The scandal was not compared to human drivers, but to their competitors. Uber are relatively latecomers to the self-driving car scene and managed to have a fatality early on in their program. Whereas their rivals had taken a much more cautious approach to their program, which although not accident free, had managed to avoid any fatalities. And had clocked up many many more safe miles in between incidents (an order of magnitude more). The other reason why it achieved so much attention is because it was precedent setting. Who would be held to account? The corporation who controlled the test? The (clearly negligent) safety driver? The State, for not regulating the tests better? More than one of the above? All that said though, you do make a good basic point. It is just that Uber did not make a good system, and there is no way that the accident which occurred should have happened. The system should have been able to detect the victim easily under the circumstances.
@jan simonides You might want to work on your 'civilised discourse' skills, if you actually want to persuade folks. If you came across as being reputable, we might accept the numbers you quote. If they are reliable your argument would be insightful. As it is though, you don't and the distaste at your attitude puts me off investing any time in verifying or debunking your argument.
Problems like this will exist for a little while . With over the air updates similar to our cell phones, once a fix is made for the problem all cars will no longer make that same mistake. If only drivers could learn from each other's mistakes. Humans constantly drink and drive. Humans constantly use their cell phone or get distracted while driving. We know it's bad but never learn. This is a critical difference and will allow self-driving cars to exceed humans at safety. Generally speaking I think the technology is good. No one speaks about how fast or slow the cars go or how mechanical their driving style seems. I could see it getting very annoying and disturbing to human drivers when there are many self diving cars everywhere. When road rage becomes robot rage.
What opponents are not seeing is the safety that automated driving brings (if evolved to perfection). The computer will not blink, will not get tired or sleepy, will not put on make up, will not get distracted by calls or other things, has multiple cameras, will not have road rage and will follow road rules.
Sometimes people get distracted while walking or don't see a fast moving vehicles. Drivers are always at fault because they're moving faster and it's their responsibility to always pay attention while driving.
Sometimes it doesn't matter who is at fault. In this case, even if the Uber was at fault it won't help her. You can see the sign in the video indicating "No Crossing"! It was just as much her responsibility to pay attention.
Why the BBC has not mentioned Tesla? Tesla has far more miles under their bonnet. Their database of over one billion miles is what will take to give autonomous vehicles the 'intelligence' required to be on our roads.
Francesco3000 very true, Tesla are way ahead and look normal. No spinning sensors, no beacon on the roof. I can only think that this might be clear evidence that the impartial BBC are nothing like impartial. Anti Tesla scare story Perhaps.? . Electric cars like Tesla are hundreds of times safer than the average driver. Maybe it's an old obsolete documentary. Budah of Birmingham
It's in the title and explained in the first few minutes. They could go to a single location and learn a lot. Not least because the Uber crash lifted the veil on a lot of details that all these companies, including Tesla, consider trade secrets at this time.
@tommy aronson Self driving cars are indeed very hard to develop, and I do not own a corporation. But that lack is not a bar to me commenting on it. However I can write a script which does not make false claims. It blatantly is not the hardest problem in technology. I would not have quibbled with it saying "one of". Incidentally resorting to insults does reveal a lack of emotional maturity, which does not lend credence to your comment.
Agree with you Mark. Fusion has been a hard nut to crack for decades. Self driving should be achievable within a decade if not much sooner. Sorry you were the target of personal abuse on this thread.
The media acts like Elon never said a word about it. Elon has backed up his words with action every single time, 6 months late maybe, but he delivers. They also act like 6 months late on going from a hand assembly line to a modern assembly line, with the safest vehicle ever made and the highest score ever by consumer reports is the end of the world. Some say 10 years away. They have a short memory when it comes to tech adoption speed. Bloomberg says 30% autonomous by 2040, and 30% electric same date. They are out of their minds. Same people who predicted $250 oil in 2008 when I bought options in June for 40$ oil by December, not much mind you everyone had me thinking I was nuts. The greatest fortune in the history of man is waiting to be made. As Tony Sheba says, it will not get rolling by 2030, electrification and autonomy will be all over by then.
But still way ahead of all the competition for everything needed to achieve Self-Drive. Tesla simply aren't calling it self-drive until they are happy it is safe enough and reliable enough to cope with all edge case problems faced by road users but the hardware is there for self drive and that is their goal. Uber and Waymo will be out of business when that day comes.
