Of course if the system is 100% reliable, has 100% redundancy, will NEVER fail and will be able to cope with EVERY situation thrown at it, to the extent that the person is now a passenger and not a driver then yeah I guess why not, only problem is that's going to be very expensive to implement in your every day autowagon.

Hmm I don't think the system has to be 100% reliable, I mean like those ****tards who don't know when to put on fog lights or check that they're on ... what % rating would you give to the average human? mine would be very low given that the majority of accidents are going to be caused by human error. I think the likely progression of the technology will have driveless cars being mainstream in cities where crosstalking cars and low speeds are clearly superior to you average human and motorways where increased reaction times are vitally important. For other places like windy roads and back routes, there I think the tech will need more time to prove.

@The Laughing Ma as long as people drive under (whatever) influence, text/call/have a conversation while driving, even a not 100% safe system is better than nothing. and autopilots still dont start/land most of planes, especially the mid/smaller size AC because they either dont have the advanced tech/sensors needed, or fly to places where the ground doesnt support it. pilots are still doing take offs/landings by "hand" until passing certain flight level... and: the autopilot has nothing (directly) to do with collision (plane or ground) avoidance...

as long as people drive under (whatever) influence, text/call/have a conversation while driving, even a not 100% safe system is better than nothing.

You're basing that assumption on an environment where barely anyone HAS these auto pilots which means that the folk driving while texting, phoning or under the influence are in the minority. So yes in this situation a non 100% safe system would still be a vast improvement, however as my example of folk with auto lights shows, the second you give a person the opportunity to assume that things will be taken care of by the computer, they allow ignorance and stupidity to creep in and then blame the computer when things go wrong. We either need to go 100% reliable and 100% redundant and make the 'driver' a passenger or we don't go anywhere because any middle ground will be abused. If the auto system requires a 'driver' then it's pointless, f*ck the guy got a speeding ticket because HE wasn't paying attention to what was going on around him allowing the auto system to sort it out for him, if ever their was a prime example of how bad the system is the guy doing the review of the system actually gave us it.

demo of the auto steering? unless i missed something that was just straight drive and highway with no turns. demo on road with turns and twists please...

To all that seem to have an idea that self-driving cars are a bad thing and they are the all-knowing ones who are on the right track-i give you this for your troubles. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLTL9oqUEAAIbMr.jpg

To all that seem to have an idea that self-driving cars are a bad thing and they are the all-knowing ones who are on the right track-i give you this for your troubles.

The guy got a speeding ticket because the self driving car didn't know what it was doing and because he was in a self driving car he thought he didn't have to pay attention. Hope that hat fits your head mate.

The guy got a speeding ticket because the self driving car didn't know what it was doing and because he was in a self driving car he thought he didn't have to pay attention. Hope that hat fits your head mate.

He's got an aura...His tin foil hat floats on top of it. 🙂

To all that seem to have an idea that self-driving cars are a bad thing and they are the all-knowing ones who are on the right track-i give you this for your troubles. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLTL9oqUEAAIbMr.jpg

Self driving cars aren't bad, they're simply not practical or as good as the media will have you believe, atleast not anytime soon... AI will need to be far more advanced before we can take a back seat, for the next ten years I think self driving cars will drive as badly as the taxi drivers in grand theft auto 4 when you tell them to hurry lol

I believe traffic would be a lot more efficient if it was all AI controlled, it could simply work like a huge very complex train station, and after being set up only human intervention could provoque an accident

The guy got a speeding ticket because the self driving car didn't know what it was doing and because he was in a self driving car he thought he didn't have to pay attention. Hope that hat fits your head mate.

