# Autonomous Cars



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 15, 2019)

I love cars. I've been in love with them since I was a small child. However, as most people know, autonomous, self-driving cars are poised to take over our streets, but it's hard to figure out just how close that day is. This is a very nuanced sort of issue, so I wonder, how much more time is left before you guys think driving will go the way of riding horses?
Lol, I probably sound like a luddite, right? XD


----------



## Vitaly (Apr 15, 2019)

15-20 years
if progress will go with the same speed as today


----------



## A Minty cheetah (Apr 15, 2019)

Vitaly said:


> 15-20 years
> if progress will go with the same speed as today



I'd agree that the tech will probably take this long to get reliable enough. The problem then is getting people to trust it and then fork out the cash to pay for it. I reckon it'll be closer to 50 years before autonomous vehicles overtake regular ones as being more prevalent on the road.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 16, 2019)

Vitaly said:


> 15-20 years
> if progress will go with the same speed as today





A Minty cheetah said:


> I'd agree that the tech will probably take this long to get reliable enough. The problem then is getting people to trust it and then fork out the cash to pay for it. I reckon it'll be closer to 50 years before autonomous vehicles overtake regular ones as being more prevalent on the road.


Are you guys sure? Remember, technology advances exponentially, not linearly.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Apr 16, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> I love cars. I've been in love with them since I was a small child.



I bet your car's name is "Chase". :V


----------



## Vitaly (Apr 16, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Are you guys sure? Remember, technology advances exponentially, not linearly.


its not about technology, its about infrastructure


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 16, 2019)

Mr. Fox said:


> I bet your car's name is "Chase". :V


Uhhhh...


Vitaly said:


> its not about technology, its about infrastructure


Infrastructure? What would realistically need to be changed?


----------



## A Minty cheetah (Apr 16, 2019)

Tech does usually progress exponentially, but there's so much emphasis on safety that the AI is going to need to be utterly perfect and that makes me think it will take much longer. This isn't a games console (for example) which can have bugs patched out later, because any bugs in the AI may well spell death for multiple people.

Regarding infrastructure: with the primary focus now being on electric cars, the charging infrastructure is going to need a serious overhaul if people are going to adopt. Even if the AI is ready only five years from now, I'd bet that manufacturers wouldn't bother with fossil fuelled autonomous cars. This would need to be implemented slowly over the years as it will cost an exorbitant amount to just go all in at once. Either way, we (the taxpayer) will foot the bill.

I have no idea exactly how autonomous cars "see" the world and roads, but surely the road markings will need to be better maintained so as to avoid confusing the systems. Even more cost to local councils which then gets passed on to the taxpayers. Yay!

Can't think of anything else to add for now; I've had a crappy night at work and need my sleeps!


----------



## Simo (Apr 17, 2019)

Given the condition of roads in many states, and the reluctance to raise taxes to fix them even to current standards, autonomous cars might never happen 

Also, the roads in a lot of US cities are in really, really rough shape: this would seem to be a huge problem, given how cash-strapped most city budgets are. 

Unless the autonomous auto industry kicks in support, it could be a long while before people were convinced they needed all this new infrastructure, when so many other issues already exist, to resolve (crime, drugs, corruption, lack of funding for schools, repair of water and sewage lines, &c, &c)


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 19, 2019)

Simo said:


> Given the condition of roads in many states, and the reluctance to raise taxes to fix them even to current standards, autonomous cars might never happen
> 
> Also, the roads in a lot of US cities are in really, really rough shape: this would seem to be a huge problem, given how cash-strapped most city budgets are.
> 
> Unless the autonomous auto industry kicks in support, it could be a long while before people were convinced they needed all this new infrastructure, when so many other issues already exist, to resolve (crime, drugs, corruption, lack of funding for schools, repair of water and sewage lines, &c, &c)


So, we can't really have autonomous cars being commonplace without robust infrastructure?


----------



## Firuthi Dragovic (Apr 19, 2019)

I think the thing with me and autonomous cars is that everything else on the roads would probably have to be autonomous as well.  Which provides for more points for someone to hack into the system.

Sorry, last time I had this discussion my first thought was Christine.  Yeah, the Stephen King one.

