# "Fully autonomous vehicles won't arrive for a long time"



## Hugo (Oct 13, 2015)

http://www.autonews.com/article/201...tonomous-vehicles-wont-arrive-for-a-long-time

An excerpt:

" . . .

The obstacles to perfecting and mass producing fully automated vehicles that can safely transport a passenger door-to-door with no human intervention are formidable: Sensing equipment, such as cameras, lidar and radar, has to get more efficient, especially in inclement weather. It also must get less expensive.

• Software has to be perfected that links the vehicle's controls with all the sensing hardware. And this software must be able to anticipate nearly every scenario a vehicle can encounter, from inclement weather to a traffic cop's hand signals to a pedestrian darting into traffic.

• Infrastructure needs to be improved, from lane markings to traffic signals to bridges -- as well as the vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communication systems. For a vehicle to drive itself safely in all conditions and speeds, it has to know where it is at all times so that, for example, it anticipates a stop sign around a corner.

*Tech with "common sense'?*

"We as humans have common sense and reasoning powers that we apply, and most of the time, if not always, we do the right thing," said Rajkumar. "Computers, though very powerful, are unfortunately lacking in common sense.

"Self-driving cars can only do what programmers tell them to do. They can't anticipate everything that can happen on the road."

Communication from automakers also can be confusing. Few automakers are promising a fully autonomous vehicle, classified as a Level 5 vehicle by SAE International. But some marketing names, such as Tesla's Autopilot, give the impression that cars with limited autonomous technology can drive themselves safely at all times.

Consumers also might not notice some of the qualifications in automakers' forecasts.

For instance, in August, Ford CEO Mark Fields said by 2021 his company aims to be making a self-driving car that eliminates the pedals and steering wheel. But this vehicle would be a Level 4 autonomous vehicle, to be used only in certain areas and conditions. Fields said that Ford's car would be used by ride-hailing and ride-sharing services in a geo-fenced area, which means it would be limited to streets that have been mapped and programmed into the vehicle's software.

. . . "

Read more at http://www.autonews.com/article/201...tonomous-vehicles-wont-arrive-for-a-long-time​


----------



## Flarpy (Apr 17, 2016)

Not surprising. Computers are not yet good at dealing with chaotic environments. Maybe when quantum computing becomes a thing.

Frankly I think they'd have a much easier time implementing self-driving cars if they could suddenly switch all the cars on the road into self-driving cars at once. But SDCs sharing the roads with human drivers is going to be... crazy.


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Hugo said:


> http://www.autonews.com/article/201...tonomous-vehicles-wont-arrive-for-a-long-time
> 
> An excerpt:
> 
> ...


----------



## WeirdBob (Jan 2, 2016)

Leaked video of Uber SDC testing:


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

WeirdBob said:


> Leaked video of Uber SDC testing:


I happen to have some also !


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Uber doesn't want to hear this. Stop messing up The Dream.


----------



## rembrandt (Jul 3, 2016)

Make no mistake. SDC is rather a religion than science. Religions initially take control of the mind by infecting it with 'belief virus' that entirely alters the logical subsystems of human brain. Uber is playing around with this virus of mind. Try next time arguing with people who are infected by the ' belief virus' and you will soon be amazed having to find out that the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

This time I'm going to take the PRO autonomous car argument. I've exhausted all my logic taking the other view.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN LONG TIME OFF? I see this all happening by Christmas at the latest. The technology is flawless. Uber is invincible. Travis is a SUPER genius. I saw it in a movie about the future once. Obama said it was so...so as he said so it will be done. 

Resistance is futile....hu-man.


----------



## Cole Hann (Aug 22, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> This time I'm going to take the PRO autonomous car argument. I've exhausted all my logic taking the other view.
> 
> WHAT DO YOU MEAN LONG TIME OFF? I see this all happening by Christmas at the latest. The technology is flawless. Uber is invincible. Travis is a SUPER genius. I saw it in a movie about the future once. Obama said it was so...so as he said so it will be done.
> 
> Resistance is futile....hu-man.


Travis has a personal wealth of $6 billion. In a capitalist society that does make him a genius and revered. Do u want to guess in a capitalist society where we drivers stand? hint: uber corporate refers to us a blood bags. ie "as soon as we replace the blood bags profits will skyrocket"


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Hugo said:


> http://www.autonews.com/article/201...tonomous-vehicles-wont-arrive-for-a-long-time
> 
> An excerpt:
> 
> ...


lol then wtf is the point even trying to build one of these stupid things ? to use it in an enclosed area ? lol


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Cole Hann said:


> Travis has a personal wealth of $6 billion. In a capitalist society that does make him a genius and revered. Do u want to guess in a capitalist society where we drivers stand? hint: uber corporate refers to us a blood bags. ie "as soon as we replace the blood bags profits will skyrocket"


I fail to see any relevant correlation between wealth and intelligence. Some wealthy people are complete morons. Some people of modest wealth are truly brilliant.

And by "US" you must mean *"YOU". *I have my own thing independent from uber.


----------



## UberSolo (Jul 21, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> I fail to see any relevant correlation between wealth and intelligence. Some wealthy people are complete morons. Some people of modest wealth are truly brilliant.
> 
> And by "US" you must mean *"YOU". *I have my own thing independent from uber.


