's right: He's a sout-side Chicagoan.)
-
Every human other than me, that is.
One of the fun things about us humans is that we all think the other person is the bad driver.
My 92-year-old father-in-law was still driving until just a couple of years ago, and he was convinced he was the only person who knew how to drive. Whenever he saw an accident, he'd say something like, "I guess dat lady screwed up." Didn't matter if it was a man or a woman, he always assumed it was "dat lady." (Dat's right: He's a sout-side Chicagoan.)
I think I'm a pretty good driver. I also think that I get distracted by my phone, passengers, my radio, billboards, nice cars, buildings, pedestrians, etc., etc., etc. Honestly, I don't think the bar is particularly high for autonomous cars to surpass the safety of human drivers.
-
I'm curious why you think that. Actually, I think the opposite is true, and that's one of the main reasons I think autonomous will come faster than many are expecting. Human beings are really inattentive and pretty horrible drivers.
+1. Can you explain, g0ldeneagle?
-
I'm curious why you think that. Actually, I think the opposite is true, and that's one of the main reasons I think autonomous will come faster than many are expecting. Human beings are really inattentive and pretty horrible drivers.
My thoughts stem from a keynote I sat in late last year at Ford where they brought up a graph very similar to the one wiki has here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_United_States#/media/File:US_traffic_deaths_per_VMT,_VMT,_per_capita,_and_total_annual_deaths.png
And the speakers, two professors at UofM, were very frank in the fact their opinion that we cannot expect autonomous to be rolled out to the masses aggressively and meet or beat the deaths per millions/billions miles driven right off the bat.
Maybe strictly looking at deaths is not fair, and there is some other metric capturing all non-fatal crashes as well that would have a larger opportunity for improvement that autonomous vehicles can go after.
-
Are autonomous vehicles safer?
The correct answer is, we have no idea.
The use of driverless cars has been tiny compared to those with human drivers, and almost exclusively in urban areas of western states under ideal driving conditions (i.e. no blizzards, downpours, narrow country roads shared by deer and farm equipment, etc.).
Even with those conditions, the rate of fatalities is, in fact, higher with driverless cars vs those with drivers.
But, in reality, the circumstances at this point don't allow for anything close to an accurate comparison.
-
My thoughts stem from a keynote I sat in late last year at Ford where they brought up a graph very similar to the one wiki has here:
And the speakers, two professors at UofM, were very frank in the fact their opinion that we cannot expect autonomous to be rolled out to the masses aggressively and meet or beat the deaths per millions/billions miles driven right off the bat.
Maybe strictly looking at deaths is not fair, and there is some other metric capturing all non-fatal crashes as well that would have a larger opportunity for improvement that autonomous vehicles can go after.
Thank you. I'm curious why they think so. I'm not arguing that they're wrong...what the hell do I know?! I'm just curious what their opinion is based on. Obviously, there must be an awful lot of deaths that are caused by reasons other than inattentive (e.g., distracted, sleeping, drunk, etc.) drivers because I'd think those would clean up quite a bit. I haven't read much about how well the autonomous will handle challenging weather conditions.
-
Are autonomous vehicles safer?
The correct answer is, we have no idea.
The use of driverless cars has been tiny compared to those with human drivers, and almost exclusively in urban areas of western states under ideal driving conditions (i.e. no blizzards, downpours, narrow country roads shared by deer and farm equipment, etc.).
Even with those conditions, the rate of fatalities is, in fact, higher with driverless cars vs those with drivers.
But, in reality, the circumstances at this point don't allow for anything close to an accurate comparison.
Yep yep.
Facts are our friends.
-
I would look at flying as an example. If anyone knows any pilots out there please ask them this but in my hundreds of thousands miles flown almost all of that has been done by an autopilot. Even in bad weather now days pilots don't do very much but usually help with taxi, takeoff and landing. I am guessing that this revolution scared people back in the day but now days it's hardly given a thought to.
I am thinking now that the full adaptive cruise technology becomes more widely available more people will get exposed to computer driving. Right now it's primarily in luxury cars but it will be more available in about 2-3 years. Once people get a taste of it and see it's not the boogie man - it will accelerate at a multiplier pace.
-
I have a feeling I'd find robocars to be very .. Sunday Driver.
I mean .. I'm no lead foot, but I do keep to whichever lane is fastest, trying to go +10 of the speed limit. (Got one ticket on my record in 1995.)
My last car had "adaptive cruise" which kept me XX feet behind the car in front of me, and I freaking hated it. First .. the gap was likely very safe, but so big that people would constantly cut in front of you -- which means suddenly the cruise control would slow to get back to the proper gap. Second, say you were going 80 and another car passed you and got in your lane going faster .. again, the cruise would slow you down momentarily, even though a human knows .. the guy who passed you is going to create a new gap.
I guess I figure that robocars will be very conservative drivers, always with the proper safety distances, always at the speed limit (yes?), never intuiting the 'faster' lane == Sunday Driver, just getting you safely from A to B.
-
I have a feeling I'd find robocars to be very .. Sunday Driver.
I mean .. I'm no lead foot, but I do keep to whichever lane is fastest, trying to go +10 of the speed limit. (Got one ticket on my record in 1995.)
My last car had "adaptive cruise" which kept me XX feet behind the car in front of me, and I freaking hated it. First .. the gap was likely very safe, but so big that people would constantly cut in front of you -- which means suddenly the cruise control would slow to get back to the proper gap. Second, say you were going 80 and another car passed you and got in your lane going faster .. again, the cruise would slow you down momentarily, even though a human knows .. the guy who passed you is going to create a new gap.
