Driverless Cars Begin 8,000-Mile Trek 151
apoc.famine writes "Driverless technology from the University of Parma's VisLab was deployed in a real-world test on Tuesday. Two driverless chase vehicles will attempt to follow two lead vehicles across multiple continents, from Italy to China, over the course of three months. The journey will cover over 8,000 miles, (~13,000 km) as the chase vehicles use lasers and cameras to navigate hazards along the way. The team expects to collect about 100 TB of data, which requires a hefty electronics and battery load — the scale is such that the cars can only run for about three hours before needing 8 hours to recharge the batteries. This journey is being billed as just a test, and far from a real-world application. The vehicles don't go more than about 35mph, and need a person behind the wheel to take over at a moment's notice. 'What we are trying to do is stress our systems and see if they can work in a real environment, with real weather, real traffic, and crazy people who cross the road in front of you and a vehicle that cuts you off,' said project leader Alberto Broggi. The goal is not to produce just road vehicles, but to improve the technology so it can be used in military and agricultural roles as well. The team hopes to have helped mature the technology within the next 10-20 years to the point that it can be used on the road."
Digital Driver (Score:5, Interesting)
Batteries? (Score:1, Interesting)
Come on...
"The team expects to collect about 100 TB of data, which requires a hefty electronics and battery load — the scale is such that the cars can only run for about three hours before needing 8 hours to recharge the batteries."
So the 'team' are too stupid to wire up an extra alternator to run the electronics? You're telling me that a car engine doesn't produce WAY more than enough energy to power some computers? What a joke! Having to stop to recharge batteries? Are they serious? Epic fail.
Re:Digital Driver (Score:4, Interesting)
Or heading off to the grocery store to pick up pre-ordered goods at the full-service "delivery" window (must tip the kind shop keep).
How about going home and parking itself to charge, while the other one goes and pick the kids up from school and drops them off at soccer practice.
Ah, the future. I wonder what people used to think of ~70 years ago...
Major differences (Score:5, Interesting)
* The car can park itself anywhere, get service or pick up stuff while you're working. Less need to use valuable city real estate and street area on parking. And as people no longer park along the streets they get effectively wider, with more space for traffic but also for bicycle lanes.
* A two-car family may only need one, as the car can go by itself to pick up family members as they need it.
* A family may in fact own no car. Car pooling becomes much more effective when you can call up a car from the pool to your front door at any time.
* No need for a license. People with dementia, or taking medication, or with severe disabilities, or underage can still get around, no problem.
* The cars will be scrupulous about obeying traffic laws and speed limits. But even with a small part self-driving cars, they will act as pace cars and slow and smooth traffic for everyone. Even more so, as they'll be recording everything happening around them, and other drivers know it. Pace will be slower, but people will arrive sooner.
* Life becomes tough for taxi drivers. Taking a taxi would become the same as short-term car rental in practice, and cheaper than taxis as there's no drivers salary to pay.
* Point to point transport becomes cheaper too, with driverless vans and trucks shuttling between shipment centers.
* Driverless drive-ins means you can send a car to do a lot of your errands.
Re:Major differences (Score:3, Interesting)
The cars will be scrupulous about obeying traffic laws and speed limits. But even with a small part self-driving cars, they will act as pace cars and slow and smooth traffic for everyone. Even more so, as they'll be recording everything happening around them, and other drivers know it. Pace will be slower, but people will arrive sooner.
I agree with everything else you wrote but the above. Some experiments have shown that a few outliers (read, poor drivers: too fast or disregard of others) can actually better the flow of traffic. One example: you have an intersection in complete deadlock; the asshole who drives on the sidewalk to escape can actually free a spot that will end the deadlock. If everybody follows the rules in this case, nobody comes out. There are other cases.
The other point is that driving slower doesn't necessarily always make it safer: I've fallen asleep and gone off the road while following a long unpassable line of 'just a notch under the speed limit' cars. Driving off the road doesn't meet the definition of 'arriving sooner' but I eagerly wait the day when I don't have to waste concentration at the tedious and dangerous task of driving.
Re:Digital Driver (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Careful what you wish for (Score:1, Interesting)
Note that anonymity is already leaving - license plate cameras are already tracking you in real time, and HOV lanes already look for how many passengers you have.
And "maybe" a reduction in accidents? That's your argument? Just eliminating drunk drivers will save thousands of lives. And the poor are already being screwed by our current transportation system. Automated mass transit might actually make things better.
Fully-automated cars will cause problems - but not what you've listed.