If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Apparently unaware a few corporations are already pushing through laws that hold them completely faultless, NYTimes asks what happens when a self-driving car kills people, speeds, or doesn't come to a complete stop   (nytimes.com) divider line 45
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1360 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 May 2014 at 4:46 AM (9 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-18 02:14:45 AM
By clicking the link above, or submitting comments and/or images to this forum, you agree that any controversy or claim arising from or relating to the New York Times, Fark.com, their holders or subsidiaries (heretofore, "Providers") shall be settled within a reasonable time by arbitration administered by a Third Party Arbiter to be determined by Providers. You further agree that any and all remedies, reparations, or decisions rendered by the Third Party Arbiter will be legally binding, and to waive any right to contest any controversy or claim with either the Providers or the Third Party Arbiter in any court of law.
 
2014-05-18 03:42:16 AM
Floriduh and Self-Driving Cars.
HOW would we tell the difference?
 
2014-05-18 04:05:28 AM
It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.
 
2014-05-18 04:28:33 AM

robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.


Oh man, you know what I just thought of? Everybody is gonna hate this: certain manufacturers of self-driving cars will lobby the government to allow their cars preferential speeds and priority access when using the self-driving car network. Then, there will be a bunch of monthly costs associated with continuing priority functionality by subscription or eternal credit card autopay.

The same as it ever was.
 
2014-05-18 04:33:40 AM

robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.


No, it will be utopia. Cars will only go where they are authorized to go. You will come to love big brother.
 
2014-05-18 04:52:04 AM

Doc Batarang: robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.

Oh man, you know what I just thought of? Everybody is gonna hate this: certain manufacturers of self-driving cars will lobby the government to allow their cars preferential speeds and priority access when using the self-driving car network. Then, there will be a bunch of monthly costs associated with continuing priority functionality by subscription or eternal credit card autopay.

The same as it ever was.


I'll be dead by then. So bring it on.
 
2014-05-18 04:54:25 AM

Triumph: robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.

No, it will be utopia. Cars will only go where they are authorized to go. You will come to love big brother.


"Hal, open the garage bay doors."

"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
 
2014-05-18 05:04:08 AM
"I'll convert your car into a self-driver -- for only $39,999.95"

img4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-05-18 06:29:37 AM

robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.


It'll be a great day. You won't be speeding, running into me because you were texting, tailgating me, running red lights, running into me when drunk or any of that shiat. And we'll all just be able to get into the car and say "take me to ....." and be done with it.

And there will still be human-driven cars, but maybe Americans will have to actually take a driving class that consists of more than proving their identity and forking over cash.
 
2014-05-18 06:30:09 AM
Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights. About the only way they could kill someone would be if the other guy ran in front of them.  Robot cars represent a serious threat to police department incomes.

Although I expect them to only be leased, and completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them. And if I could afford one I'd look at taking a city job again, where that frustrating 80 minute commute (that would only take 25 if they'd close that one farking onramp) could be spent working. Or better, sleeping.
 
2014-05-18 07:13:05 AM

wildcardjack: Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights.


What the fark are you smoking and why aren't you sharing with the rest of us?
 
2014-05-18 07:24:57 AM

robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.

I'll trust a computer over 99% of the drivers today.  Traffic will also be far more efficient as a robot's less likely to stop and seal off an entire lane during rush hour because it waited until there was less than 50 yards left to make a lane change.  Frankly, I'd love to be able to get in the "driver's" seat of a car, tell the thing where to go, and catch a quick nap.

Buuut I don't see this going anywhere as consumer advocacy groups will lobby for an "emergency override", and they'll have a point, end result being every person who has no business owning a license will use the override to drive their own way and we're right back to the Nash equilibrium all over again.  Despite relying on cars like no other, I ironically can't think of nation that deserves them less.
 
2014-05-18 07:30:38 AM
Eh - human drivers are really, really bad at driving though.  So even if robot cars have accidents and people die, a lot fewer will die.  But yeah - stupid lawsuits could potentially squash the robots cars - thankfully companies like Google have been investing/bribing the hell out of politicians to make sure it doesn't happen.

Reality is sad
 
2014-05-18 07:44:29 AM

dragonchild: Traffic will also be far more efficient as a robot's less likely to stop and seal off an entire lane during rush hour because it waited until there was less than 50 yards left to make a lane change.


Actually, the autonomous cars would use that lane until it ended and merge more efficiently.

