The Lemon Fool

https://theconversation.com/how-driverl ... 0to%20work

Interesting summary of the current situation that concurs with my own thinking.

John

Nissan to start testing on public roads in London next month :
http://newsroom.nissan-europe.com/uk/en ... in-europe2

"Passengers, including government officials and technical and safety experts, will be given the opportunity to experience and test the technology in a live environment in a modified Nissan LEAF. These will be the first demonstrations of Nissan’s autonomous drive technology on public roads in Europe"

9873210 wrote:If the on call fleet is a million cars (something like a 96% reduction compared to the current licensed vehicles), and they are distributed roughly by population then at any one time there will be 14 in Bradwell on Sea. That's enough that the on call system will work roughly as well there as in central London. Excepting the couple of times a year when half the village wants to go to the same wedding. Then you'll just have to hope the dispatching program reads the banns.

This is quite different from dispatching the 10,000 or so ambulances in the UK where there is on average only 1/7 of an ambulance serving Bradwell on Sea.

So while there might be problems in truly rural places, for these purposes there are no rural places in Essex, and are probably no rural places in England.

As these things will be driven by profit I very much suspect that it will be, as BJ said, the same as broadband where it took major effort to get ADSL, let alone fibre.

Slarti

Slarti wrote:

9873210 wrote:If the on call fleet is a million cars (something like a 96% reduction compared to the current licensed vehicles), and they are distributed roughly by population then at any one time there will be 14 in Bradwell on Sea. That's enough that the on call system will work roughly as well there as in central London. Excepting the couple of times a year when half the village wants to go to the same wedding. Then you'll just have to hope the dispatching program reads the banns.

This is quite different from dispatching the 10,000 or so ambulances in the UK where there is on average only 1/7 of an ambulance serving Bradwell on Sea.

So while there might be problems in truly rural places, for these purposes there are no rural places in Essex, and are probably no rural places in England.

As these things will be driven by profit I very much suspect that it will be, as BJ said, the same as broadband where it took major effort to get ADSL, let alone fibre.

Slarti

IMHO broadband is the wrong analogue. The part of the system that is expensive in low population density areas (and is analogous to broadband) is the roads. The roads are are already there. Self-driving cars are more analogous to the lemonfool, which started working everywhere there was Internet at the same time. Though that analogue isn't perfect, since the level of service will depend on the number of cars, but that doesn't require building any infrastructure in rural areas. Just turn the cars loose at the factory gate and let them diffuse to the demand.

Just turn the cars loose at the factory gate and let them diffuse to the demand.

Yes of course, I had not imagined that scenario before but I think it is quite powerful. You just make the autonomous car and then it drives itself of the production line and into the wild blue yonder, to make its way in the world, looking after its needs and those of its passengers, until a few years later it drives off the the scrapyard.

It brings this poem to mind

https://allpoetry.com/All-Watched-Over- ... ving-Grace

I like to think
(it has to be!)
of a cybernetic ecology
where we are free of our labors
and joined back to nature,
returned to our mammal
brothers and sisters,
and all watched over
by machines of loving grace.

My predictions:

2030: 50% of cars on UK roads will be driverless.
2035: 90% of cars on UK roads will be driverless.
2070: Few cars (driverless or othewise) will exist. We will be able to "go" anywhere we like (including a traditional shop) using VR.
3070: The paperless office will exist.

Julian F. G. W.

ap8889 wrote:I wouldn't be without Parker for all the Pimms in Claridges. He chauffeurs the Rolls magnificently, and sees to the wife when I am otherwise engaged.

Which reminds me of a joke that was popular when I was at school about 50 years ago!

(Lady Penelope to Parker)

"Parker, take off my dress."

"Yus m'lady."

"And now my bra."

"Yus m'lady."

"Parker, take off my stockings and panties."

"Yus m'lady. At once m'lady."

"And Parker, don't EVER let me catch you wearing my clothes again!"


