What do people think of this car system?

[Scuba_Steve]

Don't know if this has been brought up before?, but seen this article in stuff (http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/5663696/Driverless-car-hits-the-streets-of-Berlin) which reminded me about them & was just wondering what people thought??? Good, Bad, concerns???

I think for 80% of the population this will be fucking awesome as long as its programed right. Most drivers have no interest in drivng, don't like driving & only drive because "they're supposed to" or have to.

This system would have people driving properly mainly becuase they wouldn't have control. Most people would be happy & embrce this system, they can do their make-up on the way to work, eat, drink, drunk driving could become a thing of the past, brillant.

My only concern with it is, knowing our Govt they would try & make owning one compulsery something I would waste all the money I have (or don't as the case maybee) fighting becuase I love to drive/ride I enjoy it & aint no-one taking that away.
Then there would be opposition from Taxis, as they would be all but reduntdant cause now you could get dropped off at the airport or where ever & send you car home, tho taxi operators could embrace it with driverless taxis more moneys for them.
Then I'd also expect opposition from the Govt they would spout some Bullshit bout "safety concerns" but they'd be set to lose millions if these came in as these vehicles wouldn't be able to be scammed.

Anyways what are peoples thoughts on driverless cars???

[avgas]

Its a really stupid idea. Not because having a driverless car means accidents.

But we have driverless cars already.
They are called Taxi's, buses and trains.....

[Gearup]

No revenue needed to pay for traffic cops though.

[Scuba_Steve]

Its a really stupid idea. Not because having a driverless car means accidents.

But we have driverless cars already.
They are called Taxi's, buses and trains.....

Taxi's - FUCKING expensive (try comming to work in one of them each day you'd be better off not working)
Buses - No freedom they travel a set route & they won't be so cheap either if their running wasn't subsidised
Trains - VERY limited to where it goes, fucking packed already I'd hate to see more on them & again quite fucking expensive if they aint getting subsidised like they are now

[Gremlin]

Excellent. Then the drones can be real drones. We'll probably be a lot safer too.

Wonder how the cars will respond to bikes splitting past?

[2Seat_Terror]

Looks like a great idea to me. Cars driving properly and consistently? If anything, moving away from me on my bike as I go past... awesome. :yes: The fewer people driving that don't want to drive the better!

[Gearup]

Its a really stupid idea. Not because having a driverless car means accidents.

But we have driverless cars already.
They are called Taxi's, buses and trains.....

Don't you mean driverless cars means NO accidents.

Last time I looked, taxis, buses and trains did have drivers.

[xen]

Yeah its awesome, and definitely the future, if we want a 0 road toll this would be the only way to get there.

But then the question is will we be forced to use it all the time, don't care about cars but sure they would have a system for bikes worked out further down the line. Think if the system could be turned off but could still take control if you go outside of set parameters - ie start to veer off your lane. Hmm but gets squirelly as I'm sure a parameter would be speed.

So massive increase in safety with corresponding decrease in freedom. Ideally all the nice coastal roads would be manual drive zones - we can dream can't we?

[Scuba_Steve]

Excellent. Then the drones can be real drones. We'll probably be a lot safer too.

Wonder how the cars will respond to bikes splitting past?

Thats why I mention "if programed propperly" it should avoid accidents and drive to law, so 3 sec indication, keep left unless overtaking, never pull out unless there is a gap etc. No more SMIDSY:woohoo: we'll be much safer :yes:

And with a comp doing all the work the cars reaction times will be MUCH faster especially since it'll never be victim to "panic" manouvers

[nodrog]

Its no fuckin good for overtaking, as it can only "see" 70 metres.

[Zedder]

It's only a matter of time before it becomes a reality. Good for zero accidents and efficiency etc, but a can of worms for personal freedom.

[nodrog]

Those big fuckoff new airplanes basically just run by themselves, and they never fall out of the sky.

[oneofsix]

Yeah its awesome, and definitely the future, if we want a 0 road toll this would be the only way to get there.

