Future cars / Driverless cars

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
DanPatchToget
Target Field
Posts: 535
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby DanPatchToget » March 22nd, 2018, 8:48 am

mamundsen wrote:
March 22nd, 2018, 8:32 am
Unrelated to the pedestrian discussion.

I had a thought this morning... it's pot hole season. As drivers many of us watch for the BIG ONE and will modify how we drive. Options are usually straddling a pot hole or slightly going over a line. Think we'll see an increase in blown out tires once the driverless cars don't look for pot holes?
I thought about that as well as I crawled over potholes in St. Paul. If I'm using a car sharing service then frankly I don't care what happens to their car (unless I get charged for damages), but if I own it then I guess I'm not using it when potholes are prevalent.

Also, really stupid question, but lets say some stupid teenagers throw a bucket of water at an AV. Will sensors detect that its a liquid and drive through it, or will it slam on the brakes and give the rider(s) a heart attack? I can neither confirm nor deny that my friends did something similar when they were young, but with a bottle of sand.

alexschief
Landmark Center
Posts: 216
Joined: November 12th, 2015, 11:35 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby alexschief » March 22nd, 2018, 8:52 am

The actions of the human "driver" in this case show starkly the dangers of Level 3 automation. The human driver was complacent with the technology and lulled into thinking her car was fully autonomous. It's an understandable, probably inevitable mistake, even if she was being paid not to make it.

Uber is going to have to answer some serious questions about this. It seems as though their LiDAR failed. Their human driver obviously failed. Their cars have caused one death in about 5 million miles driven, a rate about 20 times the fatality rate caused by human drivers.

What an awful company.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1624
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby amiller92 » March 22nd, 2018, 9:12 am

tmart wrote:
March 22nd, 2018, 8:48 am
I’m thinking they haven’t solved pavement conditions yet or we’d see them testing these things outside of the desert. But in theory there’s nothing preventing a model from detecting potholes and avoiding them when safe. It’s not a fundamentally different problem from the other vision problems they’ve had to solve.
At the moment, seems more like "haven't solved yet."

tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 304
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby tmart » March 22nd, 2018, 9:29 am

DanPatchToget wrote:
March 22nd, 2018, 8:48 am
I thought about that as well as I crawled over potholes in St. Paul. If I'm using a car sharing service then frankly I don't care what happens to their car (unless I get charged for damages), but if I own it then I guess I'm not using it when potholes are prevalent.

Also, really stupid question, but lets say some stupid teenagers throw a bucket of water at an AV. Will sensors detect that its a liquid and drive through it, or will it slam on the brakes and give the rider(s) a heart attack? I can neither confirm nor deny that my friends did something similar when they were young, but with a bottle of sand.
I mean, in general I feel like "resilient when water hits sensors" is a pretty core feature of AVs. Maybe the suddenness of a bucket of water could throw off the models that compensate for these things, but I would expect they'd solve a problem like that well before sending these things out without a human fallback. One thing to remember is that these things are dealing with loads of sensors of various kinds, and not just LIDAR alone, or cameras alone. The expectation is that in a situation where one sensor doesn't perform optimally, the others will pick it up. Just like different tools provide more or less useful input for certain factors (e.g., radar is great for figuring out how fast something is going, but useless for figuring out what that thing actually is), we would expect some subset of the sensors to work in moisture or partial obstruction, and for that subset to be sufficient for safe navigation.

As far as the dumb teenagers aspect goes...if they're smart, they'll learn from the experience with tech employee shuttles in San Francisco, and realize they need to plan for these things' high profile and controversial nature making them a magnet for vandalism and protesters. I'm less confident that they'll be sufficiently self-aware on this count. :lol:
amiller92 wrote:
March 22nd, 2018, 9:12 am
tmart wrote:
March 22nd, 2018, 8:48 am
I’m thinking they haven’t solved pavement conditions yet or we’d see them testing these things outside of the desert. But in theory there’s nothing preventing a model from detecting potholes and avoiding them when safe. It’s not a fundamentally different problem from the other vision problems they’ve had to solve.
At the moment, seems more like "haven't solved yet."
They have solved lots of technically complex and meaningful problems; the models they're able to create in real-time are already an incredible accomplishment in Computer Science. (Note that not all companies' AV prototypes are created equal, either.) It's just that there are still other problems to be solved before they can be commercialized. My point is simply that the modeling techniques they've used so far will probably adapt pretty well to a lot of the cases that haven't been tackled yet. There's a huge set of scenarios to be considered, and a much higher degree of certainty needed than we've ever demanded from machine learning applications.

mplsjaromir
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1094
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 8:03 am
Location: Sommerset Knolls

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby mplsjaromir » March 28th, 2018, 6:07 am

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... y-concerns

Tesla downgraded by Moody’s. Bond offerings are now seven steps into junk rating.