Well it was quite funny in 1968

stooz wrote:But after max acceptance, driving in an advanced IAM style will be frowned upon. Insurance will sky rocket as you are a bigger risk.

I love driving too, and have more cars than I strictly need as a result. Snotter, toy car, and track day plaything, to be less vague. The Mrs has one too.

I'm one of the best qualified drivers I know - IAM, RoSPA, etc etc I take driving courses not because I need to, but because I enjoy them. Most of my insurance risk involves the theft component in terms of the car value, and some loading for 50:50 accidents where the other party is at fault but cannot be proven to be so. There is very little loading because I myself may cause an accident. So sayeth my insurer when asked how I could reduce my premium, which is already less than £250 for the main toy car. On this basis I think my insurance cost may actually fall if enough others choose driverless because my accident risk will fall.

I would have a driverless car as well as my toys, but only if it was properly safe and could truly drive itself. It would be handy to get home after a drink, and I could hollow out the seats and put in a couch such that I could sleep on the way to work, and chill out on the way home. If I have to have any input on the controls whatsoever, then it is of no use to me in any way.

Initially for the motorway commute part - you switch to driver in London:-

http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/busi ... 41.article

"Volvo is currently on the hunt for drivers who commute to west London to take part in its self-driving car trials, this will be the largest conducted by the company".
-----------------------------------
"Anders Eugensson of Volvo said that the company are (sic) looking for people of all ages who regularly commute to or from west London via the M40, M4, M25 or A4."

Clitheroekid wrote:Well it was quite funny in 1968

Ah yes. Lady P in a taxi, taxi gets a puncture. Driver jacks up the wheel but can't seem to get the hub cap off because all he's got at his disposal is a penknife, which isn't strong enough. After several minutes of watching him hopelessly, an exasperated Lady P volunteers her advice. "Surely you'd do better if you had a screwdriver?"

"Might as well," says the taxi driver. "I can't get this bloody hub cap off."

BJ

supremetwo wrote:"Volvo is currently on the hunt for drivers who commute to west London to take part in its self-driving car trials, this will be the largest conducted by the company".

Interesting that Volvo's (presumably optimistic) estimate is that the earliest they will be selling driverless cars that are motorway/dual-carriageway capable is in 3 or 4 years time.

Driverless cars in standard UK town centres are still a long way off (IMO).

Scott.

swill453 wrote:

supremetwo wrote:"Volvo is currently on the hunt for drivers who commute to west London to take part in its self-driving car trials, this will be the largest conducted by the company".

Interesting that Volvo's (presumably optimistic) estimate is that the earliest they will be selling driverless cars that are motorway/dual-carriageway capable is in 3 or 4 years time.

Driverless cars in standard UK town centres are still a long way off (IMO).

Scott.

We'll see, Scott.

While you may be correct, bear in mind that there is a long list of such predictions that were shown to be spectacularly - and often quickly - wide of the mark.

There's a handy list of some of them here: http://www.etni.org.il/quotes/predictions.htm

Watis

Watis wrote:While you may be correct, bear in mind that there is a long list of such predictions that were shown to be spectacularly - and often quickly - wide of the mark.

Yeah, and I remember Tomorrow's World telling us very soon robots would be doing all the work, and we'd all be living lives of leisure...

Scott.

Watis wrote:

swill453 wrote:

supremetwo wrote:"Volvo is currently on the hunt for drivers who commute to west London to take part in its self-driving car trials, this will be the largest conducted by the company".

Interesting that Volvo's (presumably optimistic) estimate is that the earliest they will be selling driverless cars that are motorway/dual-carriageway capable is in 3 or 4 years time.

Driverless cars in standard UK town centres are still a long way off (IMO).

Scott.

We'll see, Scott.

While you may be correct, bear in mind that there is a long list of such predictions that were shown to be spectacularly - and often quickly - wide of the mark.

