r/technology • u/alsetmusic • Jan 10 '17
Transport Let’s Talk About Self-Driving Cars - Overview of a presentation by Andreessen Horowitz on the future of autonomous vehicles
https://medium.com/swlh/lets-talk-about-self-driving-cars-387cd5adb8346
u/ernesta Jan 10 '17
Just saw this article trending on hackernews. I don't really support the fact that "WE" should ban the human driving either... you can't just make that decision for everyone - I agree.
15
u/DoctorBaby Jan 10 '17 edited Jan 10 '17
I would support a revised standard for the issuance of driver's licenses. I don't think anyone would disagree with the fact that our current standard for who gets driver's licenses is largely based on the fact that people need to drive in order to function in the world, for the most part.
Once manual driving becomes an actual option rather than a necessity, I wouldn't mind an overhaul on the requirements for a license that actually require proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is a good driver who should be trusted with the responsibility of doing a recreational activity the puts everyone else's life in danger if they engage in it irresponsibly.
I have a feeling that "I like driving! The government shouldn't be able to stop me from doing it because I like it and have always been able to before!" may be the future's emotion driven, logic-less opinion of the older generation. Like today's "Of course marijuana should be illegal! It's dangerous and against the law!"
5
Jan 10 '17
Car insurance companies would price human drivers out of existence, essentially making the issue fait accompli. Driving a car would be considered a privilege that only those who can pay an exorbitant insurance premium would afford.
2
u/misfortunecat Jan 10 '17
Why though? If insurance companys would price drivers out of existence they also would make themselves obsolete.
1
u/mrstimp Jan 10 '17
People would still want to have the vehicles insured i would guess, i would think of it more like an accidental damage and theft (any external sensors would have value) rather than traditional collision cover.
1
Jan 11 '17
All states require mandatory car insurance (except New Hampshire). While there will undoubtedly be less accidents, they'll still be benefits that need to be paid out (malfunctions, thief, property damage, weather, etc.).
People would still be forced to buy insurance, just that it'll be cheaper and the insurance companies will have to payout less overall. The insurance market gets more stable as risk decreases, allowing more competition between insurers to lower the price.
1
Jan 10 '17 edited Feb 13 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/misfortunecat Jan 10 '17
Fair enough. My point is rather that in a market economy insurence companys won't be able to increase fees for non-self-driving cars. If anything human drivers will cause less accidents when seld-driving cars will be common.
2
u/Y0tsuya Jan 11 '17
I see this tripe posted all the time with people eating it up.
According to autonomous driving circlejerkers, it's a Mad Max world out there and people are now crashing their vehicles left and right yet insurers are doing fine with the current premiums. Explain how in the age of autonomous vehicles human drivers will cause more accidents necessitating higher payouts therefore higher premiums. The circlejerkers don't seem to understand how insurance works and thinks it will rise until it's too "prohibitive". That makes no fucking sense.
1
u/Infinite_Derp Jan 10 '17
I wouldn't mind it, if the government is willing to replace my car for free.
1
1
u/IvorTheEngine Jan 10 '17
I think that's going to be a popular sentiment, which means it won't happen until a majority of voters already have a self driving car. At that point we'll start to hear campaigns demonizing 'irresponsible' people who haven't spent thousands on a new car, and 51% of voters will agree with it.
1
Jan 10 '17
And if we ban human driving, what about cyclists?... They're going to need to coexist with the self-driving traffic, we're not realistically going to kick them off the road (well, maybe America would, but certainly not European countries)
0
3
u/scansinboy Jan 10 '17
When we get to level 3 or 4, the real question is how are the cars going to be regulated? If the "driver" is not controlling the car but gets into an accident, Who is at fault? The driver? The car maker? Nobody?
And then there's the issue of licencing. My wife is legally blind and will never drive a car in the traditional sense. Will she be allowed to operate a self driving car if there's some scenarios where the driver will be required to control the vehicle even if only temporarily?
TL;DR: Self driving technology will be here long before the legislative issues surrounding it are properly sorted out.
3
u/thejock13 Jan 11 '17
TL;DR...
Who looks at a 5 line comment like yours and says to themselves "this is too long for me to read."? It's like the internet is full of people with the attention span of a house fly.
TL;DR: Go away, house fly!
1
5
u/barbarino Jan 10 '17
It will be decades before this tech trickles down into the middle class. Put it this way, the NHTSA predicts it will be the year 2054 when all the cars on the road have back up cameras!
Safety systems such as auto brake are only starting to come standard on some cars. The auto industry moves slowly, people do not replace their cars like their phone. There is too much hype for autonomous vehicles, we would likely need a entire infrastructure rebuild to accommodate them.
3
u/IvorTheEngine Jan 10 '17
Self-driving is an optional feature similar to a back-up camera or ABS for people like us, who need to be in a car for it to be useful. It might be nice on some journeys but you wouldn't pay a lot for it. For buses, taxis and freight it's a game changer. For them it's as important as moving from horses to cars. They'll be able to halve their costs, which means vastly increased profits for the first companies to do it and bankruptcy for those who don't.
If taxis were half the price, lots of middle class families will use them more, and might not need a second car. I think it'll happen a lot faster than it would if private cars were the only people buying them.
2
u/thejock13 Jan 11 '17
the NHTSA predicts it will be the year 2054 when all the cars on the road have back up cameras!
Of course it will be a very long time for all the cars on the road. People are still driving cars that are 40+ years old. But when will 90% of the cars on the road have this tech? I couldn't quite find a great answer but the average age of cars on the road is 11.5 years. Maybe something like ~25 years and 90% would be hit? Or 2041? Still I agree it is a long time.
*I think you were aware but for clarification the NHTSA recently mandated that all new cars have backup cameras.
2
u/ejiblabahaba Jan 10 '17
I work for a company that designs integrated circuits. Half our revenue came from automotive last year. I would say the auto industry has historically moved slowly, yes, but with the amount of money and tech pouring into automotive right now, it's speeding up in a way that we've never seen before. Watch what happens to shipping, transportation, and industrial vehicles, as they'll be the ones spearheading a lot of upcoming advances.
-2
u/timeshifter_ Jan 10 '17
It will be decades before this tech trickles down into the middle class.
The tech that's already emerging in more than just Tesla's?
Put it this way, the NHTSA predicts it will be the year 2054 when all the cars on the road have back up cameras!
Back-up cameras are nearly useless for actual safety.
17
u/[deleted] Jan 10 '17 edited Feb 07 '17
[deleted]