Tesla Working On Autonomous Cars: Musk Wants Teslas With Auto-Pilot 287
cartechboy writes "Do you like driving? Well then, you're going to hate the future, because automakers are racing to beat each other to the starting line of the self-driving car race. By 2020, autonomous vehicles may arrive from Cadillac, Nissan, Volvo, Mercedes, Audi, and even Google. But now Tesla wants to jump into the ring. CEO Elon Musk told the Financial Times that the electric-car maker will build a self-driving car...within three years. You'll note that's much sooner than 2020, which means Tesla would beat other, larger automakers to the punch. For those who fear self-driving cars, Musk said the autonomous Tesla could drive 90 percent of the time, but that in his opinion, a vehicle without a human in the cockpit isn't feasible. Like it or not, our roads will probably be safer because you won't actually be driving — well, OK, that other guy who's texting or talking or drinking a huge coffee or ... you get the idea."
Re:Infrastructure (Score:5, Insightful)
I think there will be lots of infrastructure required before we'll see autonomous cars.
Autonomous cars have driven hundreds of thousands of miles on existing roads. So why do you think additional infrastructure is needed? It seems to me that the opposite is true: less infrastructure will be needed. Parking spaces can be narrower (passengers will exit before the car is parked), parking lots/garages can be smaller and remotely located, lanes can be narrower, road construction can be reduced as road capacity increases, traffic lights can be phased out, etc. Public transportation will become more more popular as it shifts from big, infrequent, inconvenient buses to small, on-demand, direct-to-your-door vans. The result will be fewer cars on the road.
Re:Not really... (Score:5, Insightful)
Might as well announce that you're going to lower gravity...
That's his other company. [spacex.com]
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Only if you only drive for fun. Stop and go traffic is tedious and dull in every car that I have driven. I imagine it is pretty dull and even more tedious in a Ferrari or Lamborghini.
An self-driving car will make it even more dull and tedious, unless the car allows the driver to simply sit back and read a book. But every announcement I've read so far seems to indicate that the driver needs to stay alert in case they need to take over the driving, which sort of defeats the purpose.
Either give me a totally self-driving car so I can tune out, or a car that has manual transmission so I have something to occupy my brain while I drive.
Re:Infrastructure (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Infrastructure (Score:4, Insightful)
Pilots don't use autopilot to land.
Your self driving car will prompt you to take the wheel if conditions are too averse. If you refuse, it will simply refuse to drive itself.
Re:Infrastructure (Score:4, Insightful)
white wash, frost on camera lens, ambiguous terrain because of massive snow on the road
None of these are particularly difficult for current autonomous cars. They have multiple sensors, including GPS, radar, camera, inertial sensors, and rotation sensors. Snow may interfere with cameras, but have no effect on the others. An autonomous car also has access to far more information than you do, such as exactly where the road is, the location of other cars, and the exact location of signs and mileage markers (this data is collected and saved as the cars drive).
Re:Infrastructure (Score:5, Insightful)
ambiguous terrain because of massive snow on the road,
Unlike humans, it will probably do the smart thing and stop.
Re:Autonomous safety (Score:5, Insightful)
Which would YOU pick? Bearing in mind the car is travelling at 150km/h, and you probably have less time to decide than you do reading this sentence.
So you see something on the road at 50m, which takes your brain 200ms to identify it. You identify it as a baby, which takes, let's say, 500ms (humans are surprisingly good at that). You really quickly check your mirrors and scan the upcoming road to make sure you're not driving into something dangerous (500ms), and see that you are. You identify it as an immobile pillar, highly dangerous.
Now let's throw in some time to moralise this decision. It doesn't matter how long, but let's say 500ms.
You turn the wheel to avoid the crash, which takes 200ms, and the car begins to turn, and in say 200ms, neatly avoids the baby. Right?
Uhh, not quite. You haven't even finished checking your surroundings yet, and that baby is currently underneath your front left wheel (150km/hr * 1200 miliseconds = 50.00000004 metres). Note: 150km/h is 0.0416666667 metres a milisecond.
Your autodriving car, however, sees the baby at 50m. It doesn't care that it's a baby, because it's a solid lump in the middle of the road, and it should be avoided. If it were a wombat, it would wreck your shit at 150km/hr, and honestly a concrete pillar is probably not that much worse.
Let's see how the auto driving car fares.