But then the question is will we be forced to use it all the time, don't care about cars but sure they would have a system for bikes worked out further down the line. Think if the system could be turned off but could still take control if you go outside of set parameters - ie start to veer off your lane. Hmm but gets squirelly as I'm sure a parameter would be speed.

So massive increase in safety with corresponding decrease in freedom. Ideally all the nice coastal roads would be manual drive zones - we can dream can't we?
247213
Just the "bike" to install it in

[slofox]

Fine until someone invents a computer virus for them...:devil2:

[oneofsix]

Fine until someone invents a computer virus for them...:devil2:

A virus?? hack them :devil2: take control of their car. imagine the fun you could have :woohoo: Just imagine the females putting their makeup on on the way to work and you cause the car to suddenly change directions. :innocent:

[bogan]

Cool, good for easing conjestion once they network them up, and bit of fuel savings to!

[slofox]

A virus?? hack them :devil2: take control of their car. imagine the fun you could have :woohoo: Just imagine the females putting their makeup on on the way to work and you cause the car to suddenly change directions. :innocent:

Lipstick up the nose you mean? Yeah!

[BOGAR]

What happens if you press the wrong button and you find your car driving to wellington with out you? Might need those automated petrol stations next.
Some people need it that's for sure. Would you still be able to use it, even if you dont have a licence? :dodge:

[Scuba_Steve]

Would you still be able to use it, even if you dont have a licence? :dodge:

Atually thats a fucking good question... If the car is self driving then you are just a passenger whom told it where to go then 5yr olds should be able to go see grandma in their parents car on their own technically

But does the car have to have a drivers licence :blink::laugh:

[avgas]

Don't you mean driverless cars means NO accidents.

Last time I looked, taxis, buses and trains did have drivers.
Nope I meant it the way I said it. Its called CONTEXT.
Bad idea = accidents.......or vice verse......
Don't believe me google "Volvo failed autobraking"

As for driveless buses and taxis......they have been invented but I was referring more to the point of having a vehicle take you somewhere without you driving.
But I guess you take things quite literally, all the time.

Also there are lots of driverless train systems around the world.........get an education.

It kinda scares me that so many people on KB seem to think that because we do things a certain way in NZ/USA that the whole world works like that.
It may shock you to know that half the world does not own a personal, petrol-powered, vehicle.

[avgas]

A virus?? hack them :devil2: take control of their car. imagine the fun you could have :woohoo: Just imagine the females putting their makeup on on the way to work and you cause the car to suddenly change directions. :innocent:
Actually hackers can already do this.
http://arstechnica.com/security/news/2010/08/cars-hacked-through-wireless-tyre-sensors.ars

[Gremlin]

Its no fuckin good for overtaking, as it can only "see" 70 metres.
Occupants would probably be asleep, so they wouldn't care...


But does the car have to have a drivers licence :blink::laugh:
From the article, it sounds like it can already drive better than most of our drivers... It understands and actually obeys traffic lights... :love:

[p.dath]

I suspect the biggest impediment to this technology would be lawyers. Hard to question a computer after a crash. Had to charge a machine with something. And who do you sue?

I recall reading about an expert computer medical diagnosis system that was developed in the US. It was able to more accurately diagnose patients than 90% of the doctors pitted against it.
It never got released - because no insurance company would insure it against a mis-diagnosis.

[slofox]

... and actually obeys traffic lights... :love:

Now THAT would be unusual!

[oneofsix]

Lipstick up the nose you mean? Yeah!

Thought you would understand :yes:


Actually hackers can already do this.
http://arstechnica.com/security/news...re-sensors.ars
:yes: that's what I was alluding to.


It may shock you to know that half the world does not own a personal, petrol-powered, vehicle.
using China as an example it seems like they want to



I suspect the biggest impediment to this technology would be lawyers. Hard to question a computer after a crash. Had to charge a machine with something. And who do you sue?
yes and governments, they want to blame someone as well.


