Tesla wants have a self driving car built in 3 years

[J Reinhardt]

So Tesla, or more specifically, Elon Musk, said the company wants to have a self driving car on the road within 3 years.

Musk is being realistic about this venture. The entrepreneur and futurist clarified that Tesla's self-driving car would give the computer 90 percent control of the vehicle. Otherwise, it would take much longer to get one on the road, since "it's incredibly hard to get that last few percent."

Source:

http://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-is-building-a-self-driving-car-because-of-cou-1340946551

I really don't like the idea of self driving cars. Driving is one of favorite hobbies and I would hate it this is taken away from future generations.

What do you guys think?

[Drew Dowdell]

I'm sure it would be an option that could be activated or deactivated at will.

[balthazar]

the company wants to have a self driving car on the road within 3 years

Why?

-- -- --

So the company that markets a product to ZERO.3 percent of the market, wants to pursue a even smaller segment?? Hoping to get in on the ground floor of the ZERO.0005 % slice of the pie?

[ocnblu]

More reason to hate.

[balthazar]

Speaking overall, I've long thought that if the automobile was invented in, say, the year 2000...; that a handful of inventors brought out these 4000 lb, 300 HP, 130 MPH personal conveyances, that the Gov't would quickly work to outlaw them as dangerous & a burden on society. I would not be surprised if a number of proponents of self-driving cars think the same way- that personal control over something as complex & fast as a car is a 'bad thing'... and thusly they support the SDC. After all, this is the common mindset, that an individual is incapable of personal responsibility, and must be 'looked after' by...... other individuals who "know better".

[bobo]

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) did a study that showed 57% of the crashes were due solely to the drivers, and another 36% due to the interaction of the driver with the vehicle and/or roadway. That's 93% of all crashes due to some sort of driver error. Every year in the U.S., 32,000 people are killed in motor vehicle crashes, and over 2 million people are injured. Self-driving vehicles and all those other electronic doodads do have a lot of potential in reducing the carnage on the roadways that is overwhelmingly due to bad drivers. My fear is that drivers start to depend on these systems or drive more aggressively because they have them.

[balthazar]

^ How can drivers drive a self-driving car more aggressively?

[David]

Plus those 32,000 crashes are a built in form of population control. If people are too stupid to be self responsible and they think they can drive, smoke, text, chat, eat, drink, apply makeup and all the other multiple things people try to do on the road at the same time, it is their own fault and those of us that enjoy driving and take pride in self responsibility should not be penalized.

Keep your socialist goody too shoes fingers off my ride!

[FAPTurbo]

Plus those 32,000 crashes are a built in form of population control. If people are too stupid to be self responsible and they think they can drive, smoke, text, chat, eat, drink, apply makeup and all the other multiple things people try to do on the road at the same time, it is their own fault and those of us that enjoy driving and take pride in self responsibility should not be penalized.

Keep your socialist goody too shoes fingers off my ride!

And I'm sure the thousands of dead people in that figure who were innocent victims of someone else's driving would think this 'socialist' goody two shows idea is sounding pretty great.

-1000 points from Gryffindor.

[FAPTurbo]

From here on out, let it be known that people on C&G who oppose self-driving cars are pro-death to innocent people.

Good job!

[ocnblu]

Do you support the idea of self-driving cars?

[Drew Dowdell]

For most of the driving public? Yes. As long as the system can be disabled I'd prefer that most other people use automatic driving mode. With the amount of road travel I do. I might even use it from time to time on my longer trips.

I'm in support of it as long as it is not mandatory.

[frogger]

I'd rather not be dependent on a car to get through every day life efficiently, but the days I do need to drive I'd like to do it on my own.

[Robert Hall]

The future is coming....

[Drew Dowdell]

A large number of people hate to drive and only do it because they have no alternative. If you don't want self driving cars out there, you better start writing congress to support massive subsidies to high speed rail and local public transportation projects.

Keep in mind that most of the driving public can barely keep a '98 Corolla on the road safely, would rather not drive at all, and are one text message away from crashing into your mother. These are the people I'd want to see with the option to have the car automatically drive them..... but as long as I can have manual control once I get behind the wheel, I'm fine with the system being there.

[Intrepidation]

I'd love to have it as a feature that can be turned on and off. I mean, what sane person hope on the highway for their hour long commute through heave traffic and thinks, "Oh hell, yes, I love doing this same , menial task every single day!"

Or better yet, when you get tired on a long road trip, you can just let he car take over and catch some rest, rather than pulling off to sleep, making the trip longer, or keep driving while tired, increasing the risk of an accident.

Perhaps they could have built in breathalyzer, if you're over the legal limit, the car can just drive you home.

