# Self-Driving Cars: How Badly Is the Technology Hyped? - Spoiler alert: Pretty badly.



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/10/self-driving-cars-how-badly-is-the-technology-hyped.html

_"Contrary to Musk and many of the most prominent advocates of autonomous cars, Dr. Steve Shladover of Berkeley's Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology insists that so-called Level 5 vehicles-robocars that require no human input-are not on the horizon.* "I tell adult audiences not to expect it in their lifetimes. *And I say the same thing to students," he says. "Merely dealing with lighting conditions, weather conditions, and traffic conditions is immensely complicated. The software requirements are extremely daunting. Nobody even has the ability to verify and validate the software. I estimate that the challenge of fully automated cars is 10 orders of magnitude more complicated than [fully automated] commercial aviation."_

Herman Herman, director of the Carnegie-Mellon University Robotics Institute, disagrees as well:
_
"With autonomous cars, you see these videos from Google and Uber showing a car driving around, but people have not taken it past 80 percent. It's one of those problems where it's easy to get to the first 80 percent, but it's incredibly difficult to solve the last 20 percent. If you have a good GPS, nicely marked roads like in California, and nice weather without snow or rain, it's actually not that hard. But guess what? *To solve the real problem, for you or me to buy a car that can drive autonomously from point A to point B-it's not even close. There are fundamental problems that need to be solved*"
_
Finally, I advise readers to read the testimony of Dr. Mary Cummings before the Senate Commerce Committee on March 15, 2016 in full (like Shladover and Herman, Cummings has devoted a large portion of her professional life to tacking significant problems in robotics). Here's Cummings on some of the technical issue:

_While I enthusiastically support the research, development, and testing of self-driving cars, as human limitations and the propensity for distraction are real threats on the road, *I am decidedly less optimistic about what I perceive to be a rush to field systems that are absolutely not ready for widespread deployment, and certainly not ready for humans to be completely taken out of the driver's seat*.

Here are a few scenarios that highlight limitations of current self-driving car technologies: The first is operation in bad weather including standing water on roadways, drizzling rain, sudden downpours , and snow. These limitations will be especially problematic when coupled with the inability of self-driving cars to follow a traffic policeman's gestures.

Another *major problem with self-driving cars is their vulnerability to malevolent or even prankster intent*. Self-driving car cyberphysical security issues are real, and will have to be addressed before any widespread deployment of this technology occurs. For example, it is relatively easy to spoof the GPS (Global Positioning System) of self-driving vehicles, which involves hacking into their systems and guiding them off course. Without proper security systems in place, it is feasible that people could commandeer self-driving vehicles (both in the air and on the ground) to do their bidding, which could be malicious or simply just for the thrill and sport of it.

And while such hacking represents a worst-case scenario, there are many other potentially disruptive problems to be considered. It is not uncommon in many parts of the country for people to drive with GPS jammers in their trunks to make sure no one knows where they are, which is very disruptive to other nearby cars relying on GPS . Additionally, recent research has shown that a $60 laser device can trick self-driving cars into seeing objects that aren't there. Moreover, *we know that people, including bicyclists, pedestrians and other drivers, could and will attempt to game self-driving cars, in effect trying to elicit or prevent various behaviors in attempts to get ahead of the cars or simply to have fun*. Lastly, privacy and control of personal data is also going to be a major point of contention. These cars carry cameras that look both in and outside the car, and will transmit these images and telemetry data in real time, including where you are going and your driving habits. Who has access to this data, whether it is secure, and whether it can be used for other commercial or government purposes has yet to be addressed.

In my opinion, *the self-driving car community is woefully deficient in its testing and evaluation programs (or at least in the dissemination of their test plans and data), with no leadership that notionally *should be provided by NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). *Google X has advertised that its cars have driven 2 million miles accident free, and while I applaud this achievement, New York taxi cabs drive two million miles in a day an a half*. This 2 million mile assertion is indicative of a larger problem in robotics, *especially in self-driving cars and drones, where demonstrations are substituted for rigorous testing*.

_Technologist Brad Templeton writes:
_
Numbered levels strongly suggest an ordering or hierarchy to a technology that almost surely will not evolve in the manner laid out. The levels create an expectation of evolution in this direction and also an expectation that each level is a superset of the one below it. Regulators, press and the public are led to expect this progression by the levels, and may even write rules that demand it.
_
The levels, in other words, imply a teleology, with inevitable progress to Level 5. But as we've seen, it ain't so.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Of course. lol these jokes can't even handle rain, let alone snow and major construction.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

heynow321 said:


> Of course. lol these jokes can't even handle rain, let alone snow and major construction.


