MindStalker: Eventually once we trust these cars there will be autonomous taxi's that you can't drive even if you want to.



/also, what up with the extra apostrophe? Taxi's ... what?

browntimmy: Seriously, unless you live in Bumfark, Nebraska or do all your driving between 11pm-5am when is driving ever fun?

Going somwhere in a car might be boring. Driving somewhere in a car never is. Drive that biatch, unless of course it's a bubble buggy made by Singer, in whch case, have a can of flakes.

barefoot in the head: browntimmy: Seriously, unless you live in Bumfark, Nebraska or do all your driving between 11pm-5am when is driving ever fun?

Going somwhere in a car might be boring. Driving somewhere in a car never is. Drive that biatch, unless of course it's a bubble buggy made by Singer, in whch case, have a can of flakes.

Heh, I live on a mountain 12 miles from civilization. Driving's always fun!

/no power steering, no power brakes, no automatic transmission, no AC
//have a new car too, but it's just no damned fun

barefoot in the head: browntimmy: Seriously, unless you live in Bumfark, Nebraska or do all your driving between 11pm-5am when is driving ever fun?

Going somwhere in a car might be boring. Driving somewhere in a car never is. Drive that biatch, unless of course it's a bubble buggy made by Singer, in whch case, have a can of flakes.

Driving is a game. Oh, there's traffic? Let's see how well my AJ Foyt impersonation skills are.

And driving on the open road(for trips and such) is very, uh, zen. When I was a very young child my parents would take me for a drive if I was fussy going to bed/waking up screaming. It would put me at rest and to sleep. Today, when I drive somewhere, it has both a calming effect and an exhilaration effect, like being alive in a perfect existence. There is nothing quite like driving... well, except flying(did that once, definitely felt very alive doing it).

t3knomanser: Driving for me is a game, but the game is about communicating clearly with the other drivers and obeying the rules of the road (although not all of the laws of the road) as cleanly and clearly as possible.

It should be clear to anyone who drives that the rules of the road are often at odds with the laws of the road. I always endeavor to drive safely. This does not automatically mean that I drive legally.

flaminio: t3knomanser: Driving for me is a game, but the game is about communicating clearly with the other drivers and obeying the rules of the road (although not all of the laws of the road) as cleanly and clearly as possible.

It should be clear to anyone who drives that the rules of the road are often at odds with the laws of the road. I always endeavor to drive safely. This does not automatically mean that I drive legally.

Indeed. I don't drive dangerously, I drive sanely. I don't treat this like it's England, where 3 inches of clearance is more than enough to weave right in to a lane at speed.

I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course. If that were true, they would have released the video with great fanfare. I'm willing to bet their "race track" is a very very basic oval or a parking lot with cones and very few turns. The fastest line through a real race track usually involves getting a couple tires off track and certainly hitting the burms. And, I won't even get into how a computer will deal with brake fade, tire ware, etc

t3knomanser: The whole system would be smart and efficient.

This is what I look forward to. Make it happen, Google-nerds.

I want a self-driving car so bad, it isn't even funny. And it's not cause I'm a drunk, it's that I know that I'm not attentive enough. One of these days, that's going to catch up with me in a baaaad way.

My husband, a programmer, insists that he'd never trust a self-driving car. But he concedes that it would probably drive better than I do.

ScotterOtter: I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course. If that were true, they would have released the video with great fanfare.

Agreed; I don't think this has yet happened, but I suspect some day it will. NASCAR probably first, as there are fewer variables (go fast, turn left) -- but can you imagine the hullabaloo when a robo-car can beat Micael Shumacher on a regulation F1 course? That'll be some serious butthurt; can't wait!

ScotterOtter: I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course. If that were true, they would have released the video with great fanfare. I'm willing to bet their "race track" is a very very basic oval or a parking lot with cones and very few turns. The fastest line through a real race track usually involves getting a couple tires off track and certainly hitting the burms. And, I won't even get into how a computer will deal with brake fade, tire ware, etc

It might not beat a great driver, but it certainly would beat many.
http://mashable.com/2011/03/03/google-self-driving-car-video/
Its skidding around corners and everything.

flaminio: ScotterOtter: I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course. If that were true, they would have released the video with great fanfare.