 "Some wealthy people are complete morons" Wealth or Brains? Wealth or Brains? Wealth or Brains? Wealth Wealth Wealth

in my region 63% of drivers and myself have F/T jobs outside the ground transportation venue. Whether ur P/T or F/T uber still considers u a blood bag.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Some people are driven by money and money only. They don't accomplish much else in life but the goal of going to their graves rich - with money they can't take with them.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

UberSolo said:


> "Some wealthy people are complete morons" Wealth or Brains? Wealth or Brains? Wealth or Brains? Wealth Wealth Wealth
> 
> in my region 63% of drivers and myself have F/T jobs outside the ground transportation venue. Whether ur P/T or F/T uber still considers u a blood bag.


I'm a NO time uber driver.


----------



## ABC123DEF (Jun 9, 2015)

Cole Hann said:


> seriously, why do poor people always make your statement?


Seriously, isn't everybody entitled to comment on any given topic as they see fit? Don't come in here expecting to read everything you want to see. I personally know lots of affluent people who aren't driven only by money and they don't take where they are in life for granted.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Cole Hann said:


> u just proved the point "fail to see any relevant correlation between wealth and intelligence"
> 
> You can't see relevance cause ur not the sharpest pencil in the box and u are not rich. Rich people understand the correlation of wealth and intelligence. They are smart and rich. They spend $$$$ on their children's educations to keep the smarts and money moving forward.


Without naming names I could come up with a thousand wealthy musicians actors and athletes who aren't very bright. Nicola Tesla was brilliant but died virtually penniless in a New York hotel room.

I do not feel the need to further elaborate but please feel free to pontificate your extremely narrow view of the world.


----------



## 123dragon (Sep 14, 2016)

There's so much confusion about this topic. Let's keep in mind that this is the general frame work for Autonomous cars:

Level 0: This one is pretty basic. The driver (human) controls it all: steering, brakes, throttle, power. It's what you've been doing all along.

Level 1: This semi-autonomous level means that most functions are still controlled by a driver, but some (like braking) can be done automatically by the car.

Level 2: In level 2, at least 2 functions are automated, like cruise control and lane-centering. It means that the "driver is disengaged from physically operating the vehicle by having his or her hands off the steering wheel AND foot off pedal at the same time." The driver must be still always be ready to take control of the vehicle, however. So, level 2 means two functions automated. Easy to remember, right?

Level 3: Drivers are still necessary in level 3 cars, but are able to completely shift "safety-critical functions" to the vehicle, under certain traffic or environmental conditions. It means that the driver is still present, but is not required to monitor the situation in the same way it does for previous levels. Jim McBride, autonomous vehicles expert at Ford, said, "the biggest demarcation is between Levels 3 and 4." He's focused on getting Ford straight to Level 4, since Level 3, which involves transferring control from car to human, can often pose difficulties. "We're not going to ask the driver to instantaneously intervene—that's not a fair proposition."

Level 4: This is what is meant by "fully autonomous." According to the DOT, level 4 vehicles are "designed to perform all safety-critical driving functions and monitor roadway conditions for an entire trip." It's what Tesla says will be available by 2018.

*Level 5: It should be noted that some organizations, like the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), have their own charts that refer to "Level 5" vehicles. This refers to a fully-autonomous vehicle that does not have any option for human driving—no steering wheel or controls.

Tesla's autopilot is basically a level 2.

Uber's pilot program in pittsburg is level 3. I believe uber's intent is to use data to get to level 4 to push it up faster. The censors are collecting a ton of data about what surroundings look like. The data is aiding in helping the car learn patterns and as it continues to grow through learning it will be able to handle more and more.

Tesla hired Jim Keller who is probably the greatest computer microchip designer in our history. He is responsible for some of the iphone chip design and bring us X86 64 bit. Tesla is trying to build a strong hardware suite to process data better.

I call out these because I think that's the question. Is what ubers doing enough or do we need machines with better data analysis capabilities? If you look at it from this point of view we are not very far away from level 4 and I don't see how anyone can truly believe we are further then 5 years out. The data and this model say otherwise. If the model is wrong that's a different argument from what a lot of people say here. 

Edge cases will not stop this, just because a single driver might be able to react better then a driver in a certain scenario won't change this movement. What matters is will the majority of people be able to react better then a machine in something that can occur with some level of significance we set at a threshold. If we say with 5% frequency we got to worry about a bus not signaling a lane shift and 70% of drivers can react better then the machine that might pass threshold and be an argument for autonomous being not ready. Data will drive when the public is ready, I don't think the change management is a big lift for urban areas. The federal government is very involved in trying to figure out the right policy. I've seen self driving cars on test tract at a DOT test facility in McClain Virginia. We also have a ton of investment into ways to rethink how cities operate through grants from DOT and other agencies. You just need to look up Smart City Columbus.


----------



## Flarpy (Apr 17, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> I fail to see any relevant correlation between wealth and intelligence. Some wealthy people are complete morons. Some people of modest wealth are truly brilliant.
> 
> And by "US" you must mean *"YOU". *I have my own thing independent from uber.


You failed to understand that he meant "a capitalist society equates wealth with intelligence." Not necessarily himself personally. And it's usually true.


----------



## Gung-Ho (Jun 2, 2015)

Flarpy said:


> You failed to understand that he meant "a capitalist society equates wealth with intelligence." Not necessarily himself personally. And it's usually true.


A capitalist society equates wealth with SUCCESS.


----------



## Cole Hann (Aug 22, 2016)

Gung-Ho said:


> A capitalist society equates wealth with SUCCESS.


youre just stretching the formula

Intelligence with Success leads to Wealth aka: the byproduct


----------

