Gilbert Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) Well it's not AV by my definition, Dave...it's still "just" a driver aid. Let me know when you can type your location into Google maps (or the equivalent), and the car takes you there without any additional input or attention required by the driver. I don't think I'm the only one holding such a strict view on the definition of "autonomy." I'm using the term "driver aid" for what you're referencing, but I'm open to alternatives if you think something would be more descriptive. And if you are stubborn on using "autonomous", then what word should I use for my definition? I hate semantics, but there's clearly a communication breakdown here... Absolutely correct!!! And there are quite a few "Driver Aid's" that, IMHO, serve only to create a generation of complacent morons sitting behind the wheel of 2+ tons of steel. Edited October 22, 2015 by Gilbert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 "If one wants to get silly you can insist that it has to fuel itself, take itself to the garage, and air up its own tires to be truly "autonomous."" That is not autonomous driving, that is autonomous maintenance. To make a comment like that makes me think you're totally misunderstanding my point. Autonomy has very strict definitions in the academic world. It really shouldn't matter what their marketing team calls it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 Actually, Tesla says it's not an autonomous mode: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/542651/drivers-push-teslas-autopilot-beyond-its-abilities/ Apparently lots of problems with it too... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 Didn't see all the "problems" you mentioned. "Drivers are encouraged to keep their hands on the wheels" But not FORCED to. And the moment you take your hands off the wheel the vehicle is acting autonomously by any definition. It isn't surprising that Tesla would downplay it. Musk isn't stupid, but the company making that statement won't be a defense and they know that and apparently trust their technology. There WILL be issues and lawsuits, but the di is cast and there is no turning back. I expected the ever increasing fine point of defining "autonomy" and am not going to play that game. I'm sticking with what most consider autonomy to be: a vehicle able to travel without driver intervention under a prescribed set of circumstances. That will always be the practical and accepted definition. While it will be quite possible in the not too distant future for an overland vehicle to go from coordinates "A" to coordinates "B" without drive intervention that is way too severe a definition to apply to personal transportation. 80% of my commute is via freeway...and I'll quite happily turn that part over to my next car. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 So, one can buy a $75K vehicle with a 200 mile range, then spend another 3K on "autonomous" software that works only on the highway. That's a 100 mile round trip range, which makes the whole thing of limited use. Don't pop the corks on the Champagne yet, lots of work left to do on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 So, one can buy a $75K vehicle with a 200 mile range, then spend another 3K on "autonomous" software that works only on the highway. That's a 100 mile round trip range, which makes the whole thing of limited use. Don't pop the corks on the Champagne yet, lots of work left to do on this. Red herring. Expected that, too. The vehicles range is irrelevant. And that it should show up on the top of the line first is the norm. Happened with ABS and such. Hardly a shock. It will be on the lower priced models by next year. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 Tesla makes driver assistance features. Google makes autonomous vehicles. Quote He contrasted Tesla’s approach with Google’s autonomous vehicle program. Google is committed to complete autonomy—as a means to avoid any question about when a driver needs to be attentive or not. Its self-driving cars drive themselves in all situations, and sometimes operate without any passengers (see “Lazy Humans Shaped Google’s New Autonomous Car”). Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 These driver aids are interesting, and yet ironic. The makers are developing certain safety measures with automation, and simulataneously providing highly distractive frivolous computer functions related to the radio, nav, and bluetooth, and ways to connect smart phones. The distractions are not working well, and are killing people left and right. They are all poorly designed, poorly conceived and contradict the makers' message of safety. The so-called voice command systems for any of this junk causes massive lapses in driving concentration. Just changing the radio station can be a nightmare of "touch screen maze." Trying to find ways for people to use smart phones in cars is a DUMBASS IDEA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 Already dealt with the moving autonomous definition. If the occupant is doing nothing, the car is autonomous. Prove otherwise. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 http://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/autoinnovation/7-bizarre-driverless-car-predictions/ar-BBia4ai?li=AA8mH2#page=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share Posted October 22, 2015 Interesting, Brian. Didn't see any as "bizarre." Got a kick out of a couple...people won't love their cars anymore. Not bizarre pure truth. Few really have understood what I've said about the massive national angst that went with the decade of the demise of the horse. Very painful for many...but few of us either want or own a horse anymore. Those who do have one. Those who want to experience the past will still collect cars. Also thought the one about "no one will own a car" a bit strange in that it's obvious. I am not a good enough futurist to see how it's going to work, but I'd said starting in 15 years or so there will be "clubs" of some kind that own fleets. Need a car? Punch it into your phone and when you need it, and it's there. Some of these will be privately owned for a while and take Uber to the next milestone...actually, they've stated this as part of their goal. When a person isn't using their AV, they'll open it to the public and get money back for its use. Pointless to have an expensive vehicle that could be making money sitting in the garage when you are sleeping, on vacation, or at work. Also have a totally different take on the "road