adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,827
Likes: 4,743
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 15, 2017 20:42:37 GMT
That isn't the issue I was referring to. In both those cases the passenger is simply a customer of a service provider; liability (unless proven otherwise) lies with the service provide i.e. the taxi/bus company etc. However, if we are talking private vehicle ownership and driverless cars (i.e. simply slotting autonomous vehicles into the current norm of private/individual ownership) its a different story. In today's world, if you go into the back of me its your personal fault (well, I would say that wouldn't I). On the other hand if you are travelling in an automonous Skoda that you own, and I'm travelling in an autonomous Aston Martin that I own (I like to think it would be that way around), and despite all the tech you still go into the back of me, who has liability ? You ? Skoda ? The retailer you bought it from ? And what if technology means that cars are not fully autonomous, but have some interdependence (inter vehicle signal/data sharing) ? <nods> While there's a manual over-ride, legal liability is going to be a nightmare. And, unless there IS a manual over-ride, there's going to be a whole RAFT of other problems. Fine example - I live near Hay on Wye. It's coming up to the festival. Each year, a number of temporary car parks open up in fields to cater for the massive (relative to the town) attendance. There is virtually no mobile signal, let alone anything approaching a functional, reliable data signal. So... when autonomous car arrives, how does it know where to park? Is it really going to interpret the range of temporary car parking signs, ranging from charity-logoed to farmer-scrawled, and decide which the driver wishes to use? Is it going to follow the hi-vis clad lad pointing to where in the field to park? How is it going to deal with the policeman standing on the main road junction, telling people that the town is temporarily closed because of congestion (but it's OK to just drop a passenger off first), so use the park-and-ride? Or, indeed, all the car parks are waterlogged because of the rain, so you have no choice but to park-and-ride...
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Mar 15, 2017 21:30:39 GMT
The car informs its occupant that it is entering a zone where special temporary traffic control arrangements can apply. It then gives the option of passing through this area and continuing the journey to some previously requested destination, or allowing the car to be directed to local temporary parking areas connected with the festival: the car taking direction from a temporary radio mast erected for the event and controlled by event organisers. More individually specified transport needs could perhaps be satisfied by abandoning the darned car and using an electric wheelchair, or heaven forbid, one's legs. Never underestimate the flexibility and inventiveness of humans when the need arises.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,827
Likes: 4,743
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 15, 2017 23:04:18 GMT
The car informs its occupant that it is entering a zone where special temporary traffic control arrangements can apply. It then gives the option of passing through this area and continuing the journey to some previously requested destination, or allowing the car to be directed to local temporary parking areas connected with the festival: the car taking direction from a temporary radio mast erected for the event and controlled by event organisers. More individually specified transport needs could perhaps be satisfied by abandoning the darned car and using an electric wheelchair, or heaven forbid, one's legs. Never underestimate the flexibility and inventiveness of humans when the need arises. So, basically, this device that's meant to simplify things means that everybody else has to get involved in a shedload more expense and infrastructure...?
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Mar 16, 2017 6:05:29 GMT
That does seem to be the general trend of civilizations over the last couple of millennia. Not sure why we keep doing it, but we do. We traded the simplicity of walking for horsepower - mucking out stables, watching where you step, learning how to control a muscle-bound nervous wreck (that's the horse) for the obvious advantages. We then traded the horse's cross - country ability and speed for the motorised vehicle - restricted to roads generally, noisy, polluting, expensive to run,for the advantages - more speed, comfort, status enhancement. In the areas where motorised vehicles are now too numerous our individual decision making processes fail to optimise journey times and sometimes cause damage to property or life. We could still drive ourselves across fields in a 4wd for farming, or tootle down country lanes with the windows open or the top down in rural areas, but cities, and motorways perhaps, may need different arrangements to cope with the future volume of traffic.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,827
Likes: 4,743
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 16, 2017 8:11:58 GMT
That does seem to be the general trend of civilizations over the last couple of millennia. Not sure why we keep doing it, but we do. Because each major step previously has brought massive benefits.