Agreed; I don't think this has yet happened, but I suspect some day it will. NASCAR probably first, as there are fewer variables (go fast, turn left) -- but can you imagine the hullabaloo when a robo-car can beat Micael Shumacher on a regulation F1 course? That'll be some serious butthurt; can't wait!

Pretty sure all they meant was that the automated car would stay at the appropriate speed for traffic, not just the speed limit. I don't think there was any real racing going on.

If the replaced NASCAR drivers with robots, all arguments about it being a sport or being in any way entertaining would be null and void.

ScotterOtter: I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course. If that were true, they would have released the video with great fanfare. I'm willing to bet their "race track" is a very very basic oval or a parking lot with cones and very few turns. The fastest line through a real race track usually involves getting a couple tires off track and certainly hitting the burms. And, I won't even get into how a computer will deal with brake fade, tire ware, etc

You're obviously unaware of how much software is already in modern race cars. The computer IS dealing with brake fade, tire wear, instantaneous grip analysis, precision launch control, dynamic rebound, etc. etc. Anymore, the driver isn't doing near as much as you think.

t3knomanser: Now, the next step is to have the cars communicate. They can negotiate out speed limits based on current conditions, they can alert each other to hazards, they can offer to allow other cars to merge in and out. By integrating with signalling systems, the roadway itself can interact with the cars. The whole system would be smart and efficient.

I'd love to see the effect of "simultaneous start" on traffic. With humans, the first guy goes, the next one waits, then goes, the next-next one waits, then goes, etc. Suppose instead that everyone went at the same time, all accelerating identically. The entire mass of waiting traffic would move as if a single body, allowing a lot more cars through as the human need to wait for reaction distance is eliminated.

fluffy2097: I don't like commuting, but boy do I love to drive my car.

I want a self commuting car, not a self driving car. Build me a car that will find the nearest windy back road with no traffic and take me to it, then let ME drive down it.


I think if these cars actually dramatically improve safety and traffic flow it will eventually be illegal to drive on public roads with at least having computer assisted driving. So just like they banned 32oz sodas they will ban driving on your own, and you probably will see motorcycles declared too dangerous as well.

DrewCurtisJr: No crashes? Where will I got my organs from when I'm old?

If we have self-driving cars, no one would own them. We'd ride-share them.

Slaxl: Does anyone else whip out their phone and check their location and see they're off by a few feet and facing the wrong direction? I assume they'll make them with better GPS stuff but still, can they completely eliminate all little foibles of the system?

The system that they use, and obviously this is a simplified explanation, is a combination of GPS and sensors that detect roadlines, signs, lights, etc. Combining the two helps to eliminate a lot of the error and seems to be working rather well for their test cars.

DrewCurtisJr: No crashes? Where will I got my organs from when I'm old?

They will be growing them in pigs.

t3knomanser: v2micca: But doing so eventually shows up in any system with even a half competent network admin

This simply isn't true. You're relying on cheaters being dumber than you are. Every system can be compromised, and that includes systems for detecting attempts to compromise the system.

Which is a very valid point. People in self driving cars might cheat while people in manually driven cars always play according to the rules. No one would ever dream of winning a 3 second reduction in travel time if that meant they had to prevent someone from merging into traffic form an on ramp.



Self driving cars will reduce a whole lot of small annoyances which will outweigh the fact that some people will still find ways to speed. As long as there is vehicle to vehicle data exchange about distance and speed the vehicles should be able to avoid each other.

meanmutton: If we have self-driving cars, no one would own them. We'd ride-share them.

This exactly. Public transport would be so much easier. Take a small auto taxi to nearby Van share lot. Take Van going in the same general direction you want to go. Take a small auto taxi to your final destination. Replace "Van" with train where applicable.

haven't read any replies yet but if i remember correctly, the main driving force for setting such low speed limits was the gas mileage...well as far as interstate traveling goes, if it was any faster , you're bypass the efficient rang of MPG to MPH....surely nothing that couldn't be resolved with diff. gear ratios. We could probably give up acceleration for higher speed gear ratios. Which would make sense for self driving cars since they are probably not prone to skidding out at green lights.

browntimmy: barefoot in the head: Will the "cars" come with a free can of snowflakes and a testicle repository?

