Google Car Hits Bus.

kneemos

It's hit loads of stuff I've discovered while searching for a link.Thought these things were meant to be so safe we'd all be driving them in ten years?

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-selfdrivingcar-idUSKCN0W22DG&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwit8J-muJ7LAhUKLSYKHc9XAzIQFggqMAM&usg=AFQjCNFr2WltxT9MJeTXxGl0Ad-134acdA

KwackerJack

kneemos wrote: »

It's hit loads of stuff I've discovered while searching for a link.Thought these things were meant to be so safe we'd all be driving them in ten years?

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-selfdrivingcar-idUSKCN0W22DG&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwit8J-muJ7LAhUKLSYKHc9XAzIQFggqMAM&usg=AFQjCNFr2WltxT9MJeTXxGl0Ad-134acdA

It's obvious it was a female programmer..............cough!

kneemos

Seems there are hundreds of cases of disengagement by the computers and handing over control to a person.Mostly software problems but also cases of potential crashes.
They want to be driving,or sitting in these things by 2020 apparently. https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/13/10759424/google-self-driving-car-accidents-driver-disengagements&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwj81avvu57LAhVIbSYKHTStDd8QFggbMAA&usg=AFQjCNHx9qwpzqfyOtU8kF9zHbngiUf5bw

moc moc a moc

kneemos wrote: »

Thought these things were meant to be so safe we'd all be driving them in ten years?

It doesn't have to be safe, it just has to be safer than human drivers.

Overheal

kneemos wrote: »

It's hit loads of stuff I've discovered while searching for a link.Thought these things were meant to be so safe we'd all be driving them in ten years?

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-selfdrivingcar-idUSKCN0W22DG&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwit8J-muJ7LAhUKLSYKHc9XAzIQFggqMAM&usg=AFQjCNFr2WltxT9MJeTXxGl0Ad-134acdA

your own link says 17 cases (now 18) in excess of 2 million miles of driving. Also that this accident is pretty explanatory, that the software assumed the Bus would yield the right of way which it did not, and that the software will be updated to factor less right of way to heavy vehicles.

Obviously no fatalities have occurred. The US average is 1.5 fatalities per 100 million miles of driving. There is insufficient data to determine if they are safer than human drivers yet.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/29/crash-data-for-self-driving-cars-may-not-tell-whole-story.html

kneemos

Overheal wrote: »

your own link says 17 cases (now 18) in excess of 2 million miles of driving. Also that this accident is pretty explanatory, that the software assumed the Bus would yield the right of way which it did not, and that the software will be updated to factor less right of way to heavy vehicles.

Obviously no fatalities have occurred. The US average is 1.5 fatalities per 100 million miles of driving. There is insufficient data to determine if they are safer than human drivers yet.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/29/crash-data-for-self-driving-cars-may-not-tell-whole-story.html

It'll need to be a hell of a lot safer than human drivers if it's to be trusted.
IMO they're doomed to failure as the first case of one of them driving its occupants under a bus will destroy its credibility.

Sonics2k

kneemos wrote: »

It'll need to be a hell of a lot safer than human drivers if it's to be trusted.
IMO they're doomed to failure as the first case of one of them driving its occupants under a bus will destroy its credibility.

To be fair, the cars have done some two million miles of travel and out of 17 accidents, the driver of the other vehicle has been at fault. The 18th was a minor case were it presumed the bus would yield to allow the car in front.

Buona Fortuna

Well they've still got to be safer than someone driving themselves home after a night on the lash.

kneemos

Sonics2k wrote: »

To be fair, the cars have done some two million miles of travel and out of 17 accidents, the driver of the other vehicle has been at fault. The 18th was a minor case were it presumed the bus would yield to allow the car in front.

https://youtu.be/7Y4e7wjBVes
Here's one hitting a Goat.

BattleCorp

Anybody who thinks we won't have driverless cars in the future is away with the fairies. It's going to happen. Maybe not 2020, but it will happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.

Cosmo K

Can't wait for driverless taxis!

Buona Fortuna

BattleCorp wrote: »

Anybody who thinks we won't have driverless cars in the future is away with the fairies. It's going to happen. Maybe not 2020, but it will happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.

Do you have some sort of divine promise?

