|
I can understand why folk (including me) like driving - for a post war generation it is the enabler of independence, control, freedom, etc.
Autonomous cars need development before general adoption - time is the only barrier. At some point machines will outperform us humans.
Many will welcome the technology - non-drivers, disabled, elderly, etc. Some who can drive get no enjoyment - it is a chore they will happily relinquish.
A "black box" will inevitably be fitted to autonomous cars. It will increasingly identify human drivers as responsible for accidents. Autonomous will continue to improve - humans have probably reached the limit of development.
At some point (10-20) years only autonomous cars will be sold new . Financial and operational constraints will increase to encourage the transition. Very similar to the process being adopted for the transition to EV.
|
At some point (10-20) years only autonomous cars will be sold new . Financial and operational constraints will increase to encourage the transition. Very similar to the process being adopted for the transition to EV.
I doubt it will be that soon (and even if it were it will be of little interest to me), but I guess the makers and their geeks will continue to pursue this holy grail. On the other hand many people may dislike being prevented from doing things they like, and as the right to object grows, some may even claim an infringement of their civil liberties.
Personally I reckon there are more important problems facing the human race which could do with our urgent attention.
|
At some point (10-20) years only autonomous cars will be sold new . Financial and operational constraints will increase to encourage the transition. Very similar to the process being adopted for the transition to EV.
I doubt it will be that soon (and even if it were it will be of little interest to me), but I guess the makers and their geeks will continue to pursue this holy grail.
Personally I reckon there are more important problems facing the human race which could do with our urgent attention.
Autonomous cars will definitely be on the go within 20 years but probably not for use nationwide and possibly not for an individual to buy for their own use (assuming they wanted to). Fully autonomous taxi's being used within certain area's really aren't that far away.
On the other hand many people may dislike being prevented from doing things they like, and as the right to object grows, some may even claim an infringement of their civil liberties.
That seems a strange argument. How would an autonomous car prevent folk doing what they want to?. Surely if anything the opposite is true. People who can't drive will suddenly have more freedom offered up to them by not having to rely on bus/train/taxi (granted the taxi doesn't constrain anyone too much as long as there is a local service).
Personally I reckon there are more important problems facing the human race which could do with our urgent attention.
This is of course true, but I'm not sure what you think a computer programmer or engineer working on automous cars would be able to do regarding the climate, poverty, inequality, politics, or whatever if they weren't in their current job?. You could just as easily say car makers shouldn't bother designing any new models as there are more important problems facing the human race than a fancier infotainment system, yet more power, or an even bigger front grill.
Edited by badbusdriver on 31/12/2021 at 10:06
|
|
<< How would an autonomous car prevent folk doing what they want to?. Surely if anything the opposite is true. People who can't drive will suddenly have more freedom offered to them >>
I was interpreting the original suggestion that in 10-20 years time all new cars would be autonomous. Those people who want to be 'in charge' of their vehicle might feel disadvantaged ?
<< You could just as easily say car makers shouldn't bother designing any new models as there are more important problems facing the human race than a fancier infotainment system, yet more power, ... >>
Yes, I could (and would) :-) Makers (as is their nature) will continue to do this to get cash from punters (as is their nature) and to keep their factories going.
|
|
The history of cars in the UK is littered with new policies enforced to protect motorists, pedestrians and the general public.
Some now seem bizarre - walking in front with a red flag (locomotive act 1865) although enacted with the best of intentions at the time. Many would have been resisted - there were no doubt protests about compulsory seat belt wearing, tyre tread depth, imposition of MoT (initially for 10 year old cars) etc etc.
Once government comes to the conclusion that autonomous cars reduce the incidence of deaths and serious injuries, the writing will be firmly on the wall for the end of self-drive. The only questions are when, and the transition process.
|
The history of cars in the UK is littered with new policies enforced to protect motorists, pedestrians and the general public.
Some now seem bizarre - walking in front with a red flag (locomotive act 1865) although enacted with the best of intentions at the time. Many would have been resisted - there were no doubt protests about compulsory seat belt wearing, tyre tread depth, imposition of MoT (initially for 10 year old cars) etc etc.
I remember on an episode of QI, they were talking about how when cars first made it across to the US, there were some truly bizarre requirements of motorists outwith big towns or cities in deference to the horse (if being used as transport). If such a horse was approaching, the motorist would be expected to get right off the road in order to avoid spooking the horse. If this alone did not work, the motorist was expected to 'hide' the car using bushes, branches or whatever. But if this didn't work either and the horse still wouldn't pass, the motorist would be expected to dismantle the car into pieces small enough that the horse would pass!.
Not sure if this actually happened, or if it was just something spoken about without being put into practise. It could be impossible to do follow either of the first two depending on terrain and surrounding vegetation. As for the third, that surely couldn't be workable!.
|
|
This subject was recently covered by Matt Watson on carwow, an interesting view on why autonomous cars are a long, long way off…
|
|
|
|
<< You could just as easily say car makers shouldn't bother designing any new models as there are more important problems facing the human race than a fancier infotainment system, yet more power, ... >>
Yes, I could (and would) :-) Makers (as is their nature) will continue to do this to get cash from punters (as is their nature) and to keep their factories going.