I'm confused how this is a problem? Or, are you saying if anything wrong happens in any beta software at all, then that means it will always happen? Stop running your system, whatever it is, if you fear software so much that something happening in beta, or even not beta, makes you fear it. I do not hear anyone in this thread giving any actual information about why self-driving cars would be bad. Do you know what i do hear? Fear fear fear. Fear gets you nowhere, if fear stopped us, there would be no cars, no planes, no trains, no bicycles, nothing transportational, because they all come with fear of what "might happen". Heck, with your fear, just stay inside, never come out, build a self-sustaining bunker and just never come out if you want fear to control your life as you are doing.

Self driving cars aren't bad, they're simply not practical or as good as the media will have you believe, atleast not anytime soon... AI will need to be far more advanced before we can take a back seat, for the next ten years I think self driving cars will drive as badly as the taxi drivers in grand theft auto 4 when you tell them to hurry lol

I agree, however many people in this thread are of the "It will never be good, stop developing it, or else we are all doomed" mindset.

Or, are you saying if anything wrong happens in any beta software at all, then that means it will always happen? Stop running your system, whatever it is, if you fear software so much that something happening in beta, or even not beta, makes you fear it. I do not hear anyone in this thread giving any actual information about why self-driving cars would be bad. Do you know what i do hear?

Did you even READ my post? I gave a real world example of how automatic systems that remove driver control are already having a knock on effect on peoples ability to drive? I said in theory a 100% accurate, 100% reliable, 100% redundant auto drive system that turns a driver in to a true passenger is a good thing. The issue is we will never have that and Tesla's system sure as f*ck will never be that. That what we will end up with is more likely an advanced cruise control. That does some of the work but requires the driver to be constantly aware of what's going on and ready to take over, and there's the problem, it took this guy 1 hour of use in this auto drive system to get to a state where he was paying so little attention that he got done for speeding.

Fear gets you nowhere, if fear stopped us, there would be no cars, no planes, no trains, no bicycles, nothing transportational, because they all come with fear of what "might happen". Heck, with your fear, just stay inside, never come out, build a self-sustaining bunker and just never come out if you want fear to control your life as you are doing.

Good one, the start was a little preachy but at least headed towards a worthwhile point... ...annnnddd then you finished it off by making yourself sound like a complete and utter ignorant moron.

The issue is we will never have that and Tesla's system sure as f*ck will never be that.

Lol, we're definitely going to have that. Google can do it now, nearly completely autonomous, at ~25mph. In 15-20 years? Easily do-able. Will probably be a standard car feature.

I'll be amused when in less than a decade, all of you drivers having little trust in an autonomous car will become mere passengers. If anyone is interested in a proper discussion of what autonomous means and what it can achieve in vehicles, I'm up for it, but with the current state of the thread like this, I wonder. An autonomous car can brake faster, keep a constant speed better, follow the shortest path effortlessly, escape a human-induced accident more gracefully, etc... even if it were the only autonomous car on the road. At the very least ... autonomous cars can do better than the best human drivers in terms of reaction and response time. Ideally, all cars on the road would be driverless, being controlled in a centralized fashion while also taking care not to cause, or be part of, any immediate accident in the local area. Why is anyone afraid of such a future, a potentially zero-accident future where no one dies from car accidents anymore?

The issue is we will never have that

This is all that is needed to be read from your post I think it's time you invest in one of these, and stay inside it http://darkroom.baltimoresun.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/REU-USA__001.jpg But beyond that, so what you're saying is, because planes do not have a 100% chance of staying in the air and getting to your destination unharmed , does that mean we shouldn't have them? And because cars do not have a 100% chance of continuing to drive or getting you to your destination unharmed, should we not have them? And trains? They are not 100% either, should we not have them? How about bicycles? not 100% either, lets get rid of them too. Shoes? No shoe is 100% likely to prevent your feet from hurting or getting damaged, lets stop having shoes too. Go back to your bunker, stay there and let the rest of the world advance while you stay in the dark ages.

...annnnddd then you finished it off by making yourself sound like a complete and utter ignorant moron.