So your car sees something on the road at 50m, which it takes 200ms to identify. It doesn't spend any further time on this because objects on the road must be avoided. It begins slowing the car while it decides, and a coprocessor tightens the seat belts, primes the air bags, and potentially sounds the horn (or notifies other self-driving cars by wireless that, hey, shit's about to go down yo).
It doesn't need to check its surroundings because, as an automated system, it has full 360 vision at all times and doesn't slack off, get distracted, get tired, have a fight with the ex over the kids or get an SMS or any number of factors that could distract a driver. And before you say "But I constantly pay attention at all times on the road and never, ever slack off ever", firstly bullshit, and secondly you can't do it as well as it does anyway.
There's no moralising in this equation. It just wants to avoid hitting things.
It begins turning the wheel to avoid the crash, which takes 200ms, and the car begins to turn, and in say 200ms, neatly avoids the baby.
What other things can it do?
Let's see: how about talk to other cars wirelessly, informing them that there's a hazard and steering around it. So only this car needs to dodge, all the others are aware of it and react accordingly -- and even get out of the way of the dodger, so that it doesn't have to slam into the concrete. How about the car can (at the speed of a computer, faster a human brain) calculate its current speed, distance to target, potential impact threat of a solid object that size, and just decide to break instead. How about the car (for whatever reason) gets into an accident and automatically informs the first responders, possibly even transmitting things like: "Three passengers. Caucasian female, African male, Asian female. African male is allergic to penicillin." If you want to go truly sci-fi, then it gives real-time status feeds. "Asian female is hemmoraging, heart rate is high, possibly tachycardia. Caucasian female was thrown from the vehicle and cannot be monitored."
The advent of self-driving cars is like the invention of the internet. We don't even KNOW what it'll do to our society, but I'm really excited about it and I want one now now now now now now now now now, and not JUST so I don't get stuck being the designated drivers simply because I also own a car.
Re:Autonomous safety (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, an oncoming car suddenly swerving into your lane head-on. I would assume the AI would apply maximum brakes and that's it. A human (especially an experienced driver) could take more extreme action, like going off the side of the road to avoid a head-on collision.
This reminds me of "I don't wear a seat belt because jumping out of the car saved my live when the car went off a cliff." arguments. In sixteen years as a driver I've been in one real emergency and it was as a passenger, talking to older people they've had maybe one or two major accidents and a handful of close calls, not counting fender benders in the parking lot. Most people - and I'd say 90% of the people on the road, if you want to count yourself to the last 10% feel free - are distracted and too slow to act, too shocked to react, panic, react instinctively or make some very poor split-second decisions. Instantly slamming the brakes is a good choice and probably above average, it's potentially not the best choice but I imagine it'd be just as much post-accident imagination as reality.
Remember, it's really hard to collect realistic data on this. You can't put people in a simulator and get realistic results because people know they're there to be observed and experimented on. In reality it'll happen on the 235th time you've driven the exact same commute and driving on mental autopilot, you're a bit tired from yesterday but need to get to work, you're mentally thinking about the stuff you need to pick up after work and boom, out of the blue there's this idiot suddenly swerving into your lane head-on. Your reaction is probably not as good as you think it is. And while human drivers on average won't change much, they can collect crash data and improve. Instead of once-in-a-lifetime they'll have thousands of crashes to analyze for optimal behavior.
Re:The Problem with Self Driving Cars (Score:4, Insightful)
Self driving cars do something that people are incapable of doing. they signal and then SLOW DOWN to merge behind traffic. I know, I know, Completely and utterly Insane to SLOW DOWN and go behind someone instead of flooring it and then jerking the wheel hard to cut in front of that car so you can slam on the brakes and make your exit.
Re:Pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
In Denmark, the law requires you to walk around the vehicle and inspect it for damages and that e.g. lights work, each and every time you get in the vehicle to drive. Also, to check if an animal or small child should be under the vehicle.
I have never even heard about anyone doing this.
My current vehicle has parking sensors, front and back. The manual states that you should never rely on these solely, but always use your own judgement. They are only a help, not to be relied on. In the approx 3 years I have had them, they have not only worked flawlessly (and, they beeep, if they are covered in snow, such that I know to clean them), they have worked *way better* than my own judgement. I have come to rely on them to the extent that I "fear" driving cars without them, because I forget they are not there.
Sometimes there is a big difference between what the law requires, what the manifactor has to put in the manual, and the real world.
My bet is, that when we get the selfdriving cars, most people will take a good long nap in stop-and-go traffic. Or perhaps read a book. Or check email. And, we will all know this "public secret".