It will be interesting to see what solutions they use in colder climates where snow and ice regularly cover vehicles (and their sensors). I grew up in Maine and for several months of winter the lane markings are mostly or sometimes entirely hidden under snow.
Correct. The first mover will win. If regulators say 'no', then the prize goes to the first moving jurisdiction. If the US says 'no' then it risks giving a huge advantage to China or Japan. Just picture a world where everyone fetches water with buckets. Word gets around about piped water. One jurisdiction says "oh no, that will put our water carriers out of a job". Another says "yes", installs piping and promptly wins 2-3 hours per citizen per day. The winner suddenly has millions of man-hours of labour ready for anything else... manufacturing, education, healthcare, etc.
@One I didn't say I did. I said the companies that are investing billions into this technology are thinking about profits. This is privately funded not publicly.
For real. Who wants to do such bad Jobs, it is hard to get thru this time, but once we are there, everyone is going to love it. I see me telling my Kids and grandkids later About how life was when I drove a car and how awful it was. @@CarFreeSegnitz
It's interesting that only a few examples of companies developing this technology were referenced, and Tesla (I believe the company with the highest number of autonomous miles driven to date) not referenced at all. I really like the 20(ish) minute videos you guys produce, but I think that this would have been a great opportunity to make a multiple part series of videos showing more opinions expressed, and more companies in the mix trying to get this tech off the ground. Thanks for another great video!
I can't get excited about Tesla autopilot anymore, the slow progress over the last few years makes me think it'll probably be another decade before they reach full autonomy. Companies like Waymo and Zoox have shown far more progress than Tesla, although they only plan to be level 4 not 5 like Tesla.
Mr. Musk is intentionally laying low in regard to autonomous driving. He is focusing on the human brain ... When he is finished, the human mind will be controlled anyways. The cars are gonna be a piece of cake. This kinda shit is just to keep everyone content in the matter.
"people are mad at the vehicle driving the speed limit and following the law" that's the real reason they didn't choose California, everyone drives 15 over the speed limit and don't give a F$#%
Why fight? Why complain? We are at the point of human ability to, and no doubt will, create anything we ever imagined from now on. It is the reality we have created. Some movies are documentaries of our future. See. Hear. Soon, taste and feel. You already know this.
The BBC is telling only part of the story in respect of so called self driving vehicles. That was almost a paid for commercial for WAYMO/UBER. The program is ignoring the part being played by Tesla and other EV Auto makers striving to bring Autonomous vehicles to market. No mention was made of Electric Vehicles - all the vehicles shown were ICE vehicles. The BBC is losing the respect it once had for bringing balanced programs.
To everyone wondering why Tesla wasn't featured in this video. *No publicly available Tesla has level 5 autonomy.* I don't understand how people don't get that. The Tesla "AutoPilot" feature is *not* level 5 autonomy.
Nor are the other companies 'Level 5' as they require a safety driver. You should watch the 'Autonomy Investor Day' presentation. Tesla is years ahead and their 'actual' millions of miles driven on autopilot are used to train their AI. As Musk said, "self driving is easy, it's the edge cases that are years away". Check it out, it's really illuminating.
By the time semi trucks are autonomously self driving without a human, that old guy will be long dead. It's not as soon as most truckers think. Trains are still manned. Trucks will be too for liability and safety reasons for a long time. Yes they might be self driving, but there will be a human in the truck as well. There's this giant fear by truckers that they're going to lose their job here soon and that's not the case.