I guess I figure that robocars will be very conservative drivers, always with the proper safety distances, always at the speed limit (yes?), never intuiting the 'faster' lane == Sunday Driver, just getting you safely from A to B.
That's very interesting. Although I've heard of adaptive CC, I don't know anybody else whose cars have that feature. That would drive me nuts!
And I'm a guy who tends to keep a pretty safe distance behind the person in front of me, inviting yahoos to cut in front.
-
That's very interesting. Although I've heard of adaptive CC, I don't know anybody else whose cars have that feature. That would drive me nuts!
And I'm a guy who tends to keep a pretty safe distance behind the person in front of me, inviting yahoos to cut in front.
Know someone that just bought a new Honda with that and whatever Honda calls the feature that corrects for drifting out of their lane. So far they are frustrated with the car steering and at times braking in slight turns thinking he was drifting out of his lane.
-
I had a rental car last month when we were in Florida. I didn't know it had lane departure warning and adaptive cruise control when we pulled out of the parking garage.
As I was leaving the Miami airport, my GPS took forever to tell me which ramps to take and I missed an entrance ramp from one highway to the other. I was already stressed trying to figure out where I was supposed to be and the damn car was beeping at me for, what I later realized, crossing over the ramp lane lines.
Later in the trip, when I set the cruise control and approached a car, my car starting slowing down and freaked me out. I had the same problem as Hilltopper in that the car would start to slow down when I got within what seemed like 75 yds away. It wasn't until the 2nd day, half way down to Key West that I realized (accidently) that you could change the allowable distance between my car and the one in front of me. When I set it to the shortest allowable distance, the car started driving like I normally do. Might say more about me than the car.
-
I have a feeling I'd find robocars to be very .. Sunday Driver.
I mean .. I'm no lead foot, but I do keep to whichever lane is fastest, trying to go +10 of the speed limit. (Got one ticket on my record in 1995.)
My last car had "adaptive cruise" which kept me XX feet behind the car in front of me, and I freaking hated it. First .. the gap was likely very safe, but so big that people would constantly cut in front of you -- which means suddenly the cruise control would slow to get back to the proper gap. Second, say you were going 80 and another car passed you and got in your lane going faster .. again, the cruise would slow you down momentarily, even though a human knows .. the guy who passed you is going to create a new gap.
I guess I figure that robocars will be very conservative drivers, always with the proper safety distances, always at the speed limit (yes?), never intuiting the 'faster' lane == Sunday Driver, just getting you safely from A to B.
In an ideal scenario, all the cars around you would be autonomous and talking to each other. So they'd be able to go significantly fast than we currently allow humans to drive. Plus they could be closer as reaction time would be much better and would know well ahead of time when they would need to slow/stop/change lanes.
-
In an ideal scenario, all the cars around you would be autonomous and talking to each other. So they'd be able to go significantly fast than we currently allow humans to drive. Plus they could be closer as reaction time would be much better and would know well ahead of time when they would need to slow/stop/change lanes.
Also .. I wonder if car "transponders" will be installed in non-robocars as well. That way, robocars will know not only which cars are driven by humans, but also collect data on them, e.g., Red Mustang ABH-034 WI plates makes rapid lane changes and drives 20 over the speed limit all the time, expect irrational moves from it.
-
I would look at flying as an example. If anyone knows any pilots out there please ask them this but in my hundreds of thousands miles flown almost all of that has been done by an autopilot. Even in bad weather now days pilots don't do very much but usually help with taxi, takeoff and landing. I am guessing that this revolution scared people back in the day but now days it's hardly given a thought to.
I am thinking now that the full adaptive cruise technology becomes more widely available more people will get exposed to computer driving. Right now it's primarily in luxury cars but it will be more available in about 2-3 years. Once people get a taste of it and see it's not the boogie man - it will accelerate at a multiplier pace.
My cousin flies for AAL. A couple years ago I asked him how much flying the autopilot does. His answer was along the lines of “from the time you’re 500 feet off the ground to the time you’re 500 feet from the ground.”
-
My cousin flies for AAL. A couple years ago I asked him how much flying the autopilot does. His answer was along the lines of “from the time you’re 500 feet off the ground to the time you’re 500 feet from the ground.”
Did any of the auto-pilot-flying planes ever hit a pedestrian?
-
Did any of the auto-pilot-flying planes ever hit a pedestrian?
You haven't heard about the Boeing/FAA coverup?
-
Discussion today about the autonomous car that hit a fire truck parked at a scene with lights on. Programming didn't recognize it as a hazard. So, a lot like a human on a cellphone.
-
An alert driver would have been able to slam on the brakes to avoid the pedestrian - and obviously the fire truck.
Maybe the driver would have failed to do so, been too slow, been on the phone, whatever ... but an alert driver at least would have had a chance to avoid ending a human life.
I spent 16 years driving in some of the most densely populated areas of the city of Chicago - an extremely unpleasant experience if there ever was one - and I learned to be ready for pedestrians to step into the street at any time, bikes to appear out of nowhere, doors of parked cars to fly open suddenly, fellow drivers to go through red lights, etc.
Until the car companies can come up with a driverless car that can handle such situations - not to mention a little kid running into a street after a bouncing ball - they simply do not belong on public roads.
And I say this as one who welcomes the technology.
-
https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/
-
https://www.wired.com/story/tesla-autopilot-why-crash-radar/
Interesting. Thanks for posting. A very serious limitation in the current technology out there.
