• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Elon Musk: "Full autonomous driving without driver input will be complete by the end of 2019" just like that history is changed.

#Phonepunk#

Banned
the big problem with be, during an accident, if a person driving kills or injurs your family member, you can sue them, you can seek damages from that person, that person can be penalized, removing a dangerous driver from the road, or reforming them through training.

contrast that to if an automated car kills someone, who do you sue? is the company even liable? how many deaths per year are allowed?

guess we will find out once they start using them in bigger real world tests than these one off controlled runs they have been doing.
 

cryptoadam

Banned
Until regulations come into place this isn't going to happen and we are still years away from that. I believe we will see this in our lifetime but we are still a decade or two away from it.

I swore I read that these cars still have problem identifying black people, white supremiscist cars upholding the patriarchy confirmed.
 

n0razi

Member
I can perfectly drive myself to where I want/need to be, thank you. Driving is a joy.


Driving on the track or some sparsely populated stretch of winding highway, yes.... Driving on on 90% of metropolitan traffic invested roads, no
 

Shai-Tan

Banned
The problem isn’t net safety it’s liability. If it’s your truck and the AI malfunctions or the camera breaks or is too dirty or can’t see who is liable? This is what is the biggest roadblock to AI cars and trucks not the tech itself.

Where I live there is no fault insurance. I don't doubt product liability, regulation, infrastructure etc will evolve when the technical hurdles are solved. There are many unsolved parts of the technology that aren't just edge cases so it's not a problem that needs to be addressed overnight. If we get to fully automated there's a good chance people won't even own cars themselves
 

jadedm17

Member
I don't trust that it'll work as intended, nor do I expect a lot of companies to jump on board in light of the documented failures of self-driving cars so far. This product could be 100% flawless yet it will still take at least a decade before the skeptical populace accepts it.

The radio mentioned a flying motorcycle being sold mainstream for $380k.... Who wants to volunteer to be the first to test this stuff?

I love your passion Elon but my Grandma used paper filing for decades after computers so good luck intregrating this widespread.
 

gatti-man

Member
Where I live there is no fault insurance. I don't doubt product liability, regulation, infrastructure etc will evolve when the technical hurdles are solved. There are many unsolved parts of the technology that aren't just edge cases so it's not a problem that needs to be addressed overnight. If we get to fully automated there's a good chance people won't even own cars themselves
I think you missed what I’m saying. If the AI is blamed for a crash that’s on Tesla not the owner of the vehicle. Until something changes self driving vehicles are a non starter because of that fact.
 

motoent

Neo Member
I'm with Paasei: Technological and legal issues aside, who actually wants that? Lots of people enjoy driving, if it's not Silicon Valley rush hour traffic. Imagine a racing game where the computer drives without your input and you just watch--sound existing?

Considering the proliferation of super and hyper cars, I think Musk lives in a bubble.

 
H

hariseldon

Unconfirmed Member
the big problem with be, during an accident, if a person driving kills or injurs your family member, you can sue them, you can seek damages from that person, that person can be penalized, removing a dangerous driver from the road, or reforming them through training.

contrast that to if an automated car kills someone, who do you sue? is the company even liable? how many deaths per year are allowed?

guess we will find out once they start using them in bigger real world tests than these one off controlled runs they have been doing.

This is a problem - it's also worth considering that instead of going up against the lawyers of a person who ran you over (likely fairly bog-standard lawyers) in this case you'll be going up against the best lawyers a big corporation can buy. Your chances will be slim. Add to that issues of which jurisdiction it comes under, it gets messy very quickly. Then consider the culture of silicon valley - think Facebook and Google. Always up to shady shit and they get pulled up on it, pay the fine and then move on to the next shady shit. There's a culture in software development (outside of aerospace) of building shit that isn't properly tested and letting the users deal with it. They'll have a fund to cover the costs of any legal action and just throw it out there and hope it works. Nope.
 

Lanrutcon

Member
I think they should aim the technology at more controlled environments where H&S are already tightly monitored. Construction, mining, factories, etc. Fewer variables, fewer reckless assholes. Probably more money too. How many industries would kill for self-loading/self-driving trucks?
 

Hudo

Member
I'm with Paasei: Technological and legal issues aside, who actually wants that? Lots of people enjoy driving, if it's not Silicon Valley rush hour traffic. Imagine a racing game where the computer drives without your input and you just watch--sound existing?

Considering the proliferation of super and hyper cars, I think Musk lives in a bubble.


Well, I actually wouldn't mind being driven around in the backseat of a Rolls-Royce by the car itself. So for limousines (and maybe taxis?), it might be a good fit. But I agree with your statement, actually.
 

Super Mario

Banned
The problem with self-driving cars is that they're machines, they can't do anything outside of what you program them to. So this is going to be terrible if you want to do a lot of traveling. Human input gives the driver more control over where they want to go, and what routes they take. The most I can see coming from this tech is it just being a glorified auto pilot if you need to take a phone call, while being safe.

What kind of tired argument is this? Why can't we program them the way we want? As it stands today, that's more than we can say about humans. They are eating, putting on makeup, texting, and drunk often. How many things are humans outperforming computers in?

