http://www.philly.com/philly/business/cars/Google_car_testing_for_weird_situations.html
QuoteOne case featured a duck scampering across an intersection followed by a woman in an electric-powered wheelchair going back and forth, in apparent pursuit of the duck.
"It doesn't matter how long you gave me, I never would have come up with that scenario. There are no rules. The DMV has nothing in its handbook," Urmson said.
The car must have the ability to determine "this is weird. I'm just going to chill out here and let that all play out."
But human drivers might watch the path of the woman and the duck and proceed if they think they see a safe opening. The Google car will simply wait until its cameras and sensors don't notice any impediment.
Urmson showed another example where three lanes of traffic were about to proceed from an intersection as the light turned green. The Google car was in the far right lane. But coming from the left was a bicyclist who was determined to shoot through the intersection despite a red light in his direction.
The first two human-driven cars moved forward forcing the cyclist to swerve toward the middle of the intersection to avoid them. The Google car held its position because one of its sensors picked up the cyclist's speed and concluded it was about to bolt through the intersection.
I've heard there has only been a few accidents with the Google self driving car, and that was because of distracted motorists ramming it.
There is still quite a bit of testing to do first before it's ready for average people. How will it react in snow (if it clogs the sensors somehow) etc.
I'd be happy to buy one when it comes out though if I had the money. I don't really like driving.
I can't wait to see it rock out of a snow-filled parking space while avoiding touching the lawn chair the angry drunk neighbor put there and is watching like a hawk
The Google car drives very cautiously. Most people figure "if I didn't kill the cyclist/pedestrian, I'm fine"; the Google car will yield if they're anywhere near the road. Google cars also won't "block the box", whereas human drivers almost always will.
Quote from: vdeane on July 24, 2015, 01:03:02 PM
The Google car drives very cautiously. Most people figure "if I didn't kill the cyclist/pedestrian, I'm fine"; the Google car will yield if they're anywhere near the road. Google cars also won't "block the box", whereas human drivers almost always will.
How does the Google car handle "passenger is having a heart attack and it's time to stop being accommodating to the rest of traffic" which has happened to more people I know than I'd like?
How about "We need to pull way up into the crevice of the overpass abutment because it's started hailing like crazy and we need to cram cars in where it's safe"?
I'm guessing it doesn't handle either case.
The Google car will probably know it's about to hail and get you someplace safe before it happens, and will probably drive the fastest route to the hospital, rather than the way you think is best.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 25, 2015, 03:25:28 PM
The Google car will probably know it's about to hail and get you someplace safe before it happens, and will probably drive the fastest route to the hospital, rather than the way you think is best.
But, the car will still follow every sign/law/limit and still be much more conservative about possible problems ahead of it than someone trying to get their dying loved one to a hospital. That's the difference.
As for the hail, I'd be afraid of a car deciding to drive me somewhere I don't want to go because it thinks I'll be safer there. That's skynet territory.
The problem with driving is that there's more to it than following a rulebook and set perimeters on when it's safe to proceed.
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
Well, that's just it. I think our fallacy when speculating about driverless cars is that we assume they will handle all the same scenarios that human drivers deal with now, except that they will do so autonomously.
But in reality, driverless cars won't have to overcome a lot of these scenarios at all; they'll just stop existing altogether.
iPhone
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
Makes you wonder how easy that'll be and if the transition between automatic and manual will be smooth or cause a whole host of other problems all its own.
Quote from: Rothman on July 25, 2015, 09:18:20 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
Makes you wonder how easy that'll be and if the transition between automatic and manual will be smooth or cause a whole host of other problems all its own.
I'm thinking the ease of switching to manual (or less autonomous) modes will depend on the facility the car is currently using. A fully driverless freeway facility would allow only the most minimal driver intervention, if any, whereas parking lots and other low-speed areas would allow up to total manual control, perhaps.
iPhone
Quote from: Rothman on July 25, 2015, 09:18:20 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
Makes you wonder how easy that'll be and if the transition between automatic and manual will be smooth or cause a whole host of other problems all its own.
