What's your opinion on the future of self-driving cars?

[Maf 32,306]

3 hours ago, spiderman1000 said:

If a rat cuts one of the crucial wires or if water goes into the delicate non-waterproof parts of the car, it could lead to fatal malfunctions which could lead to a rampaging 200 Kmph car

For this reason there are systems in place to prevent that kind of malfunction. I'm not an expert on how it works, but I think there's multiple ways to go around this issue:

• Physical limitation of what the computer can do to the car.
  This isn't a perfect solution, as it prevents full autonomy, but it helps ensure that the car won't just suddenly swerve into oncoming traffic on the highway, because the computer is limited by how much it can break, accelerate, and turn, especially at higher speeds.
• System health checks.
  A separate set of sensors is in place to specifically monitor the primary system for errors and anomalies in real-time. If all else fails, an independent system would be in place to take control of the vehicle and safely bring it to a halt. Also, all systems are regularly serviced and checked by professionals.
• Redundant systems.
  If the car's main computer malfunctions, the issue is detected and there is a back-up computer ready to take over instantly.
• High standard of manufacturing.
  For autonomous vehicles, essential systems like the computers and actuators should be installed with physical protection from outside effects. There should be absolutely no possibility of something like a rat or excessive moisture getting into the vital compartments and causing damage. This is pretty easy to ensure, given enough of a budget.

The only real risk of an autonomous car going "rogue" is due to hacking.

[spiderman1000 737]

3 minutes ago, Maf said:

 

1)Physical limitation is not the solution cause even with it you can have a 50 kmph car colliding with its partner a few inches away

2)These sensors are prone to malfunctions as well and i don't think anyone will be interested in taking their car to a professional regularly. that's why 5% of the accidents happen in the present.

3)Like i said, it could malfunction as well. But there is another small yet fatal flaw. If automated cars take over, they'll probably drive close to each other for efficiency. So, by the time the prob will be detected and the backup will take over, the harm will be done.

4)yeah now that one is almost flawless. but still, rats can cut through metals. so the computers will have to be made from something string like titaniumand something rust proof like stainless steel.

But there is a prob. all points from 2-4 will make the cars exceptionally expensive. while it is easy for a company to get a sufficient budget, i don't think the commoners (Middle class to normal high class families) will be able to afford it.

as for the hacking, i think i explained that point in one of my scenarios.

 

PS: this is a good topic.

[Gauss-Hornet 489]

1 hour ago, spiderman1000 said:

rats can cut through metals

I hope we aren't talking about mutant ninja rats here...

[Maf 32,306]

52 minutes ago, spiderman1000 said:

 

I get what you mean, but at one point you just have to do a risk assessment and determine whether the risk of something happening is low enough that you can consider the system safe to use. Nothing is ever 100% safe, but that doesn't mean you should lock yourself in a bunker your whole life just to avoid freak accidents.

Tesla autopilot already has fewer accidents compared to human drivers, despite having relatively limited functionality right now. I assume it will only get better from here.

[spiderman1000 737]

4 hours ago, Gauss-Hornet said:

I hope we aren't talking about mutant ninja rats here...

They chew through such things as plastic, wood, water pipes, lead, wires, wool, leather, books, clothes, asbestos, concrete, metal and even brick! ... For example, rats can only chew through soft metals, like aluminium, but they cannot chew through heavy metals.

 

What can Rats Chew Through? - Wildlife Removal

4 hours ago, Maf said:

I get what you mean, but at one point you just have to do a risk assessment and determine whether the risk of something happening is low enough that you can consider the system safe to use. Nothing is ever 100% safe, but that doesn't mean you should lock yourself in a bunker your whole life just to avoid freak accidents.

Tesla autopilot already has fewer accidents compared to human drivers, despite having relatively limited functionality right now. I assume it will only get better from here.

Agreed. even the laptop we use for tanki can cause a wild fire. Well, a nuke can just accidently end up on the bunker and/or the bunker can collapse. I never said it would be bad. im just pointing out what could possibly go wrong.

[spiderman1000 737]

On 5/5/2020 at 9:49 AM, At_Shin said:

Anybody here seen the new web-series 'Upload'? It has some scary bits about self-driving cars in the near future. In the hidden contents there may be a spoiler for the show so read it at your own risk.

  Reveal hidden contents

In it powerful, rich people could remotely control your car by hacking it's software and cause your 'accidental death'.

 

well, anything can be hacked as long as it is digital. that is why the idea of making and living in a matrix-like digital world is being questioned (it has some more flaws as well).

that gives me an idea. why not make an off topic on this as well.

[spiderman1000 737]

here its ready

 

[Hugoslav 162]

Could be a handy thing for lazy people. A bad thing for car enthusiasts.

[B.A.B.I 643]

It's neat.

[frezeandvik 71]

The electric cars are obviously the future. But self-driving is hard to predict honestly.

[frezeandvik 71]

  

On 2/6/2020 at 9:11 PM, Maf said:

I've been thinking for a while how self-driving (autonomous) vehicles will be integrated into our world, assuming it will happen at all. At the moment the only type of autonomous traffic used on a mass scale is trains, particularly metro trains (Vancouver, Dubai, Singapore...), which run on separate inaccessible tracks and basically just speed up and slow down, stopping at designated stations. This was possible to achieve because there are very few variables to consider, since there is no interaction with human vehicle operators, no edge cases, and nothing that would require human level of decision-making.