You are probably right about driverless cars coming eventually but ....

kneemos

kneemos wrote: »

https://youtu.be/7Y4e7wjBVes
Here's one hitting a Goat.

Oops that was a dog Here's a Donkey. http://news.yahoo.com/did-googles-streetview-car-run-over-donkey-194243893.html;_ylt=A9mSs2pRTtVWaHsAa5pB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTByaW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--

kneemos

kneemos wrote: »

Oops that was a dog Here's a Donkey. http://news.yahoo.com/did-googles-streetview-car-run-over-donkey-194243893.html;_ylt=A9mSs2pRTtVWaHsAa5pB4iA5;_ylu=X3oDMTByaW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--

These are Streetview cars.My bad.

Guy:Incognito

kneemos wrote: »

https://youtu.be/7Y4e7wjBVes
Here's one hitting a Goat.

Is that not the (manned) streetview car? And it doesnt look to have hit it, it stops to let it up.And its a donkey.

seamus

kneemos wrote: »

It'll need to be a hell of a lot safer than human drivers if it's to be trusted.
IMO they're doomed to failure as the first case of one of them driving its occupants under a bus will destroy its credibility.

You can't spoof the figures. When the cost of insuring your self-drive car is a tenth of full insurance, a couple of deaths per year worldwide won't put people off.

Anyway, most people won't actually own driverless cars. The model will mostly skip private ownership and jump straight to on-demand vehicles. Taxis in effect, but far more available, way cheaper and no sh1te talk about the economy.

BattleCorp

seamus wrote: »

Anyway, most people won't actually own driverless cars. The model will mostly skip private ownership and jump straight to on-demand vehicles. Taxis in effect, but far more available, way cheaper and no sh1te talk about the economy.

Awwwwwwwwwwwwww. If there are no more taxi drivers, where will I get my fill of casual racism?

Cee-Jay-Cee

BattleCorp wrote: »

Anybody who thinks we won't have driverless cars in the future is away with the fairies. It's going to happen. Maybe not 2020, but it will happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.

So taking the average lifespan of a person is around 75 years, that makes you about 5 years old right now. Does your mammy know your on the Internet?

I can safely say without hesitation, I will never own or be a passenger in a driverless car. I don't even like automatic cars!

murpho999

Funny that a system that is still in its infancy and being tested is deemed a failure after a 2mph collision whist people have more faith in humans who cause the death of a million people plus per year.

Autonomous cars are coming, just a matter of time and fine tuning.

murpho999

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

So taking the average lifespan of a person is around 75 years, that makes you about 5 years old right now. Does your mammy know your on the Internet?

I can safely say without hesitation, I will never own or be a passenger in a driverless car. I don't even like automatic cars!

So following your logic you never get on a plane then?

seamus

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

So taking the average lifespan of a person is around 75 years, that makes you about 5 years old right now. Does your mammy know your on the Internet?

I can safely say without hesitation, I will never own or be a passenger in a driverless car. I don't even like automatic cars!

This isn't the 1960s, where people are fantasising about colonies on the moon and flying cars to get to work.

Driverless cars exist. Right now. They're being used. Right now. You will see them on Irish roads, in actual commercial or private use in the next decade. After that, full scale adoption will be swift. I've said it here before, but there's a good chance that the next car you buy may be the last.

BattleCorp

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

So taking the average lifespan of a person is around 75 years, that makes you about 5 years old right now. Does your mammy know your on the Internet?

I'm throwing on my psychic hat here and predicting I'll live to be about 72. I'm more than half way there so I expect driverless cars to be commonplace in the next 20 - 30 years if not sooner.

I can safely say without hesitation, I will never own or be a passenger in a driverless car. I don't even like automatic cars!

I'm sure there will still be driver operated cars in your lifetime but I reckon they will be phased out eventually.

As technology improves, they will eventually be shown to be safer than driver operated cars so I'd have no problem with a driverless car.

And if it means that I can get an extra bit of kip during my 3 hour daily commute, I'm all for that.

OldGoat

BattleCorp wrote: »

Awwwwwwwwwwwwww. If there are no more taxi drivers, where will I get my fill of casual racism?

Have no fear, each car will come fitted with GPP - Genuine People Personalities.

/Doffs hat to Mr. Douglas Adams

BattleCorp

OldGoat wrote: »

Have no fear, each car will come fitted with GPP - Genuine People Personalities.

