Driverless cars: A bad joke or the future?
- Thread starter Giannis
- Start date
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
Bosch Believes Cars Should Have Lasers
Some auto companies have harrumphed their reluctance to embrace 3D LIDAR, a laser imaging system, saying that they hate the look of the revolving, roof-mounted tower that makes the Google car stand out [pictured above].
But the real reason has been cost: LIDAR capable of conning a full 360 degrees around the car doesn't come cheap. Yet.
It will, though, as Moore's Law and mass production reduce the price from the US $70,000 of the Google Car setup to sums denominated in the hundreds, as academic researchers recently said. Now one of the world's biggest auto suppliers is putting its considerable weight behind them.
"At Bosch we are convinced we need LIDAR for the future," says Jan Becker, director of the Bosch Research and Technology Center in Palo Alto, Calif. He was speaking yesterday at a San Francisco conference on automated vehicles.
It's not that LIDAR will supplant radar and conventional camera systems as the eyes of tomorrow's self-driving cars. Rather, it will serve as a third eye (or fourth or fifth, depending on whether you count ultrasound, GPS and inertial guidance systems).
Redundancy is important not merely for sensors but for all critical system, Becker said. He said his company had demonstrated a car braking system with two independent methods of operation, so that a failure in one would lead not to disaster but to a lower, but still tolerable, level of operation.
Redundancy is a good idea for control systems that might be deliberately targeted by hackers. "I am sure we will see deliberate attacks on cars, and that we must increase security," Becker asserted.
Full Page Reload
Some auto companies have harrumphed their reluctance to embrace 3D LIDAR, a laser imaging system, saying that they hate the look of the revolving, roof-mounted tower that makes the Google car stand out [pictured above].
But the real reason has been cost: LIDAR capable of conning a full 360 degrees around the car doesn't come cheap. Yet.
It will, though, as Moore's Law and mass production reduce the price from the US $70,000 of the Google Car setup to sums denominated in the hundreds, as academic researchers recently said. Now one of the world's biggest auto suppliers is putting its considerable weight behind them.
"At Bosch we are convinced we need LIDAR for the future," says Jan Becker, director of the Bosch Research and Technology Center in Palo Alto, Calif. He was speaking yesterday at a San Francisco conference on automated vehicles.
It's not that LIDAR will supplant radar and conventional camera systems as the eyes of tomorrow's self-driving cars. Rather, it will serve as a third eye (or fourth or fifth, depending on whether you count ultrasound, GPS and inertial guidance systems).
Redundancy is important not merely for sensors but for all critical system, Becker said. He said his company had demonstrated a car braking system with two independent methods of operation, so that a failure in one would lead not to disaster but to a lower, but still tolerable, level of operation.
Redundancy is a good idea for control systems that might be deliberately targeted by hackers. "I am sure we will see deliberate attacks on cars, and that we must increase security," Becker asserted.
Full Page Reload
Rainer271
Kraftwagen König
BMW is testing automated driving in China
The BMW Group is a leading auto industry developer of highly automated vehicle prototypes. BMW’s research prototypes have already driven thousands of kilometres in highly automated – i.e. self-driving – mode on German motorways. In February 2013, the focus shifted to European motorways when BMW launched a joint project with Continental. Now BMW is embarking on a further research project, which will pave the way for highly automated driving in China as well.
“Vision Zero” is a strategy for achieving “accident-free mobility” that is being pursued right across Europe in many different arenas – social, political, scientific and industrial. Highly automated driving is capable of bringing Vision Zero a significant step closer to reality. In addition to the safety aspect, the aim is to enhance comfort and efficiency as well.
The BMW Group believes that highly automated driving will play a major part in ensuring sustainable personal mobility in the future. An “electronic co-pilot” system is not only able to relieve the driver of monotonous or repetitive driving tasks, but can also take over full control of the vehicle if desired. Following on from research projects in which BMW vehicles have already clocked up thousands of kilometres of highly automated driving on German and European motorways, a project is now being launched in the world’s largest car market, China, as the next logical step in the development of this technology. The fast-expanding Chinese market includes the metropolitan regions of Beijing and Shanghai and a growing number of other megacities.
Solutions to the special challenges of China’s urban highways.
Over the next two years, the BMW Group will be building prototype research vehicles for use in highly automated driving trials on Chinese roads. Whereas typical features which must be taken into account in Europe include tunnels, national borders and toll stations, China’s fast-expanding urban centres also present the engineers with challenges such as multi-level highways. BMW is taking on this new engineering challenge because it believes that only with a complete command of all the technical fundamentals will it be possible to help clarify the legal issues surrounding highly automated driving.
Many years’ experience of vehicle automation.