Atually thats a fucking good question... If the car is self driving then you are just a passenger whom told it where to go then 5yr olds should be able to go see grandma in their parents car on their own technically

But does the car have to have a drivers licence
The car will still require a sober licensed driver. The Government will still want a driver to be nominally, at least, in control of the car, see p.dath's comments quoted above also the Government want license fees etc. I know there are other ways to collect fees but why shoot a cash cow before the udder dries up.

[Gearup]

Nope I meant it the way I said it. Its called CONTEXT.
Bad idea = accidents.......or vice verse......
Don't believe me google "Volvo failed autobraking"

As for driveless buses and taxis......they have been invented but I was referring more to the point of having a vehicle take you somewhere without you driving.
But I guess you take things quite literally, all the time.

Also there are lots of driverless train systems around the world.........get an education.

It kinda scares me that so many people on KB seem to think that because we do things a certain way in NZ/USA that the whole world works like that.
It may shock you to know that half the world does not own a personal, petrol-powered, vehicle.

Perhaps not writing in semi English might help.

Are you sure you're not Katman, he's "never" wrong either.

[avgas]

Perhaps not writing in semi English might help.

Are you sure you're not Katman, he's "never" wrong either.
Tissue for your issue?
Semi-english is all i know. What rat chatter do you speak?

[avgas]

:yes: that's what I was alluding to..
Does anyone know if NASA got back their supersonic flyer?
http://defensetech.org/2011/08/11/hypersonic-jet-lost-over-pacific/

Last I heard it was on autopilot.......

[george formby]

Personally i can't wait to have a car which I don't need to drive. Just tell it where to go & have a nice snooze or whatever on the journey. Of particular interest to me is the mobility such vehicles will give the elderly, physically impaired, inept etc.

A friend in his 80's is still on the road & excuse my phrasing but he is fu#$%^g lethal! When the inevitable happens & his licence is revoked he will be stuffed, house bound & at the whim of carers. Tragic really.

So yeah, no, yeah, bring it on.

A self driving van would allow me to sleep on the trip down to Taupo, do a track day & then sleep on the way home. Marvellous!:yes:

[Gremlin]

Last I heard it was on autopilot.......
Maybe it didn't like the way it's owners treated it, so buggered off?

[oneofsix]

Maybe it didn't like the way it's owners treated it, so buggered off?

now just think you park your 6 month old auto-drive car and head off, when you return no car, it has decided a service was due so took itself to the dealers. :shit:

[george formby]

now just think you park your 6 month old auto-drive car and head off, when you return no car, it has decided a service was due so took itself to the dealers. :shit:

T'will be lectric, no servicing. Just tyres maybe. Somebody might hack it with their blackberry, though & go ram raiding by proxy.

[oneofsix]

T'will be lectric, no servicing. Just tyres maybe. Somebody might hack it with their blackberry, though & go ram raiding by proxy.

why electric cars aren't catching on, not enough money to be made from them. But like your thinking on ram ride by proxy, has lots of possibilities. Also how about sending the car down to pick up a six pack during the game.

[Gremlin]

But like your thinking on ram ride by proxy, has lots of possibilities. Also how about sending the car down to pick up a six pack during the game.
It'll have to be a drive through... does it get to know your bank cards?

God... I could just imagine my GSA knowing my card number... it would be a disaster :blink: It would spend all night browsing the web, hunting for accessories :crybaby:

[mashman]

heh, love the idea... wonder if you'd be able to stop it to pick up hitchers, or help out where there's an accident etc... I'm sorry Dave, I find your choice of hitcher highly irregular. Will it have an ejector seat?

[onearmedbandit]

A friend in his 80's is still on the road & excuse my phrasing but he is fu#$%^g lethal! When the inevitable happens & his licence is revoked he will be stuffed, house bound & at the whim of carers. Tragic really.



Interesting. I would consider a drunk-driver to be lethal as well, and there is no way I'd let a friend drive drunk, not once and not repeatedly. I'm not trying to be a smart-arse here, but how would you feel if he took out another road user or a pedestrian and you knew he was 'lethal'?

[pete376403]

If the government was able to implement a system like this, there's no way they would allow bikes to share the roads. No vehicle would be allowed that could operate independantly of the control system.