Poll & Prediction: Autonomous Car Equipment at 5k by 2019

[Travis In Austin]

56 minutes ago, Mallette said:

Travis, I am not sure where the "notice" part is.  But this was the key for me.  The jury was likely predominately those of the Mr. Coffee generation.  I have to put coffee made in these devices in a microwave immediately after pouring as the coffee is too cold for those of us raised with percolators and boiled coffee.  From that standpoint, I can understand the jury saying 185 degrees is too hot.  I really understand the "merits" of this case.  Just merit as viewed by a different generational viewpoint. 

Further, to extend this to autonomous vehicles, we are entering a period where the blame for accidents will be placed on the maker in most cases, as they are the "operator."  Sort of a different take...and a valid one...on corporations as people.  The guy in the Tesla would not have won (if he'd survived and sued) as Tesla had made it clear it was not to be used as he was using it.  But once full autonomy is endorsed, the blame goes squarely on the maker for such accidents.  For those fearful of the technology that should be enough to convince them that autonomy will be FAR safer than humans. 

 

Dave

They had notice of 700 prior burn claims, including 2nd and 3rd degree burns.  The quality assurance manager they had testify came off very poorly.  

 

Tessla can still be sued even though the driver is dead, it would be a "Wrongful Death" case.  Each state has a statute which specifies who is able to sue (spouse, children, parents, etc.). If there was a warning the issue would be whether it was adequate or not. 

 

I suspect this is why Tessla keeps insisting their car is a Level 3.  It is probably not legal in the state where this occurred to sell a Level 4 car.  If it was capable of being operated as a Level 4 and it wasn't legal in that state then Tessla is going to be exposed on a number of theories.

[Mallette]

24 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

There can't currently be rapid penetration of Level 4, 5 and 6 because there are legal barriers.  

Agree the barriers are there, but they will likely fall far more rapidly than you think.  This is no marijuana, but trillions of dollars are at stake, also public safety in that, as the accident rate for these things approaches that of airliners, the public will demand them.  Aside from all that, I currently pay 800.00 a year for liability insurance I won't need with an AV. 

 

Yes, there are those here...just as in the last days of "one man, one horse"...who are (pun intended) naysayers.  But they will get over it, starting with those with children.  There are no sensible arguments against this technology and it represents a paradigm shift in technology, economics, security, and general happiness. 

 

Dave

[Mallette]

23 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

They had notice of 700 prior burn claims, including 2nd and 3rd degree burns.

Wonder how many died of heart attacks from eating this stuff constantly.  I'll bet its a lot more than 700.  Even those people probably had better sense than to drink hot coffee while driving.  While I have done that, I ALWAYS use a spill proof mug...certainly not a paper cup. 

Dave

[Jeff Matthews]

Being "old school" has nothing to do with this. This legal standard has been in place since long before you were born.  Your initial thoughts are just not in line with prevailing judicial philosophy.  

 

It's not the fact the coffee was warm.  Everybody expects coffee to be warm.  The problem was in the fact that it was far hotter than expected.  It was unnecessarily hot.  There is nothing to gain by making something unreasonably or unnecessarily dangerous.  As a manufacturer, you have a duty to make reasonably safe products.  

 

Imagine if a candy-maker sold a candy named, "Sour Patch Kids."  You peel the wrapper, pop it in your mouth, and the citric acid (used for the sourness) is so concentrated it immediately burns a hole through your tongue and the roof of your mouth.  "Oh well, everyone knows sour foods can burn you."  Or maybe the candy is called, "Atomic Fireballs."  You pop one in your mouth, and it burns a hole in you.  "Oh well, it's advertised to be hot.  So sorry."  

 

It's unimaginable that we lived in a day when people did not wear seat belts.  Imagine the attitude, "Everybody knows you can die in a car wreck, so once they get into the car, to heck with them."  That simply does not fly.  That's why we have seat belts as standard equipment in all cars.  That's also why your car meets crashworthiness standards.  Imagine the attitude, "Everyone knows you can die when you crash, so why even bother with making cars safer?"  The manufacturer is the entity best-suited to know the dangers and to design things to be reasonably safe.  

 

Imagine the attitude, "Everyone knows that earthquakes destroy buildings, so let's not worry about making them hold up to tremors better." 

 

If the product can be made safer in an economical way while still delivering the desired utility to the consumer, then, it must be made safer.  You don't let manufacturers design dangerous products and leave the consumer to his peril.  That's a little too much of a policy of caveat emptor (buyer beware).  