-
Also .. I wonder if car "transponders" will be installed in non-robocars as well. That way, robocars will know not only which cars are driven by humans, but also collect data on them, e.g., Red Mustang ABH-034 WI plates makes rapid lane changes and drives 20 over the speed limit all the time, expect irrational moves from it.
That will almost definitely happen. In fact Ford announced today they are developing technology to allow older cards to add WiFi and other connectivity technology to their cars as old as 2010 model year.
-
So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:
https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664
This road was a 35 mph road. The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.
That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel. Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result.
On a really good day, technology might have saved her.
-
Saw that. Completely agree. Unlikely a human driver misses the pedestrian.
-
So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:
https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664
This road was a 35 mph road. The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.
That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel. Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result.
On a really good day, technology might have saved her.
Very savy of them to release the video. Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.
-
Very savy of them to release the video. Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.
I would submit that the pedestrian doesn't share the blame, it's entirely hers.
Though the irony in the inevitable multi-million dollar lawsuit is .. the robocar will be held to a higher standard than a human driver. "The robocar should have detected the pedestrian in dark clothing, at night, crossing illegally because its sensors are better than human abilities."
-
An alert driver would have been able to slam on the brakes to avoid the pedestrian - and obviously the fire truck.
Maybe the driver would have failed to do so, been too slow, been on the phone, whatever ... but an alert driver at least would have had a chance to avoid ending a human life.
I spent 16 years driving in some of the most densely populated areas of the city of Chicago - an extremely unpleasant experience if there ever was one - and I learned to be ready for pedestrians to step into the street at any time, bikes to appear out of nowhere, doors of parked cars to fly open suddenly, fellow drivers to go through red lights, etc.
Until the car companies can come up with a driverless car that can handle such situations - not to mention a little kid running into a street after a bouncing ball - they simply do not belong on public roads.
And I say this as one who welcomes the technology.
Boom. Nailed it. This is exactly why I am bearish on self-driving cars. At least in the foreseeable future.
I know people are high on AI, but the human mind makes so many calculations. So many that I don't think people realize the scope.
Autopilot on airplanes is completely different in that there is hardly any air traffic (all three dimensions are at your disposal), and there is zero chance of a ball-chasing kid running out in front of the plane.
-
There's no doubt that "accidents will happen." Completely unexpected and unavoidable events will occur, now and forever, where object A, travelling at 20-100 feet per second meet object B that appears suddenly.
Eldon and MU82 .. so how do (would you) respond when there's data (now or in the future) that robocars are safer per million miles than humans?
-
Very savy of them to release the video. Shows that the person hit shares in the blame.
She took the risk of death in her hands. It's entirely her fault.
-
There's no doubt that "accidents will happen." Completely unexpected and unavoidable events will occur, now and forever, where object A, travelling at 20-100 feet per second meet object B that appears suddenly.
Eldon and MU82 .. so how do (would you) respond when there's data (now or in the future) that robocars are safer per million miles than humans?
This. And even though the car failed, I'd still trust the autonomous car more than I'd trust an AARP driver.
I can't find anything to confirm yet, but it appears this car was not outfitted with any IR (heat) sensors.... seems to me that would have been of some help in detection; although truth be told, I have no clue how accurate consumer-grade IR can be at 40 mph, let alone the range, but if something like an A-10 can detect Hakmed and shower him a few dozen 30mm presents from a mile away, someone should be able outfit these cars with something that can pick up an intercepting ball of heat from 100 feet.
-
if there are going to be "self-driving" vehicles on the road, they should be prominently marked like a dominoes or pizza hut maniac trying to deliver it's goods on time.
i'd consider an exception if it were an arby's mobile unit :D
-
So .. the video of the self-driving pedestrian death has been released:
https://twitter.com/TempePolice/status/976585098542833664
This road was a 35 mph road. The dashcam doesn't see her until the headlights get to her, and by then the driver would have half a second to react.
That pedestrian was dead no matter who was behind the wheel. Crossing a medium-speed road, in the dark, with dark clothing, without concern for traffic had an inevitable result.
On a really good day, technology might have saved her.
Would a human being have turned on the high beams? I would have on a road like that. Did the automated car?
-
Would a human being have turned on the high beams? I would have on a road like that. Did the automated car?
I was thinking about this too. Certainly seemed like the headlights on this car were not producing a whole heck of a lot of visibility of the road ahead. I think the idea is that the autonomous car should have enough extra sensors (IR, LIDAR, RADAR. etc.) that it should not need to turn on high beams to gain the extra visibility that our naked eyes need.
-
While I definitely agree that the video looks like the pedestrian was really foolish and this probably would have been hard for the driver to avoid, I also think the video could be somewhat misleading. Video, while good (and getting better), is not nearly as good as the human eye. It is often quite dim and doesn't perceive nearly the gradations that we can see. Just look at the stark contrast between the very deep, dark black (in spite of the headlights and street lights) and the well-lit area. Not too uncommon for video, but not really how my eyes see things when when I'm driving at night. In other words, I'm not convinced by the video that an attentive driver wouldn't have seen that pedestrian (with or without high beams). Mind you, I'm not convinced the other way either...I think the video is inconclusive.
-
Would a human being have turned on the high beams? I would have on a road like that. Did the automated car?
High beams - or any focused concentration of light for that matter - can affect radar; light and sound.... they're all just waves of energy. If it were up to the car, it wouldn't need to turn the lights on at all.
Fun fact: Headlights were originally installed on vehicles so that the other car could see you coming; the realization that they could be used to improve your own field of vision came along much later. In a way, headlights can metaphorically sum up what MU lacked on the court this year... mostly defense and just a little vision.