[Robert Hall]

Lots of possibilities.

[ocnblu]

I don't want to be stuck behind one of these. Ridiculous.

[David]

Plus those 32,000 crashes are a built in form of population control. If people are too stupid to be self responsible and they think they can drive, smoke, text, chat, eat, drink, apply makeup and all the other multiple things people try to do on the road at the same time, it is their own fault and those of us that enjoy driving and take pride in self responsibility should not be penalized.

Keep your socialist goody too shoes fingers off my ride!

And I'm sure the thousands of dead people in that figure who were innocent victims of someone else's driving would think this 'socialist' goody two shows idea is sounding pretty great.

-1000 points from Gryffindor.

Life is made up of Choice, If people allow themselves to become drugged lemmings doing what ever the Government tells them then Humanity DIES!

It is a sad fact that many Innocent people are killed by the stupidity of others trying to do to many things while driving or making bad choices to drink and drive. This should NOT penalize those of us that take responsibility.

As Drew and Dodgefan have stated, a complete total control of the car to drive and yet still having the auto pilot option is a good way to go for long drives especially, but one must not allow it to take total control. Many of the nanny devices being pushed on Auto's today are a bad way of allowing people to fall into a false sense of security when Driving requires total attention.

[bobo]

The number of fatalities on the road in the U.S. actually experienced a rare uptick lately. In 2011, 34,067 died, but in 2012 that increased to 34,080. There has historically been a downward trend because of safer vehicles, safer roads, increased seatbelt use, and more DUI awareness. I suspect the increase has to do with an increase in traffic in an improving economy, but also more distracted driving-type accidents, such as texting and driving. I don't see drivers become more engaged in driving with more infotainment systems in vehicles.

Automated vehicles could increase the number of vehicles able to utilize the existing infrastructure. Some studies have shown that you can move triple the number of vehicles by having them not only travel closer together, but moving together. There is also a lot of research going on with vehicles communicating with each other and vehicles communicating with the infrastructure, such as the vehicle knowing what the traffic signal ahead is doing so that the vehicle can accelerate or decelerate to maximize fuel efficiency. All sorts of research is going on in Silicon Valley in California with the major automakers. This will be the future. Is this needed in rural America? Probably not, but the majority of fatal crashes occur in rural areas, so there are potentially huge safety benefits there.

[ocnblu]

So rather than enforce distracted driving laws and ensure that we have young drivers ready for the real world when they're given that license, we'd rather give up, allow Jennifer to LOL and TTYL on her way to Starbucks and let her Civic drive itself there? HOW SAD IS THAT.

Nobody wants to take responsibility for a damn thing anymore. We are fast becoming a nation of sitting ducks.

[bobo]

I would venture to say that most people on this board consider themselves to be good drivers, but I would also guess that most have been in crashes as well, whether at their own fault or others. I know that there appears to be an overall sentiment against these electronic nannies and anything that corrupts the pure driving experience, but I for one would appreciate technology that would avoid crashes. If that POS Tempo I drove at work years ago had Brake Assist, maybe I wouldn't have rear-ended that Volvo. Or if that Buick I passed had blind spot detection, maybe my Nissan pickup wouldn't have been sideswiped and totaled. I could make similar statements about crashes my family members or others I know have been in. However, if we start to depend upon these technologies to drive, then I would agree that's a problem.

[Robert Hall]

So rather than enforce distracted driving laws and ensure that we have young drivers ready for the real world when they're given that license, we'd rather give up, allow Jennifer to LOL and TTYL on her way to Starbucks and let her Civic drive itself there? HOW SAD IS THAT.

Nobody wants to take responsibility for a damn thing anymore. We are fast becoming a nation of sitting ducks.

Problem is the many (most?) young drivers have no interest in actually driving..they just want to get from point A to point B with as little effort as possible without interfering with their social media consumption...the little turds have to keep up with the latest Miley Cyrus/Justin Beiber/Kardashian news, after all.. and Google wants them in Google self driving cars so they can post more advertising to them.

Edited September 29, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

Actually, my preference is for a very robust (world class?) Public transportation system so the the people who don't want to drive and don't like to drive don't have to drive. The whole self-driving car theme is a sub-par solution to our lack of public transportation.

If you love driving, you should support public transportation because it helps keep people who hate driving off the road.

[Robert Hall]

Actually, my preference is for a very robust (world class?) Public transportation system so the the people who don't want to drive and don't like to drive don't have to drive. The whole self-driving car theme is a sub-par solution to our lack of public transportation.

If you love driving, you should support public transportation because it helps keep people who hate driving off the road.

