perhaps uber should ban their safety drivers from having phones or other electronics in the car, or require them to run an app on every device that rats them out to uber if they do something inappropriate.

 

The solution is to have a different AI system watching the one that's driving.

 

This is exactly why I despise these "semi-self driving" technologies, such as Tesla Autopilot, and even more primitive ones such as collision detection, etc. They encourage driver distraction and will cause more harm than good.

I can't wait until automakers start getting sued left and right whenever there is an accident involving these systems, forcing them to abandon those ambitious but idiotic plans.

 

I could be wrong, but my guess is that they will sweet-talk enough people in Congress into giving them immunity (or other limits) from prosecution, probably in the name of national security, if they can either tie in self-driving development to military needs or give that appearance. Trump would probably sign the bill.

 

Probably, but lets not forget that lawyers have their own interests in mind.

 

it is a serious problem with technology, because if your input is not needed in 99.995% of the driving, then you will certainly not pay attention when that 0.005% arrives. It is just common sense.


@och I would not put auto brake systems in the same bin, they work differently and you will certainly not let yourself go because it.

 

Volvo planning on Level 4 autonomous driving in 2022 XC90. http://www.automobilemag.com/news/spa-gen-2-xc90-coming-2021-offer-level-4-autonomy/?wc_mid=4035:12423&wc_rid=4035:562510&_wcsid=BB3A7DEE51A07F5187D50AAB9F2A35C5001E5B10D05A2165

 

looks like self-driving cars are needed more than ever...

 

Maybe his horn wasn't working, and he had to use a substitute LOL.

 

I say his stereo is not working and he provides his own music to listen to.

 

 

ha, great video. if guys like him had produced videos in the horse-drawn buggy era, we'd never have cars to drive.
plus while he ponders what will self-driving cars do in many situations, he overlooks the millions of BAD (and often lethal) DECISIONS made by human drivers.

 

He brings up some excellent points. IMO, replacing humans that make bad decisions with computers that make bad (or incomplete) decisions won't get us anywhere.

I also don't buy the horse-vs.-automobile comparison. Horses could freak out under some conditions (loud noises, storms, etc...) and become uncontrollable, putting those in the buggies at great risk. With cars, you can (usually) at least shut the engines off or shift into neutral if they start to run away. Cars also don't leave horse-dung all over the road to clean up.

I'm not totally against self-drivers, though. I can see their usefulness IF they can get the computers advanced and foolproof enough to recognize and correct for such non-standard things as temporary slowdowns, construction, accidents blocking lanes, school-zones with kids on the road, temporary lower speed limits, detours, police directing traffic, etc.... Self-drivers could, in some circumstances, allow old or disabled people more independence past the time they would normally be hanging up the keys.

 

Tell this to all those people who claimed that their Toyotas started to accelerate away on their own.

 

Claiming it is one thing.....being a reality is quite another matter. One can almost always shut an engine off or shift into neutral, unless the vehicle really has a massive electrical short that jams and/or cuts out all of the ways around it. I wouldn't completely rule that out, but it would certainly be quite rare.