-
This article may change my mind ..
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/#p3
Specifically .. the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRW0q8i3u6E
.. I suspected the Uber video was a bit dark due to low-quality dashcam. The Youtube video shows, it's pretty well lit up, headlights or not.
-
This article may change my mind ..
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/#p3
Specifically .. the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRW0q8i3u6E
.. I suspected the Uber video was a bit dark due to low-quality dashcam. The Youtube video shows, it's pretty well lit up, headlights or not.
Yeah, I thought the original video seemed unnaturally black in the dark areas. Not that it was doctored, or anything, just that it wasn't a really high quality video. These new videos look more similar to what I'd expect to see driving at night.
-
Would a human being have turned on the high beams? I would have on a road like that. Did the automated car?
My first reaction when watching this video was "wow, crappy headlights." The conspiracy theorist in me wondered if the video was doctored to make the road appear darker than it was.
-
My first reaction when watching this video was "wow, crappy headlights." The conspiracy theorist in me wondered if the video was doctored to make the road appear darker than it was.
Yes, either visibility was bad and a real person would turn on high beams, or the camera was poor in capturing the true lighting. I'm not buying that she was dead no matter what argument. This feels to me a technology failure by the car. That doesn't mean there is no blame on this person who appears to be violating the law, crossing the street outside of a cross walk at night. Not a smart move, but I believe the human driver sees this one.
-
There's no doubt that "accidents will happen." Completely unexpected and unavoidable events will occur, now and forever, where object A, travelling at 20-100 feet per second meet object B that appears suddenly.
Eldon and MU82 .. so how do (would you) respond when there's data (now or in the future) that robocars are safer per million miles than humans?
My point was that I think that we are a long ways off from even being able to get that kind of data. AI has come a long way since Y2K fears. Nonetheless, it still has a LONG way to go to match the human mind in as something as complex as driving a car.
I know that driving a car seems mundane. But it only seems that way. When driving on city roads in an urban area, humans are able to make extremely complex computations in milliseconds, or at least have the capability of doing so if needed, e.g., kid darts into street after a loose ball.
We could, of course, equip cars with infrared and whatnot, but then the car is stopping every time a squirrel is too close to the car. Humans instinctively know when to slam on the breaks. Good luck coding that instinct into an algorithm.
-
Well that was fast.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uber-reaches-settlement-family-autonomous-023342063.html
-
Well that was fast.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uber-reaches-settlement-family-autonomous-023342063.html
Do something illegal, get killed, surviving family members receive pay off from corporation. This is what makes America great.
-
Well that was fast.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/uber-reaches-settlement-family-autonomous-023342063.html
So much money on the line with this future industry, they must have backed up 10 Brinks trucks for this one. Last thing they wanted was this going to court, all of the public to see and hear about the problems with the software, hardware, cameras, etc in these vehicles.
-
So much money on the line with this future industry, they must have backed up 10 Brinks trucks for this one. Last thing they wanted was this going to court, all of the public to see and hear about the problems with the software, hardware, cameras, etc in these vehicles.
The problem was a pedestrian, as usual, being brazen with her complete disregard for the laws of the road.
She put herself in that position and deserved what happened based on her arrogance. Nothing wrong with the vehicle.
-
The problem was a pedestrian, as usual, being brazen with her complete disregard for the laws of the road.
She put herself in that position and deserved what happened based on her arrogance. Nothing wrong with the vehicle.
I’ll go with along with careless mistake, but I’m going to stop short of “jaywalkers deserve death.”
-
I’ll go with along with careless mistake, but I’m going to stop short of “jaywalkers deserve death.”
Yeah... That was an odd statement. We also don't know that there were no problems with the car. I agree that the pedestrian was at fault, but that doesn't mean that the car was perfect
-
I’ll go with along with careless mistake, but I’m going to stop short of “jaywalkers deserve death.”
Arrogant jaywalkers once again holding back progress and innovation.
-
The problem was a pedestrian, as usual, being brazen with her complete disregard for the laws of the road.
She put herself in that position and deserved what happened based on her arrogance. Nothing wrong with the vehicle.
In an earlier message I put most of the blame on her, but a person driving that car would either have the brights on or likely seen her. These cars are not infallible. There are enough videos on YouTube for people to see when they run red lights, don't yield properly, and other mishaps. They will help in the long run with safety and prevent some accidents that humans commit, but the same is true that they will likely commit a few accidents that a human being would overcome.
https://www.youtube.com/v/03ATgKkV0hc
https://www.youtube.com/v/_CdJ4oae8f4
-
In an earlier message I put most of the blame on her, but a person driving that car would either have the brights on or likely seen her. These cars are not infallible. There are enough videos on YouTube for people to see when they run red lights, don't yield properly, and other mishaps. They will help in the long run with safety and prevent some accidents that humans commit, but the same is true that they will likely commit a few accidents that a human being would overcome.
That's assuming quite a bit. It's the old parable of "everyone on the road is a terrible driver, except me". There is no proof that a person driving that car would have "likely" seen her or that they would have their bright lights activated.
I've watched people drive on residential streets in a rain storm without their headlights on. I've seen plenty of drivers on the freeway at dusk without their headlights on (especially this time of year). I've seen people buzz pedestrians in a crosswalk in the early afternoon on a flawlessly sunny day. I've watched people apply makeup to their face whilst set on cruise control at 76 MPH.
Long and short of it, humans are the fallible ones and the sooner we get tons and tons of weaponized machinery out of their distracted hands the sooner we can stem the tide of deaths on our increasingly dangerous roads.