As it looks today, knowing the big players are willing to rush into putting these cars on the road with underdeveloped technology and features because they want some cash in return after 7-8 years of blind and foolish investments, I give self driving cars 3 to 4 years until they will start fading away from car manufacturers and software developers focus.

If they start testing on public roads in 2018, 2021 or 2022 will be the beginning of their end.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

AND THEN THEY WENT LIVE!

Wow, were you way off!

I mean, wow, soooooo off!

What's your next prediction? Forks are a fad?


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Lol ramz do you understand (joking, obviously you don't) that what you're saying is akin to seeing the wright brothers fly for 15 seconds and proclaiming that F 22 fighter jets are right around the corner ?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

heynow321 said:


> Lol ramz do you understand (joking, obviously you don't) that what you're saying is akin to seeing the wright brothers fly for 15 seconds and proclaiming that F 22 fighter jets are right around the corner ?


 Uh no, it's akin to seeing F 22's pass testing and saying they are right around the corner.

Oh, and decades ahead of naysayers predictions.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

No ramz...just no. Driving people around in a sunny climate with plenty of space for parking and perfect lane markings is extremely different than driving around people in New York or San Francisco or Seattle or any other major urban center where the vast majority of on-demand TNC services Are wanted.

I know you can't understand the differences but the differences in this case are major and material.


----------



## jocker12 (May 11, 2017)

RamzFanz said:


> AND THEN THEY WENT LIVE!
> 
> Wow, were you way off!
> 
> ...


If i'll be in your shoes, I'll be hiding and stay quiet. Do you remember what Concorde was?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

jocker12 said:


> If i'll be in your shoes, I'll be hiding and stay quiet. Do you remember what Concorde was?


Do you remember what the piper cub was?


----------



## Ursula Smith (Oct 18, 2017)

This topic is always interesting to be discussed. I have read some articles about this. I personally will choose to not buy any of them in near future until I know exactly that they're safer.


----------



## MHR (Jul 23, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> Another *major problem with self-driving cars is their vulnerability to malevolent or even prankster intent*. Self-driving car cyberphysical security issues are real, and will have to be addressed before any widespread deployment of this technology occurs. For example, it is relatively easy to spoof the GPS (Global Positioning System) of self-driving vehicles, which involves hacking into their systems and guiding them off course. Without proper security systems in place, it is feasible that people could commandeer self-driving vehicles (both in the air and on the ground) to do their bidding, which could be malicious or simply just for the thrill and sport


Finally someone addresses this issue.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

MHR said:


> Finally someone addresses this issue.


 We've talked about this a ton over the years. Researchers have demonstrated how they can be hacked and how they can be confused and messed with by vandals extremely easily.


----------



## emdeplam (Jan 13, 2017)

Fantasy...in the same league as replacing the bank teller with a machine


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

heynow321 said:


> No ramz...just no. Driving people around in a sunny climate with plenty of space for parking and perfect lane markings is extremely different than driving around people in New York or San Francisco or Seattle or any other major urban center where the vast majority of on-demand TNC services Are wanted.
> 
> I know you can't understand the differences but the differences in this case are major and material.


GM's Cruise, in downtown San Francisco. At night.








tomatopaste said:


> GM's Cruise, in downtown San Francisco. At night.


Phoenix is number 5


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Lol greg that video is a really bad example if you're trying to prove how great sdcs are. That car ****s up more than 10 times in that video


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

heynow321 said:


> Lol greg that video is a really bad example if you're trying to prove how great sdcs are. That car &%[email protected]!*s up more than 10 times in that video


You clowns say it can't drive in the snow, I show it driving in the snow. You say, yeah but SDC's can't drive in large crowded metropolitan areas like downtown SF. I post video of SDC's driving in downtown SF. You're becoming a laughing stock.


----------



## goneubering (Aug 17, 2017)

jocker12 said:


> As it looks today, knowing the big players are willing to rush into putting these cars on the road with underdeveloped technology and features because they want some cash in return after 7-8 years of blind and foolish investments, I give self driving cars 3 to 4 years until they will start fading away from car manufacturers and software developers focus.
> 
> If they start testing on public roads in 2018, 2021 or 2022 will be the beginning of their end.