trip will lose its appeal." I LOVE driving this country without agenda. But I HATE having to concentrate on the driving instead of being able to look around at the scenery and finding interesting things and places to stop. Totally ready to tell my car to "head for Astoria, Oregon. Stay off interstates and use old federal highways and scenic routes." This one reflects something I've said all along with a lot of pushback about it...but it is totally logical: "The car insurance impact could be enormous if such vehicles mean much fewer accidents. As insurers balance their actuarial tables to reflect a drop in liability costs, analysts say they'd likely have to pass savings to policyholders. And who could be held responsible for any problems caused by self-driving cars? Manufacturers -- including those behind the complex technology at the core of these bold new machines -- would probably become, at least in part, the focus of lawsuits." Anyway, paradigm shifts are disruptive by nature. Fasten your seatbelts... Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudhog Posted October 22, 2015 Share Posted October 22, 2015 Just ran across this flash after reading through this poll Autonomous traffic school, anyone? Tesla can boast what's likely the most advanced autonomous-driving features with its widespread software 7.0 release last week. Still, the system couldn't stop the folks at Drag Times from getting in a little bit of trouble in Florida, according Inside EVs.Yes, folks, the "autopilot" features did a little bit of everything, including guiding the Model S electric vehicle through some construction zones. The system apparently has a bit of a proverbial lead foot, though, as the Model S got popped by the Florida Highway Patrol for doing 75 miles per hour in a 60-mph zone. The drivers weren't properly insured either, though you can hardly blame Elon Musk for that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Uber's idea sounds great. Quote ber CEO Travis Kalanick has made no secret about wanting robots to replace human drivers in his rideshare service—and now he’s found somewhere to develop them. Last month, the governor of Arizona, Doug Ducey, paved the way for the world’s first driverless taxis on public roads. At a joint press conference with Uber, Ducey unveiled an executive order calling for pilot programmes of self-driving vehicles “regardless of whether the operator is physically present in the vehicle or is providing direction remotely.” Several U.S. states already permit autonomous vehicle tests but all require a human in the driver’s seat should the technology unexpectedly fail. While safety drivers might suit auto makers like Tesla that are building “autopilots” to help motorists avoid accidents on boring motorway journeys, Uber ultimately wants to eliminate human drivers altogether. At a technology conference in California last year, Kalanick said, “The reason Uber could be expensive is because you’re not just paying for the car—you’re paying for the other dude in the car. When there’s no other dude in the car, the cost of taking an Uber anywhere becomes cheaper than owning a vehicle.” The idea would be that the car would cope with the vast majority of situations it finds itself in, but a human monitoring its cameras and other systems online could be ready to take over if something goes wrong. End I thing Google is way ahead of everyone for driverless cars. They have about 100 on public roads now. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 23, 2015 Author Share Posted October 23, 2015 Uber will be pushing the fully AV car, but I still believe the industry with by far the most to gain is the trucking industry. Fully AV trucks are already available for use in strip mines and similar non-public areas and these are providing invaluable data for transference to the public roads as those conditions are much more severe and obstacle-laden than a freeway. The trucking industry is throwing HUGE money into AV development as they salivate at the profit potential. Of course, they'll still be paying drivers to sit and take over "the last mile" for some time, but the decrease in fuel, costs, liability and accidents, as well as far better predictability of delivery times, will provide ROI on the technology immediately. Next, the drivers will become "pilots" only meeting vehicles at points where human control is required for "the last mile." Finally, full AV dock to dock. Here's a quote from a Faux News Network story: "Last year Mercedes-Benz showed off a futuristic truck concept fitted with an autonomous system dubbed the Highway Pilot that enabled it to drive itself along stretches of highway, safely and efficiently. And this year the automaker showed an updated version of the concept, one that more closely resembled a production truck, and demonstrated its self-driving capabilities on some Nevada roads. Now Mercedes is showing a production-ready truck equipped with the Highway Pilot, both to the media and German government officials. The truck is one of Mercedes’ Actros models, and it’s the first production-ready truck to drive autonomously on a highway. The special drive took place this week on a stretch of German Autobahn between Denkendorf and Stuttgart Airport. Behind the wheel was Wolfgang Bernhard, Daimler’s head of trucks and buses, and in the passenger seat was Winfried Kretschmann, the Prime Minister of the German state Baden-Württemberg. Right now the truck is only allowed to travel autonomously in a test phase but according to Mercedes the technology is ready for production. For its initial test, Bernhard drove the truck from a service station out onto the Autobahn. As soon as the truck entered the flowing traffic in the right-hand lane, its Highway Pilot switched on and was able to take over full vehicle operation. During the test, the truck meticulously kept to its lane and maintained the optimum distance to the vehicle in front of it. When the truck finally reached the exit for Stuttgart Airport, it asked Bernhard to take control. The test was then repeated in the opposite direction. Along the way there were road works to deal with. At this point, the truck in advance asked Bernhard to take control. Once the truck cleared the road works, however, Bernhard was able to reengage the Highway Pilot system. Crucially, if there was no reaction from Bernhard, the truck would bring itself to a standstill independently and safely, Mercedes says. Making this all possible are complex computer processing and multi-sensor fusion technology. The sensors include radar and stereo camera monitoring systems capable of reading the road up to 820 feet ahead." The paradigm shift is underway. Prepare for rapid acceleration. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 23, 2015 Author Share Posted October 23, 2015 I am going to step over to the critic corner from the cheering section for the moment. I am a huge fan of Elon Musk, but I can't help but wonder if he's made what could be a costly error in the manner of the AV software release. I am a technical training professional, and if he'd ask my opinion I'd have said some certified training is in order. Even my little department has the skills to develop a course in do's and don'ts for such a system. I'd have set it up such that the software would be downloaded but would not be operational until code was received that the owner and drivers had been certified as trained. The "drivers" part means that the car would need either thumbprint or other positive ID of who is in the drivers seat to engage AV control. This came to mind reading the above link from mudhog regarding the Florida Tesla under AV that was stopped for speeding. My understanding is that the Tesla software is quite capable of reading and applying speed limit signs and GPS info on limits, but that the driver apparently can override. That, in fact, is the only reason the trooper could ticket them without a challenge in the courts. That challenge would probably be a lost cause at this time given the current "the driver is responsible" statements from the OEM and prevailing attitudes, but not for long as AV control becomes more sophisticated. For instance, it's clear to me that the first AV-only lanes will be HOV lanes. No brainer. Even lone riders will be OK since there is plenty of capacity when good order is maintained. That means (go for it, conspiracists) that there will need to be a short range annunciator that police can use to determine if a vehicle is under AV control or not. The line between who is responsible will be increasingly blurred as the systems become more and more common. Given his recognized genius, I am thinking Elon understands the risks and finds them acceptable, but there WILL be accidents and the first landmark court cases are on the horizon...and not too distant future at that. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Good point. Many of the new features will require real training. Consider this..... Most people driving do not know how to use anti lock brakes, after so many years on cars. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) I expected the ever increasing fine point of defining "autonomy" and am not going to play that game. I'm sticking with what most consider autonomy to be: a vehicle able to travel without driver intervention under a prescribed set of circumstances. That will always be the practical and accepted definition. While it will be quite possible in the not too distant future for an overland vehicle to go from coordinates "A" to coordinates "B" without drive intervention that is way too severe a definition to apply to personal transportation. 80% of my commute is via freeway...and I'll quite happily turn that part over to my next car. There has been no "increasing fine point of defining autonomy". The definition has been around for a very long time, and it hasn't changed. Autonomous competitions have existed for years in the academic circles. I myself have participated in two of them - and believe me, I tried to bend the rules to get as much human involvement as possible. The academic definitions simply don't allow for any human intervention, period. There is a huge difference between "automatic" and "autonomous" - things like cruise control and automatic braking and steering fall into the automatic category. Something is not autonomous until the entire thing is autonomous. To put it another way - I won't accept a vehicle as "autonomous" until it can pass the driver's exam that is required before getting a license. Actually - couldn't the police issue a ticket for driving without a license? Just because I, as an individual, consider myself equipped to drive a vehicle, it doesn't mean that I can drive without a license. Why wouldn't the same rules apply for autonomous systems? It's quite clear to me that this Tesla thing is not ready for the road, and is a danger to everyone's safety because the true driver in the scenario (the human) is making false assumptions about the automatic aid. I also find it quite ironic that you want to train the human driver on how to use the system.....by your definition that makes it a driver aid because the driver is ultimately in control and making the final decision. When I'm riding in a plane or train, there is no training required for me because I have absolutely no say in the system. I am making no decisions. That same level of "user input" is required before you can call something autonomous. The car is the driver, and I am merely the passenger in an autonomous system. And again, these aren't new definitions, nor is this getting nitpicky. It is fundamental to the concept, and any further discussion is a complete waste of time if you're going to constantly make your own isolated definitions. It's really as simple as using the correct terms. Edited October 23, 2015 by DrWho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) For instance, it's clear to me that the first AV-only lanes will be HOV lanes. No brainer. Even lone riders will be OK since there is plenty of capacity when good order is maintained. Totally not true. That's totally ignoring how traffic congestion works. Edited October 23, 2015 by DrWho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 23, 2015 Author Share Posted October 23, 2015 Something is not autonomous until the entire thing is autonomous. When you are not involved, it's autonomous. Not going to debate that as it is obvious and non-arguable. To put it another way - I won't accept a vehicle as "autonomous" until it can pass the driver's exam that is required before getting a license. This is the point where your idea of "autonomous" becomes ridiculous. You're saying the thing isn't autonomous until you can stay in bed and it will go to work for you or will simply activate when you approach and take you where you want to go. Reductio ad absurdum. Still doesn't work. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted October 23, 2015 Author Share Posted October 23, 2015 Totally not true. No, it isn't. Won't be long, though. I'll let you know. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.