-
That's assuming quite a bit. It's the old parable of "everyone on the road is a terrible driver, except me". There is no proof that a person driving that car would have "likely" seen her or that they would have their bright lights activated.
I've watched people drive on residential streets in a rain storm without their headlights on. I've seen plenty of drivers on the freeway at dusk without their headlights on (especially this time of year). I've seen people buzz pedestrians in a crosswalk in the early afternoon on a flawlessly sunny day. I've watched people apply makeup to their face whilst set on cruise control at 76 MPH.
Long and short of it, humans are the fallible ones and the sooner we get tons and tons of weaponized machinery out of their distracted hands the sooner we can stem the tide of deaths on our increasingly dangerous roads.
(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/deathmobile-during-animal-house-25th-anniversary-ultimate-homecoming-picture-id109939187?s=612x612)
Humans are fallible, but machines built by humans can be, too. The videos I linked, of course humans run red lights also but that didn't stop that car from doing the same thing.
Weaponized machinery? Are you saying people use their cars as weapons?
-
Here's a serious question that I have never seen discussed about electric, self-driving cars being the future of transportation ...
Can our grid handle all the electricity it will take to keep all of those cars on the road?
I'm not saying it can't ... I'm saying I genuinely don't know.
But if in, say, 30 years there were only electric cars, that'll be a lot of effen electricity needed.
-
Here's a serious question that I have never seen discussed about electric, self-driving cars being the future of transportation ...
Can our grid handle all the electricity it will take to keep all of those cars on the road?
I'm not saying it can't ... I'm saying I genuinely don't know.
But if in, say, 30 years there were only electric cars, that'll be a lot of effen electricity needed.
Solar panels on your roof, and a battery in your garage. Additionally, cars will likely not be owned by individuals. There will probably be a ride service that you pay a subscription for. Car picks you up, takes you to work, goes and gets the next person, goes to charge if it has to. It is truly insane that we own cars. They're expensive and you drive it to work and it just sits there all day.
-
Solar panels on your roof, and a battery in your garage. Additionally, cars will likely not be owned by individuals. There will probably be a ride service that you pay a subscription for. Car picks you up, takes you to work, goes and gets the next person, goes to charge if it has to. It is truly insane that we own cars. They're expensive and you drive it to work and it just sits there all day.
I would love that! I hate driving, especially in cities.
If we ever move back to Chicago - an unlikely "if," because my wife hates the weather there (and I'm no big fan of it) - we will live in the city, very close to public transportation, and we will not own a car. We'd be able to afford a lot nicer apartment without having to pay the ridiculous costs/taxes/fees associated with car ownership.
Our last 8 years, we owned only 1 car, and we often left that parked for weeks at a time. And we only lived near a bus line, not the el.
-
Solar panels on your roof, and a battery in your garage. Additionally, cars will likely not be owned by individuals. There will probably be a ride service that you pay a subscription for. Car picks you up, takes you to work, goes and gets the next person, goes to charge if it has to. It is truly insane that we own cars. They're expensive and you drive it to work and it just sits there all day.
Why is it insane when that is truly the only way to get from A to B the last 100 years?
I like having my own vehicle that my wife uses to drive to various volunteering sessions, shopping, leisure, medical, etc. My music, my sun glasses, my cup holders, my garage door opener all where I want them. I keep my cars clean, in great condition, I do not have to rely on anyone else or another company. I see how rental car companies keep their cars and it isn't great.
What happens in those situations when a hurricane is coming and everyone needs to evacuate, will there be enough vehicles? How about when the power grid goes offline for a week, any cars available to do anything?
-
I watched the video, I would've killed the lady dead if I was driving.
-
Why is it insane when that is truly the only way to get from A to B the last 100 years?
I like having my own vehicle that my wife uses to drive to various volunteering sessions, shopping, leisure, medical, etc. My music, my sun glasses, my cup holders, my garage door opener all where I want them. I keep my cars clean, in great condition, I do not have to rely on anyone else or another company. I see how rental car companies keep their cars and it isn't great.
What happens in those situations when a hurricane is coming and everyone needs to evacuate, will there be enough vehicles? How about when the power grid goes offline for a week, any cars available to do anything?
Same old Chicos
-
What happens in those situations when a hurricane is coming and everyone needs to evacuate, will there be enough vehicles? How about when the power grid goes offline for a week, any cars available to do anything?
I think you forgot to turn right at the Doom thread.
-
So much money on the line with this future industry, they must have backed up 10 Brinks trucks for this one. Last thing they wanted was this going to court, all of the public to see and hear about the problems with the software, hardware, cameras, etc in these vehicles.
Or.....
The family was (most likely rightfully) advised that the pedestrian was completely in the wrong and got what little they could by settling for a mere $25,000 to cover funeral expenses and attorneys fees. Family got more than they deserved, and Uber got this to go away quickly and quietly.
I call that a win-win for the surviving parties. And if Uber can improve their algorithm and save future lives as a result of this tragedy, society wins too.
The autonomous cars are coming, and hoping for perfection is a fools errand... people will die, inevitably. The real barometer is how many more people will live as a result of these tragedies?
-
Why is it insane when that is truly the only way to get from A to B the last 100 years?
I like having my own vehicle that my wife uses to drive to various volunteering sessions, shopping, leisure, medical, etc. My music, my sun glasses, my cup holders, my garage door opener all where I want them. I keep my cars clean, in great condition, I do not have to rely on anyone else or another company. I see how rental car companies keep their cars and it isn't great.