There's a handy list of some of them here: http://www.etni.org.il/quotes/predictions.htm

Watis

The problem with city centre driving is other road users. Take London. The behaviour of most cyclists varies between random and suicidal: there's very few that actually obey the rules of the road. And self driving cars will need people to obey rules or otherwise behave predictably. Throw on pedestrians playing pokemon-go or texting, cabbies doing whatever they feel like where ever and when ever, white van man chasing money up and down the road, and a plethora of car users whose driving ability seems indicative of a need to study even for a blood test..... And you expect a program to manage that? (that's a polite laugh not a laugh at you, for clarity)

I'd love a self driving car tomorrow, mostly because I detest the train, but I'll be dead and gone before such things are operating safely in full driverless mode - by which I mean whether they have an occupant or not.

TopOnePercent wrote:The problem with city centre driving is other road users. Take London. The behaviour of most cyclists varies between random and suicidal: there's very few that actually obey the rules of the road. And self driving cars will need people to obey rules or otherwise behave predictably. Throw on pedestrians playing pokemon-go or texting, cabbies doing whatever they feel like where ever and when ever, white van man chasing money up and down the road, and a plethora of car users whose driving ability seems indicative of a need to study even for a blood test..... And you expect a program to manage that?

Yes. Computers are good at analysing lots of data in a tiny fraction of a second. As long as the machines can identify other road users, obstacles, signs, etc. and ascertain what others are doing, they should be able to operate safely and effectively.

Julian F. G. W.

jfgw wrote:Yes. Computers are good at analysing lots of data in a tiny fraction of a second. As long as the machines can identify other road users, obstacles, signs, etc. and ascertain what others are doing, they should be able to operate safely and effectively.

Yep, and my estimate of when they'll be able to do that and operate driverlessly in a normal British high street, available for normal punters to buy, is 10+ years.

And that's when they might first be available, it would take another decade or more before they could be anything approaching the majority of cars.

Scott.

Ashfordian wrote:You have outlined many benefits of driverless cars but will we own driverless cars or just call on them like a chauffeured taxi server via an App? Why own a car that sits around doing nothing for 94% of it life. The Google development approach does not look like an ownership model to me. Less cars will be needed as they will be utilised more efficiently. The only cars I see owned long term are classics and supercars, the latter mainly for track use. As per the recent car 'ownership' figures, 75% are on PCP which when simplified is in effect renting your car. It's not a huge leap to not owning a car.

People LIKE owning cars. They are an enormous status purchase. How many times have you heard "But I simply must have a new car each year. I can't rely on an old one". PCP just panders to this. Even now, there's simply no need for cars to be replaced as often as they are - and that's why second hand ones are so cheap.

I can see the shared ownership working well in big cities, where parking is difficult and waiting times would be short. But I'd imagine suburbia would perceive a need to keep their own vehicles.

There's also the issue that many people want their cars on the road at the same time. Hence rush hours. So I don't think you would get away with significantly fewer vehicles overall. Though I suppose all these electric shared ownership vehicles could go and charge themselves up somewhere (from eco friendly solar power of course) when not in use.

gryff

I wouldn't go driverless in cars / trucks / bus until they go driverless on trains ( a very regulated environment). Very unlikely to happen due to the (erroneous IMHO) safety case.

Hardgrafter wrote:I wouldn't go driverless in cars / trucks / bus until they go driverless on trains ( a very regulated environment). Very unlikely to happen due to the (erroneous IMHO) safety case.

Isn't DLR driverless?

John

Snorvey wrote:Dickhead cyclists and pedestrians will soon learn to behave in the appropriate manner.

The appropriate manner being (in their view of course) to pull right out in front of driverless cars, in the sure knowledge the car will give way to them.

Snorvey wrote:I don't see why software should be made at huge expense to accomodate them.

Fortunately, it will be made at huge expense to accommodate them.

Until of course the software can distinguish a dickhead from an innocent child.

Scott.