Who could have foreseen their Model 3 production issues?

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4711
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby David Greene » March 28th, 2018, 12:38 pm

That was sarcasm, right? :)

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 304
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby tmart » March 31st, 2018, 2:09 pm

A Tesla on Autopilot had a nasty one-car crash in Silicon Valley, killing its driver.

http://www.startribune.com/tesla-says-v ... 478457373/

Logs show the driver did not have his hands on the wheel. Autopilot isn't supposed to be fully autonomous and drivers are supposed to always be ready to take over. Between this and the Uber crash, I think we have a lot of evidence to support the position that humans don't make a particularly good fallback mechanism for AVs. I think it's human nature to lose vigilance when the car starts to feel sufficiently reliable.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4711
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby David Greene » March 31st, 2018, 2:17 pm

The bigger takeaway is that truly autonomous vehicles are quite a bit further away than advocates like to say.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


tmart
Union Depot
Posts: 304
Joined: October 6th, 2017, 10:05 am
Location: Expat

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby tmart » March 31st, 2018, 2:34 pm

David Greene wrote:
March 31st, 2018, 2:17 pm
The bigger takeaway is that truly autonomous vehicles are quite a bit further away than advocates like to say.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I don't think these incidents really tell us that. I definitely am not confident in Uber's AVs. Tesla's is trickier because this was a normal driver in a production car; I would assume this doesn't represent the current state of their tech. But there are lots of others in the AV arms race with varying objectives, levels of expertise, and amounts of completed testing/training.

Personally I'm less concerned about the technological issues and more about the social and policy ones. There's going to be a huge range of quality and safety between the different providers of AVs and AFAIK we haven't set out minimum standards for safety and testing. We don't have a legal framework for assigning liability and fault. We haven't proactively set boundaries on how and where these things will share space with humans. We haven't really addressed the congestion problems they'll create. We don't have any regulations to protect user data privacy, or equity of access, or the potential consolidation of a meaningful chunk of the transportation industry (both manufacturing and service) into a few powerful players.

Multimodal
Rice Park
Posts: 445
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby Multimodal » March 31st, 2018, 5:07 pm

tmart wrote:Personally I'm less concerned about the technological issues and more about the social and policy ones. There's going to be a huge range of quality and safety between the different providers of AVs and AFAIK we haven't set out minimum standards for safety and testing. We don't have a legal framework for assigning liability and fault. We haven't proactively set boundaries on how and where these things will share space with humans. We haven't really addressed the congestion problems they'll create. We don't have any regulations to protect user data privacy, or equity of access, or the potential consolidation of a meaningful chunk of the transportation industry (both manufacturing and service) into a few powerful players.
Great insight.

It’s like we’re at the beginning of the automobile age, and we have to make sure they don’t burn the streetcars and villainize pedestrians as “jaywalkers”.

Autonomous vehicle companies will pull all the same tricks as the car companies of yore.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1624
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby amiller92 » April 2nd, 2018, 2:50 pm

tmart wrote:
David Greene wrote:
March 31st, 2018, 2:17 pm
The bigger takeaway is that truly autonomous vehicles are quite a bit further away than advocates like to say.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I don't think these incidents really tell us that. I definitely am not confident in Uber's AVs. Tesla's is trickier because this was a normal driver in a production car; I would assume this doesn't represent the current state of their tech. But there are lots of others in the AV arms race with varying objectives, levels of expertise, and amounts of completed testing/training.

Personally I'm less concerned about the technological issues and more about the social and policy ones. There's going to be a huge range of quality and safety between the different providers of AVs and AFAIK we haven't set out minimum standards for safety and testing. We don't have a legal framework for assigning liability and fault. We haven't proactively set boundaries on how and where these things will share space with humans. We haven't really addressed the congestion problems they'll create. We don't have any regulations to protect user data privacy, or equity of access, or the potential consolidation of a meaningful chunk of the transportation industry (both manufacturing and service) into a few powerful players.

All of that and they are already used as an excuse for not doing stuff.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5604
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby MNdible » April 10th, 2018, 12:41 pm


DanPatchToget
Target Field
Posts: 535
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby DanPatchToget » April 10th, 2018, 10:28 pm

MNdible wrote:
April 10th, 2018, 12:41 pm
PRT: No longer the car of the future.
Kind of sad, as I remember at the State Fair seeing the concept for it, but I'm not surprised. I don't know if this is an official designation, but the line in West Virginia is labeled GRT (Group Rapid Transit).