With cars it's much more complicated, which is why I don't see driverless cars completely taking over the roads in the near future (within 20 years). Tesla is making significant progress with their publicly available Autopilot system, while companies like Uber and Waymo are developing their fully autonomous navigation systems. But all of them are still very far from achieving full self-driving capability (for reference).

What I think is going to happen instead, is that select cities will start dedicating specific districts to autonomous vehicles. Those could be brand new developments, which integrated autonomy in their design from the start, or refurbished city centres. The way they would adapt is by having things like near-perfect road/sign maintenance, additional barriers to minimise number of pedestrians on roads, special traffic rules, and built-in guidance systems (like beacons) to help guide autonomous cars along the city streets.

That way, autonomous vehicle owners would be driving with normal level 3 automation (like today's Tesla Autopilot) on most roads, but when entering autonomous areas, their vehicle would automatically go into fully autonomous mode.

Drivers of normal vehicles would be restricted access to such zones, and would have to make use of park-and-ride services to get into the zone via autonomous public transport.

Such areas would be experimental at first (like that Singapore cargo dock), and will gradually expand to populated areas, eventually covering the span of cities. I can't wait to see something like this become reality.

As far as places like small town roads and villages - there's too many of them to adapt and maintain them all for autonomous vehicles and it would be too expensive, and there's too many edge cases for autonomous cars to be able to navigate them like a human, so it will be decades before this is achieved, if ever.

 

What do you think with happen?

Okay I wrote my above post before I read the topic. All of what I have to say is you as a human you know how the drive in your country, you know how to treat with everyone. Some are aggressive and you will just give them space to move, and some are kind. In example, in intersections.. I think the Automated car will always give the priority to the other people, but you as a personality maybe not. And how the car will move in traffic congestion, will it be really kind.. Or like some drivers will pass your place forcefully.

In highways in example, you move in left road for the speed sign let's assume 120km, but maybe some cars are moving behind you with high beams and horn.. though you're moving in the systematic speed and the camera is around you if you passed the limit, but you have to go in the right to open the road for him.. Will the Automated car open the road or it will stay systematically (that may cause a real problems for aggressive drivers).

The Automated Cars, wont ever work except if all of the cars are also Automated in the same system (like a uniformed system between companies). If this happened, no crowd will happen in the road, and the cars may pass the speed limits easily and may move in 200km because everything is calculated. If any normal car will enter, all of this system will get ruined.

Also obviously Automated cars will only work in electric cars, because everything is integrated and the car can take the info from everywhere of the car. Normal cars are primitive and only works in too primitive mechanical way You see here's the engine and there's the radiator to not increase the car's heat and here's the brakes and there's the brake pads etc... I think this is complicated and too primitive way, I think there could be a simpler way to do this all. In electric cars you have to charge the car with an amount of time, but if you looked at normal cars you see theoretically you can fill the gasoline in 0s. Because it works with pumping way, you just put the gasoline and the car will use it. I think this is just too primitive. Though me, personally, I like the normal cars way more.

[Maf 32,306]

17 hours ago, frezeandvik said:

  

Since I posted this topic, a lot has happened in the world of autonomy. More specifically, Tesla released the beta version of their FSD software, and a number of users are currently testing it in the streets. I've been watching videos of it and, while it still makes dumb mistakes and has a lot to improve on, some of the behaviour it demonstrates is mind-blowing. At Tesla they created a driving AI, which doesn't just allow the car to understand the environment around it and follow traffic rules, but it constantly assesses the situation and makes decisions that are more akin to humans, rather than a "robot". For example, if there's a vehicle stopped in the road for no reason, it may cross the double yellow line to pass it; or if the road markings are weird and confusing, it might ignore them and take a path that's more logical based on surrounding traffic and overall layout. Very impressive system, and it keeps improving with every new version.

So you raised very valid concerns regarding an autonomous car not being able to adapt to different driving styles and cultures around the world. However, it is possible to create software that's not only adapted to peculiarities of driving in various locations, but actually learns on the go and changes its behaviour based on interactions with other drivers.

That being said, you're completely right that in order to get the highest efficiency out of autonomy, roads must become inaccessible to human-driven cars.

[Benefactor 6,888]

So if you are intoxicated and you get into the backseat of a self-driving car to take you home and you get into an accident with another self-driving car, who is at fault?

[Maf 32,306]

1 hour ago, Benefactor said:

So if you are intoxicated and you get into the backseat of a self-driving car to take you home and you get into an accident with another self-driving car, who is at fault?

If the company that produced your car has regulatory permission to allow their cars to drive autonomously without supervision from a human driver, then the accident will be their responsibility. Your condition shouldn't matter, since you are just a passenger.

[Incorp 2,084]

In my opinion, one day if self driving cars should completely replace normal cars, the cars should be connected to each other like GPS and then like when one of them goes out for a drive, it will plan out its route according to the other cars' route, and then basically calculate when the car will be where so the cars know when to stop to avoid accidents. Might be a bit confusing I'll explain later gotta charge my phone the battery is draining fast....

[Maf 32,306]

2 hours ago, Incorp said:

In my opinion, one day if self driving cars should completely replace normal cars, the cars should be connected to each other like GPS and then like when one of them goes out for a drive, it will plan out its route according to the other cars' route, and then basically calculate when the car will be where so the cars know when to stop to avoid accidents. Might be a bit confusing I'll explain later gotta charge my phone the battery is draining fast....

I get exactly what you mean. If road traffic was interconnected in a single giant network, they could organise themselves to not only avoid collisions, but also manage traffic flow on a large scale to minimise congestion.

[Incorp 2,084]

Yeah thanks for the explanations to the others lol