Google's Self-Driving Cars Pass 300,000 Miles Accident-Free

[doublenix]

As long as this doesn't lead to Johnny Taxis, I'm all for it.

The real bug of it all is the human failover concept. People won't be paying attention. When cars become platforms like this, they will be modded and will be hacked. That's where problems can arise. For me, I'll take a steering wheel.

 

[The Lugz]

Screw all those military ideas.

Google is going to become Skynet people.
Just watch.

i don't think the military has the budget anymore.. googlecorp will release a t-virus soon
so it wont matter, were screwed either way

 

[The Human Torch]

I hate ,and suck at, driving, so this would be perfect. Release this car on the European market and I will give Google all my internets.

 

[The Hungry Samurai]

I drive for a living. This is awesome, and at the same time it terrifies me. Hopefully in the future they'll keep me on as a backup driver in case of device malfunction, cuz I can't go back to retail....I...I won't damnit.

 

[DaRigger420]

I can foresee several issues appearing on this but to name a few....

Carjackings are now going to be easier. A hacker simply works his way into the signals the cars will be sending to each other and tells your car to drive itself down to the chopshop.

Crashes will not be a thing of the past as there is always the unexpected. Say you are all moving down the road in your safe little computerized boxes and you have a blowout. Your car will most likely still crash and take out a couple others.

Taking a nap while the car drives itself over long distances. For expert opinion on this one we go to HAL9000. HAL, how do you feel about driving sleeping passengers over long distances? Oh that's right, you KILL THEM!

As for the Johnny Cab, Skynet and Google Maps comments; Yes Johnny Cabs are just over the horizon, Skynet already exists and is just biding its time and I fully agree that these cars can't be using Google Maps and actually getting to their destinations.

p.s. Nascar fans will miss the crashes!

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Oh fuck me in the goat-ass... I just finished reading S.M. Stirling's T2: Future War... and self driving cars... Skynet... I know its a bit of Luddite-ish paranoia, but i would never in my life trust myself to a self-driving car. Its hard enough to trust planes that fly themselves (despite the least amount of accidents due to parts manufacturing failures), but cars are way too far. All we would need is some jackass who thinks its funny to write a virus that causes car wrecks on major freeways or as was mentioned earlier... Google/Skynet

 

[DeltaEdge]

Was I the only one that thought of Ex-Drivers when I saw this? Anyways, once it is perfected, and release unto the public, I am anticipating that since we are not driving the car on in anyway in control of it's actions minus setting the destination, we will probably not have to pay for auto insurance. I also suddenly see this becoming the kind of situation like in Ex-Driver where you just rent the car and it drives itself to you, then takes you to wherever, then drives itself back to its storage space until it is needed again. That means no money spent on gas or car maintainence either . The only downfall that I see to this would have to be computer errors. Well, that's where the Ex-Drivers come in. Okay, I'm done talking about the Ex-Drivers now.

 

[persephone]

That said, we need to be absolutely sure they're safe before just any idiot can buy one.

Actually, the idiot buying it first is a good thing, since it would prevent them from driving like idiot on the road. =p

Not necessarily; there's no such thing as idiot-proof, but this thing will need to be as close as we can get it.

And you don't want the driver to stop paying attention just because a computer's behind the wheel; computers may be safer the vast majority of the time, but inevitably there WILL be a glitch or some occurrence that requires human intervention. Those glitches and occurrences will need to be as minimized as possible before the cars are released, because idiot drivers will inevitably decide it's a good idea to take a nap during their commute.

Plus, I foresee stupid stunts such as putting a five year old behind the wheel just so a lazy/bad parent doesn't have to bother to transport them themselves. And then the five year old might decide to try to drive to the grocery store instead. Part of making sure the cars are safe/idiot-proof is making sure they can't be abused like that -- or that it's at least rather difficult.

I should also point out that part of why I'd feel comfortable with one of these cars is that, despite my disability, I *can* take over driving in case of an emergency. The damage to my arms would make it painful and a bit difficult, but I have a license and can legally, safely drive. As much as I love the idea of these cars being able to, say, transport a blind person, I am worried about what happens in the rare event where the software glitches and there's no human driver who can safely take over.

 

[persephone]

Oh fuck me in the goat-ass... I just finished reading S.M. Stirling's T2: Future War... and self driving cars... Skynet... I know its a bit of Luddite-ish paranoia, but i would never in my life trust myself to a self-driving car. Its hard enough to trust planes that fly themselves (despite the least amount of accidents due to parts manufacturing failures), but cars are way too far. All we would need is some jackass who thinks its funny to write a virus that causes car wrecks on major freeways or as was mentioned earlier... Google/Skynet

I have to agree that computer viruses and hacking become a major concern if these cars go mainstream, or are even just used by the rich or needy. Sooner or later somebody's going to try to get away with murdering someone by hacking their self-driving car (or they'll at least make you go in dangerous loop-de-loops as a "joke"). That's why I think it's important for these cars to have multiple manual overrides to let the driver take over, and that at least one such override must be purely physical in nature (i.e., no software to hack). It wouldn't provide perfect protection, but it would sure help.

 

[PoweD]

I sooner trust a computer to give me a lift than most people I know. Also I think we all want to know, can the google car beat the stig?

I WANT TO KNOW THIS, NOW

I'm not sure about driver-less cars, i like driving, maybe this will be just an extra feature to normal cars?

 

[The Great JT]

Google: Because SOMEONE has to bring us the future.

 

[Callate]

Yesterday, someone dove over two lanes in front of me in the midst of a turn getting off a highway, followed immediately by someone else making an illegal left turn in front of me across two lanes of traffic.

I am more than ready to see driving duties taken over by our machine overlords, thanks.

 

[DrOswald]

Driving is fun.

Being driven around in a hybrid lexus by computers seems... Stressful, and not fun at all.

While technologically cool, i don't want this future. I can see that in under 50 years from now we'll all be driving around in completely electric cars that are completely automated, with the driver in the seat with a wheel just for tradition. Don't forget the 'safety cameras' monitoring everyones every move.

Seems like the next 20 years will be the last time the human race will get to enjoy freedom and fun, and you know what?
It's googles fault.

I think going from self driving car to gross violations of human rights is a pretty ridiculous leap of logic.

I, for one, am looking forward to the day I can buy one of these. Driving is a waste of time that just happens to be absolutely vital for everyday life. A self driving car does not take away freedom, it adds to it by eliminating the need for you to perform a repetitive and relatively simple task each day. For some this will give as much as 3 hours of extra freedom each day. That time could be used to read a book or play a video game. Students could use the time to study, and businessmen could use the time to answer emails. Hell, I would probably just use the time to get extra sleep.

We don't lose freedom and fun by automating repetitive and simple tasks. We increase it.

 

[yeti585]

Google, we did not need a self driving car. Yes it will help a small number of the population. It could also lower the cost of a taxi/bus ride, but with that it will destroy jobs.

What we need is a good source of renewable energy. Step up your game Google.

As an afterthought: if Google monitors where you go on the web to "make your web experience better" (or whatever) will it monitor where you go in the world? Will your pissed off girlfriend be able to check where you were last night with a simple click of the "History" bar?

 

[falcon1985]

I sooner trust a computer to give me a lift than most people I know. Also I think we all want to know, can the google car beat the stig?

I WANT TO KNOW THIS, NOW

I'm not sure about driver-less cars, i like driving, maybe this will be just an extra feature to normal cars?

I like driving too, except for the idiots who ruin it. How about we make it a mandatory feature for people who have shown themselves incapable of driving a car properly? Oh how the joy of driving would return to me.

 

[McMullen]

Reading people's comments here, I can't help but be reminded of the invention of the NMRI scanner. People saw the word "nuclear" and wouldn't go near the thing, so they had to change the name to MRI.

I guess some people never figure out that educating oneself is more effective than being afraid of whatever you don't understand.

Provided there's a way to override it, I see no problem with this. I'm willing to bet that a computer is a more reliable driver than a human; they don't get drowsy, they don't get distracted, they don't talk on their cell phones, they don't forget to use turn signals or look behind them, and they don't ride your bumper for ten miles just because they never learned to not be an asshole.

 

[grigjd3]

I'd be ready for this.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

You guys have fun with your ATMOS cars.

I'm going to stick with my human operated non-Sontaran non-Skynet vehicle, thank you very much.

Remove driver error? You mean like how Skynet reduces the chance of accidental nuclear launch to near zero???

But to be entirely honest, the thing that turns me off about these the most is the prospect that they would prevent rolling stops, mild speeding and other things I enjoy.

For the disabled, I think they make perfect sense.

 

[Bloodstain]

If we could interconnect those cars and create something akin to a cloud awareness (or hivemind, if you will) -- in this case: A computer system that controls and monitors all cars -- then we would probably never, ever have road accidents again. Almost never, I reckon.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the future is happening right now.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Would you ever trust such a car? Will it get annoyed at the constant back-seat driving it'll no doubt face? It seems we might find out sooner than many of us expected.

Yes. Yes, I would.

Imagine it. You could tell your car where you wanted to go, then sit back, take a nap, read a book, play a hand-held game - whatever.

And, I imagine, if everyone had one of these, they could be networked so that your car would know what the other cars on the road were thinking. Traffic accidents could be reduced to effectively 0 (with some error for mechanical failure causing some sort of unavoidable accident).

Bring it on, I say. I could actually get some good use out of my PSP.