Self-Driving Cars -- Needs of the Many vs Numero Uno

[NW-Bound]

... which means we will always need some traditional cars on the road to keep people on their toes, so to speak.

And it also means that autonomous cars need a false decoy steering wheel for deception, like that of the coin-operated kids' cars you see outside supermarkets. Maybe even an inflated dummy in the driver seat, like the dummy pilot in the movie "Airport".

 

[JoeWras]

... which means we will always need some traditional cars on the road to keep people on their toes, so to speak.

And it also means that autonomous cars need a false decoy steering wheel for deception, like that of the coin-operated kids' cars you see outside supermarkets. Maybe even an inflated dummy in the driver seat, like the dummy pilot in the movie "Airport".

Deploy the chaff!

 

[Totoro]

Deploy the chaff!

Nah. Car stops, makes video of individual, does facial recognition and files a police report.

Person gets fined for reckless endangerment and mandatory psych evaluation.

Just like people walking in front of trains. Right?

 

[NW-Bound]

What? Trains now brake hard for jaywalkers too? Not the last time I was in Amsterdam, which admittedly has been a few years. Technology is amazing.

 

[Totoro]

People walking in front of (or on the) rails get fined.

To be clear: talking about trains here, not trams.

 

[gerntz]

Self-driving cars should let the disabled & elderly be more independent for longer time frames. Net, when I reach 100, perhaps even 99, I'll want one. Good deal imo.

 

[NW-Bound]

The lack of mobility of the elderly may be incidentally solved in a different manner in 30 years. Putting them in dormitories may be the way a society can afford to take care of them.

Of course, people with means can live independently using these smart cars. But then, you can also get people to bring you food and medicine. Oh wait. Don't we already have that arrangement, and call it assisted living?

 

[Texas Proud]

A while back, I asked the following question:



It was not strictly the computer that failed in the Florida fatal Tesla accident, but the camera that was supposedly blinded by the bright sky (according to Tesla).

I believe the camera was mounted inside and high up (by the rearview mirror?), and the top of the car was scraped off by the underside of the trailer. The owner of the house where the car stopped said that its top was peeled back like the lid of a can of sardines. Of course, the camera was obliterated, which means the "autopilot" was now blinded.

Still, the car kept on careening down the road, veered off and went through two fences until it was stopped by an electric pole. See photo below.

So, I guess I have my answer, which is really obvious. All cars eventually stop when encountering enough obstacles.

OK, revising this as I was thinking about this a bit on our long trip we just took...

Why isn't the driver of the truck being charged with some crime (if he is not).... he was clearly in the wrong... he never should have turned if there was traffic coming that had to brake for him to complete his turn... obviously he did.... no turn, no dead person...

 

[Totoro]

I think it is because as a society we decided that traffic accidents are never a crime, unless intent was involved or one was driving when (s)he is not allowed to (no driver license, drunk, ..).

Probably - sadly - because it is so common.

Just a guess.

 

[JoeWras]

I think it is because as a society we decided that traffic accidents are never a crime, unless intent was involved or one was driving when (s)he is not allowed to (no driver license, drunk, ..).

Probably - sadly - because it is so common.

Just a guess.

I thought about that a bit and I had a similar question. Like the previous poster said, this is not a crime on his part. He may get a or has gotten some sort of "failure to yield" or something like that citation.

I have a family member who drives an 18 wheeler and after getting to know him, I have a whole new respect for truck drivers. This young man is frankly the best driver I've known. He's army trained for starters.

But he explains to me that sometimes as a truck driver you have to do what you have to do.

For example: backing into some tight docks requires all traffic to stop on the frontage road as the truck backs in. By the letter of the law, he should have flaggers, etc. But he just has to do it, and traffic has to stop. Period. You'll see this all the time.

Trucks many times cannot "maintain their lane" on right turns. Some right turns mean the truck has to carry the trailer over the pavement, in pedestrian space! No choice on tight turns on one lane roads. On two lane roads, they frequently have to use both lanes to do it. You've seen the little graphic on the side of the trailer.

I don't know about this situation, but traffic may have been busy enough that the only way he'd make a left would be to go for the largest gap, and expect traffic to slow. This happens all the time.

There's the letter of the law, and then there is what an 18 wheeler driver has to deal with.

I'm not saying every truck driver is a saint, of course not. But most of these men and women are real pros who put the rest of us to shame.

 

[NW-Bound]

The whole thing was under investigation, and there was talk about the truck driver getting charged. Then, everybody keeps quiet.

The map shows that it was a very sharp turn. Remember that a semi-trailer does not accelerate very fast at all in making such a turn, yet the Tesla hit the middle of the trailer, not the engine.

There was a witness saying that the Tesla was speeding and went past her at much faster than the speed limit. If this was true, then the truck driver would be correct in judging the safe distance when he started to make the turn. He just did not allow for the overspeeding.

