California Green-Lights Self-Driving Cars

[gary]

Mark Harris, in an article at the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers (IEEE) web site (http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/california-gives-the-green-light-to-selfdriving-cars), reports that the state of
California has proposed new rules to permit autonomous vehicles on
their roads without a licensed driver on board.

A 45-day public comment period has begun and if everything goes
smoothly, the rules could come into effect as early as this November.

Rather than the putting forward of a requirement that the cars be
tested by state authorities, California has decided that the American
propensity for suing the pants off each other will give manufacturers
sufficient self-motivation to ensure their self-driving cars are safe
enough before putting them on the roads.

Part of the goal is to help make California the new world-leader in
what seems destined to become a global trillion-dollar industry.



Article here :-
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/california-gives-the-green-light-to-selfdriving-cars

[leon]

Actually I cannot see the point of a self driving car. :screwy:

I know there are lots of arguments for and against, however but how dose this work if i wanted to go for a casual Sunday morning drive around the country. do i have to inform this car of every twist and turn i wish to make.

Last year i traveled to Darwin and i did some long days, and 800 ks at a time, is it going to pull up because it thinks i need a rest.

I changed my mind some times on free camping and stopped when i pleased and drove when i pleased, is this car going to say you cant do that. :shrug:

And if the computer misses a .(dot) it will probably stop. :mad2:

I would rather be in control of the driving, i reckon and in 10-15 years up the track we will have a bunch of people who will not be able to drive at all and make important decisions behind the wheel.

My two cents worth.

Leon :thumbsup:

[xelasnave]

I would be happy to have a driverless car.
My legs get sore on a trip so I think it would be great to sit back feet up and looking at the sites rather than tbe road in front.
In stop start traffic read a book.
Pull up at the shops get out and let the car drive around and find somewhere to park whilst I shop.
Service time it can go get a service whilst I have a nap.
Alex

[AndrewJ]

Gday Alex

Ref
"The California rules also demanded that manufacturers maintain ownership of the vehicles."

As surmised earlier, the only way this technology will really work is if us plebs are not allowed to own the cars, they will be an all pervading fleet just buzzing around between jobs, ( and also taking the details of your every movement to be passed on to big mother for later use ).
Once it drops you off, it goes to its next job.
Considering how most people become lazy pigs when they dont own the space they are in, it will be interesting to see how long these cars stay clean enough to get into, Maccas and pizza wrapping anyone????

Andrew

[GrahamL]

I can't sees anything but a whole lot of trouble for this plan in that without removing the drunks , kids who think they can drive but can't, the old folks who shouldn't be driving, the fleeing criminals , the completely random and unexpected things that crop up when driving it will often fail , can you program technology to see what can't be foreseen ?, those little bits of intuitive thoughts that pop up at times when you think better of whats in front of you and go with what might be .

[gary]

If this Dec 20th 2016 dashcam video is anything to go by, perhaps
there are cases when the computer can react even faster
than most humans, in this instance braking safely before the fact that
an accident is about to occur becomes self-evident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8AUbbX-VhE

This car, a Tesla S, has what Tesla refer to as an "autopilot" feature.
Though an upgrade was recently announced, currently the Tesla "autopilot"
is still really only an advanced driver-assist feature rather than being full Level 5 autonomous.

Ford announced last month that they are skipping Level 3 autonomy
and going straight to Level 4. The reason? Ford's own engineers
were falling asleep during Level 3 test drives even when every attempt
was made to keep them alert.

See http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/ford-robocar-to-ford-engineers-wake-up

[Camelopardalis]

Bring on the days when we can go out to a dark site for an evening and have the car drive us home while we sleep :thumbsup:

[Wavytone]

Oooh yes thanks !

The day will come when we don't need to own a vehicle, merely book one like a taxi to turn up when needed. The best part is it implies we will be able to choose the vehicle to suit the task, on the day. No need for space to store it, either.

GoGet is just the start.

[leon]

Gees, there will be a heap of scrap metal. :rolleyes:

Leon :thumbsup:

[csb]

Driverless will become the norm. Everyone will become used to sitting in the car and letting it drive.

Road accidents and thus road deaths/injuries will be near zero.

Police resources can be better utilised to chase crime.

I think the benefits of driverless vehicles outway the cons.

[AndrewJ]

And once that happens, i can imagine the day the cars start saying, "Im sorry sir, the state wont let me take you there", if they dont want you to go somewhere.
If you want to reduce crime, legislate taking full dna samples of everybody at birth and implanting micro gps trackers into their bodies. Nowhere to hide.
Where will it stop?????
Metadata collection simply expanded a bit in the name of security.
Thank but no thanks, i like my manual car, and am prepared to take the risk of driving it where i want.

Andrew ( very cynical pre coffee )

[wavelandscott]

I suspect the most dangerous time in the future will be in transition with some driverless and some human driver cars on the road. Can you imagine, one set of vehicles following the rules of the road and others not?