People who see a lane closure a quarter mile ahead and immediately merge into the other lanes really can fark things up.

Consider when a lane ends past an intersection.  You have a choice of 3 lanes of cars going through the intersection or just 2 even though the 3rd lane is still available but empty because everyone thought they should merge early.  Anyone who wants to turn left and would normally be able to is now stuck in the long line of cars just adding to the congestion whereas if all 3 lanes are used they could reach a left turn lane and get the hell out of everyone else's way.
 
2014-05-18 07:50:52 AM
So we'll look at the 5 or 6 people killed per year and see if any software improvements can be made.

Which is better than 35,000 data points to look into.
 
2014-05-18 07:51:38 AM
Legally it would be the driver who's responsible.
Until the self driving car becomes seen as a reliable thing, you are the one using automation to do the work for you so you are responsible for not hitting the big red stop button when things go wrong.

/Its like asking what happens if your car rear ends someone on cruise control.
/unless you can prove the car ignored commands to stop, its all on you.
 
2014-05-18 08:03:15 AM

robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.


It will be a sad day when automatic headlights are mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when self-canceling turn signals are mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when liability insurance is mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when license plates are mandated by law.

You're gonna have to provide the reasoning behind your statement, so we can debate the merits vis-à-via the benefits of eliminating human drivers, as there are obviously points on both sides.
 
2014-05-18 08:04:28 AM

gfid: Actually, the autonomous cars would use that lane until it ended and merge more efficiently. People who see a lane closure a quarter mile ahead and immediately merge into the other lanes really can fark things up.

It's almost cute how well you think honor systems work out among strangers.  Why do you think people merge early, because they enjoy congestion?
 
2014-05-18 08:52:04 AM

wildcardjack: completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them.


I cannot imagine why.

dailypicksandflicks.com
 
2014-05-18 08:59:13 AM
eliminating people and their poor judgement would increase efficiency so much
 
2014-05-18 09:04:06 AM

gfid: dragonchild: Traffic will also be far more efficient as a robot's less likely to stop and seal off an entire lane during rush hour because it waited until there was less than 50 yards left to make a lane change.

Actually, the autonomous cars would use that lane until it ended and merge more efficiently.


I don't think this would be any more efficient. If there is traffic, then the bottleneck is going to be after that lane closes regardless of whether you spend more time in it. At best, your automatic car is a sociopath and willing to slow down everyone else to get ahead a little bit, at worst it sits in the exit lane waiting to merge out while people who actually want to exit get stuck behind them.
 
2014-05-18 09:09:22 AM
What a driver-less dump truck might look like.

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/04/10/garbage-truck-ghost-riders-video/
 
2014-05-18 09:16:55 AM

profplump: robohobo: It'll be a sad day when self-driving cars are mandated by law. Cause that's absolutely where this is headed.

It will be a sad day when automatic headlights are mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when self-canceling turn signals are mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when liability insurance is mandated by law.
It will be a sad day when license plates are mandated by law.

You're gonna have to provide the reasoning behind your statement, so we can debate the merits vis-à-via the benefits of eliminating human drivers, as there are obviously points on both sides.


None of those things take physical control of the vehicle you are responsible for away from you.
 
2014-05-18 09:18:49 AM
/everywhere you go it will be like riding a Scrambler whose cars aren't' connected to each other.
//Efficiency is buttpuckering
 
2014-05-18 09:28:58 AM
With a self-driving car, I won't need to be a designated driver. Plus, if there is no parking, I can send it home and have it pick me up when I call it. It will be like having a chauffeur that I don't have to talk to.

And for families, you could have it drop the husband at work, go home, drive the wife to work, then (if necessary) take the kids to school or ballet lessons or whatever. If a family has two or three vehicles at present, they might be able to get rid of one of them, and it certainly would save valuable sleeping time.
 
2014-05-18 09:39:16 AM
Lawsuits in sue happy US won't stop self driving cars. The US market is big but the world market is bigger. They'll just go to countries where they are legal. And people in the US will be pissed about their terrible commutes in heavy stop and go traffic while people in developing nations zip around without a care in the world. Most of Africa is already way ahead of us in the mobile payment space and has been for years. This will just be another case of "change bad" biting what is perceived internally as the greatest nation that  ever existed. Or much more likely... once the Baby Boomers get to an age where they have a hard time driving, the laws will change to suit them, which will mean heavily in favor of self driving cars. Might be the first time their self centeredness has a positive outcome.
 