Because nothing makes me feel more like a man than stop-and-go traffic on my way to work in the morning. Seriously, unless you live in Bumfark, Nebraska or do all your driving between 11pm-5am when is driving ever fun?

This is a great technological advancement. Please, humans, just this once, can we not drag our feet?

Maybe if they were self-driving tanks or fighter jets.

I lol every time I read "Google's Schmidt." It sounds like a sneeze or someone cussing in German.

Computers still shiat the bed whenever anything unexpected happens, including some animal finding a way to get into the stream of autopiloted traffic.

/at least cruise control still lets me steer

ScotterOtter: I'm going to have to call BS on the claim it can beat human drivers on a race course.

Self-driving cars have been able to do that for almost 45 years.

Thrag: They will be growing them in pigs.

Hey, pigs are either bacon or sources for growing life saving, pristine organs, not both. I think the delicious choice is clear.

NBSV: If I crash my car into a bus load of children it's my fault. If my self driving car crashes into a bus load of children who's fault is it?

That's the problem I see. The laws would have to change making the person in the car responsible even if the car is driving itself since you should be paying attention anyway. I think it'll take a few generations to phase it in so people aren't all suing the companies.
==============================================

That was my thought as well. David Pogue actually wrote a pretty good column in Scientific American several months back that addressed that very question. It would be a nightmare for the insurance companies, and given their lobbying power in state and federal government for the foreseeable future, I seriously doubt we'll be seeing self-driving cars in our lifetime.

DrewCurtisJr: Thrag: They will be growing them in pigs.

Hey, pigs are either bacon or sources for growing life saving, pristine organs, not both. I think the delicious choice is clear.

===================

Why can't they be both? Pork chops are meat, ribs are meat, bacon is meat. Grow the replacement organs in the pigs and when you need one you end up getting not only a new liver or kidney or heart, but also a completely butchered and packaged pig ready for your "Welcome home from the hospital" cookout. It's a win-win! I can see it now...

"Hey everyone, before we get started with the festivities, I'd like to take a moment to thank the pig that provided not only my new lung, but also this delicious feast of grilled chops and three Bacon Explosions."

lisarenee3505: NBSV: If I crash my car into a bus load of children it's my fault. If my self driving car crashes into a bus load of children who's fault is it?

That's the problem I see. The laws would have to change making the person in the car responsible even if the car is driving itself since you should be paying attention anyway. I think it'll take a few generations to phase it in so people aren't all suing the companies.
==============================================

That was my thought as well. David Pogue actually wrote a pretty good column in Scientific American several months back that addressed that very question. It would be a nightmare for the insurance companies, and given their lobbying power in state and federal government for the foreseeable future, I seriously doubt we'll be seeing self-driving cars in our lifetime.
==============================================

ACK! I had my citation all wrong. The article was titled "Take the wheel" by Jacob Ward in the May 2012 issue of Popular Science. Sometimes I get my nerd magazines mixed up. Here's a linky link to the article on the PopSci site.

tsakali: haven't read any replies yet but if i remember correctly, the main driving force for setting such low speed limits was the gas mileage...well as far as interstate traveling goes, if it was any faster , you're bypass the efficient rang of MPG to MPH....surely nothing that couldn't be resolved with diff. gear ratios. We could probably give up acceleration for higher speed gear ratios. Which would make sense for self driving cars since they are probably not prone to skidding out at green lights.

Mechanical advantage is a biatch. Higher speed gear ratios mean less torque from the engine. As drag gets higher, it becomes impossible to go any faster no matter how you gear the thing.

My RX-8 is drag limited to about 120mph. That's in 5th gear, which happens do be direct drive. If I shift up into 6th for efficient highway driving, I no longer have the torque to resist drag, even at the top of my engines power curve, and begin to slow down.

Self driving cars could get around this drag issue and go faster by being able to tailgate each other horrendously close to take advantage of the slipstream of the first car.

On a street level, self driving cars wouldn't require stop signs or stop lights. they could talk to the cars around them and adjust their speed a bit so they can fly right through the intersection and never hit anyone. Starting from a standing stop is one of the biggest fuel guzzlers in a car.

aerojockey: All I'm saying it, if Google makes it possible for me never to have to drive again, they can have any information about me they want, and my virginity.

Driving is the best part of the day.