I am not a first user. I literally had to get a cell phone yesterday. It is my first, and I have no idea of how to work it. But I have been all in on driverless cars since I heard about them.
Accordingly, I am not happy that Uber, which can't seem to do anything right lately, had a fatal crash in Arizona, which has suspended its efforts to make Volvos that can go without human help. The governor of Arizona ginned up some political high dudgeon and banned further testing his his state.
I have seen the video. The victim was jaywalking. It is entirely possible that a human driver would have seen her and stopped. But it is also entirely possible that a human driver would not have seen her and hit her. It is, actually, possible that a human driver would have seen here and hit her. The latter two possibilities become reality in Florida all the time.
I have two points: 1) If driverless cars have to be able to never have an accident, then we are demanding more of them than we demand of the blind, the distracted and the texting we allow behind steering wheels with the full authority of the state. 2) A lot of the people who we would agree shouldn't be behind the wheel could get out and still get around with driverless cars. Getting around is what they can't do with the public-transportation-on-the-cheap typical of the U.S.A.
I am at an age at which I can see a driverless car extending my quality of life, if they only come soon enough.
I agree, Tom. Driverless cars will probably kill people (for a while)but more likely at a rate lower than humans, who require a level of emotional stability and moral responsibility which many whom I call rectal apertures don't possess. My next car (2020?) will have every AI assist I can afford. At least lane assist, automatic braking for cars and pedestrians, stop sign and do not enter sign detection. My biggest concern with self-driving cars is dealing with the unpredictability of aforesaid apertures. These days, when the light turns green, I proceed cautiously while looking both ways. When I approach an intersection with a car stopped at a 2-way stop, I am ready to brake and swerve in case they pull out in front of me. RA's everywhere.
ReplyDeleteTom, I am with you. I don't mind driving but there is a lot to be said for train travel in that I can read or work if I want/need to.
ReplyDeleteMegan McArdle points out that the safety of driverless cars has been overhyped:
"Motor vehicle fatalities are measured in terms of “vehicle miles traveled,” which is just what it sounds like. In 2016, there were 1.18 fatalities for every 100 million miles that Americans drove. Since Americans drove nearly 3.2 trillion miles that year, that still added up to tens of thousands of deaths.
"To know whether self-driving cars are safer than the traditional kind, you’d have to know how many miles they traveled before incurring this first fatality. And the answer is “ fewer than 100 million” — a lot fewer. Waymo, the industry leader, recently reported logging its 4 millionth mile of road travel, with much of that in Western states that offer unusually favorable driving conditions. Uber just reached 2 million miles with its autonomous program. Other companies are working on fully autonomous systems, but adding them all together couldn’t get us anywhere close to 100 million. (The numbers go up if you add Tesla’s autopilot, but that system has more limited capabilities, and fatality statistics don’t necessarily get any clearer — or more favorable — if you do.)"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-driverless-cars-arent-far-safer-than-human-drivers/2018/03/20/5dc77f42-2ba9-11e8-8ad6-fbc50284fce8_story.html
McArdle goes on to note that we can expect safety and reliability to improve. I agree.
She also glances for a bit at the politics. I suppose it's natural that many people won't trust cars in which they're not in control. I may have a little bit of that myself, from which I deduce that trust is not fully a function of reason. And there is a level of paranoia out there, how well-founded I'm not completely sure, that robots will make people obsolete some day.
Tom, I am with you that it will keep the elderly and other classes of people mobile who currently aren't. Along those lines: I've been trying to determine whether Uber (not the driverless kind, but the old-fashioned kind with a driver) is cost-effective compared with driving a car myself. I think it is probably pretty comparable for simple trips around town. If I have to drive 100 miles or more, not sure; and it doesn't seem very convenient for running a string of errands.
In NYC should driverless cars come into vogue, it will be difficult to distinguish between the human driven and the computer driven. So I guess it won't be a novel problem.
ReplyDeleteI would settle for a partially computerized car that would negotiate entering and exiting complex road systems, and would be able to figure out what lane to be in. I actually don't mind driving ordinary highways and city streets and even I-80, but I- 680 in Omaha feels like the Indy 500 to me. And I am a nervous passenger with other people driving (just ask my husband!). I just have to take along something to read and not look at the road. If the person one is with has totaled three cars the fear is not necessarily unfounded.
ReplyDeleteKatherine - you might consider getting a smart phone if for no other reason than getting Google Maps with its vocal driving directions. It tells you what lane to be in, how many more miles or feet until your next turn, etc. If you're like me and make the occasional boneheaded mistake even with step-by-step directions (e.g. getting off at the wrong exit when there are two within a quarter-mile of each other), it automatically adjusts and brings you home.
DeletePlus, if you think this is a feature - it is for me - it will, on occasion, take you on a tour of towns and neighborhoods you've never been through before, because it always calculates the most efficient route, and sometimes that is a route that you never even knew existed. When some of the highways around here are backed up with traffic, it will have me exit and take me on secondary and tertiary roads instead.
Jim, we have an older Garmin. Just for kicks one time we decided to see what route it gave us to get to our son's house. It was having us turn off the highway at a little unincorporated wide spot in the road called Elk City, NE. It is true that if you follow a minimum maintenance county road from Elk City you will eventually get to Omaha. We decided not to do that and took our tried and true route. But I'm sure smart phones are much more current and logical with their directions. I do like Google maps.
Delete"Nobody Was Driving, Officer." Think of the legal mess and the insurance problems. Who does the cop give a ticket to? Wait. I could bring the return of Monty Python!
ReplyDeleteNot "I." "It." I am powerless to bring them back.
DeleteMargaret - definitely an interesting scenario. If it's a driverless car owned by Uber, I guess Uber gets fined.
DeleteThe "legal implications" will probably hold up acceptance in this country for about 10 years, during which time the rest of the world will get as far ahead of us as it did with smart cards. When 12 year-old French children can drive alone to the Alpes to meet Maman and Papa for a ski vacation, Americans will still be litigating over the cars.
DeleteTom, don't feel badly about coming lately to cell phones. I still don't have a smart phone. Dumb phone with a texting keyboard works just fine. Actually I am too cheap to get a data plan, I don't see the need for it with home wifi.
ReplyDeleteI have heard that a major hang-up with driverless cars is a situation in which 2 of them are on an apparently unavoidable collision course. Who/what will decide which car and occupant will be expendable and which one will be the "winner." Insurers will not like this conundrum. Occupants might have to sign a waiver that they understand this possibility and absolve all from liability. Ad nauseum.
ReplyDelete"Tom, I am with you that it will keep the elderly and other classes of people mobile who currently aren't."
ReplyDeleteHmm, I'm not sure how driverless cars work, but the notion of my 85-year-old mother getting into one and trying to program it or whatever is not comforting. A generation growing up with driverless cars--yes, when they get old, probably a good idea.
I also hate the way that everybody has to own a car (with the payments, the insurance, the repairs, the maintenance that goes with, never mind the taxes for roads and bridges) unless you live in a metro area.
My gramma used to tell wonderful stories about getting on the train with her girlfriend Wilhelmina and taking day trips. Every little podunk town had a station, and they travelled all over Michigan in those days with their picnic basket and high button shoes. Probably for the proverbial nickel.
I loved London--train, bus, taxi, plus hiking.
As a child I once rode on the City of Denver just before passenger service was discontinued. I still think trains would be a more fun way to travel than flying.
DeleteI agree. Always loved public transportation and trains. My mother didn't have a car until I was 12. I rented a car my first trip to Germany, but it was public transportation thereafter. Oh, to not need a car. I no longer get any pleasure from them.
DeleteUsed to take the train all the time from Lansing to Chicago. So comfy and pleasant.
DeleteBuses are another story. I took the Greyhound a few times to get to college. One time there was an exhaust leak that about choked us with diesel fumes. Anotber time a guy tried to hit on me. It was about that time that I decided I was done with buses.
DeleteLong-distance bus travel isn't great. Can't get up and move around much. No dining car.
DeleteMy father's idea of a vacation was to see how many railroads we could ride in two weeks. When he discovered Canadian Pacific he practically married the railroad. But most of those railroad companies are dead now.
Delete