The BMW Group’s research prototypes highlight BMW’s leading role in the development of safety-related and highly automated driving technology. As early as October 2009, in the TrackTrainer project, highly automated vehicles from the BMW Group were already demonstrating their ability to follow an ideal line around race tracks – including the Nürburgring North Loop, the most challenging racing circuit in the world. Important input has also been provided by the BMW Emergency Stop Assistant. If the driver is suddenly incapacitated, this system is able to switch to highly automated driving mode and bring the vehicle safely to a stop at the side of the road before automatically calling for help. The BMW Group incorporated the results from this development work in a highly automated vehicle that underwent road testing on German motorways in 2011. Meanwhile, the highly automated research prototype presented at CES 2014, which is based on a BMW 2 Series Coupe, boasts further perfected control technology. This is rooted in BMW’s view that, in order to offer robust and dependable driver stress relief in tiring situations, highly automated driving systems must be capable of coping with all potential vehicle dynamics scenarios, right through to extreme situations such as a sudden emergency.
The BMW Group is teaming up with internet giant Baidu as its Chinese partner in this latest ambitious research project. Baidu operates China’s largest search engine and is also a provider of map services and cloud services. The highly automated prototypes developed in this joint project will initially be operated on urban highways in Beijing and Shanghai.
BMW is testing automated driving in China
The BMW Group is a leading auto industry developer of highly automated vehicle prototypes. BMW’s research prototypes have already driven thousands of kilometres in highly automated – i.e. self-driving – mode on German motorways. In February 2013, the focus shifted to European motorways when BMW launched a joint project with Continental. Now BMW is embarking on a further research project, which will pave the way for highly automated driving in China as well.
“Vision Zero” is a strategy for achieving “accident-free mobility” that is being pursued right across Europe in many different arenas – social, political, scientific and industrial. Highly automated driving is capable of bringing Vision Zero a significant step closer to reality. In addition to the safety aspect, the aim is to enhance comfort and efficiency as well.
The BMW Group believes that highly automated driving will play a major part in ensuring sustainable personal mobility in the future. An “electronic co-pilot” system is not only able to relieve the driver of monotonous or repetitive driving tasks, but can also take over full control of the vehicle if desired. Following on from research projects in which BMW vehicles have already clocked up thousands of kilometres of highly automated driving on German and European motorways, a project is now being launched in the world’s largest car market, China, as the next logical step in the development of this technology. The fast-expanding Chinese market includes the metropolitan regions of Beijing and Shanghai and a growing number of other megacities.
Solutions to the special challenges of China’s urban highways.
Over the next two years, the BMW Group will be building prototype research vehicles for use in highly automated driving trials on Chinese roads. Whereas typical features which must be taken into account in Europe include tunnels, national borders and toll stations, China’s fast-expanding urban centres also present the engineers with challenges such as multi-level highways. BMW is taking on this new engineering challenge because it believes that only with a complete command of all the technical fundamentals will it be possible to help clarify the legal issues surrounding highly automated driving.
Many years’ experience of vehicle automation.
The BMW Group’s research prototypes highlight BMW’s leading role in the development of safety-related and highly automated driving technology. As early as October 2009, in the TrackTrainer project, highly automated vehicles from the BMW Group were already demonstrating their ability to follow an ideal line around race tracks – including the Nürburgring North Loop, the most challenging racing circuit in the world. Important input has also been provided by the BMW Emergency Stop Assistant. If the driver is suddenly incapacitated, this system is able to switch to highly automated driving mode and bring the vehicle safely to a stop at the side of the road before automatically calling for help. The BMW Group incorporated the results from this development work in a highly automated vehicle that underwent road testing on German motorways in 2011. Meanwhile, the highly automated research prototype presented at CES 2014, which is based on a BMW 2 Series Coupe, boasts further perfected control technology. This is rooted in BMW’s view that, in order to offer robust and dependable driver stress relief in tiring situations, highly automated driving systems must be capable of coping with all potential vehicle dynamics scenarios, right through to extreme situations such as a sudden emergency.
The BMW Group is teaming up with internet giant Baidu as its Chinese partner in this latest ambitious research project. Baidu operates China’s largest search engine and is also a provider of map services and cloud services. The highly automated prototypes developed in this joint project will initially be operated on urban highways in Beijing and Shanghai.
BMW is testing automated driving in China
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
Should a Driverless Car Decide Who Lives or Dies?
by Keith Naughton -- Bloomberg
June 24, 2015
Google's driverless car. Source: Google via Bloomberg
The gearheads in Detroit, Tokyo and Stuttgart have mostly figured out how to build driverless vehicles. Even the Google guys seem to have solved the riddle. Now comes the hard part: deciding whether these machines should have power over who lives or dies in an accident.
The industry is promising a glittering future of autonomous vehicles moving in harmony like schools of fish. That can’t happen, however, until carmakers answer the kinds of thorny philosophical questions explored in science fiction since Isaac Asimov wrote his robot series last century. For example, should an autonomous vehicle sacrifice its occupant by swerving off a cliff to avoid killing a school bus full of children?
Auto executives, finding themselves in unfamiliar territory, have enlisted ethicists and philosophers to help them navigate the shades of gray. Ford, General Motors, Audi, Renault and Toyota are all beating a path to Stanford University’s Center for Automotive Research, which is programming cars to make ethical decisions and see what happens.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
“This issue is definitely in the crosshairs,” says Chris Gerdes, who runs the lab and recently met with the chief executives of Ford and GM to discuss the topic. “They’re very aware of the issues and the challenges because their programmers are actively trying to make these decisions today.”