/Doffs hat to Mr. Douglas Adams

I won't feel relaxed in an autonomous taxi unless I hear the words "fcukin Nigerians" at least once every five minutes. :pac:

Will the GPP have Stephen Hawking's voice? I'm imagining what it sounds like when he says "fcukin Nigerians"?

cowboyBuilder

BattleCorp wrote: »

I won't feel relaxed in an autonomous taxi unless I hear the words "fcukin Nigerians" at least once every five minutes. :pac:

Will the GPP have Stephen Hawking's voice? I'm imagining what it sounds like when he says "fcukin Nigerians"?

http://tinyurl.com/huaxtf8

:P:P

Sh1tbag OToole

BattleCorp wrote: »

I'm throwing on my psychic hat here and predicting I'll live to be about 72. I'm more than half way there so I expect driverless cars to be commonplace in the next 20 - 30 years if not sooner.



I'm sure there will still be driver operated cars in your lifetime but I reckon they will be phased out eventually.

As technology improves, they will eventually be shown to be safer than driver operated cars so I'd have no problem with a driverless car.

And if it means that I can get an extra bit of kip during my 3 hour daily commute, I'm all for that.

You'll have no commute, your job will most likely be phased out too

BattleCorp

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

You'll have no commute, your job will most likely be phased out too

I work in Health & Safety. I'd say autonomous transport will be available before my job will be taken over by robots.

V_Moth

I don't think the majority of the public have realised just how revolunitary these cars can be potentially be. Some of the many potential benefits:

-Lower weight cars using less fuel = less pollution.
-Lower weight vehicles = less wear & tear on roads = lower road maintenance costs.
-Fewer accidents = lower hospital visits = lower healthcare costs to society. Less taxes (potentially).
-Higher levels of access to people with health issues = easier access to doctors/nurses/hospitals.
-Able to enjoy evening out with friends + not worrying about alcohol. I mean publicans should be shouting from the rooftops about these cars!
-Fewer/no issues with city centre parking if on-demand vehicles = less pollution in cities making them nicer places to be.
-Less road construction needed. More focus on cycleways + public transport (potentially/never in IRL).

There are more once you start analysing it.

Ken.

I was all for driverless cars till Jeremy Clarkson spoke about them on top gear. He said "At some stage your car will make a conscience decision to kill you. Imagine the scenario. Your driverless car is heading towards a group of people. If it hits them loads will die but you'll live. If the car diverts its course it'll hit a wall and you'll die. The car will take the option that causes the least damage and your screwed"

That's not word for word but as close as I remember.

storker

Cosmo K wrote: »

Can't wait for driverless taxis!

They'll put a speaking computer in to give out about other drivers, pronounce the solutions to the world's ills, and moan about how bad business is.

storker

seamus wrote: »

I've said it here before, but there's a good chance that the next car you buy may be the last.

Won't they still require owners?

Sam Kade

BattleCorp wrote: »

Anybody who thinks we won't have driverless cars in the future is away with the fairies. It's going to happen. Maybe not 2020, but it will happen in my lifetime, that's for sure.

They were saying the same 30 years ago.

Sam Kade

kneemos wrote: »

It's hit loads of stuff I've discovered while searching for a link.Thought these things were meant to be so safe we'd all be driving them in ten years?

https://www.google.ie/url?q=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-selfdrivingcar-idUSKCN0W22DG&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwit8J-muJ7LAhUKLSYKHc9XAzIQFggqMAM&usg=AFQjCNFr2WltxT9MJeTXxGl0Ad-134acdA

How would you drive a driverless car?

cowboyBuilder

ken wrote: »

I was all for driverless cars till Jeremy Clarkson spoke about them on top gear. He said "At some stage your car will make a conscience decision to kill you. Imagine the scenario. Your driverless car is heading towards a group of people. If it hits them loads will die but you'll live. If the car diverts its course it'll hit a wall and you'll die. The car will take the option that causes the least damage and your screwed"

That's not word for word but as close as I remember.

Well if that idiot Jeremy Clarkson says so, it must be true ..

SEPT 23 1989

between this and the cashless society the control governments will have on people is frightening and its something i hope i wont be alive to see in full effect

its my children i feel sorry for but they wont know any different

seamus

storker wrote: »

Won't they still require owners?

Yes, but if the car is completely autonomous, it removes a lot of stumbling blocks. In essence the reason private vehicles exist is convenience. The convenience of having a vehicle available for use, 24/7.

What if you had a taxi service that you could call and there would be a taxi there within five minutes, day or night, any time of the year? You wouldn't really need your own car.

You can't, right? Because it would mean having lots of drivers sitting in vehicles waiting for calls, with lots of downtime. But autonomous vehicles don't have drivers. They mean you can use your vehicle fleet more efficiently - you can have all of your vehicles on standby, 24/7.

How many times do you run out the door with zero notice? I'd say once or twice a year. So if you can press a button on an app, and five minutes later there is a vehicle ready and waiting to take you to your destination, that's practically all of your journeys covered.

That just can't be achieved with private vehicles or taxi services. Does that sound a little less convenient than having your own car outside your door? Yep.

However, when you consider the cost of your own vehicle - cash price + yearly insurance + fuel + maintenance - then the deciding factor between having it outside your door and having it five minutes away is merely a matter of price.

Think about how much you spend on fuel, maintenance and insurance. Now imagine you are signed up to an autonomous vehicle service that charges you €80/month, all-in. Clean, serviced, working cars available on request and at your door in five minutes, guaranteed.

Would you really rather spend €15k upfront and €200/month for the convenience of those extra five minutes? Most people won't. They will adapt.

ken wrote: »

I was all for driverless cars till Jeremy Clarkson spoke about them on top gear. He said "At some stage your car will make a conscience decision to kill you. Imagine the scenario. Your driverless car is heading towards a group of people. If it hits them loads will die but you'll live. If the car diverts its course it'll hit a wall and you'll die. The car will take the option that causes the least damage and your screwed"

That's not word for word but as close as I remember.

Autonomous cars won't get themselves into that situation because they won't drive like Jeremy Clarkson. How many times have you been in a scenario where it's a choice between hitting a group of people in the middle of the road, or a brick wall? Never. So why would autonomous vehicles be getting into these scenarios all the time?

Jeremy's good with the jokes, not so good with the thinking.

andekwarhola

murpho999 wrote: »

Funny that a system that is still in its infancy and being tested is deemed a failure after a 2mph collision whist people have more faith in humans who cause the death of a million people plus per year.

Autonomous cars are coming, just a matter of time and fine tuning.

One thing I was thinking was that the possibility of error will probably decrease as less and less human drivers are on the roads.

Anybody that drives daily surely can't believe that automated cars can be any worse than some of the crazy, incompetent bastards currently on the roads.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Does anyone here have a passion for cars and driving? If so what are your thoughts on self driving vehicles?

BattleCorp

Sam Kade wrote: »

They were saying the same 30 years ago.

The technology for them wasn't around 30 years ago. It is around now. Google cars have driven over two million miles so far.

The technology is here and it's only going to improve. These cars are here to stay.

murpho999

ken wrote: »

I was all for driverless cars till Jeremy Clarkson spoke about them on top gear. He said "At some stage your car will make a conscience decision to kill you. Imagine the scenario. Your driverless car is heading towards a group of people. If it hits them loads will die but you'll live. If the car diverts its course it'll hit a wall and you'll die. The car will take the option that causes the least damage and your screwed"

That's not word for word but as close as I remember.

What would Clarkson know about it?

Why would a driver-less car be driving towards a group of people?

Planes fly mostly automatically and have been flown into buildings by people not computers.

UrbanSprawl

Reboot,Reboot,Does not compute!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn4cxLaTZhY

andekwarhola

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Does anyone here have a passion for cars and driving? If so what are your thoughts on self driving vehicles?

Yeah, I really enjoy driving.

But not as much as I'd enjoy safer roads, being driven home from the pub and lower driving costs.

Dr. Mantis Toboggan

Buona Fortuna wrote: »

Well they've still got to be safer than someone driving themselves home after a night on the lash.

That's the dream. Hopping into the car after drinking fifteen pints and eating a snack box on the way home.

What a time to be alive!

The Backwards Man

BattleCorp wrote: »

The technology for them wasn't around 30 years ago. It is around now. Google cars have driven over two million miles so far.

The technology is here and it's only going to improve. These cars are here to stay.

Two million miles in testing. Where the car is in pristine condition, the maps and GPS data are fully up to date and the roads are exactly how they should be.