That's a UI/UX issue. That's the easier problem. All of the car companies have UX designers and they'll find out what works.
Quote from: realjd on July 26, 2015, 01:07:48 AM
Quote from: Rothman on July 25, 2015, 09:18:20 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
Makes you wonder how easy that'll be and if the transition between automatic and manual will be smooth or cause a whole host of other problems all its own.
That's a UI/UX issue. That's the easier problem. All of the car companies have UX designers and they'll find out what works.
The movie The Sixth Day demonstrates how a transition from computer to human control might work. The driver appeared slightly annoyed at the computer's prompts making sure he was ready before switching, but it seems sensible to me.
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
The latest Google prototypes don't even
have a manual drive mode, and the NMA speculates that manual driving will become illegal within a decade or two of self-driving cars hitting the market.
Quote from: vdeane on July 26, 2015, 04:14:08 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
The latest Google prototypes don't even have a manual drive mode, and the NMA speculates that manual driving will become illegal within a decade or two of self-driving cars hitting the market.
Nonsense. In aviation, autopilot remains optional even though some level of autopilot has been available on even small aircraft models for many years. This country is especially unlikely to take away the personal responsibility of safely operating one's own motorized land vehicle.
Quote from: vtk on July 26, 2015, 05:00:49 PM
Nonsense. In aviation, autopilot remains optional even though some level of autopilot has been available on even small aircraft models for many years.
Yes, but small planes generally serve a mostly recreational purpose and are operated only by a small subset of the population that seeks to learn to do so. Cars are used mostly for functional rather than recreational purposes and almost everyone drives one at some point in their life.
Autopilot remains optional on small planes because using it defeats the entire purpose for most users. For cars, the same would not be true. Most users would embrace it once they became comfortable that it wasn't going to kill them, and the few of us who would rather not stand a good chance of having our fun spoiled because society at large decides that what we're doing is dangerous.
I do think NMA is a bit aggressive in their predictions, though. When self-driving cars first hit the marketplace they will be expensive and beyond the means of most people. Once the prices come down they will become more commonplace, but even then it will take some time before all new cars are self-driving. And once that happens it will take a couple more decades for all the human-controlled cars out there to go to the scrap heap.
Even still, though - just because Google's cars lack a manual mode does not mean future cars on the market will. In the course of real usage by real people - not just roadgeeks - there will be situations the autopilot can't cover. Offroading. Looking for something or someone whose location is not precisely known. Towing a boat out of the water. Use on construction sites. Etc.
What is, perhaps, a more likely scenario than manually operated cars becoming illegal is it becoming illegal to manually operate a car on a public roadway.
I'm pretty sure roadgeeks are the only group of people who consider driving to be recreation. Everyone else considered it a chore that is solely a means of getting from point A to point B. We're the oddballs, and society is NOT likely to cater to us, especially since there are people who want to take the dangerous humans out of the driver's seat. Most people would LOVE to have a self-driving car that would allow them to just play with their phone the entire time. Many would also be happy to get rid of car ownership entirely and just have a random car pull up to their house when they need to go somewhere.
QuoteI'm pretty sure roadgeeks are the only group of people who consider driving to be recreation.
Car enthusiasts?
Beyond that...I dunno- I just spent my weekend up in the vicinity of Glacier National Park, and I can tell you based on their leisurely driving speed and propensity to slam their brakes at the last second to pull over to take a picture of a tree or some shit that most of those cars were not just going from "Point A" to "Point B"- they were on leisurely roadtrips.
Yeah, car-based tourism is practically an American tradition. Driving for recreation is definitely not a something roadgeeks have a monopoly on.
Quote from: vdeane on July 26, 2015, 07:34:40 PM
I'm pretty sure roadgeeks are the only group of people who consider driving to be recreation. Everyone else considered it a chore that is solely a means of getting from point A to point B. We're the oddballs, and society is NOT likely to cater to us, especially since there are people who want to take the dangerous humans out of the driver's seat. Most people would LOVE to have a self-driving car that would allow them to just play with their phone the entire time. Many would also be happy to get rid of car ownership entirely and just have a random car pull up to their house when they need to go somewhere.