Automakers and Google are pouring billions into developing driverless cars. This week Ford said it was moving development of self-driving cars from the research lab to its advanced engineering operations. Google plans to put a “few” of its self-driving cars on California roads this summer, graduating from the test track.
Social Robots
Cars can already stop and steer without help from a human driver. Within a decade, fully automated autos could be navigating public roads, according to Boston Consulting Group. Cars will be among the first autonomous machines testing the limits of reason and reaction in real time.
“This is going to set the tone for all social robots,” says philosopher Patrick Lin, who runs the Ethics and Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic University and counsels automakers. “These are the first truly social robots to move around in society.”
Driverless Technology Showcased At Robert Bosch GmbH Automated Driving Event
The promise of self-driving cars is that they’ll anticipate and avoid collisions, dramatically reducing the 33,000 deaths on U.S. highways each year. But accidents will still happen. And in those moments, the robot car may have to choose the lesser of two evils -- swerve onto a crowded sidewalk to avoid being rear-ended by a speeding truck or stay put and place the driver in mortal danger.
“Those kinds of questions do have to be answered before automated driving becomes a reality,” Jeff Greenberg, Ford’s senior technical leader for human-machine interface, said during a tour of the automaker’s new Silicon Valley research lab this week.
Asimov Laws
Right now, ethicists have more questions than answers. Should rules governing autonomous vehicles emphasize the greater good -- the number of lives saved -- and put no value on the individuals involved? Should they borrow from Asimov, whose first law of robotics says an autonomous machine may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human to be harmed.
“I wouldn’t want my robot car to trade my life just to save one or two others,” Lin says. “But it doesn’t seem to follow that it should hold our life uber alles, no matter how many victims you’re talking about. That seems plain wrong.”
That’s why we shouldn’t leave those decisions up to robots, says Wendell Wallach, author of “A Dangerous Master: How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control.”
“The way forward is to create an absolute principle that machines do not make life and death decisions,” says Wallach, a scholar at the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at Yale University. “There has to be a human in the loop. You end up with a pretty lawless society if people think they won’t be held responsible for the actions they take.”
Disobey Laws
As Wallach, Lin and other ethicists wrestle with the philosophical complexities, Gerdes is conducting real-world experiments. This summer on a racetrack in northern California, he’ll test automated vehicles programmed to follow ethical rules to make split-second decisions, such as when it’s appropriate to disobey traffic laws and cross a double yellow line to make room for bicyclists or cars that are double-parked.
Gerdes is also working with Toyota to find ways for an autonomous car to quickly hand back control to a human driver. Even such a handoff is fraught with peril, he says, especially as cars do more and driving skills degrade.
Ultimately, the problem with giving an an autonomous automobile the power to make consequential decisions is that, like the robots of science fiction, a self-driving car still lacks empathy and the ability to comprehend nuance.
“There’s no sensor that’s yet been designed,” Gerdes says, “that’s as good as the human eye and the human brain.”
Source: Bloomberg
by Keith Naughton -- Bloomberg
June 24, 2015
Google's driverless car. Source: Google via Bloomberg
The gearheads in Detroit, Tokyo and Stuttgart have mostly figured out how to build driverless vehicles. Even the Google guys seem to have solved the riddle. Now comes the hard part: deciding whether these machines should have power over who lives or dies in an accident.
The industry is promising a glittering future of autonomous vehicles moving in harmony like schools of fish. That can’t happen, however, until carmakers answer the kinds of thorny philosophical questions explored in science fiction since Isaac Asimov wrote his robot series last century. For example, should an autonomous vehicle sacrifice its occupant by swerving off a cliff to avoid killing a school bus full of children?
Auto executives, finding themselves in unfamiliar territory, have enlisted ethicists and philosophers to help them navigate the shades of gray. Ford, General Motors, Audi, Renault and Toyota are all beating a path to Stanford University’s Center for Automotive Research, which is programming cars to make ethical decisions and see what happens.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
“This issue is definitely in the crosshairs,” says Chris Gerdes, who runs the lab and recently met with the chief executives of Ford and GM to discuss the topic. “They’re very aware of the issues and the challenges because their programmers are actively trying to make these decisions today.”
Automakers and Google are pouring billions into developing driverless cars. This week Ford said it was moving development of self-driving cars from the research lab to its advanced engineering operations. Google plans to put a “few” of its self-driving cars on California roads this summer, graduating from the test track.
Social Robots
Cars can already stop and steer without help from a human driver. Within a decade, fully automated autos could be navigating public roads, according to Boston Consulting Group. Cars will be among the first autonomous machines testing the limits of reason and reaction in real time.
“This is going to set the tone for all social robots,” says philosopher Patrick Lin, who runs the Ethics and Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic University and counsels automakers. “These are the first truly social robots to move around in society.”
