Autonomous Vehicles

sesevans said:
But perhaps the example in California is relevant here. If Waymo's application is approved, California's new law proposes the ability of tele-operation. If the self driving vehicle comes across a situation that it does not know how to solve, a remote operator can cause the vehicle to move safely to the side of the road, when the situation is available.
Click to expand...

The problem with a system like that is it's just asking to get hacked.
 
Nasher said:
The problem with a system like that is it's just asking to get hacked.
Click to expand...

1. It is an issue front and centre in the mind's of self driving vehicles development teams. As to the new California law, a requirement for approval is the vehicle must be "hacker proof".

https://www.inverse.com/article/41685-autonomous-cars-must-be-hacker-proof-under-california-rules

2. Waymo has recently communicated with potential consumers in its Lets Talk Self-Driving and you will note 5 sections including a relevant Functional Safety which relates to subsystem redundancy.

https://letstalkselfdriving.com/

Essentially, all Waymo self driving vehicles have a secondary computer that can operate the vehicle in case the primary computer fails. Similarly there are redundant power systems on every vehicle. The idea is to navigate the vehicle to a safe stop.
 
If it's wirelessly networked, it will never be hacker proof. With the size of the network and number of AVs on it, the attack surface will also be massive.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
It's the same reason all the multinationals are bricking it over GDPR. The general rule is that if it was made by a human it can be 'hacked' by a human.
Click to expand...

Yep, while encryption isn't always crackable. Networks are most vulnerable to attacks from the inside and that's how most happen. Offer enough money to an employee in need of cash and your in. You'll find underpaid, disgruntled staff in pretty much every corporation.
 
Last edited:
An Indian company has just released their first fully autonomous, driverless vehicle:

Tbyxahf.gif
 
What has Waymo learned after a year of testing its self driving cars in Phoenix, Arizona with its Early Rider programme? Some of what they learned:

  • "It needs to get better at designating specific pick-up entrances at a store so that frustrated riders won't have to lug shopping bags through the hot sun to reach a car
  • On narrow streets, riders prefer to cross the road to reach a car, instead of having it drive to the end of a road, turn around and come back
  • It needed to figure out how to accommodate people with service animals (it figured this out after a query from a passenger)
  • The best way to wake sleeping passengers is with a little chime sound."
Waymo intends to bring a commercial service later this year. Some comments in the article also highlight that more people fear riding in the self driving vehicle than accept it and one Reddit comment talks about the need for the service to be cheaper than Uber or Lyft as this person is concerned about the job loss of the driver.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/13/alp...y-riders-interview-with-saswat-panigrahi.html
 
So is the economic impact of self driving vehicles to job losses to drivers of current vehicles worth it? Simple answer in economic terms: yes.

According to this report for the US economy: "Significant economic benefits from the widespread adoption of AVs could lead to nearly $800 billion in annual social and economic benefits by 2050, mostly from reducing the toll of vehicle crashes, but also from giving productive time back to commuters, improving energy security by reducing dependence on oil, and providing environmental benefits".

So are fears of job losses in the sector being overblown?

http://markets.businessinsider.com/...bs-economic-impact-worth-it-2018-6-1026937775
 
sesevans said:
So is the economic impact of self driving vehicles to job losses to drivers of current vehicles worth it? Simple answer in economic terms: yes.

According to this report for the US economy: "Significant economic benefits from the widespread adoption of AVs could lead to nearly $800 billion in annual social and economic benefits by 2050, mostly from reducing the toll of vehicle crashes, but also from giving productive time back to commuters, improving energy security by reducing dependence on oil, and providing environmental benefits".

So are fears of job losses in the sector being overblown?

http://markets.businessinsider.com/...bs-economic-impact-worth-it-2018-6-1026937775
Click to expand...
All those repair garages not having to fix cars anymore. :O
 
Personally, I find the neat way to wake someone is with an air horn right by the ear, have they tried that yet? I’m sure they’ll agree if they do.

And more seriously, it’s little things like designating pick up spots that you don’t even consider to be a big factor, but as they found out, actually are. That’s one of the reasons for beta testers I guess, especially for something that has never been done before.
 
Amp34 said:
And more seriously, it’s little things like designating pick up spots that you don’t even consider to be a big factor, but as they found out, actually are. That’s one of the reasons for beta testers I guess, especially for something that has never been done before.
Click to expand...

It also makes perfect sense now its highlighted, you can't waive down an AV like you can a traditional taxi/minicab so appropriate designated pickup points are the way forward.