People don't love driving?
When did this happen? The car companies' marketing departments don't know this, popular culture doesn't know this, and lots of ordinary people I know who love to drive don't know this.
There are times when driving is a chore, but there are plenty when people love the joy of the open road.
For the most part, sadly, no, I don't think people love driving. I do; many on this site do. But I think we're in the minority.
I'm ready to hop in the car at almost any time. Going somewhere as I group? I'm the first to volunteer: "I'll drive!"
My brother and sister-in-law habitually fight over the keys...to decide which of them is stuck driving, not which of them has the pleasure to. My wife hasn't driven in four years because my car has a manual transmission and she refuses to learn to operate it. "Why would I want to make driving more difficult?" she'll ask. "I already hate it enough." If I go on about how much more fun driving a manual can be, she looks at me with bewilderment. I might as well be talking about how much more fun one washing machine is vs. another.
Even among people who outwardly profess at least a passing interest in cars and driving, I think a sizable proportion are motivated as much or more by ancillary factors–the image a car presents, the social status they think it gives them, the mobility or freedom a car allows–than by the visceral experience of gripping the steering wheel and piloting a vehicle in motion.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 26, 2015, 10:30:44 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 26, 2015, 07:34:40 PM
I'm pretty sure roadgeeks are the only group of people who consider driving to be recreation. Everyone else considered it a chore that is solely a means of getting from point A to point B. We're the oddballs, and society is NOT likely to cater to us, especially since there are people who want to take the dangerous humans out of the driver's seat. Most people would LOVE to have a self-driving car that would allow them to just play with their phone the entire time. Many would also be happy to get rid of car ownership entirely and just have a random car pull up to their house when they need to go somewhere.
People don't love driving?
When did this happen? The car companies' marketing departments don't know this, popular culture doesn't know this, and lots of ordinary people I know who love to drive don't know this.
There are times when driving is a chore, but there are plenty when people love the joy of the open road.
It could be considered a chore for commuters, especially ones knowing they will be stuck in traffic.
Quote from: briantroutman on July 26, 2015, 11:39:27 PM
For the most part, sadly, no, I don't think people love driving. I do; many on this site do. But I think we're in the minority.
I'm ready to hop in the car at almost any time. Going somewhere as I group? I'm the first to volunteer: "I'll drive!"
My brother and sister-in-law habitually fight over the keys...to decide which of them is stuck driving, not which of them has the pleasure to. My wife hasn't driven in four years because my car has a manual transmission and she refuses to learn to operate it. "Why would I want to make driving more difficult?" she'll ask. "I already hate it enough." If I go on about how much more fun driving a manual can be, she looks at me with bewilderment. I might as well be talking about how much more fun one washing machine is vs. another.
Even among people who outwardly profess at least a passing interest in cars and driving, I think a sizable proportion are motivated as much or more by ancillary factors–the image a car presents, the social status they think it gives them, the mobility or freedom a car allows–than by the visceral experience of gripping the steering wheel and piloting a vehicle in motion.
I think there's a difference between enjoying the experience of a road trip, or even the freedom of using a car for ordinary activites, and being an enthusiast of the actual act of driving the vehicle. Sure, the two things overlap a lot of the time, but in just as many instances they're totally separate experiences.
So, for many people who enjoy the traveling aspect of using their car, that won't necessarily be diminished if the car is totally autonomous. And by the same token, those who enjoy the actual driving may not be as out of luck as they fear when driverless cars do become commonplace. It will just be separate products for separate purposes.
I absolutely enjoy the actual driving of the vehicle; the way the car responds to a steering/braking/throttle input. I always have, even when I drove crappy cars back in the day.
