Self-Driving cars / autos merged threadfest

[canuguzzi]

In California, lane splitting is legal and while I don't unless it is miles to my destination and the traffic is stop and go, plenty of others do, routinely.

If you ride on some of the freeways, in the #1 lane, sled drivers tend to move over even with no motorcycles present and sort of create a lane splitting lane for lack of a better description. What will the autodriver car do? I figure it would just maintain its position in the center of the lane but what does the car do if it is in lane #2 and a bike comes up from the rear between lane 1 and 2, does it move over toward the right or what?

Seeing how the guesstimates are these things will be out and about in a few years its something to think about. I know they are around now but not in any numbers other than small test samples.

[rbm]

While I can't answer the questions you've posed, I think the statement "In California, lane splitting is legal ..." is wrong.  Lane splitting is not legal in California, but on the other hand it is not specifically illegal.  So, police tend to look the other way if the maneuver is performed safely.  There is currently a bill in the state legislature proposing to legalize lane splitting, and if it passes, lane splitting will become lawful.

[Lannis]

In California, lane splitting is legal and while I don't unless it is miles to my destination and the traffic is stop and go, plenty of others do, routinely.

If you ride on some of the freeways, in the #1 lane, sled drivers tend to move over even with no motorcycles present and sort of create a lane splitting lane for lack of a better description. What will the autodriver car do? I figure it would just maintain its position in the center of the lane but what does the car do if it is in lane #2 and a bike comes up from the rear between lane 1 and 2, does it move over toward the right or what?

Seeing how the guesstimates are these things will be out and about in a few years its something to think about. I know they are around now but not in any numbers other than small test samples.

June 4, 2015.   Bookmark this post.   "Self-driving cars" will NOT be out and about on the public roads threatening your motorcycle in a few years, any more than the personal jet-packs, backpack helicopters, flying cars, personal spacecraft, or any of the other stuff that we've been promised in every "What's New" column in Popular Science for the last 80 years has happened ....

Lannis

[yourfavorite]

My thoughts on it...

I'd imagine that the self driving cars treat motorcycles like any other vehicle getting close to them. Imagine a car riding next to a self driving car (SDC). If that car tries to move into the lane of the SDC, the SDC will probably perform some sort of maneuver to avoid collision. I would think that it handles a motorcycle riding up next to it in a similar fashion. Seeing as Google is based in CA, I'd imagine they are working to come up with code that will properly account for typical motorcycle behavior.

The bigger long term concern imo is what will happen to Motorcycles when SDCs are the norm? If Google can keep their accident numbers down low, you've now got some pretty easy insurance. With fewer accidents in SDCs, the insurance rates will likely drop low for them. With that being the case, people driving manual cars and people driving motorcycles will have fewer people paying big money into the insurance pot. This will likely cause a rise in insurance costs for anyone not in an SDC. Eventually most drivers will opt for the SDC and that will just leave motorcyclist and the folks who really love driving.

Its not a certainty, but I'd say its a definite possibility. That said, if all the cars are self driving, I'd imagine motorcycle accidents would drop considerably. So there's a silver lining there!

RE: popular science... I'd guess that SDCs will be on the roads in strong numbers within the next 25 years. Seems far away but at the rate people buy new cars its not that many car purchases away.

[travelingbyguzzi]

Self driving cars are imminent. Even if they cost $150,000. What if a taxi company didn't have to pay any drivers, or any of the other costs associated with having an employee.
A $150,000 selfdriving car would pay for itself in 2 years. It could work 24 hours a day.
Selfdriving city transit busses. Coming to a town near you.

[canuguzzi]

While I can't answer the questions you've posed, I think the statement "In California, lane splitting is legal ..." is wrong.  Lane splitting is not legal in California, but on the other hand it is not specifically illegal.  So, police tend to look the other way if the maneuver is performed safely.  There is currently a bill in the state legislature proposing to legalize lane splitting, and if it passes, lane splitting will become lawful.

Lane splitting is legal. What the proposed law does is set limits. There is a difference. What we have right now is a free for all, anything goes and it is up to the police to decide if the lane splitting is safe or not.

What the law will do is clarify under what conditions and in what manner lane splitting is okay.

Say you're lane splitting at 5 mph. The police can arbitrarily ticket you and you have little fall back in the law to argue it was being done safely. If the law passes, the police will have to prove that your speed was excessive for the conditions while lane splitting.

The police aren't looking the other way, they just have no guidance in the  law regarding the limits. Very soon, they will have and then so will all drivers.