Driverless Technology Showcased At Robert Bosch GmbH Automated Driving Event
The promise of self-driving cars is that they’ll anticipate and avoid collisions, dramatically reducing the 33,000 deaths on U.S. highways each year. But accidents will still happen. And in those moments, the robot car may have to choose the lesser of two evils -- swerve onto a crowded sidewalk to avoid being rear-ended by a speeding truck or stay put and place the driver in mortal danger.
“Those kinds of questions do have to be answered before automated driving becomes a reality,” Jeff Greenberg, Ford’s senior technical leader for human-machine interface, said during a tour of the automaker’s new Silicon Valley research lab this week.
Asimov Laws
Right now, ethicists have more questions than answers. Should rules governing autonomous vehicles emphasize the greater good -- the number of lives saved -- and put no value on the individuals involved? Should they borrow from Asimov, whose first law of robotics says an autonomous machine may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human to be harmed.
“I wouldn’t want my robot car to trade my life just to save one or two others,” Lin says. “But it doesn’t seem to follow that it should hold our life uber alles, no matter how many victims you’re talking about. That seems plain wrong.”
That’s why we shouldn’t leave those decisions up to robots, says Wendell Wallach, author of “A Dangerous Master: How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control.”
“The way forward is to create an absolute principle that machines do not make life and death decisions,” says Wallach, a scholar at the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at Yale University. “There has to be a human in the loop. You end up with a pretty lawless society if people think they won’t be held responsible for the actions they take.”
Disobey Laws
As Wallach, Lin and other ethicists wrestle with the philosophical complexities, Gerdes is conducting real-world experiments. This summer on a racetrack in northern California, he’ll test automated vehicles programmed to follow ethical rules to make split-second decisions, such as when it’s appropriate to disobey traffic laws and cross a double yellow line to make room for bicyclists or cars that are double-parked.
Gerdes is also working with Toyota to find ways for an autonomous car to quickly hand back control to a human driver. Even such a handoff is fraught with peril, he says, especially as cars do more and driving skills degrade.
Ultimately, the problem with giving an an autonomous automobile the power to make consequential decisions is that, like the robots of science fiction, a self-driving car still lacks empathy and the ability to comprehend nuance.
“There’s no sensor that’s yet been designed,” Gerdes says, “that’s as good as the human eye and the human brain.”
Source: Bloomberg
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
Should driverless cars make life-or-death decisions?
Keith Naughton
June 25, 2015
DETROIT (Bloomberg) -- The gearheads in Detroit, Tokyo and Stuttgart have mostly figured out how to build driverless vehicles. Even the Google guys seem to have solved the riddle.
Now comes the hard part: deciding whether these machines should have power over who lives or dies in an accident.
The industry is promising a glittering future of autonomous vehicles moving in harmony like schools of fish. That can’t happen, however, until carmakers answer the kinds of thorny philosophical questions explored in science fiction since Isaac Asimov wrote his robot series last century. For example, should an autonomous vehicle sacrifice its occupant by swerving off a cliff to avoid killing a school bus full of children?
Auto executives, finding themselves in unfamiliar territory, have enlisted ethicists and philosophers to help them navigate the shades of gray. Ford, General Motors, Audi, Renault and Toyota are all beating a path to Stanford University’s Center for Automotive Research, which is programming cars to make ethical decisions and see what happens.
“This issue is definitely in the crosshairs,” says Chris Gerdes, who runs the lab and recently met with the chief executives of Ford and GM to discuss the topic. “They’re very aware of the issues and the challenges because their programmers are actively trying to make these decisions today.”
Automakers and Google are pouring billions into developing driverless cars. This week Ford said it was moving development of self-driving cars from the research lab to its advanced engineering operations. Google plans to put a “few” of its self-driving cars on California roads this summer, graduating from the test track.
Social robots
Cars can already stop and steer without help from a human driver. Within a decade, fully automated autos could be navigating public roads, according to Boston Consulting Group. Cars will be among the first autonomous machines testing the limits of reason and reaction in real time.
“This is going to set the tone for all social robots,” says philosopher Patrick Lin, who runs the Ethics and Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic University and counsels automakers. “These are the first truly social robots to move around in society.”
The promise of self-driving cars is that they’ll anticipate and avoid collisions, dramatically reducing the 33,000 deaths on U.S. highways each year.
But accidents will still happen.
And in those moments, the robot car may have to choose the lesser of two evils -- swerve onto a crowded sidewalk to avoid being rear-ended by a speeding truck or stay put and place the driver in mortal danger.
“Those kinds of questions do have to be answered before automated driving becomes a reality,” Jeff Greenberg, Ford’s senior technical leader for human-machine interface, said during a tour of the automaker’s new Silicon Valley research lab this week.
Asimov laws
Right now, ethicists have more questions than answers. Should rules governing autonomous vehicles emphasize the greater good -- the number of lives saved -- and put no value on the individuals involved? Should they borrow from Asimov, whose first law of robotics says an autonomous machine may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human to be harmed.
“I wouldn’t want my robot car to trade my life just to save one or two others,” Lin says. “But it doesn’t seem to follow that it should hold our life uber alles, no matter how many victims you’re talking about. That seems plain wrong.”