Seems a very odd view - if companies never improved their products we would have cars from over 100 years ago...not sure many people would want that.
I'd love an autonomous car - I do a 2 hour commute...I would rather watch some TV/read a book/do some drawing than sit and drive to work.
|
|
<< Seems a very odd view - if companies never improved their products we would have cars from over 100 years ago...not sure many people would want that. >>
I suggest that not all new models represent any 'improvement' (in the true sense of the word). These days much of it is little more than adding another, possibly useful but probably unasked-for, new gizmo. There will always be a need for changes to allow for new legislation or better safety, but novelty is not necessarily improvement as far as my motoring needs go. Sorry. I don't need to keep up with any Joneses.
|
|
|
|
I'd love an autonomous car - I do a 2 hour commute...I would rather watch some TV/read a book/do some drawing than sit and drive to work.
Surprised at that comment as most people prefer to drive than be driven, ok the area we drive in makes a difference as to scenic or concrete jungle, which imo London is, but luckily I am on the outskirts and most of my drive is scenic within reason.
but then being a back seat driver which I would be as I hate being driven, and would hate an autonomous car, so rather hope we are not forced into one at any time in the future
I would miss all that goes on around me as well however bad drivers can be its all in a days driving to me and would hate for it to be taken away, it keeps the mind working as well which being a backseat driver would take away imo
though I don`t think autonomous capable motors are far away due to more powerful chips and software making its way into cars, probably taxis first then delivery motors before our cars, but should be switchable so you have a choice!
|
|
If autonomous proves to be better (safer) than self drive I expect the government will rapidly remove most controls to avoid folk like us thinking we can do a better job and fiddling.
However there may be a need for very low speed manoeuvring - eg: put in a postcode, arrive at the address - do I park in the road or drive, tow caravan to caravan site - precisely where do I park the van etc.
Possibly joystick control for speeds of less than (say) 10mph??
|
If autonomous proves to be better (safer) than self drive I expect the government will rapidly remove most controls to avoid folk like us thinking we can do a better job and fiddling.
Historically drivers have been 'persuaded' to wear seat-belts, to drink less, and not to use hand-held phones while driving. Most do, some do whatever they want. For me, putting on a seatbelt is done almost unconsciously, even when the car will move only a few yards.
But I can visualise drivers resisting when their car chooses to do something they wouldn't do. And it won't be the same as seatbelts, booze, or phones - there may be much less choice ?
|
|
Whilst some laws are treated with contempt by some (eg: phone, seatbelts), the continued non-compliance is largely down to a lack of effective enforcement.
The MOT which regulates tyres, emissions, lighting, etc is the government mandating standards. Compliance is not discretionary - no MOT, = no RFL, no insurance, no drive.
The government have, and can in the future, force technology upon us through legislation (like it or not!)
|
|
""But I can visualise drivers resisting when their car chooses to do something they wouldn't do. And it won't be the same as seatbelts, booze, or phones - there may be much less choice ?""
I can just imagine Basil Fawlty thrashing it to an inch of its life!...
|
Whilst some laws are treated with contempt by some (eg: phone, seatbelts), the continued non-compliance is largely down to a lack of effective enforcement.
But the reason for the 'contempt' is that without having a police-state these regulations depend on public compliance, which itself depends on the public accepting that it 'makes sense'. The British public will not accept a police state, at least a communist-style one where everyone is expected to spy on everyone else and report.
I think you might agree that enforcing the use of seatbelts or the non-use of phones is not a practical proposition in this country ? Compliance must be voluntary, and anyone tempted not to comply should desist from playing cops and robbers for enjoyment.
|
|
I agree the law in the UK relies upon compliance and don't want or like to a police state.
But manufacturers will comply with the law. If the law say "fit a joystick and enable functionality at below 10mph", that is precisely what they will do. However much you want to take control, you can't.
Your only choice will be like the transition to EV - continue to drive an increasingly old car sold before the transition date for only new autonomous cars.
It's just a guess but I expect autonomous cars to be mandated for new sale in ~2040, and by ~2050 for all self drive to be banned. By then I will be a few years short of my century so not overly concerned!
|
|
I'd love an autonomous car - I do a 2 hour commute...I would rather watch some TV/read a book/do some drawing than sit and drive to work.
Surprised at that comment as most people prefer to drive than be driven, ok the area we drive in makes a difference as to scenic or concrete jungle, which imo London is, but luckily I am on the outskirts and most of my drive is scenic within reason.
but then being a back seat driver which I would be as I hate being driven, and would hate an autonomous car, so rather hope we are not forced into one at any time in the future
I would miss all that goes on around me as well however bad drivers can be its all in a days driving to me and would hate for it to be taken away, it keeps the mind working as well which being a backseat driver would take away imo
though I don`t think autonomous capable motors are far away due to more powerful chips and software making its way into cars, probably taxis first then delivery motors before our cars, but should be switchable so you have a choice!
I'm not sure most people do prefer to drive than be driven - think the majority would rather be driven than have to do it themselves.
Personally I enjoy driving - but can see a lot of time saved by not having to drive when commuting - you may enjoy a long commute - I'd rather not have to but at the moment that's what I have but if I had the choice to be driven then I'd be happy with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
