"Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

PeterFord
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 May 2017, 6:42pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby PeterFord » 17 May 2017, 9:23pm

landsurfer wrote:Fair enough .....

Thanks Landsurfer

PeterFord
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 May 2017, 6:42pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby PeterFord » 17 May 2017, 9:24pm

Bmblbzzz wrote:Reading road signs might not be the ideal method but it's what various cars (presumably other vehicles as well) already do, or try to.

Confirmed. You can see a Tesla doing that / trying to do that in the video posted here: viewtopic.php?t=110566#p1071154

I took a screenshot at 0:37, and edited it with red graffiti to show a road sign apparently being detected http://i.imgur.com/EW1tkoL.jpg

PeterFord
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 May 2017, 6:42pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby PeterFord » 17 May 2017, 9:25pm

So anyway...

Does anyone agree with Cycling UK's "CWIS" submission, where it states that the time during which there is a mix of human-driven vehicles and autonomous vehicles "will provide only disadvantages and no advantages for cycle use and cycle safety"? Can you elaborate?

Does anyone agree with me that my "gradually safer" scenario is also a realistic possibility?

Barks
Posts: 93
Joined: 14 Oct 2016, 5:27pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby Barks » 17 May 2017, 10:53pm

I'd trust an autonomous vehicle more than one driven by humans - bring them on asap.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1282
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby Pete Owens » 18 May 2017, 12:29am

PeterFord wrote:Does anyone agree with me that my "gradually safer" scenario is also a realistic possibility?


Yes, absolutely. I totally fail to understand the paranoia on this. Its not as if humans have an immaculate record at driving vehicles safely.

I can understand why petrol heads who are enthusiastic about driving would worry. Once autonomous vehicles become widespread I would anticipate that the vast improvements to safely will result in humans being prohibited from diving vehicles in a fairly short timescale. So to a certain extent the supports the position of minimising the transition period. What I can't understand is worrying about the transition period itself. Every vehicle that is removed from the control of a slightly evolved chimp will represent an incremental improvement to our safety.

PeterFord
Posts: 8
Joined: 13 May 2017, 6:42pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby PeterFord » 18 May 2017, 1:25am

Pete Owens wrote:So to a certain extent that supports the position of minimising the transition period.

Thanks, yes. To me, the "minimze the transition period" argument is one that we might choose to deploy after AVs have been around long enough that we are confident it's the right thing to do. So the period might well be minimized by bringing forward its end date[1], but probably not by delaying its start date.

What I can't understand is worrying about the transition period itself. Every vehicle that is removed from the control of a slightly evolved chimp will represent an incremental improvement to our safety.

I can conceive of an argument that there would be confusion in a cyclist's mind about how a car is going to behave depending on whether it's an AV or not. But it seems weak to me, and I do think the "gradually safer" scenario is more likely.



[1] - And that might even turn out to be unnecessary. If AVs were a roaring success, but in 2050 still 1% of miles were being driven by humans, there would be a great deal of focus on those human miles. There would perhaps be zero tolerance for driving while distracted / tired / not an expert. It might turn out that human driving had thus also become a roaring success. Human driving might not end altogether until 2100, resulting perhaps in an 80 year "transition period"! (Obviously these numbers are purely illustrative.)

N.B. So I actually think the actual term "transition period" gives the wrong impression; as per my post at the start of this discussion.

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 1556
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby Bmblbzzz » 18 May 2017, 9:00am

Yes, the 'gradually safer' idea seems sensible to me. Assuming that AVs are safer than human drivers, which seems fairly likely overall if only through absence of ego, then as soon as some HDs are replaced by AVs, overall safety increases. However, it might well be that AVs do not replace HDs but are additional to them.

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 15584
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: "Minimise the time with a mix of human-driven & driverless cars"

Postby [XAP]Bob » 18 May 2017, 11:31am

I don't see why a mix on the road would be more dangerous...

The AV will be an increase in the number of 'good' drivers - and that is only ever going to help...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way.
No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
A good pun is it's own reword

There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.