 

Fortunately, our society is a bit more consumer-oriented than others.  That's why, for example, Chinese car makers can't sell cars over here.  Their cars do not meet our higher standards.  

 

Under your "old school" way of thinking, they could just serve the coffee at 3,000 degrees, and you should know it's hot and to be careful with it.  Yeah, right.

 

[Travis In Austin]

6 hours ago, Mallette said:

Agree the barriers are there, but they will likely fall far more rapidly than you think.  This is no marijuana, but trillions of dollars are at stake, also public safety in that, as the accident rate for these things approaches that of airliners, the public will demand them.  Aside from all that, I currently pay 800.00 a year for liability insurance I won't need with an AV. 

 

Yes, there are those here...just as in the last days of "one man, one horse"...who are (pun intended) naysayers.  But they will get over it, starting with those with children.  There are no sensible arguments against this technology and it represents a paradigm shift in technology, economics, security, and general happiness. 

 

Dave

 

Has nothing to do with naysayers.

 

It is Economics 101 coupled with the macroeconomics of governmental regulation.  Airbags, seatbelts, GPS in aircraft, nuclear power plan approval, HD TV, etc., etc. all took significant time to implement after the technology was well established.  Some of those required a federal mandate or they would never have become universally accepted.   aan accident can be caused by your negligence in failing to maintain the vehicle.  In addition, you are going to want coverage for uninsured and underinsured operators who will continue to be able to operate non-AV vehicles on the same roads as you.  .

 

There was no logical argument against seat belts or air bags either.  The technology was available for years and years prior to them being mandated. 

 

Parents who drive have not historically been a source of demand for safer products or vehicles.  Car seats had been available since the early 60s.  There wasn't a sensible argument against that technology either, just the cost.  It wasn't until the mid 80s that they started to be required.  Now it is a crime not to have one when transporting a child and they won't let you leave the hospital with a newborn unless they check your car seat. 

 

They have the technology right now to avoid collisions on trains and there was a mandate to have them installed last year (over 15 years after the technology was available, not on the drawing board or in development, but available).  That was delayed.  There is no logical argument against installing them either.  Well one, cost.

 

Regulation will drive up cost, this will add delay.  Whoever has the breakthrough will lobby Congress to preempt the field, and will also seek some sort of protection from lawsuits or limited liability.  It is at that point that things will begin to accelerate.  

[Mallette]

15 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

It is Economics 101 coupled with the macroeconomics of governmental regulation.

Precisely what I said, but you reduce it to comparing with seat belts and such?  We're talking about profit to all, right down to us retired folks, that is the biggest opportunity I can think of.  End of new road construction not associated with new building, regaining incredible amounts of time lost in traffic, eliminating billions in litigation, cutting travel times by 3/4 or more, no downtime for sleeping on the road, and those are only the big ones that come to mind.  When it's about money, HUGE money the likes no one has seen since the Gold Rush, it will speed things up.  It simply hasn't sunk in yet.  They're still talking about high speed rail.  Rail is dead and doesn't know it.  It will be autonomous trucks that lead the way, and cars will follow.  Just the conversion to autonomous trucks will drop prices...and increase profits...like nothing since interchangeable parts and the assembly line. 

Don't know why I try to convince folks.  History will take care of that.  If I were a young person I'd be betting the farm on this paradigm shift.  As per "The Graduate," "I have two words for you:  autonomous vehicles."  They will make plastics look like chump change. 

 

Dave

[DizRotus]

I'll be 69 in November.  My conservative Republican parents taught me to get the facts and think for myself.  

 

Initially, I too had the knee-jerk anti-plaintiff reaction.  After reading the details of the evidence -- the coffee was accidentally spilled; the cup was not placed between her legs -- I changed my opinion.  I'm not telling anyone to change theirs.

[Travis In Austin]

1 hour ago, Mallette said:

Precisely what I said, but you reduce it to comparing with seat belts and such?  We're talking about profit to all, right down to us retired folks, that is the biggest opportunity I can think of.  End of new road construction not associated with new building, regaining incredible amounts of time lost in traffic, eliminating billions in litigation, cutting travel times by 3/4 or more, no downtime for sleeping on the road, and those are only the big ones that come to mind.  When it's about money, HUGE money the likes no one has seen since the Gold Rush, it will speed things up.  It simply hasn't sunk in yet.  They're still talking about high speed rail.  Rail is dead and doesn't know it.  It will be autonomous trucks that lead the way, and cars will follow.  Just the conversion to autonomous trucks will drop prices...and increase profits...like nothing since interchangeable parts and the assembly line. 