And that one scenario in Megaman Battle Network too while we're at it.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

FrostyTheDragon said:


> I think the thing with me and autonomous cars is that everything else on the roads would probably have to be autonomous as well.  Which provides for more points for someone to hack into the system.
> 
> Sorry, last time I had this discussion my first thought was Christine.  Yeah, the Stephen King one.
> 
> And that one scenario in Megaman Battle Network too while we're at it.


You see hacking being a major problem? (Sorry for the slow response)


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> You see hacking being a major problem? (Sorry for the slow response)


Hacking cars is already happening with the limited electronics they have. Hell, you have the CIA/FBI on video showing how it's done. Tho that may easily be fake as far as I know.

But yes, remote control/hacking is a far bigger concern with autonomous cars. Especially if the car have any sort of wireless connection available.


----------



## CrookedCroc (Apr 24, 2019)

Modern problems for our modern times
www.dezeen.com: Robot run over by self-driving Tesla on way to CES in Las Vegas


----------



## Slytherin Umbreon (Apr 24, 2019)

Everyone was afraid of robots...
No one suspected the cars...


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Yakamaru said:


> Hacking cars is already happening with the limited electronics they have. Hell, you have the CIA/FBI on video showing how it's done. Tho that may easily be fake as far as I know.
> 
> But yes, remote control/hacking is a far bigger concern with autonomous cars. Especially if the car have any sort of wireless connection available.


Huh. How come I haven't heard any of that before?


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Huh. How come I haven't heard any of that before?


www.washingtonexaminer.com: WikiLeaks warns CIA can hack cars for 'undetectable assassinations'


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Apr 24, 2019)

I remember watching a video where someone gave this scenario:

Imagine your autonomous car driving itself with a relatively fast speed, say 60-70 mp/h. Imagine that suddenly an obstacle appears right in front of you and the car has a split second to determine what to do - it can swirl away to the side, where there are pedestrians, and kill them, or it can slam you into the obstacle and kill you. What should the car be programmed to do in a case such as this? Kill the driver, or kill the bystanders?

So it's not just about hacking the cars. It's a bit more complicated than that.

And I for one, am not yet ready to place my life in the hands of a computer script.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Yakamaru said:


> www.washingtonexaminer.com: WikiLeaks warns CIA can hack cars for 'undetectable assassinations'


The mainstream media doesn't like WikiLeaks.


Rimna said:


> I remember watching a video where someone gave this scenario:
> 
> Imagine your autonomous car driving itself with a relatively fast speed, say 60-70 mp/h. Imagine that suddenly an obstacle appears right in front of you and the car has a split second to determine what to do - it can swirl away to the side, where there are pedestrians, and kill them, or it can slam you into the obstacle and kill you. What should the car be programmed to do in a case such as this? Kill the driver, or kill the bystanders?
> 
> ...


The issue is that a certain car company with a certain prolific CEO is rushing headlong into all of this stuff, regardless of whether society is ready for, or even wants autonomous cars yet. They don't seem to be willing to answer these questions.


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> The issue is that a certain car company with a certain prolific CEO is rushing headlong into all of this stuff, regardless of whether society is ready for, or even wants autonomous cars yet. They don't seem to be willing to answer these questions.



I can't really recall who was talking in the video, but I'm almost certain it was the same prolific CEO you're talking about. It could very well have been he, who proposed this scenario. And I can't really afford to look through videos at the moment because I'm running on limited internet data xD


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

AnyPenny said:


> I'm a terrible driver. Everyone else on the road frightens me. I hope it comes sooner rather than later!


I will admit that the autonomous car revolution will come with some benefits to me, mainly the fact that I won't have to bum rides off of people anymore.
But, at the same time, cars has been my primary passion since I was 3 or 4 years old. Having the steering wheel forcibly taken away will deal a crippling blow to my hobby, since there's no way in hell that any government will allow people to drive anymore once autonomous cars make there way onto the streets. I don't know how I'm supposed to sacrifice something that's literally a part of who I am as a person. You have to understand...


Rimna said:


> I can't really recall who was talking in the video, but I'm almost certain it was the same prolific CEO you're talking about. It could very well have been he, who proposed this scenario. And I can't really afford to look through videos at the moment because I'm running on limited internet data xD


Which scenario did he propose?