Oh, because it's exactly what you're doing? That's cool. Instead of saying i'm an "ignorant moron" for showing you what you are doing, then please tell me how i'm incorrect. Please, tell me how what you're saying about autonomous driving is not what people said about cars when first introduced? and about planes when first introduced? They all did it BETTER then walking from point A to point B, but also introduced a POTENTIAL danger. That's exactly what this is, Autonomous cars drive BETTER and are SAFER but also introduce a new POTENTIAL danger. So please, tell me how my examples of what we didn't let fear stop us from doing, is any different from your fear saying it shouldn't be done?

Few months back there was an article that stated that the reason why individuals were still in the driver's seat of Google's self-driving cars were so that they would override the system to avoid such occurrences from happening. Tesla forgot to instill in the driver that they were still responsible no matter what. Police 1, test pilots 0. Full auto is only going to make some helpless when the GPS satellites are down. Grid lock will take on a whole new meaning. Traffic jam will become to be the term used for when satellite communications have been disrupted.

I'll be amused when in less than a decade, all of you drivers having little trust in an autonomous car will become mere passengers.

http://www.returnofkings.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Naive-Naive-people.jpg I hope it'll come one day soon that I can be a passenger but you'd have to be naive to think that it'll come in less than a decade... It'll take about two decades for a full self driving car, in the meantime you'll have more and more driving assisting AI. Think about it... A full auto pilot needs to know where the lines are on a street without a single painted line. It will have to figure out when it is necessary to break the law, say there is a statue I placed in the middle of the road and blocked the car, the only way to pass is to drive across a solid yellow line; will the car decide that it is okay to break the law? Will it wait for human guidance? So what if it is programed to break laws when it sees it fit? What happens if it causes an accident when it does? Or gets a ticket? What if a psychopath decides to purposely attack your auto pilot car? How will we program the algorithm to react to this? Will it fight back or fall off the bridge to avoid the accident? Right now there is no amount of software that can know the difference between the nuances of humanity, things we know intuitively that we take for granted . We need far more advanced AI tech that is not possible for the next 15 years tohave it interact with society.

Oh and this http://givememora.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/naive.jpg

Autonomous cars drive BETTER and are SAFER

Title of topic. Tesla Auto drive gets first speeding ticket. LOL, jog on mate your bunker references are as tiresome as your inability to read what has been written.

Lol, we're definitely going to have that. Google can do it now, nearly completely autonomous

LOL, google can do that now only to then turn round on the next sentence and say that they are 'NEARLY COMPLETELY AUTONOMOUS'. So what you meant is they can NEARLY do that as opposed to they CAN do that? Don't they also require the person in the vehicle to be aware and able to step in at any moment to stop the vehicle... so NO they can't do what I was talking about, a system that NEVER requires the human to step in take over or otherwise control the vehicle under ANY circumstances because just about any half way function WILL be abused.

TLOL, google can do that now only to then turn round on the next sentence and say that they are 'NEARLY COMPLETELY AUTONOMOUS'. So what you meant is they can NEARLY do that as opposed to they CAN do that? Don't they also require the person in the vehicle to be aware and able to step in at any moment to stop the vehicle... so NO they can't do what I was talking about, a system that NEVER requires the human to step in take over or otherwise control the vehicle under ANY circumstances because just about any half way function WILL be abused.

That's weird. Your post clearly states: "The issue is we will never have that" I also specifically state "nearly" in my sentence about Google, so I don't know why you're repeating what I said. The point is Google can almost do it now, in 2015. By 2025 it will almost certainly be significantly better. By 2035 it will be exactly how you describe it.

That's weird. Your post clearly states: "The issue is we will never have that" I also specifically state "nearly" in my sentence about Google, so I don't know why you're repeating what I said. The point is Google can almost do it now, in 2015. By 2025 it will almost certainly be significantly better. By 2035 it will be exactly how you describe it.

If 2035 is the timeframe you're giving it, then yes, it is possible to have a fully self driven car by then as we'll need a IBM Watson X 20 in a small box.