Don't know why I try to convince folks.  History will take care of that.  If I were a young person I'd be betting the farm on this paradigm shift.  As per "The Graduate," "I have two words for you:  autonomous vehicles."  They will make plastics look like chump change. 

 

Dave

 

You were the one who thought this would be driven by parents with kids in the car.  Reality doesn't support that, nor does safety.

 

You have made a massive leap to get to saving on commute time.  I agree that is a long term benefit, but not in the short term as this is phased in.

 

There isn't profit to all, not from an economic standpoint.  

 

It is no different than the fax machine, the cell phone, or having a live conversation on your computer.  Those all revolutionized business and communication and eliminated travel all together.  

 

I think people need convincing because the technology isn't available in a usable form yet.  There is no solid projections on cost available yet.  The people who are really doing the design on this stuff are all over the  place on when a level 5 or 6 vehicle will be ready for production to the public.

 

This is pretty much going to go like the cell phone.  Available to some in the mid-80s, very expensive, a buck a minute.  It is going to get cheeper and cheeper.  Demand will rise, compitition will increase, prices will fall.  BUT FIRST THE FCC HAD TO APPROVE IT. 

 

It isn't going to go anywhere until someone offers it on a production vehicle.  Depending on the cost, it will go from there.

[Jeff Matthews]

It almost sounds like you agree with each other.  Dave says, "paradigm shift," and Travis says ,"cell phone pace."  Cell phones have really transformed life since the 1990's.  Who knows what the right analogy will be?  Maybe it will be like the PC.  The PC heralded a big "boom" era with massive leaps in productivity.  Maybe it will be like the "smart" phone with touch motion.  Whatever the case, count me in!  I think this is going to be totally cool!  Can't wait to ride!

[Travis In Austin]

33 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

It almost sounds like you agree with each other.  Dave says, "paradigm shift," and Travis says ,"cell phone pace."  Cell phones have really transformed life since the 1990's.  Who knows what the right analogy will be.  Maybe it will be like the PC.  The PC was a big "boom" era.  Maybe it will be like the "smart" phone with touch motion.  Whatever the case, count me in!  I think this is going to be totally cool!  Can't wait to ride!

I agree, it will revolutionize car travel, the only question is how long.

 

We had an IBM  PC in our house in 1981. It took over ten years to get to Windows 3.1.  How long did it take for 10% of homes to have one, 25% etc. Decades?

 

I'm stretching my brain to come up with one example of new consumer technology that caught the world by storm and became nearly universal in less than 10 years.  I just can't think of one.  

 

Transistor radios maybe?  Digital cameras might be another.

 

Microwave oven?  Nope, 20 years the patents had to run.

 

If one car manufacturer comes up with level 5 or 6 and has solid patents it will slow to a crawl if they don't want to license the tech.  

 

If the big 3 auto consortium gets it first then things could speed up dramatically.  Then it will depend who is sitting on the Gold Mine as to how it moves through Congress. 

 

I want one now and hope someone can spit one out soon; but I'm still waiting.

 

 

[Jeff Matthews]

28 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

If one car manufacturer comes up with level 5 or 6 and has solid patents it will slow to a crawl if they don't want to license the tech.  

 

If the big 3 auto consortium gets it first then things could speed up dramatically.  Then it will depend who is sitting on the Gold Mine as to how it moves through Congress. 

 

That reminds me of this:

 

http://patentabsurdity.com/

[Mallette]

1 hour ago, dwilawyer said:

It is no different than the fax machine, the cell phone, or having a live conversation on your computer.  Those all revolutionized business and communication and eliminated travel all together.  

 

I think people need convincing because the technology isn't available in a usable form yet.  There is no solid projections on cost available yet.  The people who are really doing the design on this stuff are all over the  place on when a level 5 or 6 vehicle will be ready for production to the public.

Sheesh, Travis.  Won't respond.  Everything you said is readily refuted by available research from a variety of sources.  Even the most pessimistic aren't in the category of your "...no different from the fax machine..." and other comparisons. 

 

I prefer to just watch what is happening and I am pretty sure I'll have a fully autonomous vehicle while I am still young enough to enjoy it.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

45 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

We had an IBM  PC in our house in 1981. It took over ten years to get to Windows 3.1.