A couple of other things to imagine...no longer will space be taken up with car parks. The need for multilane highways will be reduced. Will we need safety systems in the vehicles when they are all autonomous and programmed not to crash? This technology has the potential to radically alter civilization as we know it.

A related question...how many vehicles does the world really need? What do we do with the factories and people that used to make all of this cars and then drive them around?

[AndrewJ]

And nothing goes wrong with computers does it.
People dropping rocks ( or themselves ) off bridges.
Oil or black ice on a roadway.
Hackers deciding it will be "fun" to cause mayhem.
Recent events would indicate we cant protect any systems these days, so i dont put full faith that software will be the total answer.
As i keep thinking, why ( after trillions of dollars have been spent on automation ) do we still have pilots in passenger planes.
I can easily see auto cars working in a large metro CBD type area
but outside that, there wont be enough sensors to cope with every eventuality.
Andrew

[leon]

Speaking of hackers, they can already control some computers in cars and literally cause them to die where they stand.

It is so stupid and making a lazy generation even lazier, what happened to making choices. :shrug:

Most of the up coming adults cant even boil water. :confused2:

Leon :thumbsup:

[AndrewJ]

Why would you need boil something that comes pre pasteurised in a plastic bottle and costs more than petrol?????

Andrew

[csb]

With driverless cars, no-one will be breaking road rules, eg speeding, running red lights, so police won't have to monitor driver behaviour nor spend time giving traffic tickets = more time for police to work on crime.

As Scott said, dangerous time during the transition phase. I think a speed restriction on human drive vehicles (max 60 km/h) may be introduced. Also human drivers may be barred from certain roads. This will happen over a period of time, of course.

[AndrewJ]

Most of that is automated now anyway ( cameras )
I have driven to Adelaide about a dozen times in the last 12 months
and i saw very few police cars. They are all already behind desks looking at computers, vs handing out tickets ( unless there is a specified blitz on ).

And again, if the desired advantage is "control" of the population and where/when it can go, then microchipped people is the next step.

As i mentioned, Auto drive in the CBD areas may work well, but for 100% coverage it has to work everywhere, and private ownership/use has to be banned. I cant see that happening as big business wont provide a service in regions that have little return on their investment ( read that as 95% of Australia.

Andrew

[JA]

"That's the plan" and implemented via something we all need to use..... money !

In terms of integration/acceptance in to use and excluding early barter (can't tax it easily):

First .....Cash,
then,.....Credit Cards (using Physical impression on paper using stamper roller in store)
then, ....Debit/Credit Cards (with Magnetic Strip EFTPOS machines in store and ATMs)
then, ....Debit/Credit Cards (with Microchip Reader, Magnetic Strip in store & ATMs)
then, ....Debit/Credit Cards (with Wireless Microchip, Microchip Reader, Magnetic Strip in store & ATMs)
then, ....there will be wearable devices (these already exist to an extent- gym membership bracelets, that sort of thing)
then, ....Implanatables for Debit and Credit Cards (the tech already exists and is used to track some people, children - hyped as protection against kidnapping.

They can be as small as a grain of rice and easily implanted (injected) below the skin.
Who wouldn't want one? :D

Best
JA

[AndrewJ]

A lot of people, esp if it also has a gps that tells the ??? govt/corporation everything you do, everywhere you go, everything you buy.....
Just look at the new biologics push ( as an analogy to the evolution of credit cards etc )
First no jab no pay
Now now jab no play
Next, no govt implant, no pay or "public" hospital treatment
I can see the technology for implants advancing to a point where it will be cost effective for everyone to be forced to have a device that measures heartrate, alcohol/drug/fat/sugar consumption, exercise levels etc etc
such that those deemed a threat to themselves ( ie "the economy" ) can be "retrained" or ostracised.
There would be so much money to be made/saved in something like that ( as there will be in self driving cars ), that someone wont be able to resist trying to implement it.

Andrew ( even more cynical after 2 coffees :-) )



.

[csb]

I don't think implants will happen because we are already tracked with our devices, notably mobile phones. These are becoming ever more a necessity to have with us at all times AND we take them with us voluntarily.

It seems facebook profiles are already used by some employers to vet prospective employees and I'm sure other organisations, including government, access peoples social media profiles.

So why would the government bother with implanting when so much data collection is easily available AND the means is already acceptable to the general population.