----------



## Deleted member 111470 (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Which scenario did he propose?



The one I mentioned - where the car has to decide who to kill - the driver of the by-standers.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Rimna said:


> The one I mentioned - where the car has to decide who to kill - the driver of the by-standers.


I remember seeing that question asked as early as 2013/2014, so I don't know if it was him who asked that.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

AnyPenny said:


> Oh 100%. I want autonomous cars for people like me, but I would hate for it to be at the expense of others who are passionate about it.


I want 100% autonomous cars, too. As I said before, I'd never have to bum rides off of people ever again and would be able to go wherever I wanted, whenever I wanted to. It would be legitimate liberation for me.
But, yeah, at the same time, I'm afraid that it's going to be at the expense of my hobby. I'm not afraid of self-driving cars. I'm afraid of the people and their governments deciding that self-driving cars ought to be the _only_ way to go. I'm afraid that society won't tolerate allowing the roads to be shared between humans and computers.


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

The idea of the car killing a bunch off bystanders as to save the driver, or killing the driver to save the bystanders is actually a subject we have treated in class during a lecture about "ethics", which id clearly reminiscent of the footbridge and trolley problem (Foot 1978)

there is certainly a deontologist or utilitarian approach, that the ones creating such cars need to take into EXTREME consideration

However, as a libertarian, I'M the one driving the car, and I'M the one who decides whether to smash those brainlets or not and I'M the one that smashes them or not


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Apr 24, 2019)

www.recode.net: Tesla’s 2020 self-driving car promise sounds too good to be true because it is


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> The idea of the car killing a bunch off bystanders as to save the driver, or killing the driver to save the bystanders is actually a subject we have treated in class during a lecture about "ethics", which id clearly reminiscent of the footbridge and trolley problem (Foot 1978)
> 
> there is certainly a deontologist or utilitarian approach, that the ones creating such cars need to take into EXTREME consideration
> 
> However, as a libertarian, I'M the one driving the car, and I'M the one who decides whether to smash those brainlets or not and I'M the one that smashes them or not


The problem is, if the majority of the population supports taking our keys away, how do we stop that? What are we going to do if congress proposes a law banning driving?


Misha Bordiga Zahradník said:


> www.recode.net: Tesla’s 2020 self-driving car promise sounds too good to be true because it is


Yes, I actually saw that article already...
I know that most people I talk to and most news articles are taking his predictions with a grain of salt, but have you ever talked to a Tesla fan before? They're basically saying that everybody who thinks that Musk is wrong is either just plain wrong or is a liar.
And because of the type of person that I am, I don't know who to believe!


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> The problem is, if the majority of the population supports taking our keys away, how do we stop that? What are we going to do if congress proposes a law banning driving?



what


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> what


What do you mean, "what"?
You haven't heard people complain about all of the deaths that happen each year due to car accidents and can't wait for driving to be banned?


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> What do you mean, "what"?
> You haven't heard people complain about all of the deaths that happen each year due to car accidents and can't wait for driving to be banned?


Now that

That's the most retarded thing I've heard in a while, fat chance happening

First taxation and then this sm my h


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> The problem is, if the majority of the population supports taking our keys away, how do we stop that? What are we going to do if congress proposes a law banning driving?
> 
> Yes, I actually saw that article already...
> I know that most people I talk to and most news articles are taking his predictions with a grain of salt, but have you ever talked to a Tesla fan before? They're basically saying that everybody who thinks that Musk is wrong is either just plain wrong or is a liar.
> And because of the type of person that I am, I don't know who to believe!


Musk has a longstanding history of grandiose claims that don't come to fruition. His fans have blinders on to this. 

The flamethrowers have to have been the worst. I feel sorry for anyone who actually got one of those. Not even practical for farm work let alone the libertarian dick-waving that inspired their creation.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> Now that
> 
> That's the most retarded thing I've heard in a while, fat chance happening
> 
> First taxation and then this sm my h


But, the legend himself, Elon Musk, has said that this is going to happen...


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Misha Bordiga Zahradník said:


> Musk has a longstanding history of grandiose claims that don't come to fruition. His fans have blinders on to this.
> 
> The flamethrowers have to have been the worst. I feel sorry for anyone who actually got one of those. Not even practical for farm work let alone the libertarian dick-waving that inspired their creation.