I'm all for public transportation---keep the non-serious drivers on buses, trains, etc. The problem is, the US is so vast with sprawling metro areas and there are people living in the sticks far from public transportation.

Speaking of alternate transportation solutions, I've seen a bunch of the Lyft cars around lately, with the stupid pink hipster mustaches on the front..

Edited September 29, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

More people live in cities these days than not.

[Robert Hall]

More people live in cities these days than not.

True...though living in the middle of Phoenix I still drive everywhere. Public transportation would be inconvenient for me...there are no use cases in my current reality context where I need to use public transportation. If I were in a different metro area where I commuted from the burbs into a city downtown with really bad traffic and a good train or bus infrastructure (like Chicago or San Francisco), then I would consider using public transportation..

Edited September 29, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Drew Dowdell]

That's only because Phoenix doesn't have a PT system at the level it needs. PT is very much "if you build a good one, they will come". It's like that for me now in Pittsburgh. I'm a strong PT advocate, yet the system here has been cut so much it is nearly unusable for me anymore when I once used it multiple times a day.

[Robert Hall]

That's only because Phoenix doesn't have a PT system at the level it needs. PT is very much "if you build a good one, they will come". It's like that for me now in Pittsburgh. I'm a strong PT advocate, yet the system here has been cut so much it is nearly unusable for me anymore when I once used it multiple times a day.

Yeah, Phoenix and it's burbs have bus systems and light rail, but to use any of them for my typical use cases (home to office, office to client offices, home to airport, office to airport, etc) would double or triple my commute time...just not practical. Not to mention I don't want to be out walking around in the gawdawful heat we have 6 months a year.

Now when I lived in Denver, I did use the light rail quite a bit, though not to go to/from work but for getting around downtown and to/from downtown from the burbs for events (baseball, hockey, concerts, etc) and nights out..

My next move (likely in 2015 if not sooner) will be likely to an area with better PT options.

Back to the topic, though, I can understand the utility of self-driving cars...so many individual travel endpoints in a trip don't fit within traditional PT systems...so if a consumer is too lazy/distracted to drive themselves (and don't want to use a taxi or car service) then maybe self-driving cars fit that need...

Edited September 29, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[ocnblu]

Funny, I'd like to move even further out of town.

[David]

I would venture to say that most people on this board consider themselves to be good drivers, but I would also guess that most have been in crashes as well, whether at their own fault or others. I know that there appears to be an overall sentiment against these electronic nannies and anything that corrupts the pure driving experience, but I for one would appreciate technology that would avoid crashes. If that POS Tempo I drove at work years ago had Brake Assist, maybe I wouldn't have rear-ended that Volvo. Or if that Buick I passed had blind spot detection, maybe my Nissan pickup wouldn't have been sideswiped and totaled. I could make similar statements about crashes my family members or others I know have been in. However, if we start to depend upon these technologies to drive, then I would agree that's a problem.

In regards to your Post I would have to say that you are blaming others rather than having been alert to what is going on around you. If you were paying attention to what was going on in front of the Volvo you would not have rear ended it, it you were checking your mirrors and doing shoulder checks while driving you might have been able to avoid being side swiped.

In 33yrs of driving or what my family calls aggressive defensive driving in the way I drive I have not had a an accident yet.

Nanny devices will cause people to become less aware of what is going on around them and you seem to be a perfect fit for a self driving car so you do not have to be alert to the world around you.

[Z-06]

Social solutions beat engineering solutions.

[David]

Funny, I'd like to move even further out of town.

Totally Agree with you, rather commute in an hr or two than live like a sardine in the smelly cities.

[Robert Hall]

Funny, I'd like to move even further out of town.

Totally Agree with you, rather commute in an hr or two than live like a sardine in the smelly cities.

Not for me...I've done rural and small towns in the past, doesn't work for me. The good jobs in my field are in the cities or suburban office parks, I like to be close to everything...I like having my Starbucks a mile from home, a good grocery, hardware store, Target, PetSmart, a large variety of restaurants close by, 15-20 min to a major airport, and keep the commute under 40 minutes...

Edited September 29, 2013 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[David]

Funny, I'd like to move even further out of town.

Totally Agree with you, rather commute in an hr or two than live like a sardine in the smelly cities.

Not for me...I've done rural and small towns in the past, doesn't work for me. The good jobs in my field are in the cities or suburban office parks, I like to be close to everything...I like having my Starbucks a mile from home, a good grocery, hardware store, Target, PetSmart, a large variety of restaurants close by, 15-20 min to a major airport, and keep the commute under 40 minutes...