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Mar 16, 2017 8:46:15 GMT
Well this one is aimed at dealing with the congestion of traffic isn't it?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,827
Likes: 4,743
|
Post by adrianc on Mar 16, 2017 8:55:42 GMT
Well this one is aimed at dealing with the congestion of traffic isn't it? Mmm. "Different private cars" will not deal with congestion. Sensible urban public transport would do that. But, of course, that won't do anything about extra-urban/rural transport issues.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 16, 2017 8:57:20 GMT
And of course the other aspect is the issue of liability for compliance with road rules etc. If my Aston Martin was speeding, or ran a red light, who's liable ? We are currently in a world where say 99.9% of accidents and breach of road rules are down to owner/driver responsibility, and a legal (and commercial) framework which is predicated on that. That is flipped on its head with autonomous vehicles. It should be easy to work out who is liable because there will be video footage from several angles, GPS data, radar or lidar and many other sensors. Not the point I was making. Regardless of all that data, who's responsbile for the speeding offence ? Me as the 'owerner/"driver"' or the manufacturer ? My point was that the biggest 'roadblock' to deployment / adoption of driverless cars is constructing and getting in place the legal framework in which they can operate. We don't yet have that and no clear consensus on what it should look like.
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Post by bigfoot12 on Mar 16, 2017 9:04:22 GMT
Well this one is aimed at dealing with the congestion of traffic isn't it? The problem is that if it works well, I will use my car much more. If I could get my car to drop me off in the centre of a town or city and I don't have to worry about parking I'll use my car much more. If I can do some work in the car even if it is low grade telephone calling then that would swing many journeys for me away from the train. If I can send my car to collect relatives who are visiting why wouldn't I? And if I can drink and then get my car to drive me home even better. If I could afford the car, and the servicing, and the monthly subscription for data and mapping I could imagine using it 10 times as much as I do now. Those with children aged 10-17 might use it even more.
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Mar 16, 2017 10:26:29 GMT
Yes, we use our cars more every time the road network is improved - better surfaces, more lanes, by-passes etc. No reason to suppose autonomous cars won't have the same effect. But should we then seek to make the use of cars more irksome? I'd use public transport more if it was less irksome!
|
|
toffeeboy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 499
Likes: 359
|
Post by toffeeboy on Mar 21, 2017 13:18:54 GMT
It should be easy to work out who is liable because there will be video footage from several angles, GPS data, radar or lidar and many other sensors. Not the point I was making. Regardless of all that data, who's responsbile for the speeding offence ? Me as the 'owerner/"driver"' or the manufacturer ? My point was that the biggest 'roadblock' to deployment / adoption of driverless cars is constructing and getting in place the legal framework in which they can operate. We don't yet have that and no clear consensus on what it should look like. A fully autonomous car wouldn't be capable of speeding so the question is mute. If it could speed then it would be a nightmare situation for the developers as they would be liable as it would have been their system that enabled the vehicle to speed.
The extension of this is that if all of the cars on the road are fully automated then there wouldn't be the need for a speed limit as they could all talk to each other to plan the traffic together. A car would be capable of calculating the safest speed it could travel based on the varying factors involved and not exceed that speed.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 21, 2017 14:30:26 GMT
A fully autonomous car wouldn't be capable of speeding so the question is mute.
ROFL !!! A lot. Ah that's alright then. So the legislative/legal framework that is needed to be put in place is not as far off / need as much work doing on it as i was making out.
|
|
|
Post by moonraker on Mar 23, 2017 13:58:39 GMT
Well this one is aimed at dealing with the congestion of traffic isn't it? ... If I could afford the car, and the servicing, and the monthly subscription for data and mapping ... How many people will be able to? I've seen a figure of £5K on the price of a new car. And what about the cost of repairing the new technology when it goes wrong, especially if one's finances are limited? Another big problem will be mixing autonomous cars with those still with human drivers - how will the latter react to the new cars driving themselves sensibly? I'm looking forward to seeing how such a mix - and eventually a predominance of autonomous cars - will cope with the mayhem in the very small "20-minute" car park at my local railway station as vehicles crowd in to await the evening trains back from London. There's official parking for two cars (plus two for disabled drivers and one for the ticket-man who finishes work at 1300). Far more cars crowd in, with one or two unable to do so and spilling back onto the main road. It would be fascinating to see twenty or so cars "talking" to each other and sorting themselves out.
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Mar 23, 2017 14:17:56 GMT
I can't see that 'mixed' traffic could work - manual drivers would only have to up their risk taking manoeuvres slightly and the well mannered and cautiously programmed auto driver bot will back off and let them through. Imagine two manual drivers jousting for road space in the hope that the other car will back off like all the others had. More likely that some roads would be designated as 'auto only' - like bus lanes are supposed to be now.
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Mar 23, 2017 21:31:14 GMT
A fully autonomous car wouldn't be capable of speeding so the question is mute.
ROFL !!! A lot. Ah that's alright then. So the legislative/legal framework that is needed to be put in place is not as far off / need as much work doing on it as i was making out. Software to tweak the AI to go 5 (or more!) mph faster would likely become commonplace.
|
|