Off Topic Driverless cars

gelders pie

gelders pie

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
6,730
11,488
113
annfield plain
The chancellor wants driverless cars on the roads by 2021. I wonder, do we really need this facility ? How many of us would really benefit from one and in which way. I can't see me finding it particlularly useful. And can it work with a mix of these and current drivers on the road at the same time ?

(sidenote -- can we work on a goalkeeperless goal ?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: red&white wanderer
I have 2 thoughts on this.

1) no matter how good the technology and equipment, machines can fail.

2) I like driving.

I see the logic in being able to switch a system on for motorway driving etc but I don’t see that it can ever be advanced enough to work flawlessly in traffic with a guarantee of no incidents.
 
Nads said:
I have 2 thoughts on this.

1) no matter how good the technology and equipment, machines can fail.

2) I like driving.

I see the logic in being able to switch a system on for motorway driving etc but I don’t see that it can ever be advanced enough to work flawlessly in traffic with a guarantee of no incidents.
Click to expand...


Agree with all your points. For motorways I think cruise control is enough. I never even liked that, was always worried I'd get bored and lose concentration
 
gelders pie said:
Agree with all your points. For motorways I think cruise control is enough. I never even liked that, was always worried I'd get bored and lose concentration
Click to expand...

Aye I’m the same, I just naturally think you need to be alert while driving and if you’re just sat there you ain’t.

We’ve all had them moments when you’ve drifted off and instinct kicks in and you know live gotta brake out of nowhere, can a computer ever fully replicate human instinct?

It’s not something I’m keen on one bit, who’s responsible of it fails? You? Insurance? Car manufacturer?

Seems like a minefield we don’t need and a potential feeding frenzy for these mightily annoying accident claims companies we all get annoyed with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gelders pie
All I’ll say is that imagine a driverless car injured or heaven forbit kills a loved one of yours due to ‘machine error’.

Not sure much more needs said.
 
The majority of road traffic accidents are caused by driver error, so until we have the situation where all vehicles are controlled by artificial intelligence machines the human driver will be the weakest link.
I drive about 100 miles a day on the M4 and would happily give that up but there are so many irresponsible drivers out there who don't give way, pull out in dangerous positions and go far too fast or far too slow for the road conditions - so until all vehicles have the same driverless technology it would be far too risky to trust a machine to make a decision based on erratic human behaviour in other cars.

I generally enjoy driving - apart from the work commute so it will be a sad day when / if this happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gelders pie and Nads
A great way to cut down on accidents of course would be to actually enforce things like people blocking outside lane, driving way below speed limit etc so that other road users don’t get frustrated.

How many accidents occur due to the knock on effect of a driver being frustrated by other folks driving, the middle and outside lane thing is ridiculous, it’s in the Highway Code even that you ‘always move for a faster travelling vehicle regardless of speed limit’.

Nothing is ever done about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Makemstine Roger
Longer distance motorway driving I can understand/get, provided the tech switches your car to autopilot as soon as you hit the motorway.

City driving I don’t see how driverless cars can function properly. The need for up-to-date mapping , intense data needs to support mass traffic and other random traffic/non-tech vehicles will be too much.
 
I don’t know how it can navigate these housing estates supermarket parking etc.
It’s bad enough women driving
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burly Hurley
It's looking like Joe Public isn't too keen (and has valid reasons) But hey, the few politicians and the people who hope to make a fortune want it so they'll deem it oK. Another thing that falls into the 'just because it may be possible, doesn't mean it's necessarily good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Makemstine Roger
They shouldn’t be aiming for driverless, if anything focus on getting the technology right to work WITH the driver.

Many cars now have sensors that beep if you’re too close etc, few have the technology to actually slow you down etc, that’s the way forward not to completely remove the human element.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gelders pie and RTB
Nads said:
They shouldn’t be aiming for driverless, if anything focus on getting the technology right to work WITH the driver.

Many cars now have sensors that beep if you’re too close etc, few have the technology to actually slow you down etc, that’s the way forward not to completely remove the human element.
Click to expand...

Why not? Driverless could cut out human error and would stick to speed limits etc..
 
We won't even get all electric cars on the road by that point let alone driverless cars. More farfetched Tory deadlines they'll fail on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back