Google gets Nevada driving licence for self-drive car

What are your thoughts on this, good idea or bad? Are people ready for this, will they accept it, would you accept it?

According to software engineer Sebastian Thrun, the car has covered 140,000 miles with no accidents, other than a bump at traffic lights from a car behind.

I personally think this is not only going to be the future, I am glad. No more stupid drivers, and you can eat your breakfast without having to worry. You can text or talk while "driving". Just imagine when all the cars are communicating in a network.

"Through the use of computers, sensors and other systems, an autonomous vehicle is capable of analysing the driving environment more quickly and operating the vehicle more safely."

www.bbc.com...

Personally, I like driving...myself.

Why take away a pleasure that many of us enjoy? It will then become law that we must have these cars. We then have to buy these cars or don't drive at all.

But that's ok right? Take public transport and feed the elite that own those modes of transport if you can't afford to drive what you are told to drive.

What about antiques, motorcycles etc? Outlawed because they can't be retrofitted? Of course.

Good bye freedom of going where and when you want.

No thank you.

Peace

Click here for more information.

There are times I enjoy driving.

There are other times, like monotonous commutes with hours of highway driving - where I would much rather be able to kick back and take a nap or work on some computer project.

That said - Nevada is a good place to demo-run a self-driving car. Nothing to hit.

reply to post by jude11


Change is good, don't fear change. You do realize there are already a whole host of exemptions for antique cars.

As AIM64C states, I too enjoy driving, and I wouldn't want to always be forced to let the car have all the fun, but there are times I work 20 hours straight, and have trouble keeping my eyes open driving home, the option would be great.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


This is a perfect example of how technologies would improve a number of driving conditions. Driving fatigued is just as bad - if not worse - than driving drunk. Most traffic accidents involve alcohol or fatigue.

As for government mandates - honestly, the problem isn't the technology. The problem is that we've allowed government the authority to mandate how cars are to be built and a whole host of other things. It's the same as with the "microchip" threads that cause a stir. The problem isn't the technology - the problem is the amount of authority we have given governments and their agencies (though those of you who believe any/every organizational institution is involved in some kind of world-domination plot are beyond help - just accept that there is a conspiracy to dominate your mind and PM me so that I can start issuing instructions without hijacking your mind... trust me - I'm the world dictator you want in charge of everything... you can do this voluntarily or I'll just reprogram your mind using subliminal messaging in my posts and the list of ingredients on your box of cereal - your choice).

Fix the problems in our government structure and we don't have to worry about technological advances being forced upon us by laws.

reply to post by Aim64C


Your posts are a breath of fresh air. I completely agree, I suppose your subliminal posts are working on me as well ....

We should have the option to both drive and let the car drive itself like in that movie "i-Robot"

I think this is a big plus. Except.. for when a trigger happy cop decides to override your car..

reply to post by Mizzijr


Why would a police officer have that ability? I can see it being possible through proper channels to stop a high speed chase, but I dont think any lone officer will have the ability.

Edit: As it is now the Google car has the option to be driven by a person.

Hmmm.. When technology works well, it works very well. But when it fails, it can be catastrophic.

If we put too much reliance on technology to do the simplest of tasks, then we better be prepared should something go wrong. Imagine a freeway where the speed limit is 110kph. No room for critical thinking AFTER the fact something may have fritzed your navcom or gps, as you're speeding right into a curve and oncoming traffic.

If they invent a decent cruise control, that'd do me I prefer to drive anyway..

You can't perform car park ballet with a mate, if your robot is driving you home after work... lmao, poor campus security guard caught us and we sheepishly drove off into the wild blue yonder.

reply to post by mainidh


I dont imagine anything will ever be perfect, but as it is there are numerous accidents on the highway. If this technology lowers the number of them then it's a success.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


What happens when someone wants you dead or a laugh and they hack into the software being used to driver your car?

Cutting someone's brakes isn't a sure thing, but I'm sure locking the steering wheel and accelerating to 100+ mph into a concrete divider or the guardrails on a bridge or overpass would definitely get the job done.

I'd feel way safer driving myself.

these things sure would make nascar extreamly boring or any kind of auto racing for that matter.

reply to post by MaryStillToe

What happens when someone wants you dead or a laugh and they hack into the software being used to driver your car?

If I want you dead, you will die. That's all there is to it. You do not need to concern yourself with the tools at my disposal - your life is but a speck of noise on the screen; and just as fleeting. Abstaining from purchasing a self-driving impact-resistant protective shell is not going to do you any favors if I am truly after your life.

I'd feel way safer driving myself.

Which is what it boils down to. You want control.

The fact of the matter is that I can already hack your car just as easily as any proposed self-driving car (if not easier). The gas pedal you push is not really a gas pedal; the brakes are not mechanically connected to the braking system (they are, instead, connected to a servo motor that provides feedback to make it feel as though you are actually pressing the brake). The engine is all computer controlled - down to the timing (that used to be triggered purely mechanically).

There really isn't much of a credible threat of someone taking control of your car away from you.

There is, however, reason behind an honest: "I like to be in control, and being in a vehicle not under my control weirds me out."

It does, me... at least when I'm on familiar roads.

But in the military - I find myself in places I do -not- want to drive (such as San Diego, South Korea, etc) - at which point, I'm more than happy to relinquish control to something else. Unless I was authorized to go trucking around in an Abrams MBT... I'd drive that through down-town San Diego and not give a # about the stupid drivers.

Seriously... "you all" in San Diego (and California in general) have no friggin' business operating a vehicle. Whoever issued you all a drivers' license needs to be fired and raped with a cactus.

reply to post by Aim64C


Everyone is not like you and this goes way beyond an attack directed at specific individual. I am also talking about random mischief and terrorism.

reply to post by MaryStillToe


As was stated there are already plenty of ways to mess with a car, or a person, or committ terrorist attacks. There is no reason why use control of the car has to be taken away, you simply add automation, and allow the user the ability to override it. The cars of the future are going to be connected, they will be plugged into the internet, so no matter what this is most likely going to be something you can encounter and will have to be defended against. As was stated your car is already more or less computer controlled and you have the illusion of it feeling mechanical.