Ford to target 2021 for fully Autonomous vehicle...

In reply to Robbie:

I don't doubt that people could let their cars go roam around at night. Though it definitely opens a whole other dimension of risk when someone can make your car go anywhere they want it to when they want it to. Chop shop anyone?

But the bigger question is will they. As is there a bike share programs and by the use rental cars that are way underutililized. In addition, the johnsons can always air bnb their house for the unused days too. Very few do. I have a feeling it's because these automated cars are going to cost the equivalent of a years pay for most and letting an asset of that comparable worth roam around unchecked just won't be comfortable

For corporations..... Well that is a different story. One more way to replace a human with a machine is a no brainer.

So why do we want them again?

I was recently ask some questions and my thoughts on autonomous vehicles. I really have no grasp on what changes this will cause.

This articles states that Ford is trying to head off a situation where less than half the current automobiles are needed on the road.
Intersting.

Ford owned Hertz in the past and this was a way to move tons of new cars into the market. Heck for '07 (the last year of the original Taurus) all sales were just to fleets (mostly Hertz)
Seems like this kind of contracted sales are what Ford sees for its future.

I was going to start a new thread, but it seems to be appropriate to add to this one - autonomous Uber cars in Pittsburgh in the next few weeks. I may have to give that a whirl.

Uber autonomous cars in Pittsburgh soon

In the year 5555

Your arms hangin' limp at your sides

Your legs got nothin' to do

Some machine's doin' that for you

JohnRW1621 wrote: I was recently ask some questions and my thoughts on autonomous vehicles. I really have no grasp on what changes this will cause. This articles states that Ford is trying to head off a situation where less than half the current automobiles are needed on the road. Intersting. Ford owned Hertz in the past and this was a way to move tons of new cars into the market. Heck for '07 (the last year of the original Taurus) all sales were just to fleets (mostly Hertz) Seems like this kind of contracted sales are what Ford sees for its future.

That, and they're protecting themselves from a time in the future when owning a vehicle controlled by a sack of meat could become legislated/priced out of reason for the vast majority of the buying public.

In reply to STM317:

An occurance for which our government does not have the slightest bit of Constitutional Authority to make LEGALLY make come to pass. Doesn't mean the tyrants we call politicians won't try, though...

Ford will do it. The newest Taurus parallel parks itself. How? With the same sensors it could use to navigate roads and traffic. The tech is in place. It's a matter of perfecting the software now. Data over time will do that for us.

Don't fear the Reapers guys! Change is coming. It will have it's ups and downs. Personally, I don't mind having a permanent designated driver in the form of an automated car. That or a commuter driver so I can do important things like play whatever game someone invited me to join on Facebook or send a tweet about how that cloud over there looks like an inflamed ear lobe.

Automated cars will free us from the drudgery of driving. We can still do track days or Chump Car for fun.

WildScotsRacing wrote: In reply to STM317: An occurance for which our government does not have the slightest bit of Constitutional Authority to make LEGALLY make come to pass. Doesn't mean the tyrants we call politicians won't try, though...

I'm not suggesting the government will make it illegal to operate your own vehicle (although as you say it's possible), but there are ways owning a current vehicle could be dis-incentivized. I think there may come a point where human operated vehicles are just seen as such a liability that it may cost a fortune to insure/register, etc. If automated cars end up being so much safer than human drivers, then insurance companies aren't going to just kiss their precious revenue goodbye. Somebody has to pay for Flo and the gecko, so I think they're going to increase rates across the board, or at the very least increase rates for people that stubbornly insist on controlling their own vehicle.

When that happens, human driven rides basically become what horses are now. They'll mostly be expensive toys for the wealthy, but out of reach and kind of pointless for Joe Schmoe to own.

Great- turning a good thread into a distopian future.

In reply to alfadriver:

Sorry for steering it off the course you intended? What did you want to talk about?

For what it is worth (and maybe will get us back on subject), I happened to get to talk to Dale Pollak a couple weekends ago. (Dale is the founder of vAuto, which is a software function that most used car dealers across the country use to evaluate both buy and sell prices for their cars). vAuto is now owned by Cox Automotive, who own a bunch of stuff like cars.com and KBB or similar.

He and I got on the subject of driverless cars, and that is one of his biggest focuses nowadays like many others in the auto industry. His opinion agreed with ford, that in 5 years driverless cars would be widely available.

I think it's brilliant.

Not from a technological perspective, or safety, or even marketing (in the traditional sense of the word). It's a brilliant business decision.

Uber committed to be driverless by 2030 a long time ago (most Uber drivers don't know this).

Ford is recognixing this as the biggest and best way to sell cars.

It's coming. And nobody cares if car guys don't like it. By 2030, Uber will have its choice of manufacturers and platforms to choose from. Tesla, Google, MB, Volvo, basically EVERY manufacturer will have an option.

What Ford is saying is that they are the only company with the technological capability, the financial stability, the engineering prowess, the legal strength, the marketing network, and the chutzpah to not only make it happen, but to be first to market and accelerate the timeline by 9 years.

They are looking to stomp the competitors like Tesla.

And in the process, they will also make the individual buyer (and probably their entire dealership network) obsolete.

They are prepared to make the next 3 decades about fleet sales, corporate partnerships, platform control, and changing the world and the manner in which people own cars. berkeley you, individual buyer.

They are throwing down the gauntlet. It's a brilliant business maneuver.

Watch for them to be positioning to begin buying competitors with IP assets who can't keep up with the muscle they will be exerting.

Have you driven a Ford/ Lincoln/ Tesla lately?

STM317 wrote: In reply to alfadriver: Sorry for steering it off the course you intended? What did you want to talk about?

It's one thing to think about the technology, and consider it's impact on us, and society. But to stretch that into a prediction that cars will be banned?? I don't see that move.

I'm on the fence- not so sure about the tech, but if done well, and cars talk to each other well (for a system) the drive to work should get a lot better (someday). I don't think that will happen before I retire, but if the network knows where cars are going- it can tweak speeds so that little time is lost, but a big bunch of cars don't plug things up.

When autonomous cars are truly here, and proven reliable and safe (and occupy the vast majority of vehicles on the road) Ive got all sorts of nerdtastic thoughts.

Since computer controlled cars should be incapable of a collision,Can we legally and safely do away with seatbelts, and a riding position as we know it? No more gigantic baby seats? (A current sore spot for me)

No collisions mean no need for crash structures, or airbags. No dashboard and inward facing seats will increase interior space, all while decreasing vehicle weight dramatically. Perhaps larger cars won't be needed, just larger inside. A current sized suburban could be turned into a living room on wheels.

With no driver's seat, user controls can be mounted wherever is convenient or most logical, rather than driver centric. Doors no longer need to be placed at each seat. Every vehicle could have one big opening for entry/loading.

What if more of the car was glass? Why we can't enjoy a great view out the entire side of the car?

If you can do a autonomous car, you can do a semi. This would revolutionize the trucking industry. Goods would arrive faster, in better condition, more efficiantly, for cheaper. I actually expected long haul trucking to be the first industry to make autonomous vehicles commonplace. Massive job losses in this sector should be expected. If you're a truck driver, start thinking about a new career now, this is coming, there's way to much money to be saved not to.

The prospect of autonomous cars is depressing to me, I want no part of it.

Im so over tech, it used to impress me and fill me with awe. now it just seems to me to be a constant quest to rob humans of their humanity. Why are we so intent on making ourselves redundant?

All I can say is be careful what you wish for, you may not be so impressed with what actually gets delivered

Toyman01 wrote:

Robbie wrote: Here's the thing, with autonomous cars, I will never need to own a car at all. I just call up the RV when I need an RV, I call up the commuter when its just me, I call up a super-luxo car for dates, I call up a tow truck to pull my new race cars home or to the track, etc. None of them even take up my precious garage/driveway space. They are driving other people around when I don't need them. I imagine I could pay a subscription service for this, or individual rentals, whatever.

Having seen the way the general public takes care of taxis and buses, I don't want to live in your dream world. The soda, urine, and vomit soaked seats, with graffiti sprayed everywhere, would make me want my own car back.

One of the cooler things I heard thrown around once we have transitioned past normal driving dynamics was essentially a pod that you would own that would then hook up with a drivetrain that would come to you and pick you up.

So you paid for the drivetrain service then had your own pod. This allowed for upselling to premium markets (bentley pod vs ford pod or whatever) and reduced the general ick factor that you explained above.

It also would alleviate the situation another poster was talking about with groceries or duffle bags that they wanted to keep around while they went somewhere else.

There is a pretty large obstacle to autonomous cars around these parts...winter. Imagine a blanket of snow and ice as well as driving snow and the effects on sensors and what they can actually see. Highways will likely have markers that the cars can read, but side roads and all streets won't. Also visibility becomes a big concern. We could end up sitting out "bad" weather which our autonomous cars deem too unsafe to drive in.

I have read that this is a challenge that the designers are working on, but haven't seen much in the way of solutions.

In reply to Aspen:

I don't see it.

The range of available input sensors is far greater than the human eye and ear, the resolution can be significantly better, and the reaction time for any response is much better.

Regardless of the driving condition, I think properly equipped autonomous cars should outperform their human counterparts on all measures.

There may be a predetermined liability threshold which basically says "Unsafe conditions", but those conditions would be more unsafe with a human driver. If a driver chooses to override, it's just a dumb decision, like any other dumb human driver decision.

There was a recent C&D editorial that said autonomous cars won't happen until all kids and dogs are equipped with bluetooth. Or something like that.

I think the biggest issue with the coming of autonomous cars will be the transition of human driven cars to software driven cars. The chances of 'bad' drivers (be they human or software) will still cause lots of headaches until the humans are reduced to a small fraction and/or the software is sorted enough to deal with the human responses to all the inputs the world throws at us.

In reply to daeman:

You read my mind!

I can't see the preciseness and order of automated cars fitting in well with human drivers.

There's no algorithm to predict what a 19 year old girl driving a 4,000 lb suv is about to do.

Edit: I think I just paraphrased Stafford1500

ebonyandivory wrote: There's no algorithm to predict what a 19 year old girl driving a 4,000 lb suv is about to do.

So, a human driver is more capable of predicting her???

SVreX wrote:

ebonyandivory wrote: There's no algorithm to predict what a 19 year old girl driving a 4,000 lb suv is about to do.

So, a human driver is more capable of predicting her???

Exactly right. Humans are only as good at predicting the future as the information they can collect is good. Autonomous cars have access to a vast array of sensors (already mentioned) that are better and different than eyes/ears/fingers/mouth/nose. And then computers can react faster.

There already are (and have been for many decades) airplanes that simply cannot fly without serious computer input and resulting stabilization functions. Its not that a human can't fly a plane, its that a computer can do it better.

Autonomous cars won't simply use lane markings to drive. They won't simply use GPS and computerized maps and routes of the roads. They won't simply constantly scan visual (and IR) and radar feedback from all directions. They won't simply follow wires buried under the roads. They won't simply constantly track wheel slip at all wheels and use accelerometers to measure for sliding. They won't simply communicate with all other vehicles near them on the roads. They will do ALL of those things and more.

SVreX wrote:

ebonyandivory wrote: There's no algorithm to predict what a 19 year old girl driving a 4,000 lb suv is about to do.

So, a human driver is more capable of predicting her???

Not sure I said anything like that but whatever.

I simply meant technology works well with technology. Not so much with we unpredictable humans.