The problem isn’t net safety it’s liability. If it’s your truck and the AI malfunctions or the camera breaks or is too dirty or can’t see who is liable? This is what is the biggest roadblock to AI cars and trucks not the tech itself.

I don't see much of a change to be honest. If anything, I can see "autonomous" insurance coming. Maybe it costs more, maybe it costs less. The technology is there to greatly surpass what a human can do. The camera argument is a weak one too. If humans aren't able to use that defense, why would this be a thing? Why couldn't there be multiple cameras? Heck, it's not even far fetched that an autonomous vehicle could compile a report of what law was violated by the other driver when the incident occurred.
 

Makariel

Member
I'm with Paasei: Technological and legal issues aside, who actually wants that? Lots of people enjoy driving, if it's not Silicon Valley rush hour traffic.
"Lots of people" maybe, but fewer and fewer. Most people want people carriers. Only a minority is actually asking for cars that are fun to drive. That's why manual gearboxes are dying out. For most people having to change gears is a hassle, automatic gearboxes are slowly taking over.

Considering the proliferation of super and hyper cars, I think Musk lives in a bubble.
Great for you and your rich friends I guess. Here in the regular world, regular car sales decrease, while SUV and truck sales surge. Why do you think Ford is pretty much stopping to sell regular cars in the US? With rumours being this will spread to Europe next.
 

GermanZepp

Member
Truck driver is the top job in 29 states. In addition to all those truck drivers and their families, you have the vast network of gas stations, food service and retail workers catering almost exclusively to truck drivers. It will be a large amount of jobs, from a group of people that are not particularly likely to embrace retraining into a different field at a lower wage. That will play out largely like it has in the rust belt with the death of manufacturing, which also disproportionately impacted non-college grad men. Huge increase in suicide, crime, home losses. This lowers spending in other totally unrelated local businesses as well, and many cities in Michigan and Ohio are virtually dead ghettos now representing billions of lost potential economic spending.

And this is just the first thing to be automated.

One of the next most common jobs is cashier / retail, and that's one of the next ones to be automated. Fast food and grocery stores are already doing that.

During all that pain for large groups of people, there will also be political fallout. We largely got Trump due to anger over neoliberal economics in the rust belt. That anger will radically increase if you lose your job to a robot. Could be large riots, protests, major fallout.

I see a grim and fucked up Robocop Detroit in your post.
 

motoent

Neo Member
"Lots of people" maybe, but fewer and fewer. Most people want people carriers. Only a minority is actually asking for cars that are fun to drive. That's why manual gearboxes are dying out. For most people having to change gears is a hassle, automatic gearboxes are slowly taking over.

Great for you and your rich friends I guess. Here in the regular world, regular car sales decrease, while SUV and truck sales surge. Why do you think Ford is pretty much stopping to sell regular cars in the US? With rumours being this will spread to Europe next.

You are right as to the trend away from stick-shift, though manual paddles are now popular with automatic transmissions. I also agree that with traffic in most cities, driving to work is not necessarily fun and you'd rather use the time in the car while being driven. I don't own a supercar, but I wouldn't say no if someone gave me one and I think many other people also wouldn't.

The Ford article you cite seems to presume "car" means "sedan," while Europeans have an obsession with functional cars with a hatchback, like a wagon or an SUV, and therefore don't buy sedans much anymore. I still consider that a "car." By the way, Ford has been very successful with pushing its latest generation Mustang in Europe, at times outselling the popular 911 and Audi TT in Germany:

 

Makariel

Member
The Ford article you cite seems to presume "car" means "sedan," while Europeans have an obsession with functional cars with a hatchback, like a wagon or an SUV, and therefore don't buy sedans much anymore.
Yes, that's what I wrote and you quoted. Not sure where there would be a disagreement then? I just think that Tesla sees the trend quite clearly, hence the move to X/Y series that could drive on autopilot, which can cover most needs of commuters. So I don't think that Elon Musk sits in a bubble on this one, but just follows the trend other manufacturers also see, i.e. less regular cars, more SUV and trucks. And no, I don't consider a SUV a car, I consider a SUV an eyesore and to be purged once I become god-emperor of Terra.
 
Even if this advancement reduced traffic accidents and fatalities drastically, I don't think it will matter. Any glitch or error that leads to an accident or fatality will be viewed as "an avoidable mistake" if a human had been driving and will be heavily scrutinized every time. I just think it will always be an uphill battle for automation, and in most cases rightfully so.
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
My next vehicle purchase is definitely going to be a Tesla, but it'll probably be another 5-6 years before that happens. Self-driving cars are going to be great, although it's one of those technologies that will likely continue getting better over time (like most technologies) as it's iterated on, but also a higher adoption rate will improve the reliability of these systems.
 