That’s why we shouldn’t leave those decisions up to robots, says Wendell Wallach, author of “A Dangerous Master: How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control.”
“The way forward is to create an absolute principle that machines do not make life and death decisions,” says Wallach, a scholar at the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at Yale University. “There has to be a human in the loop. You end up with a pretty lawless society if people think they won’t be held responsible for the actions they take.”
Disobey laws
As Wallach, Lin and other ethicists wrestle with the philosophical complexities, Gerdes is conducting real-world experiments. This summer on a racetrack in northern California, he’ll test automated vehicles programmed to follow ethical rules to make split-second decisions, such as when it’s appropriate to disobey traffic laws and cross a double yellow line to make room for bicyclists or cars that are double-parked.
Gerdes is also working with Toyota to find ways for an autonomous car to quickly hand back control to a human driver. Even such a handoff is fraught with peril, he says, especially as cars do more and driving skills degrade.
Ultimately, the problem with giving an an autonomous automobile the power to make consequential decisions is that, like the robots of science fiction, a self-driving car still lacks empathy and the ability to comprehend nuance.
“There’s no sensor that’s yet been designed,” Gerdes says, “that’s as good as the human eye and the human brain.”
Source: Autonews
Keith Naughton
June 25, 2015
DETROIT (Bloomberg) -- The gearheads in Detroit, Tokyo and Stuttgart have mostly figured out how to build driverless vehicles. Even the Google guys seem to have solved the riddle.
Now comes the hard part: deciding whether these machines should have power over who lives or dies in an accident.
The industry is promising a glittering future of autonomous vehicles moving in harmony like schools of fish. That can’t happen, however, until carmakers answer the kinds of thorny philosophical questions explored in science fiction since Isaac Asimov wrote his robot series last century. For example, should an autonomous vehicle sacrifice its occupant by swerving off a cliff to avoid killing a school bus full of children?
Auto executives, finding themselves in unfamiliar territory, have enlisted ethicists and philosophers to help them navigate the shades of gray. Ford, General Motors, Audi, Renault and Toyota are all beating a path to Stanford University’s Center for Automotive Research, which is programming cars to make ethical decisions and see what happens.
“This issue is definitely in the crosshairs,” says Chris Gerdes, who runs the lab and recently met with the chief executives of Ford and GM to discuss the topic. “They’re very aware of the issues and the challenges because their programmers are actively trying to make these decisions today.”
Automakers and Google are pouring billions into developing driverless cars. This week Ford said it was moving development of self-driving cars from the research lab to its advanced engineering operations. Google plans to put a “few” of its self-driving cars on California roads this summer, graduating from the test track.
Social robots
Cars can already stop and steer without help from a human driver. Within a decade, fully automated autos could be navigating public roads, according to Boston Consulting Group. Cars will be among the first autonomous machines testing the limits of reason and reaction in real time.
“This is going to set the tone for all social robots,” says philosopher Patrick Lin, who runs the Ethics and Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic University and counsels automakers. “These are the first truly social robots to move around in society.”
The promise of self-driving cars is that they’ll anticipate and avoid collisions, dramatically reducing the 33,000 deaths on U.S. highways each year.
But accidents will still happen.
And in those moments, the robot car may have to choose the lesser of two evils -- swerve onto a crowded sidewalk to avoid being rear-ended by a speeding truck or stay put and place the driver in mortal danger.
“Those kinds of questions do have to be answered before automated driving becomes a reality,” Jeff Greenberg, Ford’s senior technical leader for human-machine interface, said during a tour of the automaker’s new Silicon Valley research lab this week.
Asimov laws
Right now, ethicists have more questions than answers. Should rules governing autonomous vehicles emphasize the greater good -- the number of lives saved -- and put no value on the individuals involved? Should they borrow from Asimov, whose first law of robotics says an autonomous machine may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human to be harmed.
“I wouldn’t want my robot car to trade my life just to save one or two others,” Lin says. “But it doesn’t seem to follow that it should hold our life uber alles, no matter how many victims you’re talking about. That seems plain wrong.”
That’s why we shouldn’t leave those decisions up to robots, says Wendell Wallach, author of “A Dangerous Master: How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control.”
“The way forward is to create an absolute principle that machines do not make life and death decisions,” says Wallach, a scholar at the Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics at Yale University. “There has to be a human in the loop. You end up with a pretty lawless society if people think they won’t be held responsible for the actions they take.”
Disobey laws
As Wallach, Lin and other ethicists wrestle with the philosophical complexities, Gerdes is conducting real-world experiments. This summer on a racetrack in northern California, he’ll test automated vehicles programmed to follow ethical rules to make split-second decisions, such as when it’s appropriate to disobey traffic laws and cross a double yellow line to make room for bicyclists or cars that are double-parked.
Gerdes is also working with Toyota to find ways for an autonomous car to quickly hand back control to a human driver. Even such a handoff is fraught with peril, he says, especially as cars do more and driving skills degrade.