I wouldn't get too excited about the i-Pace order just yet, they have committed to buy "up to" 20,000. 'Up to' is a really important phrase and that actually could mean any number between 1 and 20,000. The reality of it is that they will build a few, test them see how they perform and then order a few more, I would expect to see a couple of hundred to test with from this year. They are not due to go into service until 2020 and I wouldn't expect them to have 20,000 of them by that point, more like a few thousand to launch and then volume deliveries starting from there.

The reality of it is Waymo will have multiple brake clauses at various volumes depending on how it performs and feedback from customers, that's why its only 'up to 20,000'. Something else more compelling might come along in the mean time and be a better platform than the i-Pace. It also relies on regulatory permissions for a wider roll out and as we know that can take years.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
It also makes perfect sense now its highlighted, you can't waive down an AV like you can a traditional taxi/minicab so appropriate designated pickup points are the way forward.

I wouldn't get too excited about the i-Pace order just yet, they have committed to buy "up to" 20,000. 'Up to' is a really important phrase and that actually could mean any number between 1 and 20,000. The reality of it is that they will build a few, test them see how they perform and then order a few more, I would expect to see a couple of hundred to test with from this year. They are not due to go into service until 2020 and I wouldn't expect them to have 20,000 of them by that point, more like a few thousand to launch and then volume deliveries starting from there.

The reality of it is Waymo will have multiple brake clauses at various volumes depending on how it performs and feedback from customers, that's why its only 'up to 20,000'. Something else more compelling might come along in the mean time and be a better platform than the i-Pace. It also relies on regulatory permissions for a wider roll out and as we know that can take years.
Click to expand...

You are technically correct about the phrase "up to 20,000" of course could mean as few as 1 or as many as 20,000. But you seem to be a bit too conservative in your assumption about how solid the partnership between JLR and Waymo really is. Waymo has had extensive experience working with bespoke contract manufacturers and parts suppliers in the nearly 10 years since they announced to the public their goal of creating autonomously driven vehicles. IMO,it would not have chosen to partner with JLR unless it was extremely confident that Magna Steyr of Graz, Austria, was top notch in manufacturing their AV. JLR design is well known and the assembly plant of Magna Steyr in Austria, owned by Canada's Magna International, where the self driving i-Pace is being manufactured, is highly regarded. A quick check of Wikipedia shows Magna Steyr has the capacity to manufacture 200,000 cars per year.

Magna Steyr developed Mercedes-Benz's "4Matic" four-wheel drive (4wd) system, and assembles all E-Class 4Matic models. The company also undertook substantial development on the BMW X3 and manufactured all original X3s, and the Aston Martin Rapide. The company developed several cars on behalf of manufacturers such as the Audi TT, Fiat Bravo and Peugeot RCZ.
In March 2017 Magna Steyr started to produce the new BMW 5 Series sedan; production is shared with BMW Group's manufacturing plant in Dingolfing, Germany.

In early December 2016 Magna International announced it will build the new Jaguar I-Pace, the company’s first battery electric vehicle. Jaguar later said Magna Steyr will also assemble its E-Pace crossover, starting later in 2017. Magna Steyr confirmed the deal following Jaguar's announcement. Production for the I-Pace started in early 2018.

So I expect that over the next two years we will see most of the 20,000 i Pace AVs that Waymo seeks to build out its AV taxi fleet.
 
What is likely to be one of the single biggest sticking points to wide introduction of AVs? According to a blog I read with Radio Free Mobile ("The Turkey vote"), they believe that insurance company resistance will likely slow down the AV introduction.

Why? They compare the state of the motor vehicle insurance market to a turkey at Christmas! No turkey volunteers to be shot. No turkey votes for Christmas.

Similarly motor vehicle insurers are well aware of the potential collapse in motor vehicle premiums with the successful launch of AVs and are unlikely to wish to speed up their own demise.

Since 94% of all road accidents are caused by humans error, having machines drive cars should lead to a collapse in the number of accidents and hence premiums. Companies like Waymo will want to know that their vehicles are many times safer than the human driver.

As stated, turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Motor vehicle insurers want to delay the inevitable for as long as possible.
 
One of the best funded self driving start-ups, Zoox, has revealed little about themselves to the public but hopes to have a ride hailing service on public roads by 2020. They believe however that retro-fitting existing vehicles with self driving technology makes little sense. They believe in building a self driving vehicle from the ground up.

https://www.androidheadlines.com/20...self-driving-tech-doesnt-make-sense-zoox.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom