TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,323
- Thread starter
- #21
Giving the idea that someone can hack into your car and reprogram its destination/speed or whatever is very concering, all sorts of trouble could occur
thats very interesting angle on it, i've only ever read and considered the technology. i'd wager this has just killed off the driver less car, or at least substantially limited its appeal. people arent going to want to pay an annual fee to own a car (i know they do effectively, its about perceptions).
The funniest argument against driverless cars is that people don't 'trust' computers, as they 'eventually' make mistakes... Unlike humans, who are perfect and never do things like fall asleep at the wheel or drink drive.
And yet they are quite happy to board a plane to fly off on holiday even though they take off, fly them to their destination and land all by the computer. The pilot is there only in-case of an emergency.
No more drunk driving? Fewer Accidents? Less congestion? No more tickets? Fine on the surface of it.. ..but what about the real world implications?
I'd hate to tell my car to go home and then I wake up in Rome. Or to wake up after a heavy night out and find myself in a car being driven halfway across the country. These issues need addressing.
My view is that an annual fee will be accepted among new car buyers but once the car is 3rd/4th hand things will start to get a bit iffy.
I think a move to a complete leasing system (i.e. you don't own a car but 'summon' one when required and pay per mile), while being more efficient, would put people off. So while this might be the long-term solution, I think in the medium-term people will still want to own their own self-driving car.
I'd hate to tell my car to go home
Are they going to give the driverless cars characteristics based on who owns them?
Women will love them, that's the parking problem solved.
As I pointed out earlier, people are completely barking up the wrong tree here. Individuals won't own driverless cars - that's not the point. The lead in this area is Google, a company that's all about delivering services, not products. You log on to Gmail, you don't have a mail server sitting in the corner of the room.
And as I said earlier, this isn't necessarily about the technology, this will be about insurance, about mixed use - as Mejona points out, there will be confusion with driven cars and driverless ones on the road. My feeling is that the tax on driven cars will rise and rise until owning one will be hellishly expensive and 99% of the vehicles on the road will be driverless.
There has been plenty written about driverless cars but none of the thinking is about mass ownership. There are too many Luddites on here, the future will look very different
http://www.vox.com/2014/5/28/5758560/driverless-cars-will-mean-the-end-of-car-ownership
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/01/google-self-driving-pods-end-of-road-car-ownership
" prototype driverless cars to be tested in the heart of four British cities are unveiled on Wednesday, with the government claiming the nation is uniquely placed to lead the development of the technology.
An autonomous shuttle traversing the North Greenwich plaza beside O₂ Arena will mark a small but significant step on the way to what ministers and engineers hope will be a safer, less-congested, driverless future.
The projects we are now funding in Greenwich, Bristol, Milton Keynes and Coventry will help to ensure we are world-leaders in this field and able to benefit from what is expected to be a £900bn industry by 2025,” he said."
What are NSC'S thoughts on driverless cars?
I bet I can park cars as well as you
I'm not sure if you noticed but my post wasn't exactly serious.
As I pointed out earlier, people are completely barking up the wrong tree here. Individuals won't own driverless cars - that's not the point. The lead in this area is Google, a company that's all about delivering services, not products. You log on to Gmail, you don't have a mail server sitting in the corner of the room.
And as I said earlier, this isn't necessarily about the technology, this will be about insurance, about mixed use - as Mejona points out, there will be confusion with driven cars and driverless ones on the road. My feeling is that the tax on driven cars will rise and rise until owning one will be hellishly expensive and 99% of the vehicles on the road will be driverless.
There has been plenty written about driverless cars but none of the thinking is about mass ownership. There are too many Luddites on here, the future will look very different