My wife has really learned to love it as well over the years-and we BOTH drive manual transmission cars ;)
I absolutely detest riding in a car that someone else is driving, even if they are doing it safely. I can't do it for any trip longer than maybe to a local restaurant or running to the store, anything longer than that and my mental distaste for it becomes physical sickness. I don't believe it necessarily motion sickness, per se, because I can ride on trains/planes/ships with no problem but I can't handle going down the highway with someone else in control, so I'm not so sure how I would be able to handle an automated car.
I will say this much. Computers, regardless of application, will always pick the absolute most inconvenient time to crash (in a computer term sort of way) so a manual mode will be a must have. All of us who use computers in our jobs (I suspect that pretty much all of us here) know this to be true. For you it may be designing the next great interchange, for me its processing a 911 call. When I absolutely positively need my computers to work 100 % flawlessly some sort of software glitch will rear its ugly head and if I wasn't as experienced as I am it could cause a very real problem. I still have other manual resources at my disposal and I am still proficient in the use of them so help will still get to you when you need it. If the car decides it time to reboot to safe mode in the middle of navigating a 45 mph cloverleaf ramp someone is going to have to have the capability of grabbing control of the vehicle and safely continuing the trip....or would you prefer the vehicle just automatically stopping in the middle of the road blocking it up so no one else can get around you until you can figure out how to restart the computer or wait 4 hours for the nearest I.T. tech to come to your rescue, LOL.
Quote from: slorydn1 on July 27, 2015, 01:34:15 AM
I absolutely detest riding in a car that someone else is driving, even if they are doing it safely. I can't do it for any trip longer than maybe to a local restaurant or running to the store, anything longer than that and my mental distaste for it becomes physical sickness.
I'm going to go out on a limb here, but since you invited us in... not needing to absolutely always be the person to do any activity is an important social skill, never mind piece of relationship diplomacy (particularly since you're taking away your wife's chance to do something she loves). It must be difficult when on long trips you can't switch off driving and simply have to stop making any progress.
[/quote]If the car decides it time to reboot to safe mode in the middle of navigating a 45 mph cloverleaf ramp someone is going to have to have the capability of grabbing control of the vehicle and safely continuing the trip....[/quote]
This would require the user be at all times ready to do so.
One thing I've noticed about people's views and inquiries about these cars: People ask about all sorts of situations. When followup stories are written saying that the car has handled a situation without fail, people come up with more and more situations. Many times, normal drivers can't handle those situations very well, and are upholding a computerized car to a higher standard.
QuoteIf the car decides it time to reboot to safe mode in the middle of navigating a 45 mph cloverleaf ramp someone is going to have to have the capability of grabbing control of the vehicle and safely continuing the trip....or would you prefer the vehicle just automatically stopping in the middle of the road blocking it up so no one else can get around you until you can figure out how to restart the computer or wait 4 hours for the nearest I.T. tech to come to your rescue, LOL.
Cars are mainly computers nowadays anyway. They simply don't shut down unless there's some sort of issue. Most cars either have keys with chips in them so the ignition can recognize the code, or the car has a key fob and a button you press to start it up. If cars had computer issues, it would suddenly think the key wasn't there and shut it down. Car computer systems are way more advanced than the device you are using to read this right now, and by in large won't have any issues.
Quote from: vdeane on July 26, 2015, 04:14:08 PM
Quote from: realjd on July 25, 2015, 09:01:09 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 25, 2015, 06:35:16 PM
And how the hell are you going to get Google to understand how to pull into a muddy field so you can snap a photo of a sign from just the right angle? Or trespass in a cool abandoned industrial complex with countless forking service alleys to explore? Or stake out a corner of a busy parking lot, snapping into action and pouncing on the person walking to the best spot in the lot before anyone else does?
They handle it by putting the car into manual drive mode. Cases like that aren't what self driving cars are being designed for. Different tools for different needs.
The latest Google prototypes don't even have a manual drive mode, and the NMA speculates that manual driving will become illegal within a decade or two of self-driving cars hitting the market.
There are cars built before seatbelts were mandated that still don't need seatbelts. I doubt there's going to be a requirement that everyone has to get a self-driving option on their car within 10 years.