[Testarossa]

I don't see any reason to panic. The main issue is going to be conspicuity. Right now we're mostly concerned about not being seen by vacuous or distracted drivers. In a SDV environment, being seen by the controlling computer is actually an easier task: a small radar reflector and some kind of flashing light (maybe an infrared light?) ought to cover both radar and "visual" systems like Subaru's. That might reduce the incidence of cars turning left into us, rear-ending us and moving into our lanes. In the long run vehicles will probably have transponders broadcasting vectors computed through GPS, and will be able to calculate convergence probabilities. Yamaha probably already has that capability in its six-axis motion sensor.

[Murray]

This has been doing the rounds of various motorcycle forums with those who buy catering packs of foil on a regular basis predicting armageddon. Even if the self driving vehicle doesn't see us I don't think it will be a problem (remembering the sensors see pedestrians stray dogs/cats light poles recognise the difference between stop sings and give way/Yield etc etc ). Why? it will be completely and utterly predictable. It won't forget to cancel indicators try and drink eat and use a phone so driving becomes a subtask.

If you want to have a paranoid whinge anyway go ahead!

[Lannis]

Dunno , the technology to implement SDCs already exists, is not very expensive and they don't require any skill or training to operate. All of those other contraptions required both new tech and or training . Wasn't all that long ago that washing machines took a serious level of commitment to operate , now , not so much , no one is complaining .

  Dusty

The good thing is, there's no need for arguing about it or He Said She Said.   All we have to do is live a little while longer, and see.

Lannis

[canuguzzi]

This has been doing the rounds of various motorcycle forums with those who buy catering packs of foil on a regular basis predicting armageddon. Even if the self driving vehicle doesn't see us I don't think it will be a problem (remembering the sensors see pedestrians stray dogs/cats light poles recognise the difference between stop sings and give way/Yield etc etc ). Why? it will be completely and utterly predictable. It won't forget to cancel indicators try and drink eat and use a phone so driving becomes a subtask.

If you want to have a paranoid whinge anyway go ahead!

Where is all that coming from? No one is panicking, its just a topic for discussion.

Lots of thin skins around here today. Must be laundry day.

[Mayor_of_BBQ]

Self driving cars are imminent. Even if they cost $150,000. What if a taxi company didn't have to pay any drivers, or any of the other costs associated with having an employee.
A $150,000 selfdriving car would pay for itself in 2 years. It could work 24 hours a day.
Selfdriving city transit busses. Coming to a town near you.

This is EXACTLY what I told someone interested in training to become a long-haul trucker the other daY!  Dude, why would you go to school for that? That job will not exist in 8-10yrs!

[tris]

I heard a very interesting discussion awhile back on Radio 4 in the UK  re self driving cars

It was a philosophical discussion regarding the algorithms that control them and in the event that something unexpected happens (a child runs in to the road for example) would the car select child or wall and whether or not these would be programmable options for the humans in the car?

I'm not sure automated cars will be on our roads too soon

[Lannis]

I heard a very interesting discussion awhile back on Radio 4 in the UK  re self driving cars

It was a philosophical discussion regarding the algorithms that control them and in the event that something unexpected happens (a child runs in to the road for example) would the car select child or wall and whether or not these would be programmable options for the humans in the car?

I'm not sure automated cars will be on our roads too soon

I'm sure they won't, and for exactly the same reason.

We'll accept irrational and bad decision-making by HUMANS that costs lives (DWI, texting while driving) but no one will accept a "smash the car or kill the child - or is that a dog?" decision programmed into a computer.

Lannis

[redrider]

I'm one of those folks buying foil. Run it through the shredder, pack it into a Sch 40 pipe with a CO2 trigger or ram air pressurization. Aim to the rear, activate and watch the fun.

[kirby1923]

And what wall would that be ? Humans can't react nearly as fast as a computer , unfortunately a child that runs on to any highway that has walls is probably gonna get ran over . Drivers simply aren't quick enough to prevent those types of accidents . Besides , most young folks are already willing to turn over the wheel to a computer , most really don't care about operating a motor vehicle .

  Dusty

95% of the operation of airliners have been taken over by computers and unfortunately the result has been a shocking decline in piloting ability as in airmanship.

Want to forget how to drive, stay alert and think ahead of the situation? Put a computer in charge and just sit back and enjoy the ride.

m

[blackcat]

Computers operating vehicles sounds scary but as we know,humans don't exactly operate vehicles very well either.

[Testarossa]

This is mostly speculation of course. I suspect the frustrations we encounter with SDV will have more to do with regimentation than with new dangers. Imagine you're on a two or three-lane freeway and all the cars are moving at the speed limit, neither faster nor slower, because that's how they're programmed. A row of cars ahead happen to be synched up line abreast. There's no way to pass without lane-splitting and that's illegal in your state. Are you now condemned to follow meekly at the speed limit until one of the cars exits?

