It Does matter who’s at fault. and you’re making a huge assumption that the outcome would be different if there was a driver.
^That’s how statistics work, Mike: it would be “a huge assumption” to attribute ANY ONE accident to Google cars being inferior drivers; over a sufficiently large sample, the “random” causes of accidents balance out, which leaves us with–there is something human drivers do, that Google cars don’t do nearly as well, that results in a disparate accident rate.
And (though I can’t prove this) it stands to reason Google (who has a lot of money on the line) will “cherry pick” those driving conditions that most favor their cars: no driving in horrible weather, or when there’s a lot of drunks on the roads, etc. Plus, you can bet their cars are in immaculate condition. And YET, they still have their accident rate.
I worked on a black box (actually it was gray but that is what they call them) for a well known military aircraft. It had the watchdog timer someone mentioned here. Every module in the program was supposed to “kick the dog”, that is, send a reset pulse to the watchdog timer. If the timer went a certain time with no kick, it was supposed to restart the CPU so it could not hang up and lose control.
The program was well written so that it always knew where it was and what it was doing before the restart.
One day, I called the Senior lab tech on the project, a good man. I asked him what the period was on the watch dog timer. There was a stunned silence! After a minute he told me it should never reset.
I informed him that it not only did, it always had, and the period was around 2,5 msec. That is, 400 times a second that CPU in that black box completely restarted, and no one but me had ever noticed it. it seemed to perform all its assigned duties without problems.
This time the stunned silence was very long.
Note: This project was not Secret and I am disclosing no classified information. That aircraft had the capacity to carry nukes over your head, though. I retired in 1997 and have no idea if the program was debugged to get rid of the restarts. I dunno’. Perhaps it didn’t matter since it did all its work okay.
@meanjoe75fan, why is controlling conditions in an experiment a bad thing? Alphabet is just following hundreds of years of experience that shows when conditions are controlled, the experimenter can learn the most. It seems to me that they are just being conservative and it is just good fortune that they can run their driverless cars year-round in Mountainview, CA and the surrounding area.
@meanjoe75fan - You may be a good driver, I may be a good driver (maybe), but the reality is that most drivers on the road are HORRIBLE. I would gladly give up my controls to ensure that everyone else is having a computer drive their car. Plain and simple. And I have news for you. Driverless cars, like all technology, will improve constantly and will quickly be MUCH better at driving than you or me.
Good science, good engineering, and real progress mandate controlled conditions. As we learn from our results, the original experiments morph eventually into truly usable systems. It can take years of experimentation to get there.
Bloody, I’ve pondered this question myself. And I cannot decide. There’s no question in my mind that far too many of the human drivers on the road are poor drivers, and some (like that guy in the video I posted that nodded off and did a “pit maneuver” on a school bus… in the middle of a busy multilane tunnel) are just plain idiots. But giving up control means I give up the ability to respond. Perhaps ten years from now, when the technology has been beta tested to the nth degree and all the bugs are worked out. I just haven’t decided yet.
Given many drivers I see, driverless does not scare me.
I don’t trust driverless cars, but I trust cars with drivers even less. The only thing I can tell you as someone who has driven a few million miles is that bad human drivers somehow signal their ineptitude in ways I can’t always pinpoint but signal me that their presence is something to avoid.
@meanjoe75fan - Again I have to question that you actually read the article. Google isn’t the one reporting the accidents…so they’re not cherry-picking anything.
BTW…I’ve said this several times in other threads about driverless cars…I’m not convinced the technology is ready for prime-time yet. But that doesn’t mean it won’t ever be. You seem to be convinced that the technology is stagnant…It’s growing and evolving…It may actually be ready for cities like Boston. But it seems it’s not ready yet.
bloody_knuckles: I agree with you 100%. We have had “driverless” motor vehicles since they were invented with the “driver” being a “Loose nut behind the wheel”. It seems to be getting worse every day. Autonomous military aircraft are operating successfully but they operate in a big sky, little aircraft environment. Some of my favorite aviation humor is maintenance write ups. One that is appropriate to this topic. “Auto-land rough”/“Aircraft not equipped with auto-land”! I have used Google map/directions a total of 5 times. It has sent me to a dead end only 3 times. Driverless cars is a possibility but needs a lot more work to be safe. I’m wondering how they will determine right of way when 8 out of 10 human drivers seem to have no clue?
While not reading all the comments, lets get one thing straight, some of us drive because we like to. Its not just getting from one point to another. We enjoy it. Why would I want a robot to drive my car? Why not just take a cab or a bus then? Taking away an IC engine for an electric motor is bad enough, but now you don’t even want me to drive? How about just a feeding tube so you don’t have to cook or eat? Some people like to cook and eat.
Oh boy. Progress. Who needs it.
