Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yeah, it seems that way to me too. But that one time when the microchip throws a nana and decides to park inside another car, you'd want to have good reflexes and a way to override it.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I would still prefer driving myself then my car Itself.

*than

I am sure that quite a few people would prefer that, albeit a lot of 'em mainly because of hating change. The good of many though far outweights the good of some. If getting close to zero accidents is achievable, then by all means, embrace such a technology. I'd be willing to co-fund it.

Self driving cars? Madness I say. What if self-driving car causes accident? Who will be responsible? What will happen when self-driving car will meet situation that does not correspond to his programming? What if the technology malfunctions? I just don't think our technology is reliable enough for self-driving cars.
The only way I see this working is when the human driver can intervene at any time and drive the car manually.
Also, if you do not want to drive yourself, why not take a bus?

 morfangdakka wrote:
I think the future might be that people don't even buy cars but instead summon them from a phone app to their location and then drive them home. Since most of the time vehicles just sit in the driveway fully automated cars could just be summoned using GPS from your phone to find you. This would make it more economical for people with lower incomes.

THe prices on these cars will come down since it is new they are expensive like DVD players they were a couple thousand dollars now they are supper cheap.

On a more serious note, I don't trust the technology in its current state. 5 or 10 years from now, maybe, but I'd rather drive the car myself. I could see this being of great use to people on long road trips, who have a better chance of being fatigued.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I would still prefer driving myself then my car Itself.

*than

I am sure that quite a few people would prefer that, albeit a lot of 'em mainly because of hating change. The good of many though far outweights the good of some. If getting close to zero accidents is achievable, then by all means, embrace such a technology. I'd be willing to co-fund it.

No me, a machine can do everything or account for everthing, that is why we still have pilots and train drivers. A machine can't think outside of its programing.

I have been involved in five minor collisions. Two of them were my fault, when I was a learner driver, involving fences.

The other three were people hitting my parked car and driving off without the courtesy of leaving their insurance details.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
What if self-driving car causes accident? Who will be responsible?

Same as today. What caused the accident, and who's responsible for it?

What will happen when self-driving car will meet situation that does not correspond to his programming? What if the technology malfunctions?

And what if the occurrence of all these things combined still results in vastly fewer accidents and injuries than when the cars are driven by the Mk. 1 Sapien?

Also, if you do not want to drive yourself, why not take a bus?

I don't know where you live, but in most of the world, buses only operate at set times and set locations.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
A machine can't think outside of its programing.

That's why a machine is a superior driver in most situations. No more "Oh gak, I missed the exit, better pull of a 180° in the middle of the road!" or this:

[gif involves a car crash, SFW, no violence or gore seen]

I see people pull crap like that all the time. I have zero bad feels about someone getting what was inevitably coming to them. Hopefully they survived and will be more cautious in the future.

What I always hate are those jackasses who decide to drive in the breakdown lane during traffic jams. I remember my old bus driver used to pull half in to the breakdown lane to block them.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
A machine can't think outside of its programing.

That's why a machine is a superior driver in most situations. No more "Oh gak, I missed the exit, better pull of a 180° in the middle of the road!" or this:

[gif involves a car crash, SFW, no violence or gore seen]

Spoiler:

it also can't think on its feet, so to speak. If an accident is imminent, it will just default to its programming.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

it also can't think on its feet, so to speak. If an accident is imminent, it will just default to its programming.

Which could e.g. mean an immediate stop, with a faster reaction than any human could possibly have, without the risk of being distracted and with a 360° vision.

Or, your fate depends on a mouse - click.
By someone, somewhere.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Would you even need insurance?


If your AUTOmobile crashes due to an issue with the car itself, surely you'd sue the manufacturer and not the rider.

What happens if a moose wanders into view?

 Frazzled wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
Would you even need insurance?


If your AUTOmobile crashes due to an issue with the car itself, surely you'd sue the manufacturer and not the rider.

What happens if a moose wanders into view?

you are in canada, so you have the problems with the car being to polite

I had a pack of coyotes attempt to commit suicide by leaping in front of me on a highway at night once.

Honestly, the safety piec eis the tip of the Iceberg in the self-driving car revolution.

Car pooling will have an entirely new meaning, becasue when you are not using the car, you can literally have it drive to someone else to use, so it could essentially never be idle. A group of people could pool their resources together and get one car to split amongst them.

Plus, kids will now be just as mobile as adults since the parents can pre-program (or use their smart devise) to program where to take the kids, with littel or no adult supervision while the parents are at work or elsewhere. I.e. Car, take Timmy to the movie theatre, then pick up Suzie and take her to the ball field. Then, return to the thatre for Timmy once Suzie is done at ball practice.

This will be a revolution in automotive affairs.

See the thing is, at least in its 'hybrid' state right now, where we still manually drive but with computer 'assistance', I know my wife's car has already made me safer on a number of occasions.

Like in my OT I mention the car preventing me from changing lanes into a car in my blind spot and the car slowing down for an animal I didn't even see.

Would I have been in an accident had it not been for that, maybe not necessarily but it's still made me safer than I would have been on my own.

Course the argument still stands - Where do we draw the line? And what happens if the computer dies malfunction?

And how long till someone hacks the dawn things?

Wasn't that a Doctor Who episode with the Sontarans?