Catphish

Member
I am personally terrified of the self-driving future. There are so many flaws with computing technology and wireless technology in typical consumer applications. Computers crash, bugs and vulnerabilities in code are constantly exposed, wireless gets interrupted, satellites malfunction... How the fuck can we expect current technology to safely handle cars and trucks without turning them into a fleet of high-speed murder machines?
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
I am personally terrified of the self-driving future. There are so many flaws with computing technology and wireless technology in typical consumer applications. Computers crash, bugs and vulnerabilities in code are constantly exposed, wireless gets interrupted, satellites malfunction... How the fuck can we expect current technology to safely handle cars and trucks without turning them into a fleet of high-speed murder machines?

Old technology has failure rates too, yet we still trust it to power our vehicles. Brake pads fail, tires fail, electrical systems in our cars already have known vulnerabilities. Lots of cars have product recalls due to safety issues.

The technology behind self-driving cars is designed to be self-contained. You won't need a consistent internet connection to drive, just to receive system updates (which is much easier than current solutions that require you to go into a dealership to update your on-board electronic's firmware). Self-driving technology also has a huge number of self diagnostics that will prevent the car from piloting itself in the event that something like an onboard camera is malfunctioning. This same onboard diagnostic equipment also provides a lot more diagnostics to your vehicle's mechanical and electrical systems then we currently get with a "check engine" light.

I don't think it too big of a leap to go from cars that are dangerous because of potential mechanical and electrical failures to cars that are dangerous because of potential software failures. Especially because the software flaws are infinitely more agile to update vs hardware flaws.
 

Catphish

Member
Old technology has failure rates too, yet we still trust it to power our vehicles. Brake pads fail, tires fail, electrical systems in our cars already have known vulnerabilities. Lots of cars have product recalls due to safety issues.

The technology behind self-driving cars is designed to be self-contained. You won't need a consistent internet connection to drive, just to receive system updates (which is much easier than current solutions that require you to go into a dealership to update your on-board electronic's firmware). Self-driving technology also has a huge number of self diagnostics that will prevent the car from piloting itself in the event that something like an onboard camera is malfunctioning. This same onboard diagnostic equipment also provides a lot more diagnostics to your vehicle's mechanical and electrical systems then we currently get with a "check engine" light.

I don't think it too big of a leap to go from cars that are dangerous because of potential mechanical and electrical failures to cars that are dangerous because of potential software failures. Especially because the software flaws are infinitely more agile to update vs hardware flaws.
Yeah, that's a good point. But it still fills me with dread. :)
 

goldenpp72

Member
I don't trust that it'll work as intended, nor do I expect a lot of companies to jump on board in light of the documented failures of self-driving cars so far. This product could be 100% flawless yet it will still take at least a decade before the skeptical populace accepts it.

It only needs to be better than humans, which won't be hard.
 
Last edited:

Pagusas

Elden Member
There are 1.3 million deaths in America PER YEAR from car accidents. Let that sink in. Especially with how much of social justice warriors we are on preventing every death possible. People hate change. They will never trust this no matter what the facts say. 1 accident in years of testing this technology is all most people need to know.

Um what? No there aren’t. There were 33k deaths last year. Still 33k too many, but where in the heck did you get 1.3 million from!?
 
Last edited:

Dontero

Banned
the big problem with be, during an accident, if a person driving kills or injurs your family member, you can sue them, you can seek damages from that person, that person can be penalized, removing a dangerous driver from the road, or reforming them through training.

I don't really see it as problem.

Regardless of what was the cause of accident if car was guilty everything will be covered by car insurance much like it covers you already when you hit someone when you actually drive. Do you sue building maker or building owner when bricks falls down on your head ? Law is already there. Owner via his insurance answers for damages it causes.

As for prison time etc, it doesn't make sense here because it was car driving here. The only idea here for lawsuit against tesla would be if cars were more dangerous than humans and that is not likely because they already have data that they are less likely to hit person.

I am yet to see Boeing ever going to prison over construction errors.
 

Nelsin

Banned
With full self driving finally ubar and such will be much much cheaper than what is actually is. Maybe 3-5 dollar 15min ride instead of 12-15$
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
This shit should be banned in country's. Way to dangerous.

We already got self driving trucks, on a special road with all of them tight behind them driving after eachother. It's called a train.

Anyway he can complete whatever he's doing all he wants in 2019. It means nothing.

It's only a matter of time before this tech gets banned through endless accidents. Guess he got to keep his stock holders happy.
 
Last edited:
While this type of transportation could be valued for helping with big city driving/cutting down on traffic jams, I know there are going to be millions of Americans fighting against this because they want to maintain complete control of their vehicle.
Hell, my grandma still uses a VCR and VHS tapes to record her “stories” because she doesn’t want to mess with new technology..lol
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
This shit should be banned in country's. Way to dangerous.

We already got self driving trucks, on a special road with all of them tight behind them driving after eachother. It's called a train.

Anyway he can complete whatever he's doing all he wants in 2019. It means nothing.

It's only a matter of time before this tech gets banned through endless accidents. Guess he got to keep his stock holders happy.
I think you mean it's only a matter of time until humans get banned because of endless accidents (relative to robots).
 

Cunth

Fingerlickin' Good!
that m8 looks so good

bmw-concept-m8(11).ashx
 
Top Bottom