Quote from: Sykotyk on July 25, 2015, 04:21:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 25, 2015, 03:25:28 PM
The Google car will probably know it's about to hail and get you someplace safe before it happens, and will probably drive the fastest route to the hospital, rather than the way you think is best.
But, the car will still follow every sign/law/limit and still be much more conservative about possible problems ahead of it than someone trying to get their dying loved one to a hospital. That's the difference.
The problem with driving is that there's more to it than following a rulebook and set perimeters on when it's safe to proceed.
The difference between rushing to the hospital and driving there at the speed limit is probably under a minute. You may think you're rushing there, but really the difference in speed is minor. (Before you say every minute counts, while that's true in some cases, most people needing to get to a hospital won't be experiencing a life threatening issue). If the person is in that much of dire assistance, it's 100% better to call 911 in all cases. If you tell the Google Car you need to get to a hospital right away, it will know where traffic is congested, and will route you the fastest way. Taking a side street at 25 mph, which seems slow, may be faster than getting stuck in a line of traffic at a red light. And since we're just going on theory here, if you tell the car that someone is having a heart attack, it may know to route you to a trauma center vs. a regular hospital, possibly saving additional time and steps. And this is all very important in an area that you aren't familiar with. Heck, even in an area you are familiar with, you probably know your main hospital, but not others nearby.
And what if the DRIVER is the one with the medical issue? A self-driving car will park itself right at the ER door, not on the shoulder of the highway!
QuoteAs for the hail, I'd be afraid of a car deciding to drive me somewhere I don't want to go because it thinks I'll be safer there. That's skynet territory.
What? So you would rather put yourself into a bad situation and have to find a way out of it, rather than avoiding that situation whatsoever? It's not going to take 10 minutes of hail to crack your windshield...that first ice ball could be all it takes. I'd rather be in a safe area - even if I don't know what's happening - rather than driving miles down a road looking for that next overpass (which is probably already crowded with other vehicles taking cover).
Yeah, I'm pretty sure most people are interested in the trip itself, seeing the scenery, doing things with friends/family... not the actual act of driving. I, on the other hand, find driving on even the same old suburban streets that I seen every single day to be relaxing.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 27, 2015, 09:33:50 AM
The difference between rushing to the hospital and driving there at the speed limit is probably under a minute. You may think you're rushing there, but really the difference in speed is minor. (Before you say every minute counts, while that's true in some cases, most people needing to get to a hospital won't be experiencing a life threatening issue).
Not if, by driving 20+ mph over the limit, you manage to slip through right before a long light... or just run the light if it's safe to do so. And isn't it a time honored tradition that the soon-to-be father take advantage of his wife going into labor to drive 100 mph down the freeway, getting a police escort instead of a ticket if pulled over?
QuoteIf the person is in that much of dire assistance, it's 100% better to call 911 in all cases.
So you can wait half an hour for an ambulance?
Quote
What? So you would rather put yourself into a bad situation and have to find a way out of it, rather than avoiding that situation whatsoever? It's not going to take 10 minutes of hail to crack your windshield...that first ice ball could be all it takes. I'd rather be in a safe area - even if I don't know what's happening - rather than driving miles down a road looking for that next overpass (which is probably already crowded with other vehicles taking cover).
Not knowing what's happening would drive me NUTS. I can't deal with not knowing. And what exactly is a "safe" area? If it's hailing out, an overpass is probably the only place covered.
DATA (http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/Traffic/story?id=485098&page=1&singlePage=true)!
Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2015, 12:48:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on July 27, 2015, 09:33:50 AM
If the person is in that much of dire assistance, it's 100% better to call 911 in all cases.
So you can wait half an hour for an ambulance?
In a fully automated system, the vehicle should coordinate it's movements with other vehicles and traffic control systems to gain an advantage and if possible arrange and intercept with an ambulance for initiation of medical care. This would not be an override situation.
And back to the topic, I do not envision any system that does not have some level of override, but there will be reserved road systems where it is not allowed. Even then I would hope the system would seek human advice when confused, though I could envision it not always being the vehicle occupants.