I found that for the year and a half on the east coast in a terrible dirty state called New Jersey you are right you have to drive miles and lots of time to get to anything that has decent stores. Yet in washington state, I enjoy a rural life with a Home Depot 5 min from where I live and a mall 15 min from where I live and I can still drive into the larger town and get on the express bus into Seattle and get to work just fine.

Not sure why NJ is called the garden state with how dirty the state is and the only thing I really saw was corn be grown there and then the crazy jug handles and lack of shopping. NJ should just be merged into another state as it seems to be just a bedroom place for NY, Philly or DC.

[balthazar]

^ Whoa, whoa, WHOA!
OK, you're mostly right, there.

However, shopping is a chronic over-compensation, not a lack of. There's a Target 7 miles to the NE of me, and one 6 miles to the SW of me. To me, that's one too many, being 13 miles apart. Not according to Target Corporate; they're putting one in across the street soon. 3 Targets in a 13 mile stretch?

There is a LOT of really beautiful Jersey, but you're not going to see it flying thru low on the major highways.

There are 2 major cons to Jersey- the congestion, and the taxes.

[Drew Dowdell]

The problem with urban planning these days is that everywhere needs to be it's own little suburban paradise with all the shopping conveniences no more than 4 miles away. Add in the bribery that happens when big box stores promise to build in a location and raise everyone else's property values (they expect property tax abatement in return for this "service"), the local townships are just as guilty.

In one recent case, as soon as the property tax abatement expired after 15 years of property tax free selling, Walmart pulled up and moved 3 miles down the road to another township that was willing to offer a tax abatement.

[J Reinhardt]

So many good points raised here. My concern is, young drivers would be ill prepared to drive the car themselves in the event the self drive mechanisms fail. Or what happens if the self driving car actually causes an accident or death? It only takes one and then consumers get scared off and we're back to sqaure one.

[Drew Dowdell]

So many good points raised here. My concern is, young drivers would be ill prepared to drive the car themselves in the event the self drive mechanisms fail. Or what happens if the self driving car actually causes an accident or death? It only takes one and then consumers get scared off and we're back to sqaure one.

Great points. What level of attention will the law require with self driving cars? Will we have "no sleeping while not driving" or "No reading"?

[David]

But the GOOGLE Priuses in Arizona are being driven by blind people. So how do you deal with that when the car accidentally hits and kills someone?

[Robert Hall]

But the GOOGLE Priuses in Arizona are being driven by blind people. So how do you deal with that when the car accidentally hits and kills someone?

Sue Google, I guess....what about when cars eventually are fully autonomous...I can see parents sending a car to a school to drop off/pick up the kiddies...

[David]

But the GOOGLE Priuses in Arizona are being driven by blind people. So how do you deal with that when the car accidentally hits and kills someone?

Sue Google, I guess....what about when cars eventually are fully autonomous...I can see parents sending a car to a school to drop off/pick up the kiddies...

Death of Humanity as Parents become more and more isolated from raising their kids. Sounds like an Isaac Asimove book on robots being the parents and parents are all selfish on their own interest and never really raise your kids.

Parents need to be involved in their kids life including picking up the kids from school and dropping them off. If you want kids you have a minimum of 24yrs to get them raised, college educated and a productive member of society.

[J Reinhardt]

But the GOOGLE Priuses in Arizona are being driven by blind people. So how do you deal with that when the car accidentally hits and kills someone?

Well once that happens the lobbyists and policiticians will get involved in trying to ban autonomous cars from Google and promote the autonomous cars from the car company that's paying them.

[Drew Dowdell]

Google has very deep pockets and very talented lobbyists

[Z-06]

Cars could be hacked.

[David]

So we break the codes into the cars and sell them to the highest bidders for control of your personal transportation.

Can I get an auto with Sandra Bullock like in the movie Demolition man?

[ocnblu]

God, I really want my '65 Corvair back.

[Robert Hall]

Maybe they will make an app so you can sit in the back seat and control the car w/ your iPhone or tablet.

[balthazar]

Wiki states the equipment currently costs about $150K per car, so I don't see this going much farther than in special, subsidized handicapped applications. As it should. It's not coming soon to the family sedan segment, if ever, so we're not going to have to deal with this anymore than we 'have to deal' with a Lamborghini on the street. Sure, costs should come down, but just look at all the bitching over the Volt costing merely $10K over the segment...

God, I really want my '65 Corvair back.

Yep- all the increasing nanny garbage makes me yearn for another '64 Catalina.

Edited October 1, 2013 by balthazar

[David]

Another reason I think my 2008 Trailblazer is my last new auto. I love all my auto's and especially my 94 suburban. Gotta get that back on the road since I am in the middle of converting it to CNG.