Every manufacturer wants to be first. I want SDCs to be safe for other people. I won't be using one.


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

heynow321 said:


> Lol greg that video is a really bad example if you're trying to prove how great sdcs are. That car &%[email protected]!*s up more than 10 times in that video


Oh look...it didn't kill a raccoon! That's proof of safety, correct? Pay no attention to the weaving, the traffic blocking, the bizarre lane choices...

Whatever you do, make sure you run it at full speed. Do NOT use the gear icon to play it at 0.25 speed, where it is closer to real time and the driving errors are more apparent.



tomatopaste said:


> You clowns say it can't drive in the snow, I show it driving in the snow. You say, yeah but SDC's can't drive in large crowded metropolitan areas like downtown SF. I post video of SDC's driving in downtown SF. You're becoming a laughing stock.


It drove through SF like a stoner after smoking a fat Chonger of the goods. Stopping for no obvious reasons, weaving in the lane, being confused about lane choice, and running up on stopped cars too quickly. But I will give it props for not squishing the raccoon.


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

WeirdBob said:


> Oh look...it didn't kill a raccoon! That's proof of safety, correct? Pay no attention to the weaving, the traffic blocking, the bizarre lane choices...
> 
> Whatever you do, make sure you run it at full speed. Do NOT use the gear icon to play it at 0.25 speed, where it is closer to real time and the driving errors are more apparent.
> 
> It drove through SF like a stoner after smoking a fat Chonger of the goods. Stopping for no obvious reasons, weaving in the lane, being confused about lane choice, and running up on stopped cars too quickly. But I will give it props for not squishing the raccoon.


Are you still in SF, Weird Bob? I'm guessing at a bar. I'm guessing at the Male Box.


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

tomatopaste said:


> Are you still in SF, Weird Bob? I'm guessing at a bar. I'm guessing at the Male Box.


So that WAS you in the bright red miniskirt? Sorry, but those shoes do NOT go with that skirt and top!


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

tomatopaste said:


> Are you still in SF, Weird Bob? I'm guessing at a bar. I'm guessing at the Male Box.


p.s. Love love LOVE your stage name - Lady Pomodoro!


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

So let me get this straight. We here at the UP community voice our doubts as to the rapid development of SDCs for mass public consumption and tomatopaste says we're all crazy.

But then these people go and say the same thing. Are they crazy, too Greg?

Dr. Steve Shladover of Berkeley's Partners for Advanced Transportation

Herman Herman, director of the Carnegie-Mellon University Robotics Institute

Dr. Mary Cummings, a robotics expert


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> But then these people go and say the same thing. Are they crazy, too Greg?


You tell me.


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> You tell me.


Herman Herman, director of the Carnegie-Mellon University Robotics Institute, disagrees:
_
*"With autonomous cars, you see these videos from Google and Uber showing a car driving around,* but people have not taken it past 80 percent. It's one of those problems where it's easy to get to the first 80 percent, but it's incredibly difficult to solve the last 20 percent. If you have a good GPS, nicely marked roads like in California, and nice weather without snow or rain, it's actually not that hard. But guess what? *To solve the real problem, for you or me to buy a car that can drive autonomously from point A to point B-it's not evenclose. There are fundamentalproblems that need to be solved*"_


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> If you have a good GPS, nicely marked roads like in California


SDC's don't use GPS or lane markings, but yeah, go with what this commie says. Wow, you found a commie on a college campus, stop the presses!


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> SDC's don't use GPS or lane markings, but yeah, go with what this commie says. Wow, you found a commie on a college campus, stop the presses!


What's with your Commie hate? Is this 1955?


----------



## tomatopaste (Apr 11, 2017)

iheartuber said:


> What's with your Commie hate? Is this 1955?


Commie, liberal, socialist, it's all the same mindset. Using 'commie' is more fun though.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

emdeplam said:


> Fantasy...in the same league as replacing the bank teller with a machine


Perhaps the cashless society and the paperless office?


----------



## iheartuber (Oct 31, 2015)

tomatopaste said:


> Commie, liberal, socialist, it's all the same mindset. Using 'commie' is more fun though.


Yeah if it was 1955!


----------