[Penderic]

And Insurance Fraud. One of the reasons for those dash cameras becoming popular in countries with people that stage traffic accidents in order to sue for compensation.

That kind of person will actively try to find ways to overcome the manufacturers safety features in order to stage an accident - in order to create a nuisance lawsuit and big liability claim.

Maybe the automatic vehicles computers can use a "Judge Dredd" application, kind of like a legal Trunk Monkey, to deal with any interference.

[Mark West]

Well. there are currently autonomous self driving cars in CA but limited to certain areas in city areas with a max speed of 35MPH. these are google vehicles with no steering wheel or controls so totally dependent on the guidance system.

One thing I read recently is that all the self driving vehicles currently being tested rely on a map to indicate where everything is including stop signs how many lanes there are, etc. If a stop sign gets added somewhere and the map the vehicle uses isn't updated it will go right through. Another example would be if there is a road crew that closes a lane, the vehicle would only see this as an obstruction in the road and could respond in an unpredictable manner.

what this means is that before we let loose all these cars without drivers some kind of system will need to be put in place so that any change of any kind made to any road will need to be instantaneously updated to whatever map database is used.

There are also autonomous semis being tested on highways as we speak. it's very possible that we will see these before cars. Limited to expressways for long-hauls perhaps, but there is a shortage of long haul drivers and eliminating driver pay could be a big incentive for a large trucking company.

I have no idea how they treat motorcycles but suspect it would be no different from another vehicle. From a lane splitting perspective, I think they could program the vehicle to stay to the left in the lane and watch for bikes but if one came up doing 40MPH faster than traffic, which isn't uncommon currently, it's hard to say how it would react.

[Jerryd]

I'm going to get a self-driving motorcycle and let it communicate with the self-driving cars. They can figure it out for themselves 

[Penderic]

Follow the money!

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2015/02/05/382664837/map-the-most-common-job-in-every-state

There are a lot of problems with the above map (see article) - many more jobs in the other fields were not counted properly, but the gist of the matter is that there is a lot of money spent on delivery that can be cut with AI and available robotics. This going to eventually happen to all services because us humans are getting just too expensive and troublesome! 

[Sasquatch Jim]

 
BBBbbut who would get the taxi tip?  Who could you road rage against?  It would be so frustrating to give the finger with no one to see it.

[Testarossa]

The computers would call each other names and question their ancestry

"Wassa matta whichu, you runnin' Windows?"

[Penderic]

Enjoy the ride. bzzzt.

[atavar]

According to google *none* of the 12 accidents so far were due to the autonomous car.  All were do to other vehicles striking the google car except one that was due to a human driver in control of a google car that rear ended another vehicle (did he forget he was driving?).
What they are not saying or taking in to account is how many accidents were caused by the autonomous cars, whether or not they were involved in the actual accident.

[rocker59]

Lane splitting is not illegal. What the proposed law does is make it legal and set limits. 

Fixed that for you.

[rocker59]

Computers operating vehicles sounds scary but as we know,humans don't exactly operate vehicles very well either.

Considering the endless number of variables, I'd say that humans do a great job.

I can't imagine the amount of processing power that will be required to have a truly autonomous automobile.

[Idontwantapickle]

The google car will be pretty cool once widely implemented. You won't even need to ride in it! Just send it to the store and have them put yer stuff in the trunk! And traffic coordination? The cars will know where all the other cars are so that merging onto the highway isn't the bloodbath of profanity it is now.
I do wonder how these smartypants cars are going to affect my motorcycles.
 But there was a time when autos started using roads full of horses......
Hunter

[rocker59]

The google car will be pretty cool once widely implemented. 

I won't care.  I'll be travelling in style.  Above it all.  In my Moller Sky Car! 

But there was a time when autos started using roads full of horses......

The thing is, though, both horses and autos are operated by humans. 

[canuguzzi]

Fixed that for you.

No to go too far off topic but that didn't fix it. When we need a law to tell us what is legal instead of what is not, we're in deep doo-doo.

There are no laws that state specifically I can walk on the sidewalk, go out onto my property and yell at the crows. There are laws that say I cannot walk on the freeways. The premise of your fix is that we are not allowed to do anything some law say we cannot do, that is contrary how laws work.

Lane splitting is legal in the absence of a law stating it is not. The same works for helmets. Are there any states where it is illegal to ride without a helmet and no law exists stating such? There is not one.

To date, not one single motorcyclist in California has been ticketed and found guilty of violating any law for lane splitting, all have been tickets for doing so in an unsafe manner. It's a very big difference. No one has to  prove what they are doing is legal, it is up to some authority to prove it is illegal.