2014-05-18 09:55:57 AM
There'll still be places to go if you want to drive a vintage car. Private tracks, road parks, whatever. Just like you can still ride a horse, if you're so inclined. Just not on the freeway.
 
2014-05-18 10:05:44 AM
Cars don't kill people, people kill people.


silly sociaizizatss!!
 
2014-05-18 10:08:38 AM
self-driving cars are only as good as the road system they're on

and most of the road system in America is pretty shoddy

i mean, yeah sure... interestate traffic could be very easily automated, but beyond that? haha good luck on back roads
 
2014-05-18 11:33:49 AM
Expect an insurance discount on driverless cars, the same way that city buses have no insurance. You have to sue and wait. As they are classified as terrain drones, the military will need to stop and inspect them at any time, in case that evil guy from the new 24 tv series can control them, too, even though Jack Bauer's doing his best.
 
2014-05-18 12:35:34 PM
The car that killed someone should be arrested by cop cars, taken to car court, judged by a jury of its car peers, and sentenced for (at least) cruelty to humans if found guilty. That's a 1-5 year sentence in car prison.
 
2014-05-18 12:38:53 PM

Destructor: The car that killed someone should be arrested by cop cars, taken to car court, judged by a jury of its car peers, and sentenced for (at least) cruelty to humans if found guilty. That's a 1-5 year sentence in car prison.


That's like 5-25 in car years.
 
2014-05-18 01:30:37 PM
What could possibly go wrong?

i.telegraph.co.uk
 
2014-05-18 02:03:56 PM
BitwiseShift: Expect an insurance discount on driverless cars, the same way that city buses have no insurance. You have to sue and wait. As they are classified as terrain drones, the military will need to stop and inspect them at any time, in case that evil guy from the new 24 tv series can control them, too, even though Jack Bauer's doing his best.

Google's already talked about how they'll be subsidized greatly by tracking everywhere you and how long you stay there. Then using that information to sell targeted ads to you in the vehicle. But the biggest cash cow is the sale of your all your tracking information.
 
2014-05-18 02:58:40 PM
They're probably going to need a combination of manual overrides and some sort of kill switch located at various points in the vehicle. Might be a good idea to have a prominently featured "yank it to kill the engine and apply full brake pressure" style rope running the length of the car, just in case the occupant can't make it to the "drivers" seat

//that being said, i give it 20 minutes before someone uses it to try a handbrake turn at speed...
 
2014-05-18 05:13:28 PM
As long as I have access to my uncle's red Barchetta, I'm ok with this.
 
2014-05-18 06:30:14 PM

wildcardjack: Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights. About the only way they could kill someone would be if the other guy ran in front of them.  Robot cars represent a serious threat to police department incomes.

Although I expect them to only be leased, and completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them. And if I could afford one I'd look at taking a city job again, where that frustrating 80 minute commute (that would only take 25 if they'd close that one farking onramp) could be spent working. Or better, sleeping.


Pretty much this and thats why it will never happen in the next 30yrs. Law enforcement just makes too much money from traffic stops, racial profiling and general non-crime solving asshattery.
 
2014-05-18 07:22:42 PM

Elzar: wildcardjack: Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights. About the only way they could kill someone would be if the other guy ran in front of them.  Robot cars represent a serious threat to police department incomes.

Although I expect them to only be leased, and completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them. And if I could afford one I'd look at taking a city job again, where that frustrating 80 minute commute (that would only take 25 if they'd close that one farking onramp) could be spent working. Or better, sleeping.

Pretty much this and thats why it will never happen in the next 30yrs. Law enforcement just makes too much money from traffic stops, racial profiling and general non-crime solving asshattery.


Ahh, just imagine a world in which the police use crime prevention as a metric rather than fund raising. No more DMV's. Vehicle insurance growing negligible. Hours of our day otherwise spent behind the wheel suddenly taken back. An entire aspect of our lives becomes irrelevant as the process is abstracted to a computer process. A lot of people think little of it, but it will be one of the most significant changes in our society since mass media. Any nation which can fully convert to such a system stands to reap almost unbelievable social and economic benefits.  Just think about it, imagine a world where you arrive to your workplace having  already read Fark. Hours of productivity gained.
 
2014-05-18 07:26:50 PM

Mytch: Elzar: wildcardjack: Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights. About the only way they could kill someone would be if the other guy ran in front of them.  Robot cars represent a serious threat to police department incomes.