Yes, I know that. I'm well aware of that, being an industry watcher. I'm just wondering how many times a supposed "genius" can be wrong...
And what was that last part?


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> But, the legend himself, Elon Musk, has said that this is going to happen...



Ah so when Mr Genetically Created Anime Cat Girls says that the most used, and crucial medium of transport for most people on fucking earth is going to be banned, it is 100% going to

absolutely

A bit of common sense wouldn't hurt ya


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> Ah so when Mr Genetically Created Anime Cat Girls says that the most used, and crucial medium of transport for most people on fucking earth is going to be banned, it is 100% going to
> 
> absolutely
> 
> A bit of common sense wouldn't hurt ya


He's not saying that cars are going to be banned. He's saying that we're going to be banned from driving them. He's saying that only computers will be allowed to drive.


----------



## Yakamaru (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> The mainstream media doesn't like WikiLeaks.


The Legacy media don't like a lot of things. Especially not those who would oppose their greed for power.

"If you don't read the news you're uninformed. If you do read the news you're misinformed."


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> He's not saying that cars are going to be banned. He's saying that we're going to be banned from driving them. He's saying that only computers will be allowed to drive.



Ah so computers are also going to control those that decide to walk across the street without looking both sides?
And again, whether the AI has a Deontologist or Utilitarian approach, lives are going to be lost anyways, so, to my eyes, claim makes literally no sense


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Yes, I know that. I'm well aware of that, being an industry watcher. I'm just wondering how many times a supposed "genius" can be wrong...
> And what was that last part?


www.google.com: Here’s Elon Musk’s $500 Boring Company flamethrower









As one can see, the "not a flamethrower" is surprisingly aptly named.

Addendum; they had difficulties delivering on these too.


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

Misha Bordiga Zahradník said:


>





mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm krispy kritters


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> Ah so computers are also going to control those that decide to walk across the street without looking both sides?
> And again, whether the AI has a Deontologist or Utilitarian approach, lives are going to be lost anyways, so, to my eyes, claim makes literally no sense


But, people are still going to go, "They're still safer than people. Take their damned keys away already!"


Misha Bordiga Zahradník said:


> www.google.com: Here’s Elon Musk’s $500 Boring Company flamethrower
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is this actually a thing? It feels like an Onion article or something.


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> "They're still safer than people. Take their damned keys away already!"



Hmmm 

Reminds me of a farely similar thing that hasn't really worked that well and it's just focused on one country

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

"Take their dammed guns away already!" 

like taking the indivial freedom of driving is going to work out 

fat

chance


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> Hmmm
> 
> Reminds me of a farely similar thing that hasn't really worked that well and it's just focused on one country
> 
> ...


You have a damned constitutional amendment protecting your guns. Us car guys have nothing at all. Big difference right there.


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> You have a damned constitutional amendment protecting your guns. Us car guys have nothing at all. Big difference right there.



Still an individual freedom "threatened" to be taken away.
Driving isn't going to get banned, regardless.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> Still an individual freedom "threatened" to be taken away.
> Driving isn't going to get banned, regardless.


What makes you so sure?


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> What makes you so sure?


1) Do you realise the sheer scale of people that drive on daily bases? World wide? Nation wide? Public Transport? Deliveries? Ambulances?
2)Have you taken into account the economic repercusions of said ban? I.E vehicle market, certain companies holding a monopoly?
3) So the state is literally going to force me to ditch my old car and have to spend MY hard earned money into buying a self driving car?
4)Self driving cars are a massive, unsolved moral hazard.
Seeing the outcome of the "ethics" lecture I've been to, on the subject of should the car kill the driver and not the bystander, most people agree on that matter, the car should sacrifice the driver and save the bystander

The funny thing is that those who voted that a self driving car should do that, are the same ones who said that they *would not ride such self driving car
*


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> 1) Do you realise the sheer scale of people that drive on daily bases? World wide? Nation wide? Public Transport? Deliveries? Ambulances?
> 2)Have you taken into account the economic repercusions of said ban? I.E vehicle market, certain companies holding a monopoly?
> 3) So the state is literally going to force me to ditch my old car and have to spend MY hard earned money into buying a self driving car?
> 4)Seeing the outcome of the "ethics" lecture I've been to, on the subject of should the car kill the driver and not the bystander, most people agree on that matter, the car should sacrifice the driver and save the bystander
> ...