OK, said I wouldn't respond.  But MS/IBM...which I lived through...is much worse than any other of your odd choices of comparisons.  Windows is still a very, very poor OS that is shot full of bugs and can't even stay up for more than a few days without crashing.  It only came to homes due to the vested interests of corporate IT people who MS wooed by a variety of means.  It was in these folks interest that an OS be unreliable and they be "high priests."  Worked nicely and the much superior consumer OS systems were wiped out. 

 

I just don't get your comparisons.  This tech is already safer than any human, but has to be 99.9999% reliable before any sensible manufacturer would underwrite it to the public.  Close to or equal to aircraft. We are pretty close, and the announcements keep coming.   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjXxIu77dLTAhVE5IMKHYgNAIAQFgg-MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fprojects%2Fla-fi-automated-trucks-labor-20160924%2F&usg=AFQjCNEA44h_O1HwR3CYV_0bHy-iY8OZoQ

 

Trucks are MUCH harder than cars...

Dave

[DizRotus]

Take a real hard look at the drivers with whom we share the road.  Is it truly hard to believe that an already available system of cameras and computers can do a better job of observing, analyzing and reacting to situations than most of the humans out there? I certainly don't think so.

 

Of course the interaction of autonomous vehicles with Bubbas in clapped out F-150s or Silverados will be a challenge.  There are already knuckleheads who love to mess with driverless cars.

 

 

[JJkizak]

11 hours ago, Mallette said:

OK, said I wouldn't respond.  But MS/IBM...which I lived through...is much worse than any other of your odd choices of comparisons.  Windows is still a very, very poor OS that is shot full of bugs and can't even stay up for more than a few days without crashing.  It only came to homes due to the vested interests of corporate IT people who MS wooed by a variety of means.  It was in these folks interest that an OS be unreliable and they be "high priests."  Worked nicely and the much superior consumer OS systems were wiped out. 

 

I just don't get your comparisons.  This tech is already safer than any human, but has to be 99.9999% reliable before any sensible manufacturer would underwrite it to the public.  Close to or equal to aircraft. We are pretty close, and the announcements keep coming.   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjXxIu77dLTAhVE5IMKHYgNAIAQFgg-MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fprojects%2Fla-fi-automated-trucks-labor-20160924%2F&usg=AFQjCNEA44h_O1HwR3CYV_0bHy-iY8OZoQ

 

Trucks are MUCH harder than cars...

Dave

 

You forgot about Unix from Bell labs which has been around since the early 1950's.

JJK

[Travis In Austin]

11 hours ago, Mallette said:

OK, said I wouldn't respond.  But MS/IBM...which I lived through...is much worse than any other of your odd choices of comparisons.  Windows is still a very, very poor OS that is shot full of bugs and can't even stay up for more than a few days without crashing.  It only came to homes due to the vested interests of corporate IT people who MS wooed by a variety of means.  It was in these folks interest that an OS be unreliable and they be "high priests."  Worked nicely and the much superior consumer OS systems were wiped out. 

 

I just don't get your comparisons.  This tech is already safer than any human, but has to be 99.9999% reliable before any sensible manufacturer would underwrite it to the public.  Close to or equal to aircraft. We are pretty close, and the announcements keep coming.   https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjXxIu77dLTAhVE5IMKHYgNAIAQFgg-MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fprojects%2Fla-fi-automated-trucks-labor-20160924%2F&usg=AFQjCNEA44h_O1HwR3CYV_0bHy-iY8OZoQ

 

Trucks are MUCH harder than cars...

Dave

2

They are not my comparisons they were yours and others.  Give me a good comparison, I have tried to think of one tech innovation that would result in saving lives, cost savings, etc. that was regulated and was able to get accelerated to market.  I can't think of one.  Maybe you have one?  It isn't revolutionary, they ran trucks in convoys on I-15 in the 80s.  That system required infrastructure to be installed on the highways, it was determined to be too expensive.  The only thing different about this wave is that they have figured out how to do it without having to install sensors in the road.

 

There is a site dedicated to all of this, http://www.driverless-future.com/?page_id=384

 

They track all of this and have a page on "Misconceptions" which says that my belief that  it will take time for this to phase in is all wet.  However, they are tracking on what the car makers and other developers are saying publicly about when they expect this technology.  Elon Musk is at the bottom.  He expects a Level 4 car to be available next year but that it will take between 1 and 3 YEARS to obtain regulatory approval.  Musk is aware he is going to have to sort through regulatory hurdles.  He is going to be the one behind a federal framework so he doesn't have to go through 50 different processes.  