I thought there was a report that the Tesla driver had had several speeding tickets in recent years, one for driving 64 mph in a 35-mph residential zone. So, the Tesla driver was not one known for prudent driving.

 

[gerntz]

Trucks many times cannot "maintain their lane" on right turns. Some right turns mean the truck has to carry the trailer over the pavement, in pedestrian space! No choice on tight turns on one lane roads. On two lane roads, they frequently have to use both lanes to do it. You've seen the little graphic on the side of the trailer.

No doubt he's a good driver, meaning safe.

I don't agree any truck driver needs to go over the pavement ex an emergency. I.e., if the truck to is too large for the roadway provided, driver shouldn't go there & the business & trucking company need to use a vehicle that fits the driving space.

A big problem with turns is car drivers ignoring the white stop stripe across their lane & instead pulling halfway into the intersection when they stop. I watch this all the time & at least 50% of car drivers are oblivious to the stop line.

 

[NW-Bound]

Here's a photo showing where the Tesla hit the trailer. And NTSB preliminary report said that onboard recorded data showed the car was traveling at 74 mph. The speed limit was 65 mph.

 

[Texas Proud]

Here's a photo showing where the Tesla hit the trailer. And NTSB preliminary report said that onboard recorded data showed the car was traveling at 74 mph. The speed limit was 65 mph.

Never saw this pic.... but, even if 9 mph over the limit, this is common and the truck driver should not be turning in front of traffic... also, the car still would have hit the truck if it was doing the speed limit... the difference is probably a second or two and the truck would not have gotten out of the way...

As to this might be the only gap, that does not fly with me... even in a car I will go to an intersection with a light in order to cross a street with lots of traffic... there are many streets around here with 3 lanes going the other way and no good time to cross...


I am not excusing the Tesla driver for not paying attention... he paid the ultimate price for his inattention... but it was the truck driver that I believe is responsible...

 

[Amethyst]

But the "assisted" are virtual prisoners; they have to wait until somebody decides it's time to take them out for an airing. Perhaps with autonomous autos, the "assisted" can decide where they'd like their airing to take place.

The last time I was in a large, cheap, vulgar local restaurant, favored by the work crowd for its hefty platters of fried food and huge, watered-down drinks, I saw two tables of old, frail ladies - some so frail, their heads were practically in their plates. I don't imagine they were given the option of a nicer restaurant. This is where their minders were gonna take 'em, and they'd better be happy about it.

The lack of mobility of the elderly may be incidentally solved in a different manner in 30 years. Putting them in dormitories may be the way a society can afford to take care of them.

Of course, people with means can live independently using these smart cars. But then, you can also get people to bring you food and medicine. Oh wait. Don't we already have that arrangement, and call it assisted living?

 

[harley]

Another potential issue for GPS controlled self driving cars - the road moving. Australia moving up in the world... literally.

Australia currently moves north by about seven centimetres each year due to normal tectonic motion and Jaksa said the change was needed "to keep pace with that".
.
.
.
"(And) around the corner, in the not too distant future, we are going to have possibly driverless cars or at least autonomous vehicles where, 1.5 metres, well, you're in the middle of the road or you're in another lane," he said on Thursday.

 

[meierlde]

Another potential issue for GPS controlled self driving cars - the road moving. Australia moving up in the world... literally.

Assuming the road has a white strip on the edge and a dashed white or solid yellow in the center then the car will use its tv cameras to remain in the proper lane (this is present in many cars with the safety systems, called lane departure warning or something similar).
Since a standard driving lane is roughtly 4 m wide the car will override the detailed gps coordinates with what the lane monitoring system shows. Consider how often roads change, and how rarely the databases get updates.

 

[NW-Bound]

I believe most self-driving cars now rely mainly on camera vision for "lane keeping" such as the capability of the Tesla "autopilot". Later, the truly autonomous cars may use GPS to know roughly where they are to map out the route to where they want to go.


But while enroute, an autonomous car still needs to use camera vision and Lidar to avoid obstacles, road constructions, debris, other cars on the road, bicyclists, pedestrians, etc.. Such a truly autonomous car is what Google is working to achieve, which is a far cry from the chintzy lane-keeping systems we see now.

 

[ERD50]

Another potential issue for GPS controlled self driving cars - the road moving. Australia moving up in the world... literally.

Funny co-incidence - DW and I just got home from a trip into the city, and took the train in/out, and Uber from train to destination. I was playing with the off-line capable GPS navigation (HERE WeGo ) app on the train.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.here.app.maps


The train runs alongside a highway much of the way, and the navigation system 'pulled' our location (in the train) to the highway. Kind of odd to watch.

So as others have said, GPS gets 'in the ballpark', the car will rely on other tech to find the lane.

-ERD50