What happens in those situations when a hurricane is coming and everyone needs to evacuate, will there be enough vehicles? How about when the power grid goes offline for a week, any cars available to do anything?
Did ya take da pick up wich you to Idaho, a'ina?
-
Did ya take da pick up wich you to Idaho, a'ina?
How else is he going to get around White Lives Matter Ranch? Not to mention to-and-from the beer summits?
-
I watched the video, I would've killed the lady dead if I was driving.
In your life have you ever ran a red light? I've been driving legally for more than 40 years and have never ran a red light, but that auto car had no problem doing that.
Another article about another auto crash killing
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/30/tesla-autopilot-was-on-during-deadly-mountain-view-crash/
And the Wall Street Journal has a story on these deaths this a.m. https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-uber-deaths-raise-questions-about-the-perils-of-partly-autonomous-driving-1522661400
-
Same old Chicos
Isn't Billy Hoyle a Chicos?
Why is it insane that we own a car again? I only use my power drill probably 2 or 3 times a year, should I only rent that considering I use my car at least 4 or 5 times a day.
-
Humans are fallible, but machines built by humans can be, too. The videos I linked, of course humans run red lights also but that didn't stop that car from doing the same thing.
Weaponized machinery? Are you saying people use their cars as weapons?
I didn't know you were Chicos using yet another name. I no longer have interest in this discussion since it doesn't meet my requirements of engagement.
-
I didn't know you were Chicos using yet another name. I no longer have interest in this discussion since it doesn't meet my requirements of engagement.
For a few weeks I have asked what a Chicos is, but no one has given me the courtesy of defining it. Instead I have seen 4 or 5 people labeled as such. Now you do it. Ok.
-
In your life have you ever ran a red light? I've been driving legally for more than 40 years and have never ran a red light, but that auto car had no problem doing that.
Another article about another auto crash killing
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/30/tesla-autopilot-was-on-during-deadly-mountain-view-crash/
And the Wall Street Journal has a story on these deaths this a.m. https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-uber-deaths-raise-questions-about-the-perils-of-partly-autonomous-driving-1522661400
Purposely? Yes.
Thousands of red lights are run daily. There's municipalities that have massive budgets due to red light cameras.
-
For a few weeks I have asked what a Chicos is,
I'm going to munch on my popcorn while I wait for wades to spike that beautiful set
-
I'm going to munch on my popcorn while I wait for wades to spike that beautiful set
(https://media.giphy.com/media/2ALbeBfUZME4aCdyZg/giphy.gif)
-
In your life have you ever ran a red light? I've been driving legally for more than 40 years and have never ran a red light, but that auto car had no problem doing that.
If I'm being honest, I push the limits of a yellow/red light every day because where I drive, if you don't, you're more likely to get rear ended than pulled over.
So given my propensity to push said limits, I am sure it is - whatever the opposite of statistically impossible is - that I have ran multiple red lights in my 40 years.
-
I have accidentally run one red light in my 13 years of driving. Fortunately no one was coming the other way.
I have also been told that I havent stopped long enough at a red light when making a right turn several times.... Fing red light cameras
-
At many, many, MANY Chicago intersections, if you don't turn left just after yellow turns to red, you don't turn. Period.
On more than one occasion, I got caught sitting behind a car - usually with a Wisconsin plate, but not always - through several cycles because the driver refused to turn left just after the change.
On a couple of those occasions, when my beeping didn't result in the car turning, I couldn't take it any more. I got out of my car and tapped on the window of the car sitting at the light. Once it was a man, once a woman. Both times, I politely said a version of: "Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but if you don't turn right after the light turns red, we will sit here all day. That's just the way it is in Chicago."
It worked both times. And yes, I'm aware that I could have been shot either time.
-
Isn't Billy Hoyle a Chicos?
Why is it insane that we own a car again? I only use my power drill probably 2 or 3 times a year, should I only rent that considering I use my car at least 4 or 5 times a day.
Your arguments are seriously the worst.
Obviously, no you shouldn't rent your power drill it doesn't cost tens of thousands of dollars, and the saving ratio would be minimal.
Christ.
-
At many, many, MANY Chicago intersections, if you don't turn left just after yellow turns to red, you don't turn. Period.
On more than one occasion, I got caught sitting behind a car - usually with a Wisconsin plate, but not always - through several cycles because the driver refused to turn left just after the change.
On a couple of those occasions, when my beeping didn't result in the car turning, I couldn't take it any more. I got out of my car and tapped on the window of the car sitting at the light. Once it was a man, once a woman. Both times, I politely said a version of: "Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but if you don't turn right after the light turns red, we will sit here all day. That's just the way it is in Chicago."
It worked both times. And yes, I'm aware that I could have been shot either time.
As a Wisconsinite, this drives me insane. A tiny bit of my dies every time someone sits through the whole green and when they have a chance, they just sit there.
-
If I'm being honest, I push the limits of a yellow/red light every day because where I drive, if you don't, you're more likely to get rear ended than pulled over.
So given my propensity to push said limits, I am sure it is - whatever the opposite of statistically impossible is - that I have ran multiple red lights in my 40 years.
I'll take "what is absolutely certain?" for $200, Alex!
-
If I'm being honest, I push the limits of a yellow/red light every day because where I drive, if you don't, you're more likely to get rear ended than pulled over.
So given my propensity to push said limits, I am sure it is - whatever the opposite of statistically impossible is - that I have ran multiple red lights in my 40 years.
Have you run them in the fashion that was seen on that camera. I push the lights, too, but that was red for quite some time and the car completely missed it.