 

The truck driver article was a great one.  Mentions all of the technology, but unlike Musk who knows about the regulatory frame work and  labor relations, the article doesn't mention anything about the 1.4 million Teamsters who will be represented during this regulatory phase.  Musk is  a pretty bright guy and knows there will be many "stakeholders" at the table during this process.  Thus, the esitimate for 1 to 3 years.

 

 

 

 

 

Here are what the people in the know are saying:

 

Forecasts

Autonomous car forecasts

This page lists the most recent predictions about when driverless cars will be available on the  market:

NVIDIA to introduce level-4 enabling system by 2018
At the Bosch Connected World 2017 in Berlin NVIDIA’s CEO Jen-Hsun Huang announced that NVIDIA will provide technology enabling Level-4 autonomous driving capabilities by the end of 2018.
(Source: NVIDIA, 2017-03-16)

Audi to introduce a self-driving car by 2020
Scott Keogh, Head of Audi America announced at the CES 2017 that an Audio that really would drive itself would be available by 2020.
(Source: IEEE Spectrum, 2017-01-05)

NuTonomy to provide self-driving taxi services in Singapore by 2018, expand to 10 cities around the world by 2020
The company has just started trials of its self-driving taxis in Singapore’s 1 North District. It plans to deploy self-driving taxis commercially in Singapore by 2018 and aims to be operational with fleets of self-driving taxis in 10 cities of the world by 2020.
(Source: Yahoo News, 2016-08-29, Digital Trends, 2016-05-24)

Delphi and MobilEye to provide off-the-shelf self-driving system by 2019
Both companies have announced that they will bring a fully self-driving (SAE level 4) system on the market for use in a variety of cars in 2019.
Source: TheVerge, 2016-08-23

Ford CEO announces fully autonomous vehicles for mobility services by 2021
Mark Fields, Ford’s CEO announced that the company plans to offer fully self-driving vehicles by 2021. The vehicles, which will come without steering wheel and pedals, will be targeted to fleets which provide autonomous mobility services. Fields expects that it will take several years longer until Ford will sell autonomous vehicles to the public.
Source: Reuters, 2016-08-16

 

Elon Musk now expects first fully autonomous Tesla by 2018, approved by 2021
In an interview by Danish newspaper  Borsen, Tesla’s founder Elon Musk accelerates his timeline for the introduction of fully autonomous Teslas by 2 years (!) compared to his estimate less than a year ago (October 2014). He now expects fully autonomous Teslas to be ready by 2018 but notes that regulatory approval may take 1 to 3 more years thereafter.
(Source: Borsen Interview on youtube, timeline: 8:06-8:29, recorded on 2015-9-23)

 

 

[Mallette]

2 hours ago, JJkizak said:

You forgot about Unix from Bell labs which has been around since the early 1950's.

Not really.  It's always been the "workhorse" of science...but what I consider the best OS of all time, and still never equaled, was AmigaDOS, UNIX based.  Of course, Linux and Mac OS are both drawn from Linux...but neither have true preemptive multitasking with programs designed to never say stupid things like "A dialog box is open" when you are trying to access help, etc. 

 

Anyway, age of the PC is over now for most so it really doesn't matter. Discussing these things is about as timely as cylinder vs. disc.

 

Dave

[Mallette]

1 hour ago, dwilawyer said:

 I can't think of one.  Maybe you have one?

Yes.  AVs.  Every prediction you listed up there is shorter by 50% or so from 2 years ago to MUCH more accelerated from 5 years ago.  All will arrive sooner and the governments "we can make BIG money from this" and the consumers "Me WANTS the precious..." will set in.  And that's leaving out a massive industry that has the opportunity to replace almost every vehicle on the road in a decade.  Try and stop it...

 

For me, I think I have enough years left to travel this country some day in an AV.  Tell it to hit the interstate at night when I can't enjoy the scenery, get fuel as required, and wake me when the coffee is ready at daylight.  Then, tell it to hit the old Federal highways while I simply look out the window for something interesting to explore.  Oh, the motels are in for a BIG hit.  They'll survive on those who decide to stay in a place for a day or few or other reasons.  But no need for sleeping from driving fatigue. 

 

Dave

[DizRotus]

I'll join you on that AV journey Dave.  Just so long as we get coffee somewhere other than McD's.  

@Mallette

[Mallette]

30 minutes ago, DizRotus said:

Just so long as we get coffee somewhere other than McD's.  

Ready to go!  Wouldn't get coffee there anyway...not hot enough.

Dave