Ultimately, the problem with giving an an autonomous automobile the power to make consequential decisions is that, like the robots of science fiction, a self-driving car still lacks empathy and the ability to comprehend nuance.
“There’s no sensor that’s yet been designed,” Gerdes says, “that’s as good as the human eye and the human brain.”
Source: Autonews
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
Mapping the automation of automobiles
"We get amazing detail," Ristevski said. "Every detail of the road surface, the building surfaces, you can even see 3-D people standing by the side of the road."
"So if there's an obstruction on a road, like maybe there's too much snow or there's a truck in the way, they can drop an icon on the map and we'll come back to it," he said.
With a new standard of maps comes a new set of problems, though. Where turn-by-turn maps can be created once and updated every year, or sometimes every five years, HD maps place new demands on mapmakers. The maps need to be as up-to-date as possible, which means the work of Nokia's little Volkswagens is never quite done.
Here & LA Times
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
New car technologies often unused by drivers, J.D. Power finds
A new study from J.D. Power suggests that automakers are investing billions into technologies that a considerable number of drivers aren’t using.
J.D. Power’s first 2015 Driver Interactive Vehicle Experience Report found that at least 20 percent of new-vehicle owners have never used 16 of the 33 technology features measured.
According to the study, 43 percent of people said they never use in-vehicle concierge services, while 38 percent haven’t used available mobile routers.
The study also found that 35 percent of drivers never use automatic parking systems, and 33 percent said they haven’t used head-up displays. For in-vehicle apps, 32 percent of people reported that they have never used them.
Such technological features have a brief 30-day window for gaining acceptance among drivers. If owners don’t use certain features during that time, they probably never will, said Renee Stephens, vice president of U.S. automotive quality at J.D. Power, in an interview.
Dealerships play a key role in the early stages of ownership.
If a dealer doesn’t explain a feature, the study found that owners have a higher likelihood of never using it.
In addition, features that aren’t activated when a vehicle is delivered sometimes results in owners not knowing they have the technology.
Stephens said the initial enthusiasm people have upon buying a vehicle is one of the reasons that 30-day window is so important.
“People tend to be really excited when they get a new vehicle. They tend to try out a lot of different features, and that’s how they gain acceptance,” Stephens said. “That’s when they’ll learn the most. They’ll go to a tech session by their dealer or they’ll be online. There’s a heightened level of interest in the vehicle.”
The report is based on responses from more than 4,200 vehicle owners and lessees after 90 days of ownership. The study took place from April to June.
Unwanted tech
The study also looked at features that drivers don’t want.
J.D. Power says there are 14 features that 20 percent or more of owners could go without in their next vehicles, including Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, in-vehicle concierge services and in-vehicle voice texting.
For Gen Y, those born between 1977 and 1994, at least 20 percent of them said there are 23 features that they don’t want. The unwanted technologies are related to entertainment and connectivity, the report says.
Unused technologies, according to J.D Power, result in “millions of dollars in lost value for both consumers and the manufacturers.”
Why are consumers rejecting certain features?
The study says the most common reasons were that they “did not find it useful,” or it “came as part of a package on my current vehicle and I did not want it.”
Tech experts
Well-trained dealership staffers who are comfortable with vehicle technologies will continue to be crucial going forward.
There’s value in “‘[Apple Inc.’s] Genius Bar’ approach or a tech expert that can help consumers in their own time. Many times as [owners are] picking up the vehicle, they’re just trying to get through the financing part and get out the door,” Stephens said.
“We need to offer time for them to come back in their own time to be able to spend time talking to somebody that understands the features.”
Automotive News
A new study from J.D. Power suggests that automakers are investing billions into technologies that a considerable number of drivers aren’t using.
J.D. Power’s first 2015 Driver Interactive Vehicle Experience Report found that at least 20 percent of new-vehicle owners have never used 16 of the 33 technology features measured.
According to the study, 43 percent of people said they never use in-vehicle concierge services, while 38 percent haven’t used available mobile routers.
The study also found that 35 percent of drivers never use automatic parking systems, and 33 percent said they haven’t used head-up displays. For in-vehicle apps, 32 percent of people reported that they have never used them.
Such technological features have a brief 30-day window for gaining acceptance among drivers. If owners don’t use certain features during that time, they probably never will, said Renee Stephens, vice president of U.S. automotive quality at J.D. Power, in an interview.
Dealerships play a key role in the early stages of ownership.
If a dealer doesn’t explain a feature, the study found that owners have a higher likelihood of never using it.
In addition, features that aren’t activated when a vehicle is delivered sometimes results in owners not knowing they have the technology.
Stephens said the initial enthusiasm people have upon buying a vehicle is one of the reasons that 30-day window is so important.
“People tend to be really excited when they get a new vehicle. They tend to try out a lot of different features, and that’s how they gain acceptance,” Stephens said. “That’s when they’ll learn the most. They’ll go to a tech session by their dealer or they’ll be online. There’s a heightened level of interest in the vehicle.”
The report is based on responses from more than 4,200 vehicle owners and lessees after 90 days of ownership. The study took place from April to June.