Bing: Hallelujah Brother! Although I no longer drive anywhere near my vehicles limits I still enjoy a twisty road. I attempt a perfect entrance, clip the apex, and attempt a perfect exit (although rev matched shifts are no longer possible with a clutch delay valve and “I know better than you” electronic throttle). I find myself doing this on mild highway curves without even thinking about it. When I am no longer able to drive there are alternatives available short of a self driving car.
Mikey:
Let’s get one thing straight. I never said ANYthing about Google falsifying accident reports! Show me where I said that. What I DID say (and I prefaced it by saying I had no direct knowledge, but it stands to reason) that they would cherry pick the TIMES and ROUTES to select for the “least likely to bend metal” options. That is, NOT the “Blue Route” in Philly, during rush hour; NOT driving home at 2AM with all the drunks. More like, 2PM on a Sunday, on a empty road, in fair weather. (And we DO KNOW that Google drivers “take over” for the computer whenever the driving gets too challenging…)
You either are making a disgusting attempt to put words in my mouth, or you truly [inhale] at reading comprehension.
Second–rest assured, I (gleefully!) read the reports that Google cars are involved in accidents in excess of double the nominal rate. It’s been several months, but I remember the gist. I also remember the Company Twerps trying to “excuse” it as “not our fault; our cars drive perfectly and people can’t handle that.” (Ironically, it was the same lame argument the “computer psychologist” made in 2010 when he wrote of HALs killing spree as “not his fault; he was perfectly honest, and told to lie, and didn’t know how to do it.”)
Third–you just called me out as a liar. You said that you doubted I read the article RIGHT after I assured you I had. Now, let me be diplomatic: in the “real world,” where you are not electrons on a screen, this smear of one’s personal reputation is beyond reproach. In many of the circles in which I operate, it is expected somebody will challenge this gross defect of behavior to find out if, indeed, your [posterior] is capable of “backing up” what your mouth is going on about. As (merely) a word to the wise, you would do well to mind your tone in F2F conversations, lest somebody test you as above.
Finally–while I don’t generally lie, I’m not above using the truth as a weapon. And the TRUTH, Mikey, is that you’re a mouthy know-it-all who has aged far more than you’ve matured. In the past, you’ve challenged things I and others have said (in my particular case, you–very rudely–told me I was wrong when I said that MPG readouts are calculated from duty cycles of the fuel injectors.) When I linked to a GM executive that backe me up 100%…I got silence from you. And I’m not the only one! It seems to be your M.O. to be brash and rude in your arguments, and couple that with NEVER offering a Mea Culpa, no matter how much one is owed. Yes, I run my mouth–but at least I can throw a “oops, my bad” out there when I mess up! Why you can’t, I don’t know…though I strongly suspect it relates to your “aged but not matured” personality profile. (Also…if I suspect but cannot prove a fact, I at least fess up to that upfront. You NEVER do! You state as Gospel things that you merely believe. And anybody who cares to look back at your posts can see that; they don’t need to take MY word for it.)
So, yes, you are 100% out-of-line in accusing me of being a liar. And YES, you dealy owe me an apology. HOWEVER, I do not expect one, as that seems to be a “Bridge too Far” for you. (And, should I in fact get one, I suspect it is only because I have successfully shamed you into providing one.)
Good DAY, sir!
Everyone take a deep breath here. I think we are all in agreement about certain basic facts.
1- Human drivers are horrible (generally) and getting worse
2- Computers will eventually be better at driving than humans (especially once most cars don’t have human drivers)
3- We all like to drive and don’t want that option taken from us, notwithstanding items 1 and 2 above
4- We are all car geeks so let’s be nice to each other
Remember to call your mother tomorrow (or think of her often if she is not still with us). Happy Mother’s Day to all of you great folks who post in these discussions!
I think @“the same mountainbike” first comment summed up my view perfectly…
@meanjoe75fan - You can test…but you’ll loose. You’re all mouth…Always have been…always well be.
I’d post the times I’ve proven you wrong here…but the list is too long.
I do apologize for questioning if your read the article. I mis-read your post about cherry-picking.
But please get off your high-horse…you’ve proven in this forum many times how MEAN you can be. Don’t have to keep proving it.
Aw, guys: as they say, it’s just Car Talk! this is supposed to be fun. Let’s put away our dueling pistols. One can disagree with an opinion without making digs at another’s personality or character.
I don’t think anyone is proposing cars that you can’t drive. At my age and diminished eyesight I no longer care to drive at night, I don’t expect them to hit the market in time to help me but In the absence of train and bus service like Switzerland has, a self driving car is the only option that would permit unfettered travel access for many people.
I hear ya oldtimer, Night driving is an avoidance for me also, as is going out for beers, as I have a 2 beer then 1 beer per hour limit. Now If I had a self driving car I might go bar hopping every now and then.
Im starting a Car Talk Boxing Ring… Entry is free but you need to fight your way out… Hahaha