[AndrewJ]

Thats still an "opt in" system, and is still difficult for someone to put ALL the data together "for everyone".
"Devices" can be left behind, or you can use a stolen one, and arent designed for "realtime" tracking. Social media use can be bypassed ( for most purposes ) using VPNs etc if you want
A gps chip inside you linked to a dedicated tracking system is another thing??? ( and would be worth a LOT of money to the owner of that system ) Its just a logical next step in JAs timeline above.
Ie who went to an anti govt rally, someone gets mugged or a place burgled, so who was nearby at the time. It would be a massive time saver for the authorities.
The techology is advancing fast enough that this is going to be practical soon, and if its practical, you can bet they will try to implement it.
Just think, when yr self drive car arrives, you just get in and a sensor detects who you re and charges you accordingly.
Same for public transport, shop payments etc
Hmmm, phones can go back to being phones and browsers, without needing finacial security systems :-)

Andrew

[gary]

For interested readers, a 10 Mar 2017 article by Evans Ackerman (http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/how-driveai-is-mastering-autonomous-driving-with-deep-learning)at the
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) web site describes how
one publicly-listed Mountain View, California company, Drive.ai, are using
what are termed "deep learning" algorithms to try and reach Level 4
autonomy.

The company was founded in 2015 by deep learning experts from Stanford University’s Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.





The author goes for a test ride.

Article and video here :-
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/how-driveai-is-mastering-autonomous-driving-with-deep-learning

Safety concerns and fears by legislators and the public with self-propelled
vehicles are nothing new.

In 1865 in the U.K, what was known as the "Red Flag Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locomotive_Acts)" mandated that
self-propelled vehicles only be allowed to travel at a maximum of 4mph
in the country and 2mph in the city and that a man carrying a red flag had
to walk in front.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary
Whilst i can still see these sort of cars becoming common in the CBDs, i think the deep learning would have a hard time a few km outside the CBD. ( Be interesting to see if it could be leveraged for PEC training :-) )
That said, i had also read ( a few years back ) that research was being done for CBD/freeway type operations where a lot of the sensors would be fixed on/in the streets, thus reducing the load on individual transport units, as it would be easier to map the flows. Do you know if more research been done on that??? I can easily see that as a near term possibility, vs a truly autonomous car that can do everything by itself.
Andrew

[xelasnave]

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.techinasia.com/world-first-driverless-taxis-start-singapore/amp/

Alex

[xelasnave]

The link above is about driverless taxi in Singapore.
I think I read elsewhere last month it was up and running now I will look into it more when I have more time.
Alex

[Starman73]

Hey there,
Reading about the Californian government laws for driverless cars where the plan is for the manufacturers to make sure they are safe through threat of litigation almost reminds me of the Cold Wars mutally asured destruction. Funny that. I think we should be worried about the transition phase between drivered cars and driverless, if we can't work out what that idiot in front of us is doing with our brain power how are we ever going to be able to programme a computer to do it. Despite all the sensors thatI'm sure the cars are equiped with, can they account for human stupidity, the "P" platers over confidence or the other drivers lack of confidence and the will he/she won't she/he make the turn, change lanes etc.

Implanting chips wih our data, linking things like taxation with banking and everything else and current techology makes me wonder what were we all worried about with the Australia Card, it's all happened anyway, and worse.

Feels good to get that off my chest lol:)

Paul

[gary]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for the posts.

With the recent advances in in-vehicle sensors, including LIDAR and
cameras, the increase in computing power and the increasing sophistication
of the software, the major players are aiming for Level 4 and Level 5
autonomy and attempting to avoid the necessity for guidance infrastructure
to be built into the roadside.

The cost of these sensors is also dropping, in particular with companies
targeting semiconductor LIDAR's that will only cost a few dollars compared
to the thousands of dollars they cost today.

The first trials of modern autonomous vehicles took place in the country
and not the city, starting with the 2004 DARPA "Grand Challenge"
held in 2004 on dirt tracks in the Mojave Desert.

Back then, not one of the 15 teams that qualified for the final race managed
to finish the 132 mile course.

The following year, in 2005, five teams finished the course.

So in that short span from 2004 to the present, the advances have
been impressive, with the Google cars alone having clocked up well over
2 million miles.

The decision by Google to aim for Level 4/5 was arrived at early
in their trials when the in-car cameras reportedly captured an
engineer horsing around with a notebook computer rather than
being attentive as the backup human driver.

This is similar to the Ford decision to skip Level 3 after multiple
incidents where the engineers would nod-off in the car.
Even when Ford put a second engineer in the car to watch the first,
they were both nodding off.

So the expectation is that the general public would become similarly
blasé when sitting in an autonomous car so the computer better be
capable enough to be in control at all times.

With the majority of car trips taking place in towns and cities, it
will be no surprise if the uptake of autonomous vehicles is initially
stronger in more populated areas.

Several companies are testing autonomous trucks, so it might transpire
that they become a more common sight on rural highways in the future.

A couple of years ago I drove the 857km from Cooktown to the Tip
of Cape York. There was no shortage of gravel roads, potholes,
corrugations, rocks, bulldust and the occasional roadtrain.