Unwanted tech
The study also looked at features that drivers don’t want.
J.D. Power says there are 14 features that 20 percent or more of owners could go without in their next vehicles, including Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, in-vehicle concierge services and in-vehicle voice texting.
For Gen Y, those born between 1977 and 1994, at least 20 percent of them said there are 23 features that they don’t want. The unwanted technologies are related to entertainment and connectivity, the report says.
Unused technologies, according to J.D Power, result in “millions of dollars in lost value for both consumers and the manufacturers.”
Why are consumers rejecting certain features?
The study says the most common reasons were that they “did not find it useful,” or it “came as part of a package on my current vehicle and I did not want it.”
Tech experts
Well-trained dealership staffers who are comfortable with vehicle technologies will continue to be crucial going forward.
There’s value in “‘[Apple Inc.’s] Genius Bar’ approach or a tech expert that can help consumers in their own time. Many times as [owners are] picking up the vehicle, they’re just trying to get through the financing part and get out the door,” Stephens said.
“We need to offer time for them to come back in their own time to be able to spend time talking to somebody that understands the features.”
Automotive News
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
Daimler organizes symposium on "Autonomous Driving, Law and Ethics"
Can drivers take their hands off the wheel? How will vehicles respond in unexpected situations? And who bears the responsibility?
Open legal and ethical questions require dialog with science, politics and society
Daimler promotes discourse with numerous measures
Before autonomous driving becomes reality, there is a wide range of legal and ethical questions to be answered. To support social discourse and communicate with experts, Daimler is hosting a symposium on "Autonomous Driving, Law and Ethics". More than 100 experts from business, science, politics and the media discuss the new challenges on September 23.
The symposium is opened by Dr. Christine Hohmann-Dennhardt, Member of the Board of Management of Daimler AG, responsible for Integrity and Legal Affairs. She is convinced that autonomous driving will be a fixture of future mobility, thanks to its many advantages: greater convenience, less stress, lower consumption and the potential for higher road safety. However, not only the technical requirements but also the legal and ethical questions must be clarified.
"The safety of every road user is our top priority for automated driving as well. Just as important as technical developments is that our customers have legal certainty and security when it comes to ethical and data protection matters. This is why we promote the dialog on these issues."
Responsibility in the view of technology ethics
In his keynote address on technology ethics, Prof. Dr. Julian Nida-Rümelin, Professor of Philosophy at LMU Munich and former State Minister for Culture, also examines the risks of new technologies: "Who is responsible for autonomous driving – the driver, the vehicle owner, or the manufacturer? Since robots cannot act like humans or be treated like them, we must clarify how to assign our criteria from criminal law, civil law and common morals to the new technologies." Julian Nida-Rümelin leads research projects in the field of technology ethics and is a member of the Advisory Board for Integrity and Corporate Responsibility at Daimler AG.
Autonomous driving requires a legal and ethical framework
Automation not only makes driving cars more convenient, but also has the potential for lower emissions and greater safety. It reduces stress on drivers during monotonous trips in traffic jams or on the highway. At the same time, they would still be able to take the wheel for routes that are more fun to drive. The topics discussed at the symposium include liability, data protection and ethical questions related to unexpected traffic situations.
Data protection already plays a key role from the development stage of connected and automated systems, as explained by representatives of Research & Development and Corporate Data Protection from Daimler during the afternoon session. Data protection experts, legal experts and engineers coordinate their efforts at an early development stage to work on user-friendly solutions ("Privacy by Design"). At the end of the event, representatives from the Bundestag, the European Parliament and the European Commission speak with the symposium's participants on new challenges to politics.
Autogazette & Daimler
EnI
Piston Pioneer
The most interested parties in automated driving are not the individual customers but the fleet customers.
The automated driving would eliminate the need for a driver, or driving. That would allow to lower the labor costs, and / or allow fleet commuters who usually drive themselves to a location to do other stuff then driving - so eg some office business will be able to be performed in a car during the ride = time & money saved. Shuffle services, taxi services, cargo transport services etc ... driverless in the future. Why do you think Uber was so interested to buy Nokia's HERE?
Intelligent Transport & Traffic Solutions (= automated traffic) are the next big thing. They can not only contribute to more traffic safety but even more to optimization, rationalization, time & cost savings etc.
The automated driving would eliminate the need for a driver, or driving. That would allow to lower the labor costs, and / or allow fleet commuters who usually drive themselves to a location to do other stuff then driving - so eg some office business will be able to be performed in a car during the ride = time & money saved. Shuffle services, taxi services, cargo transport services etc ... driverless in the future. Why do you think Uber was so interested to buy Nokia's HERE?
Intelligent Transport & Traffic Solutions (= automated traffic) are the next big thing. They can not only contribute to more traffic safety but even more to optimization, rationalization, time & cost savings etc.
SDNR
Kraftwagen König
Masdar city is kind of the model for future sustainable cities.^ Somehow reminds me of these?
The United Nations Agenda 2030 program is rolling out these measures worldwide.