Ultimately these cars will be better than human drivers, but they will not be infallible and at times will even miss the most obvious of accidents that humans may have avoided. I'm thankful that at my age it will not be something I have to worry much about. My enjoyment in driving will still be there. The idea of being a kid right now and never having the ability to drive myself in the future feels fundamentally wrong. No different than pre car days when you would learn to ride a horse and the independence that provided.
-
For a few weeks I have asked what a Chicos is, but no one has given me the courtesy of defining it. Instead I have seen 4 or 5 people labeled as such. Now you do it. Ok.
!! I'm so glad I checked scoop today. Never change, Cheeks, never change (though none of us are worried you will).
-
Your arguments are seriously the worst.
Obviously, no you shouldn't rent your power drill it doesn't cost tens of thousands of dollars, and the saving ratio would be minimal.
Christ.
Weren't you the one arguing earlier that MU's season was done, wouldn't even get into the NIT. I might say the same about your arguments related to basketball. ;)
I don't think it is crazy that we own our cars since there is no other current way of doing business. In a few years that will change, but there will still be a large portion of the country, especially in rural America that needs vehicles at the ready. It provides independence, reliability, safety and the idea that you own and take care of the asset. For a more urban, younger population is makes sense.
Do you know how long it takes for an ambulance to get to some rural places? 35 to 45 minutes in some parts. People load their loved ones in the car and get them to the hospital themselves. Maybe it is my age, but I like the idea of knowing my car is at the ready on my time, not having to wait for someone else's car to arrive and deal with whatever has been going on in that vehicle in the past. It isn't crazy at all to own a vehicle. If people want to share cars, that is fine, too. It works to a small degree in places like Seattle. Bike sharing works also, but mostly in urban dense environments and for people that don't want or can't afford a vehicle themselves along with the upkeep (gas, insurance, maintenance). If that fits your life, then go for it but it won't be for everyone.
-
Purposely? Yes.
Thousands of red lights are run daily. There's municipalities that have massive budgets due to red light cameras.
I had red that some municipalities were being questioned on the purpose. Locally here there was an article a few months back. Depends if you are in the city or the burbs.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-red-light-cameras-suburbs-20180105-story.html
-
As a Wisconsinite, this drives me insane. A tiny bit of my dies every time someone sits through the whole green and when they have a chance, they just sit there.
I wonder if a driverless car would just sit at those lights and never turn. Cycle after cycle after cycle.
That would be fun!
-
At many, many, MANY Chicago intersections, if you don't turn left just after yellow turns to red, you don't turn. Period.
On more than one occasion, I got caught sitting behind a car - usually with a Wisconsin plate, but not always - through several cycles because the driver refused to turn left just after the change.
That hurts, Mike.
I don't know how that could happen when we are always driving in the center lane.
-
Weren't you the one arguing earlier that MU's season was done, wouldn't even get into the NIT. I might say the same about your arguments related to basketball. ;)
I don't think it is crazy that we own our cars since there is no other current way of doing business. In a few years that will change, but there will still be a large portion of the country, especially in rural America that needs vehicles at the ready. It provides independence, reliability, safety and the idea that you own and take care of the asset. For a more urban, younger population is makes sense.
Do you know how long it takes for an ambulance to get to some rural places? 35 to 45 minutes in some parts. People load their loved ones in the car and get them to the hospital themselves. Maybe it is my age, but I like the idea of knowing my car is at the ready on my time, not having to wait for someone else's car to arrive and deal with whatever has been going on in that vehicle in the past. It isn't crazy at all to own a vehicle. If people want to share cars, that is fine, too. It works to a small degree in places like Seattle. Bike sharing works also, but mostly in urban dense environments and for people that don't want or can't afford a vehicle themselves along with the upkeep (gas, insurance, maintenance). If that fits your life, then go for it but it won't be for everyone.
Your premise is naive. There is no reason an autonomous car company wouldn't function in rural America. Additionally, it IS your age. If you can't wait 5-10 minutes or plan 5-10 minutes ahead of time (using your phone of course) when you will need a ride, then maybe its time to book a room in the old folks home.
-
If you can't wait 5-10 minutes or plan 5-10 minutes ahead of time (using your phone of course) when you will need a ride, then maybe its time to book a room in the old folks home.
Disagree completely. Impatience knows no age group.
-
Disagree completely. Impatience knows no age group.
Sorry. In too much of a hurry to read this tripe.
-
On more than one occasion, I got caught sitting behind a car - usually with a Wisconsin plate, but not always - through several cycles because the driver refused to turn left just after the change.
I grew up and lived almost 30 years total in WI and have now been in MN for 20 years.
In all my years of living in WI, I can't recall that ever happening. But since I have been in MN, I see cars with MN plates doing that all the time.
Not saying you're wrong. I just find it interesting that I've only seen it since leaving WI.
-
In Texas, they are never taught that you can pull into the intersection when waiting to make a left turn. They stay behind the crosswalk and as a result often get stuck for several cycles on busy streets. Drives me up a wall. But the nice bonus is that Texan passengers in my car often scream and fresh out when I pull into the intersection
-
I am fine with a destination wedding as long as the bride and groom and their families aren't honked off when people decline (which I have seen).
It may be cheaper whoever is paying for the wedding, but certainly not cheaper for the bridal party or any of the guests. Most of the folks who attended my wedding had no expenses other than a modest gift and the cost of gas to drive to Gesu and then to the Milwaukee Athletic Club. Oh, and the MAC charged $3 for parking, and believe me, we got complaints from some of the native Milwaukeans about that.
