"No self-driving car should have missed that pedestrian crossing the road."

So... it didn't.

Ahh, the grace and versatility of English...

Having just spent hours negotiating Nashville and Atlanta traffic, I can tell you that modern Americans can't do the speed limit on an Interstate. Backups and stoppages are common due to mere human indecisiveness. I came to a full halt many times because my fellow travelers could simply could not concentrate on getting down the road.

Robots would fix that. They don't gawk at accidents or at the nice blonde - or anything that resembles a female - by the roadside. Skirt? Hit the brakes!

Um, I'm trying to figure out just how putting even more (individual) cars on the roads makes things better? Due to sheer numbers, even AI and robots won't be able to get there any faster on clogged up roads.

Sorry, but I just don't think this is a giant step for mankind (or womankind either).

Hope they work better than self flushing toilets

Can you retrofit the Pink Nash?

And, will you change your I am a human confirmation for submission question to “People are driven to work in . . .”?

"Um, I'm trying to figure out just how putting even more (individual) cars on the roads makes things better?"

Not "more", necessarily, because the number of cars on the road depends on the number of people requiring transportation - and don't miss that the 'bot's not gabbing on the phone, can know the position and velocity of all cars around it and doesn't care that you want to look at the crash.

A bot's job? Arrive where you are, take you where you want to be, charge itself. What's your job?

Mass transit? Even if you forget that non-field jobs don't have to require a commute, there's no way other than gross seizure of property to put rail in where it's not already - practical rail, not the high-speed nonsense nobody remembers has to stop.

Lotta changes coming. At one time, the car was a big deal in NYC because there wasn't going to be any horse exhaust.

Pink Rambler has been gone for a long time. I rarely leave the house these days, as I am writing a medical expose.

I love the idea of self-driving cars, and I think the fact that Raddy points out above -- that robots will not drive like assholes -- will mean a lot for safety and also for traffic being less nightmarish.

Cars will also go off the roads and be junked as more people see they have other options.

Car insurance companies (selling personal insurance to the individual driver) surely are not happy about this.

I don't think people are uncomfortable with robots in their lives. So I doubt robot cars will change that. It is just that robots aren't that great yet. We've had roombas for quite a while now. They are nice for some things but for most of us they don't really replace a vacuum cleaner so having two (both a manual and an automatic) doesn't really make sense.

The Pink Rambler... Wonder where it is now. I've got guitars like that. I'll always wonder what became of the '53.

I liked this article about levels of autonomy, because it shows how each regulatory/advisory body has their own standards...

And more importantly, this will NOT be one-size-fits-all. Not for every car, not for every setting, and certainly not for almost any single driver/passenger.

When are people going to stop complaining about self-driving vehicles? When there's no legal need to have a designated driver inside these cars anymore.

Plus, they will capture the hearts and money from the hotel chains if they device a mass-produced automated car with an interior that only needs a good hosing for it to be clean.

I cannot WAIT for there to be a service where you can call a self driving car. Ideally you could schedule one to take you to and from work every day, and then call one as needed for other things. I would get rid of my car in a heartbeat if we had that.

When you miss a payment these self driving cars will drive themselves to the dealership.

Until they can make self drive truck and jeeps for people who like to go off roading and camping in the middle of no where car insurance companies will still exist

"Um, I'm trying to figure out just how putting even more (individual) cars on the roads makes things better?"

There won't be more cars on the road. There will, in fact, likely be far fewer. And for just the reason that Daghain mentions above: "I would get rid of my car in a heartbeat if we had that."

I suspect many folks would.

Do you know what most cars do, most of the time? They sit. They sit motionless and unoccupied (often at substantial expense) something like 90% of the time, waiting for the owner to show up and drive somewhere.

Once the owner of an autonomous vehicle realizes that he can make money during these times leasing his car out for short term use (which will likely take about 3 nanoseconds) the game will change forever.

The next logical step, especially after realizing the convenience of having a vehicle at your beck and call without the headache of ownership, will be do ditch ownership completely. This will result in a *reduction* of vehicles on the road. A reduction possibly as high as 90%. Imagine what we will do with all the empty parking garages . . . .

Lotta changes coming indeed.

Do you know what most cars do, most of the time? They sit. They sit motionless and unoccupied (often at substantial expense) something like 90% of the time, waiting for the owner to show up and drive somewhere. ~ railmeat at March 30, 2018 12:38 PM

That expensive motionless car is not a hunk of metal, it's freedom. You can go out to it and drive almost anywhere you want on a moment's notice - into any neighborhood, out of town, out of state, on the road, off the road, etc.

I suspect that having to wait for a car and being restricted to in-town destinations may be a small enough price for many people to ditch their cars, as plenty of city dwellers already make do with public transit and rentals. And I'm sure a service with out-of-town destination privileges will crop up.

Which brings up the question, what happens when driverless car companies find their cars being vandalized more often in certain neighborhoods, or by customers from certain neighborhoods? What about people throwing up in the car and not cleaning it up? Will we have another red-lining controversy as companies charge more for certain neighborhoods or restrict their cars from going into those neighborhoods?

Driverless cars sound wonderful, but the back-end maintenance is dependent upon someone who has almost no stake in a successful outcome. Airplanes are cleaned in a half-assed fashion because the cleaner has no stake in making sure you don't find a used tissue in the seat back. His turnaround time is too tight for him to check every nook and cranny. Walk through the plane with a vacuum and get paid. The mechanics have a real stake in doing their job - logs are kept to make sure they don't half-ass the repairs and the plane crashes because of it.

So, good luck with that driverless car that took Suzie and her drunk friends home from the club last night. Don't worry about that smell coming from the glove box. Just enjoy whatever freedom the network allows you.

This will result in a *reduction* of vehicles on the road. ~ railmeat at March 30, 2018 12:38 PM

Not necessarily. People who currently use busses and subways may be motivated to switch to driverless cars for the privacy, lower costs, and convenience - no walking to the bus stop or train station as the car meets you at your door.

That switch, done on a large enough scale, would result in more cars on the road, as well as an increased demand for cars, increased wear and tear on roads, and increased need for administration of driverless car networks.

Youse guys are missing something (and the network doesn't necessarily have to be administered...)...

Intelligent cars don't have to stop for red lights, anticipating them. Nor do they miss turns. They can synchronize with other cars to form short "trains" between stops for the aero efficiency.

Drive between wherever you are now and your destination. Count the times you are impeded because another driver is confused, on the phone, doesn't know how big her car is vs a parking space, etc.
Change that number to zero.

A fully automated fleet of cars doesn't need stop lights or signs. They don't even need distance between them in traffic.

Drive between wherever you are now and your destination. Count the times you are impeded because another driver is confused, on the phone, doesn't know how big her car is vs a parking space, etc. Change that number to zero. ~ Radwaste at March 30, 2018 2:54 PM

I appreciate that current issues with driving will be reduced or even eliminated. However, you're discounting the fact that new issues and inconveniences will arise. I don't know what they'll be, but there will be issues.

"Intelligent cars don't have to stop for red lights, anticipating them."

If they are driving on the same roads as cars with human drivers this probably doesn't make a difference. There is also the issue of human drivers bullying robot drivers. The google cars are easy to harass and take their turns at stop signs.

If you have a self-driving car would you have to have a driver license? Could a blind man with his own self-driving car go by himself where and when he pleases? What about a kid? Could a mother send her kids to their grandma's house on their own? Or would she get busted for leaving them in the car unattended? Could you send your dog to the groomer on his own?

I want to see what a driverless car will do in the middle of a riot when surrounded by rioters beating on the car with pipes.