PRT may not necessarily be dead, but it would be very different from the mini monorail pods envisioned. I can see a similar system, but on the road with autonomous cars.

It does make me a little worried that buses, LRT, BRT, and/or commuter rail could have a similar fate but we'll just have to wait and see (and check how government from the local to federal level decides on transportation policies; whether to be more friendly towards transit, or the status quo of car-friendly, transit-hostile policies).

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4711
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby David Greene » April 11th, 2018, 1:49 pm

Oh it's not dead. Its legacy as the shiny thing anti-transit people use as an excuse not to do transit lives on in the form of autonomous vehicles.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5604
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby MNdible » April 11th, 2018, 1:55 pm

Except that autonomous cars definitely are going to happen, for better or worse.

mplsjaromir
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1094
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 8:03 am
Location: Sommerset Knolls

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby mplsjaromir » April 11th, 2018, 3:11 pm

There will be self-driving features and limited routes populated by self driving vehicles. But self driving livery vehicles integrating into existing cities? Not in our lifetime.

karen nelson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 110
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 10:47 am

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby karen nelson » April 13th, 2018, 4:18 pm

Waymo is already taxing people around Phoenix without drivers just fine - not that they won't have accidents, but overall - Google seems to have already figured this out at least for a city like Phoenix. And they are starting to test in other cities.

Everything that makes AVs work keeps getting better and cheaper. Velodyne makes expensive lidar but it keeps getting cheaper and just read some other company is coming out with way cheaper lidar to try to unseat Velodyne. The processing power made by the likes of Nvidia keeps getting cheaper, AI keeps getting better, and electric vehicles - the ultimate fleet vehicle will keep getting cheaper with cheaper batteries.

AVs will be happening. At the worst, they will only be able to operate in select cities with maybe some help/restrictions from certain streets, areas with those cities, by 2021.

I think AV shuttles could be the killer app of AVs, as they could be cheap and run fixed routes frequently so never have to walk more than a couple of blocks for one or wait more than a few minutes, but unfortunately I think AV single-occupant cars will end up so cheap, flexible, and good at that they do, that only way people use shuttles is if most congested cities force it via congestion pricing or lane, pick-up preferences for multi user vehicles.
Last edited by karen nelson on April 13th, 2018, 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

karen nelson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 110
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 10:47 am

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby karen nelson » April 13th, 2018, 4:19 pm

So I'm working on a list of all the good and bad for cities, our streets, our built environment, our transportation folks think will come from AV revolution...will post for comments in a few days.

DanPatchToget
Target Field
Posts: 535
Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm

Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby DanPatchToget » April 13th, 2018, 7:05 pm

I believe it was in Burnsville's Comprehensive Plan it was mentioned traffic lights would no longer be needed with AVs. Everyone wants to use AVs instead of driving, biking, or walking right?

karen nelson
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 110
Joined: April 24th, 2017, 10:47 am

Re: RE: Re: Future cars / Driverless cars

Postby karen nelson » April 16th, 2018, 7:47 pm

DanPatchToget wrote:I believe it was in Burnsville's Comprehensive Plan it was mentioned traffic lights would no longer be needed with AVs. Everyone wants to use AVs instead of driving, biking, or walking right?
The no traffic light thing seems way further out than AVs becoming vast majority of trips/miles.

Even the very optimistic Tony Seba who predicts something like 90+ percent of miles/trips in cities by share ride AVs by 2030 ....I think says about 40 perecnt of vehicles will still be individual owned vehicle (the 60 percent of fleet AVs will just do way more trips than individually-owned vehicles).

The individuals owning those not-ride-shared cars will have a choice if they want autonomous or not, since driver is already in car anyways, no cost savings by ebing autonomous.

- I suspect there will be aways be a decent minority of people who both have reason to own individual car even when ride-share AVs very cheap and won't want autonomous vehicle...or could just have a 15 year car in good shape and place to park it, so they just don't want to give up.

Anyone who has to carry a lot of gear in their vehicle on regular basis, like contractor, family with kids and sports gear, car seats etc...will still want an individualy owned car...and thus may not have it be autonomous.

I can see DUI drivers forced to use AVs, and eventually even individually owned vehicles may be required to be autonomous in certain city limits etc just for safety and traffic efficiencies, but I think that is further off than 2030.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk



Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests