• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: The News Thread

MindzEye said:
The cost of human driving insurance will, if it even continues to exist.
Click to expand...
Again, absolutely going to be grandfathered in. No government is going to force everyone to buy a new car. Every Automotive initiative more or less gets grandfathered in, with new cars required to have new features starting in whatever year.
Neither require a specific type of liability insurance. Driving a car does.
Click to expand...

And there are antique cars on the road today that don't meet all current safety standards, and people drive them using antique licenses. I'll happily do that. And good luck to the government that tries to take away the ability of people to drive their own cars.
 
Altair said:
Again, absolutely going to be grandfathered in. No government is going to force everyone to buy a new car. Every Automotive initiative more or less gets grandfathered in, with new cars required to have new features starting in whatever year.

And there are antique cars on the road today that don't meet all current safety standards, and people drive them using antique licenses. I'll happily do that. And good luck to the government that tries to take away the ability of people to drive their own cars.
Click to expand...

it wont be country wide and yes it will be gradual

it will be highway by highway, downtown cores, etc
 
i also think getting tough on drivers will be there as well

an extremely hard annual road test, extremely expensive fines for speeding, high insurance, etc
 
worm said:
would probably be easier for the computers to not have human controlled cars on the road

humans are the worst
Click to expand...

You act as if computer controlled cars wont need to be programmed to drive on the roads with human drivers for a decade or two to begin with.

Again, computer controlled cars are not happening overnight. No government can force a entire populace to buy a new vehicle overnight.
 
Altair said:
You act as if computer controlled cars wont need to be programmed to drive on the roads with human drivers for a decade or two to begin with.

Again, computer controlled cars are not happening overnight. No government can force a entire populace to buy a new vehicle overnight.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. It's still going to be ~5-10 years until self-driving cars are even legal to operate on roads, and then will take another 10-15 years before they become "mandatory" for new cars. And then probably another few years until they actually ban non-self-driving cars (although as mentioned, most likely with a grandfather clause in there). Maybe there will be a new tech that will speed this up, but yeah, it's going to take a while.
 
Habsy said:
Worst thing to happen to traffic since the inception of the merge lane (which people in Florida have no idea how to properly use. Hint: do not come to a full stop because you don’t want to accelerate that quickly).

How many times have you guys seen a driver not move when a light turns green? Then they move after getting honked and the light goes red screwing everyone behind them.

Or the lane drift.

Driving 20 while holding the phone straight out in front of the driver texting.

It goes on and on. All phones should be restricted to Bluetooth and hands free discussions. Texting should be outlawed while driving.

People need to put the phone down, it’s really not that important. Especially in comparison to a moving vehicle that can kill.
Click to expand...

+100

I cycled ~16 km r/t daily in TO for my commute, and it is ****ing terrifying how common it is to see people texting while driving.

Daily you get some idiot who ends up drifting into the bike lane cause they're on their phone. Fortunately I have a loud voice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Altair said:
Again, absolutely going to be grandfathered in. No government is going to force everyone to buy a new car. Every Automotive initiative more or less gets grandfathered in, with new cars required to have new features starting in whatever year.
Click to expand...

You can't "grandfather" the market unless the voting populace is willing to eat the costs.

And there are antique cars on the road today that don't meet all current safety standards, and people drive them using antique licenses. I'll happily do that. And good luck to the government that tries to take away the ability of people to drive their own cars.
Click to expand...

Antique licenses aren't insurance though. You're not thinking this through. Think about the nature of insurance and how it functions. A large group absorbs the inevitable costs put on the system by a small amount of people/incidents. Now drastically shrink the size of the group of end users. The government is going to do what? Force owners of autonomous cars to prop up the system by holding insurance that only needs to exist because a human driver might run into their autonomous car? Or the government is going to own the costs of human drivers running into shit? (remember that existing government run insurance set ups like Sask & BC only exist because it's a profitable industry, the desire to be in that business if it was a drain on general revenue would disappear in a hurry).

People will resist at first, until they get told enough stories about how their buddy from work catches 45 minutes of sleep while the car drives him to work, or how he was able to get a pile of extra work done on the way to the office and is leaving early. How about parking? Your autonomous vehicle won't need to be parked close to where you are (which if you work in a high density core with expensive parking is kind of a big ****ing deal...oh my car drives itself to a parking lot 10 minutes away to park for a fraction of the price? Or **** it, I can ride share my car out and make money off of it while I'm at work?). Then your car picks you up at the front doors, exactly when you're ready. There's just too many benefits man, mass adoption will be rapid.

Listen, I ****ing love driving. I will be one of those people in 2035 picking up a 2020 Porsche on the cheap because nobody wants to drive for themselves, and I'll do so as long as I can afford the insurance. But make no mistake, that shit will become cost prohibitive at some point.
 
MindzEye said:
You can't "grandfather" the market unless the voting populace is willing to eat the costs.
Click to expand...
You also cannot force people to buy a new car. This will work just like every other automotive advancement, mandatory in newer vehicles, but that cannot and will not be forced onto older vehicles.
Antique licenses aren't insurance though. You're not thinking this through. Think about the nature of insurance and how it functions. A large group absorbs the inevitable costs put on the system by a small amount of people/incidents. Now drastically shrink the size of the group of end users. The government is going to do what? Force owners of autonomous cars to prop up the system by holding insurance that only needs to exist because a human driver might run into their autonomous car? Or the government is going to own the costs of human drivers running into shit? (remember that existing government run insurance set ups like Sask & BC only exist because it's a profitable industry, the desire to be in that business if it was a drain on general revenue would disappear in a hurry).
Click to expand...
And I'm saying you aren't getting those older vehicles off the road for 20-30 years after automated cars are mandatory. The pool will shrink with each passing year, but at the end of the day, there are those who will continue to drive their older cars until they run into the ground. Considering how many vehicles are on the road, even 1-5 or 1-10 will still be a sizeable amount of the population
People will resist at first, until they get told enough stories about how their buddy from work catches 45 minutes of sleep while the car drives him to work, or how he was able to get a pile of extra work done on the way to the office and is leaving early. How about parking? Your autonomous vehicle won't need to be parked close to where you are (which if you work in a high density core with expensive parking is kind of a big ****ing deal...oh my car drives itself to a parking lot 10 minutes away to park for a fraction of the price? Or **** it, I can ride share my car out and make money off of it while I'm at work?). Then your car picks you up at the front doors, exactly when you're ready. There's just too many benefits man, mass adoption will be rapid.
Click to expand...
I like cars that cannot be hacked, thank you bud. And if you could see some of the shit that people are cooking up for those cars linked to a single network, you would think twice about it.
Listen, I ****ing love driving. I will be one of those people in 2035 picking up a 2020 Porsche on the cheap because nobody wants to drive for themselves, and I'll do so as long as I can afford the insurance. But make no mistake, that shit will become cost prohibitive at some point.
Click to expand...

I'll pay. **** it. Still cheaper than buying a new car.
 
Altair said:
You act as if computer controlled cars wont need to be programmed to drive on the roads with human drivers for a decade or two to begin with.

Again, computer controlled cars are not happening overnight. No government can force a entire populace to buy a new vehicle overnight.
Click to expand...

no
that was my point

it would be much easier if we could just go straight to no human drivers
we would probably already be using driverless cars
 
Altair said:
You also cannot force people to buy a new car. This will work just like every other automotive advancement, mandatory in newer vehicles, but that cannot and will not be forced onto older vehicles. And I'm saying you aren't getting those older vehicles off the road for 20-30 years after automated cars are mandatory. The pool will shrink with each passing year, but at the end of the day, there are those who will continue to drive their older cars until they run into the ground. Considering how many vehicles are on the road, even 1-5 or 1-10 will still be a sizeable amount of the population I like cars that cannot be hacked, thank you bud. And if you could see some of the shit that people are cooking up for those cars linked to a single network, you would think twice about it.

I'll pay. **** it. Still cheaper than buying a new car.
Click to expand...

I guess the big question becomes, why is it that you want to drive? Do you like fighting traffic, or worrying about whether you're making the next light? Do you like looking around and trying to think if the guy next to you is swerving a little more than you expect, so maybe you need to give him a little space?

I mean, I can understand the joy of getting up to speed on the highway, or taking a car out to a track. But for a daily commute? You'd have to pay me an awful lot to get me driving on a daily basis.
 
UWHabs said:
I guess the big question becomes, why is it that you want to drive? Do you like fighting traffic, or worrying about whether you're making the next light? Do you like looking around and trying to think if the guy next to you is swerving a little more than you expect, so maybe you need to give him a little space?

I mean, I can understand the joy of getting up to speed on the highway, or taking a car out to a track. But for a daily commute? You'd have to pay me an awful lot to get me driving on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

1, I like driving. I have a relatively nice commute, very little in terms of traffic.

2.https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...CBAB&usg=AOvVaw0UA9ur6wSh0Tav_GPO_O-b&ampcf=1

Security firm Trend Micro on Wednesday published a blog posthighlighting a little-noticed automotive hacking technique it presented at the DIVMA security conference in Bonn, Germany last month, along with researchers at LinkLayer Labs and the Polytechnic University of Milan. Their work points to a fundamental security issue in the CAN protocol that car components use to communicate and send commands to one another within the car's network, one that would allow a hacker who accesses the car's internals to shut off key automated components, including safety mechanisms.
Click to expand...
These things are unlikely now, but as automated vehicles become more widespread, so will peoples interest in taking on the network and vehicles within it.

If I'm going to be zipping down the road in a 2 ton vehicle at a hundred+ kph, I would much rather be in control of it. There are times when I trust another human being to be in control of whatever vehicle I'm in, from a plane to a train, to a my wife driving the car, but if I am capable of driving the vehicles, I would rather do it.

3. I do not for one minute trust auto companies to be at the forefront of cyber security in order to keep us all safe. GM for example made the decision to let people die from their ignition switch turning off while driving than to recall their vehicles to fix the issue. Why? Profits. Now I'm supposed to trust them to control everything right down to the steering and hope that someone isnt hackingnmy vehicle or their code is faulty? I would rather not.
 
Altair said:
1, I like driving. I have a relatively nice commute, very little in terms of traffic.

2.https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sour...gQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0UA9ur6wSh0Tav_GPO_O-b&cf=1

These things are unlikely now, but as automated vehicles become more widespread, so will peoples interest in taking on the network and vehicles within it.

If I'm going to be zipping down the road in a 2 ton vehicle at a hundred+ kph, I would much rather be in control of it. There are times when I trust another human being to be in control of whatever vehicle I'm in, from a plane to a train, to a my wife driving the car, but if I am capable of driving the vehicles, I would rather do it.

3. I do not for one minute trust auto companies to be at the forefront of cyber security in order to keep us all safe. GM for example made the decision to let people die from their ignition switch turning off while driving than to recall their vehicles to fix the issue. Why? Profits. Now I'm supposed to trust them to control everything right down to the steering and hope that someone isnt hackingnmy vehicle or their code is faulty? I would rather not.
Click to expand...

the cyber security angle is the most compelling argument I have heard against autonomous vehicles.

I am someone who loves to drive. That excludes city commutes, but I love driving.

Despite that, I accept that autonomous vehicles are coming and they will probably make the roads way safer. The only issue is the vulnerability to cyber attacks. Which is pretty terrifying in its own right.

Unfortunately too much of humanity is too ****ing poor at operating a motor vehicle safely that the rest of us have to suffer. But I've seen enough people do enough things on the roads that I am ready to bring on the ****ing robots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top