Once again, the logic is that computers are going to take over for us. As for the jobs, sadly, the prevailing attitude is "too bad! find another job!"
Also, uh, once autonomous cars become popular, you won't need to buy a replacement car... Everybody will use Uber/Lyft style services.
And, as for monopolies, the US government doesn't seem to care anymore. Look at Disney. Or Google.


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> Once again, the logic is that computers are going to take over for us. As for the jobs, sadly, the prevailing attitude is "too bad! find another job!"
> Also, uh, once autonomous cars become popular, you won't need to buy a replacement car... Everybody will use Uber/Lyft style services.
> And, as for monopolies, the US government doesn't seem to care anymore. Look at Disney. Or Google.



This are probably some of the most unrealistic claims I've seen in a long time.



FluffyShutterbug said:


> Also, uh, once autonomous cars become popular, you won't need to buy a replacement car...



Ah yes because cars are given for absolutely free on daily bases



FluffyShutterbug said:


> Once again, the logic is that computers are going to take over for us. As for the jobs, sadly, the prevailing attitude is "too bad! find another job!"



Yeah because that's not going to cause social unrest and cause more harm than good*



FluffyShutterbug said:


> Everybody will use Uber/Lyft style services.



It's not like Uber got into legal trouble due to their loose terms of service and was brought to an european court of justice and imposed stronger regulations, *not to talk about the massive backlash by Taxi drivers.



FluffyShutterbug said:


> Look at Disney. Or Google.



Last time I checked I don't use Disney to survive on a daily bases, and isn't exactly something that can help an individual get from one place to another (i.e get to work), so does google, which are not exactly related to the subject


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


> This are probably some of the most unrealistic claims I've seen in a long time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You do realize that I"m purposely playing Devil's Advocate in order to get questions that I'm worried about answered, right? I actually agree with your sentiments here.
But, at the same time, I feel like society doesn't seem to give a hoot about people who question progress or innovation for one reason or another. We and our concerns are just written off...


----------



## Julen (Apr 24, 2019)

FluffyShutterbug said:


> society


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Julen said:


>


That was such a facepalm-y moment, lol.


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Apr 24, 2019)

In terms of self driving cars, they could in theory be safer; but that is a long way off in the future in terms of technology. We are talking advanced encryption and computing to process how to minimize harm. Modern cars are nowhere near there yet.

Cars cause more death and destruction than guns. I'm pro gun but 





I also don't trust the bourgeoisie to not dick people over or cut corners for their bottom line in making self driving cars; which makes a ban on regular cars problematic to say the least because it creates an absolute demand allowing for price gauging and disregard for safety. 

The law could have negligible economic impact if done progressively or with a long time frame. It would make more sense as a ban on making new non-autonomous vehicles.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Misha Bordiga Zahradník said:


> In terms of self driving cars, they could in theory be safer; but that is a long way off in the future in terms of technology. We are talking advanced encryption and computing to process how to minimize harm. Modern cars are nowhere near there yet.
> 
> Cars cause more death and destruction than guns. I'm pro gun but
> 
> ...


But, once again, the damned Silicon Valley fanbois are claiming that all of that stuff will be fixed in like 6 months. They think we've already hit the Technological Singularity.
And, yeah, the part about the bourgeoisie screwing us over  is exactly what I fear happening, Misha. I couldn't have said it any better myself.


----------



## Simo (Apr 24, 2019)

They should make a car and call it The 'Bourgeoisie'. I'm sure it would sell if marketed cleverly: p


----------



## Misha Bordiga Zahradník (Apr 24, 2019)

Simo said:


> They should make a car and call it The 'Bourgeoisie'. I'm sure it would sell if marketed cleverly: p


It would if you made it a luxury car.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 24, 2019)

Simo said:


> They should make a car and call it The 'Bourgeoisie'. I'm sure it would sell if marketed cleverly: p


Heh, that reminds me of one of the vehicles from the Saints Row series, the "Status Quo".


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Apr 25, 2019)

What do you fellas think about this video?


----------