I have no doubt there will be autonomous vehicles on high volume corridors sometime in the future, but I can't see the infrastructure and the hardware catching up with the technology on a widespread basis any time soon

BattleCorp

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Two million miles in testing. Where the car is in pristine condition, the maps and GPS data are fully up to date and the roads are exactly how they should be.

I have no doubt there will be autonomous vehicles on high volume corridors sometime in the future, but I can't see the infrastructure and the hardware catching up with the technology on a widespread basis any time soon

The technology is in its infancy but it will improve and autonomous vehicles will become more reliable and adaptable.

The only unknown really is the definition of 'any time soon'. I'm guessing there will be a lot of improvements in the next 10 years and they will probably become widespread in the next 20 - 30 years.

eeguy

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Two million miles in testing. Where the car is in pristine condition, the maps and GPS data are fully up to date and the roads are exactly how they should be.

I have no doubt there will be autonomous vehicles on high volume corridors sometime in the future, but I can't see the infrastructure and the hardware catching up with the technology on a widespread basis any time soon

An unproven, barely tested prototype technology has a single crash where it wasn't 100% at fault.
You can buy a car today that can drive barely assisted on a motorway.

20 years is a long LONG time in tech terms. Remember 1996? Brick size mobile phones, no laptops, dial up internet if you were lucky, hardly anyone had a computer. People actually owned a personal phone book.

Who could have predicted then what we have now?
Who now can predict what 2036 will be like?

BattleCorp

eeguy wrote: »

20 years is a long LONG time in tech terms. Remember 1996? Brick size mobile phones, no laptops, dial up internet if you were lucky, hardly anyone had a computer. People actually owned a personal phone book.

Ha ha. Internet without wires, no chance. I'm saying it now, it will never happen. :pac:

seamus

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Two million miles in testing. Where the car is in pristine condition, the maps and GPS data are fully up to date and the roads are exactly how they should be.

I have no doubt there will be autonomous vehicles on high volume corridors sometime in the future, but I can't see the infrastructure and the hardware catching up with the technology on a widespread basis any time soon

Accurate mapping isn't that important really, it's used for navigation rather than real-time steering. GPS maps out what's happening, but the steering and decision making is handled in real-time. Software can handle road closures, layout changes, sign changes, etc.

I've heard a lot of that, "it can only drive in perfect conditions" stuff going around, but that's actually pretty short-sighted. The kind of issues faced by inclement conditions can be overcome in a matter of months and a year or two, rather than a decade or two.

Unlike 1986, we're at a point now where the technologies have all sufficiently converged to make the entire thing viable.

Here's a good video on it. Skip to 7:45*, this is where you will see how the vehicles process data and react to actual stimuli in real time: https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_urmson_how_a_driverless_car_sees_the_road?language=en

Or, if you just want a short GIF: http://imgur.com/AsdcLec

These things are way, way further along than many people seem to be aware. They're not just glorified trains following a GPS trace down the road. They are actually self-driving.

And the rate at which they "learn" to drive is exponential because they share the data between all vehicles. Imagine if your driving experience didn't just consist of the mileage that you do, but all of the accumulated mileage and experienced that your friends and family have too. You'd literally be ten times the driver you are now.

Perhaps it's because they've been talked about since the 1960s that people are skeptical, but I think everyone seems unaware of how advanced the technology actually is now. It's not some ridiculous grey box rolling around a test track in Nevada. They're actual production vehicles driving around real streets in real conditions. And not getting into accidents.

*Though if you have the time, the first 7 minutes discusses why going from "manual drive" to "driver assist" to "automated drive" doesn't work in real terms and won't happen in any major way.

eeguy

There's also a misconception that they'll need well marked defined roads to operate.

Here's the 2007 DARPA challenge, done on dirt roads: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2AcMnfzpNg

Those cars did very well and that was 9 years ago. Ten versions of the iPhone have been released since then.

Sam Kade

BattleCorp wrote: »

The technology for them wasn't around 30 years ago. It is around now. Google cars have driven over two million miles so far.

The technology is here and it's only going to improve. These cars are here to stay.

FFS, there was a robot tractor ploughing at the ploughing championships in cork in 1977 not many of them around yet.

AnonoBoy

Was the bus asking for it?