By June 2019, even that frontier will be tarmac all the way and so that
drive is likely to be less challenging to a human or computer than the
8km of Pennant Hills Road here in Sydney's north from Hornsby to
Parramatta which is congested and challenging at any time of the day.

When we watch science fiction movies, we seem comfortable with the
notion that in the future we will be accompanied by seemingly intelligent
robots that can acts as scouts, descend to a hostile planet and have
reaction times that can outmanoeuvre any threat.

So in order to make such a future a reality, one might argue
we have to start somewhere.

No doubt the development of autonomous vehicle technology
will not be without incident, unfortunately including some serious accidents.

But if advances in autonomous vehicles begin to reduce accidents and
start to help save lives, then that has to be a goal worth aiming for.

[AndrewJ]

Gday Gary
Thanks for the extra info
Agreed. The engineer in me is fascinated by the technology, but the cynic in me is concerned that if it is owned by big business, its going to end up a commercial process, not a functional process ( Bit like privatising the electricity )
Not to mention more logging of everything you do, ( which will bring in even more money )

Andrew

[JA]

The Driverless car - its Achilles' heel will be found and exploited, either for fun, profit or evil.

Tic / Toc

Best
JA

[gary]

Intel is betting heavily on a future that includes autonomous vehicles becoming ubiquitous.

In news today, Phillip E. Ross at the IEEE web site, reports on the acquisition
by Intel of an Israeli company, Mobileye, for USD15.3 billion.

Apparently this $15 billion makes Mobileye the third-largest market valuation for any publicly traded Israeli company and is high for an
auto-parts supplier.

No doubt there will be one big celebration party going on at the
Mobileye offices in Jerusalem tonight.

By comparison, Intel itself has a market capitalization of over USD163 billion.



Mobileye was founded in 1999 by one researcher out of an Israeli university.

It showcases the potential for Australian startups who are willing to take
risks to enter into the autonomous vehicle parts supply market.
With the closing of car manufacturing in Australia, it might be the type
of new opportunity the country needs.

Article here :-
http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self-driving/intel-buys-mobileye-for-15-billion

[JA]

A hiccup?

http://www.smh.com.au/world/uber-suspends-testing-of-selfdriving-cars-after-crash-20170325-gv6kn9.html

Best
JA

[AussieTrooper]

Imagine the day when some criminal works out how to hack them, and in one night hundreds of cars self drive out of their owners driveway...

[JA]

Yes hacking .... Imagine a scenario where

1. a group of vehicles is hacked and driven as a group to form a roadblock, which criminals could exploit against police,
2. Used for anonymous pickup of kidnapping ransom, or
......

Don't worry I'm sure we will see something on the matter in a Hollywood action movie soon.

Best
JA

[gary]

https://youtu.be/y35bsVZeXYE

[JA]

^^^ Nice 1 Gary. But there is a defence against it - Head for hallowed ground !

Best
JA

[gary]

:thumbsup:

Likewise I think Red Bull engineers will need to resort to some sort of exorcism
on Daniel Ricciardo's F1 car during this coming week.

[DarkArts]

Self-driving cars? As usual, XKCD has an amusing perspective: https://xkcd.com/1559/

[AussieTrooper]

Picture the Bourke st attack, but this time there's no driver to deal with. How would you stop the car? Someone in Iran/wherever could be controlling it. Good luck prosecuting anyone.

[JA]

That would be another terrible scenario. Maybe some form of electronic countermeasure/jamming ... or a Barrett 50 cal. It's a potentially very difficult future we now find ourselves looking towards and impossible to unravel....

Best
JA

[AndrewJ]

And after hearing the news this morning i see its already happening in bulk.
http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/at-work/office-workers-implanted-with-microchips-in-sweden/news-story/70fff9ebdefc1bc5a999a6c3c0c64ffa

Andrew

[pgc hunter]

That is pretty much the case now.

[AndrewJ]

Looks like that is about to be tested.
Uber car ( with safety driver on board ) just killed a pedestrian in Arizona.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-19/uber-autonomous-car-involved-in-fatal-crash-in-arizona
Who will get the blame???
Will ( the inevitable ) psychological testing show that like now, the more computerised help you add to a car, the less the occupant "thinks" or "watches", even when its their only job.

Andrew

[Wavytone]

Another issue is that if autonomous vehicles are able to safely negotiate a city without hitting pedestrians it won’t take long before pedestrians figure they’re safe - and will do as they please.

City centres will be gridlocked quickly with cars waiting forever while the pedestrians ignore them.

The one thing that keeps pedestrians off the roads is the knowledge that some human drivers -esp large vehicles - might not give way.

[AndrewJ]

Thats easy to fix ;)
All roads will be forced to be retrofitted with the equivalent of pool fences, just like the cheese graters going up in the bush roads now.

Saves the trees, but makes stopping for an emergency ( or a leak ) a rather dangerous operation now.

Andrew