SDNR
Kraftwagen König
Absolutely correct Tine.The most interested parties in automated driving are not the individual customers but the fleet customers.
The automated driving would eliminate the need for a driver, or driving. That would allow to lower the labor costs, and / or allow fleet commuters who usually drive themselves to a location to do other stuff then driving - so eg some office business will be able to be performed in a car during the ride = time & money saved. Shuffle services, taxi services, cargo transport services etc ... driverless in the future. Why do you think Uber was so interested to buy Nokia's HERE?
Intelligent Transport & Traffic Solutions (= automated traffic) are the next big thing. They can not only contribute to more traffic safety but even more to optimization, rationalization, time & cost savings etc.
It must be noted that the big push for driverless vehicles is not coming from the automakers themselves .....they have been heavily encouraged to get on board with government programs for sustainability.
I am not against sustainability or lowering pollution at all, but I am naturally suspicious of terms like "Smart Growth" and "Sustainable Development" .....they sound great but often behind them is more bureaucracy and loss of personal freedoms. We should watch these programs carefully ....I'm always suspicious when government and big business get into bed together to shape the world around us without much Democratic process.
Giannis
Staff member
The first driverless automobile in Greece is a bus that is operating in the city of Trikala since last week!
Source: Driverless bus on the way in Trikala | Kathimerini
Driverless bus on the way in Trikala, Greece
A revolutionary driverless bus has successfully completed its test runs in the streets of Trikala, central Greece, and is due to become fully operational next month.
The computer-controlled vehicle is expected to serve commuters along a 2.4-kilometer route in the center of the city, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. and from 4 to 8 p.m. from Tuesdays to Sundays.
The buses, which are built by French manufacturer Robosoft, are 5 meter long and 1.5 meters wide and can carry up to 10 people. Their speed will not exceed 20 km/h. The vehicles are equipped with an advanced GPS and a laser mapping system for localization and movement control. Laser and ultrasound technologies are used to detect obstacles in front of and around the bus.
The introduction of the driverless bus, which is a pilot platform, is part of CityMobil2, a multi-stakeholder project co-funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program for research and technological development (FP7). Similar automated road transport systems will be implemented in a number of urban environments across the bloc.
Until Thursday, September 17, the sensor-navigating bus will be circulating without passengers. The public will be able to use the automated service as of Friday, September 18, although the vehicle won’t become fully operational until late October.
Local authorities have taken steps to make sure that the bus route will not be obstructed by private cars or other obstacles.
E-trikala SA, the municipality-controlled company which is running the project, has launched a public awareness campaign to inform prospective passengers as well as drivers about the new service. Negligent drivers can expect to be fined for misusing bus lanes.
Four more vehicles will be added to the fleet by early October, raising their total number to six.
Source: Driverless bus on the way in Trikala | Kathimerini
SDNR
Kraftwagen König
I'm not so sure.
There is a concerted agenda underway to *nudge people out of their private vehicles and use public transport ......to ease congestion and improve "sustainability". This is going to be rammed through on a global level -- it will happen at City Council level ....increased taxes on cars and petrol, fewer public parking spaces, tolls and fees to enter central city areas, more cycle and bus lanes.
They're not going to force you out of your vehicle, they'll just make it socially and economically undesirable to own one.
*nudge is the title of a book by Cass Sunstein .....which is essentially an instruction manual for social engineers. It outlines how to use psychology to manipulate populations into doing what you want them to do while giving them the impression they freely chose to do it themselves. Rather than using force to achieve an objective, you gently "nudge" people in the direction of your predetermined outcome.
.
Wolfgang
Kraftwagen König
An update from Nissan. 
Ghosn hedges Nissan's 2020 autonomous deadline
Renault-Nissan CEO Says Regulations Could Limit Rollout Of Self-Driving Cars
Three years ago, Nissan was one of the first companies to promise a hands-free autonomous car by 2020. According Nissan Chairman and CEO Carlos Ghosn, when and how much we'll be able to take our hands off the wheel depends on more than just the components in the car. At a press conference during this year's Frankfurt Motor Show, the head of the Renault-Nissan Alliance said, "No matter how fast the technology develops, the autonomous cars are very dependent on the regulation." Basically Ghosn is saying that Nissan will be ready, but the laws allowing hands-free driving might not be so prompt.
Ghosn hedges Nissan's 2020 autonomous deadline
Ghosn hedges Nissan's 2020 autonomous deadline
Renault-Nissan CEO Says Regulations Could Limit Rollout Of Self-Driving Cars
Three years ago, Nissan was one of the first companies to promise a hands-free autonomous car by 2020. According Nissan Chairman and CEO Carlos Ghosn, when and how much we'll be able to take our hands off the wheel depends on more than just the components in the car. At a press conference during this year's Frankfurt Motor Show, the head of the Renault-Nissan Alliance said, "No matter how fast the technology develops, the autonomous cars are very dependent on the regulation." Basically Ghosn is saying that Nissan will be ready, but the laws allowing hands-free driving might not be so prompt.
Ghosn hedges Nissan's 2020 autonomous deadline