-
I am fine with a destination wedding as long as the bride and groom and their families aren't honked off when people decline (which I have seen).
It may be cheaper whoever is paying for the wedding, but certainly not cheaper for the bridal party or any of the guests. Most of the folks who attended my wedding had no expenses other than a modest gift and the cost of gas to drive to Gesu and then to the Milwaukee Athletic Club. Oh, and the MAC charged $3 for parking, and believe me, we got complaints from some of the native Milwaukeans about that.
Don't look like the MAC to me.
(http://malta.intercontinental.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Daenerys-wedding-azure-scene-shot-in-malta-azure-window.png)
-
Ugh, how did I manage to post this in the wrong thread?
That's what I get for trying to multitask.
By the way, lame gift, Lord FriendZone.
-
I grew up and lived almost 30 years total in WI and have now been in MN for 20 years.
In all my years of living in WI, I can't recall that ever happening. But since I have been in MN, I see cars with MN plates doing that all the time.
Not saying you're wrong. I just find it interesting that I've only seen it since leaving WI.
In Minnesota, I found it was more often the Iowa license plates.
I'm out wandering around.
Idiot on wheels ahead.
I owe (the) world (an) apology.
I offend without accelerating.
Invested over woeful advice
The list goes on. Minnesota teens are the worst.
-
Your premise is naive. There is no reason an autonomous car company wouldn't function in rural America. Additionally, it IS your age. If you can't wait 5-10 minutes or plan 5-10 minutes ahead of time (using your phone of course) when you will need a ride, then maybe its time to book a room in the old folks home.
For autonomous car mass adoption the car makers are saying 5G technology will be required to lower the cost of the vehicles rather that putting all the computing guts into the cars themselves. 5G is coming to rural areas a long long time from now because of the nature of the bandwidth.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-5g-will-drive-the-adoption-of-self-driving-cars-2017-12
My premise is around the efficiency of autonomous cars in rural areas. In a densely populated area where the car can get the next rider quickly that opportunity doesn't exist in towns of 100, or 1000. It becomes a volume game.
I like to drive. I am not against autonomous cars, but they are not for everyone and won't be a solution everywhere.
-
In Texas, they are never taught that you can pull into the intersection when waiting to make a left turn. They stay behind the crosswalk and as a result often get stuck for several cycles on busy streets. Drives me up a wall. But the nice bonus is that Texan passengers in my car often scream and fresh out when I pull into the intersection
if I'm not mistaken, the actual law in Texas is that you can't pull out into the intersection, isn't it?
Another thing you won't see in Texas is a courtesy wave.
-
if I'm not mistaken, the actual law in Texas is that you can't pull out into the intersection, isn't it?
Another thing you won't see in Texas is a courtesy wave.
I believe you are mistaken. I've never heard that... And I've seen several cops do it (though that doesnt necessarily mean anything) ...and I've done it in front of several cops
-
I believe you are mistaken. I've never heard that... And I've seen several cops do it (though that doesnt necessarily mean anything) ...and I've done it in front of several cops
Hmmm, ok, I thought that was what they were teaching in driving classes. Then why the F do people just sit behind the white line? Maddening
-
Hmmm, ok, I thought that was what they were teaching in driving classes. Then why the F do people just sit behind the white line? Maddening
Arizona natives do that too.
-
For autonomous car mass adoption the car makers are saying 5G technology will be required to lower the cost of the vehicles rather that putting all the computing guts into the cars themselves. 5G is coming to rural areas a long long time from now because of the nature of the bandwidth.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-5g-will-drive-the-adoption-of-self-driving-cars-2017-12
My premise is around the efficiency of autonomous cars in rural areas. In a densely populated area where the car can get the next rider quickly that opportunity doesn't exist in towns of 100, or 1000. It becomes a volume game.
I like to drive. I am not against autonomous cars, but they are not for everyone and won't be a solution everywhere.
Ah, so you took one person's view and expanded it to fit your narrative. Got it. His premise is that 5G connectivity will be required for autonomous cars. A dubious claim.
From the article you posted:
This wouldn't preclude them from leaving a few dead zones — the cars could fall back on GPS for navigation purposes in those instances, or download sections of maps ahead of time, as well as media for passengers to enjoy while out of range. Meanwhile, the most mission critical data processing and analysis functions of self-driving cars, including analyzing the data from their sensors about obstacles in their surroundings, will take place on the car's own computing systems, and therefore won't rely on network connections anyway. As such, it's highly unlikely that dead zones in 5G coverage will significantly hamper self-driving car adoption.
Semis will likely be the first fully autonomous vehicles in regular use. They won't be using 5G to navigate long stretches of rural highway. That sort of communication power is probably only required for the 'difficult' math problems that are urban areas. The 'simple' math problems of rural driving won't require that level of communication.
-
Not one person's claim, there are a number of think tanks and firms stating this as a way for wide adoption because of the costs of putting all the computing power into the vehicles. Cloud based and delivered via 5G makes that less expensive.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bijankhosravi/2018/03/25/autonomous-cars-wont-work-until-we-have-5g/#49ffd091437e
https://venturebeat.com/2017/05/20/why-intel-believes-5g-wireless-will-make-autonomous-cars-smarter/
https://www.rcrwireless.com/20180301/5g/sk-telecom-5g-autonomous-cars-tag17
https://www.cio.com/article/3173848/consumer-electronics/5g-will-help-autonomous-cars-cruise-streets-safely.html
You don't want to own your car, that is fine. I do, as driving is an enjoyment for me and knowing that I have access to it when I want with no one else's paws or rights to it is a great security for me.