Although I expect them to only be leased, and completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them. And if I could afford one I'd look at taking a city job again, where that frustrating 80 minute commute (that would only take 25 if they'd close that one farking onramp) could be spent working. Or better, sleeping.

Pretty much this and thats why it will never happen in the next 30yrs. Law enforcement just makes too much money from traffic stops, racial profiling and general non-crime solving asshattery.

Ahh, just imagine a world in which the police use crime prevention as a metric rather than fund raising. No more DMV's. Vehicle insurance growing negligible. Hours of our day otherwise spent behind the wheel suddenly taken back. An entire aspect of our lives becomes irrelevant as the process is abstracted to a computer process. A lot of people think little of it, but it will be one of the most significant changes in our society since mass media. Any nation which can fully convert to such a system stands to reap almost unbelievable social and economic benefits.  Just think about it, imagine a world where you arrive to your workplace having  already read Fark. Hours of productivity gained.


Plus, you could make out with your girlfriend in the back seat as the car drove around.
 
2014-05-18 10:05:02 PM

Snarfangel: Mytch: Elzar: wildcardjack: Ummm, robot drivers don't speed or run lights. About the only way they could kill someone would be if the other guy ran in front of them.  Robot cars represent a serious threat to police department incomes.

Although I expect them to only be leased, and completely "NUSP" like a Macbook. The companies will not want any maintenance done under a shade tree to reflect on them. And if I could afford one I'd look at taking a city job again, where that frustrating 80 minute commute (that would only take 25 if they'd close that one farking onramp) could be spent working. Or better, sleeping.

Pretty much this and thats why it will never happen in the next 30yrs. Law enforcement just makes too much money from traffic stops, racial profiling and general non-crime solving asshattery.

Ahh, just imagine a world in which the police use crime prevention as a metric rather than fund raising. No more DMV's. Vehicle insurance growing negligible. Hours of our day otherwise spent behind the wheel suddenly taken back. An entire aspect of our lives becomes irrelevant as the process is abstracted to a computer process. A lot of people think little of it, but it will be one of the most significant changes in our society since mass media. Any nation which can fully convert to such a system stands to reap almost unbelievable social and economic benefits.  Just think about it, imagine a world where you arrive to your workplace having  already read Fark. Hours of productivity gained.

Plus, you could make out with your girlfriend in the back seat as the car drove around.


Ok, I was all against it until this statement. Go Auto-bots!
 
2014-05-18 11:27:18 PM

Snarfangel: Plus, you could make out with your girlfriend in the back seat as the car drove around.


I have never been an early adopter, but shiat! I have GOT to get me one of THESE!

(sex in public spaces was always kinda hot)
 
2014-05-19 12:06:42 AM

BitwiseShift: Expect an insurance discount on driverless cars,


Expect the cost of insuring a human-operated car to skyrocket. The government won't have to outlaw human-operated cars, they will be to expensive to insure.

Meanwhile crash rates will fall to a near-negligible amount, but we'll be stuck paying the same insurance rates. Because who has more sway in DC and at the state capitols, citizens or insurance lobbyists?
 
2014-05-19 09:33:05 AM
Any autopilot for cars is going to have to start on roads on which there are human drivers.  That's going to be the state of afairs for a good long time after.  That means that all of the real time savings from having cars and the roadway communicate with each other won't happen for a good long time as well.

Can't wait for that day.  I won't do the commute from Long Island to NJ without my GPS.  Now that the summer is starting it's not unusual to see multiple major roads go tits up all at once.  When it gets really bad, I actually have to divert on to local roads in the Bronx and upper Manhattan.
 
2014-05-19 12:19:54 PM
Unlike humans, Google cars can text and drive at the same time.
 
2014-05-19 03:22:04 PM

Krieghund: Expect the cost of insuring a human-operated car to skyrocket. The government won't have to outlaw human-operated cars, they will be to expensive to insure.

Meanwhile crash rates will fall to a near-negligible amount, but we'll be stuck paying the same insurance rates. Because who has more sway in DC and at the state capitols, citizens or insurance lobbyists?


I expect the opposite - substantial discount for self-driving cars, but current human rates will remain stable until human driving experience drops enough that 'everybody' ends up in the teen group due to sheer inexperience.

There's sufficient competition in insurance companies to keep rates reasonable.

Heck, I half predict that sellers of self-driving cars will provide at least the liability insurance.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report