www.carscoops.com/2019/06/bmw-shows-off-7-series-prototype-with-a-level-4-autonomous-driving-system/ BMW and Mercedes both say they'll have level 4 autonomous driving cars for sale by 2024, and Tesla, even sooner. I believe this will mean that driving positions will begin phasing out by 2025. Since Big Trucks spend the vast majority of time on open highways, they'll be able to do without level 5 systems before ditching drivers. It's just as well, seeing all of the distracted drivers (of all ages) on the road staring at their phones. This is going to happen, so we might as well get into it, before other nations do it first. We didn't wait for the Soviets to get to the moon after they beat us to space, so why wait for Germany, China, Japan or Korea to beat everyone to full autonomy? You have to push forward with technology to stay on top, and we've been slipping over the recent decades. Then there's the "But muh Job!" argument, which is valid. If you look at the actual spectrum upon which AI and Autonomy can operate at, you'll see that online retail has already started to kill off millions of sales jobs. They already killed off stock trading. Warehouses are already partially automated (with more incoming). McDonald's and Pizza Hut already have the tech to replace most of their employees. Lawyers and some Doctors jobs (understanding how drugs work together and reading images/charts) can be replaced with tech we already have. If you're stuck in a 20th century frame of mind, it's easy to get scared, but if we don't push for change, someone else will do it anyway, and we'll have more strife and trouble when it does reach us. I understand that no one wants to live off of a welfare state (or most anyway), but we won't be able to "create more jobs" to offset all of the displaced ones. The only person running for office I've seen address this is Andrew Yang ( #Yang2020 ), whom had come to the same conclusions I had, before hearing about him. A UBI (Freedom Dividend), funded by the tech giants that don't employ tons of people and get around taxes already is the best starting place for taking care of people affected. It'd allow more people to work part time, allowing the jobs left to be split up, and supporting a grassroots economy instead of piss on economics, which supports aristocracy. His policies (over 100 of them) are very much pro small business, and help the poor, which would help 90% of the population. Sorry for getting political, but it's just too relevant to the discussion at hand, as no one else (Repub or Dem) is even addressing the issue seriously...
No mention of Tesla, and the difference in opinion between those running a few hundred LIDAR-centric vehicles, on mapped streets, and those with a fleet of almost half a million cars on the road, feeding info & data to the hive mind, 24x7. The massive earthmovers are great, but there are even BEV versions now, that are scaling mountains, empty, and charging the batteries on the downward trip, fully laden. The negligence displayed by that “safety” driver, combined with the engineering decision to disconnect/disable the safety system, were human failures, and should not cast a shadow on the self driving technology (however crippled it is, by its reliance on LIDAR). Incomplete, BBC.
The BBC clearly lack journalistic integrity. General purpose A.I. is the only viable solution to level 5 autonomy and Tesla is light years away in that regard. When you do a 25 minutes segment on self driving, in 2019, and you don't even mention Tesla or Autopilot, you clearly have an anti Tesla agenda.
Not sure how you can do a 25 minute piece on autonomous driving without even mentioning Tesla...arguably further ahead in this area than anyone else. Notice how all the experts agree that the most important enabler for self driving is the "training" and data? Tesla is the only company in the world with a fleet hundreds of thousands strong collecting this data
The ones that attack the vehicles are extremely emotional people that feel threatened by intelligent people and their achievements. This type of Technophobia is often fed by age-driven Neophobia, in which a person considers anything that was invented after they are 20-years of age as evil on three basis: 1- they don't understand it, 2- they have a difficult time learning to use it and 3- It simply did not exist when they were learning to cope with the world. Funny thing is, they are perfectly comfortable with existing technologies that might have caused the same effect when they were invented, such as guns or bicycles.
Although the fatal Uber accident showed serious flaws with Uber self-driving I have never once seen a video criticizing the woman for crossing and not checking the road was clear. You can see she is not even looking in the direction of the car. Also, like at the time of the accident you can see a 'No Crossing" sign behind the commentator. The fact that the commentator did not bring up these facts is because they are inconvenient to his argument that Uber was 100% to blame. Personally, I give 80% of the blame to the woman crossing for not checking the road was clear.
Didn't expect a futuristic tech program such as BBC click to be such cynical about a future tech. The Tech is already here and it has a long way to go and yet, it's already orders of magnitude safer than people driven vehicle. The total number of accidents run in single digits and people cause accidents in thousands every single day. About the job loss, with every new tech the existing job will be replaced with a more comfortable job. That's what happened when agriculture adopted technology, that's what happened when industrial revolution happened. We don't have jobs anymore, where people used to gaslight the street lamps or knock on windows of houses to wake up people. But, we have jobs like astronauts, youtubers, AI programmer now. With advent of tech, more jobs are created, albeit with more comfort, less physical effort. Move your primitive urge of resisting the change and doubting anything new aside. That's expected from an oldtimer truck driver, not you BBC Click.
A self driving car, I saw one back in 2014 that was being driven by a human and it was taking note of the streets and road ahead, but now we are in 2019, many people have died from a car, and their lives could of still been living if the technology was there to stop the car from collision. Now speaking about the UBAR car accident, yes the car should of saw the woman at a earlier time and the car should of had the number of cameras a truck does, just in case one of its cameras is unable to view its destination.
In Chile, one of the biggest mining companies Codelco have 25 heavy truck this model, self driving running on test for one year total, right now they completed almost 6 months. All this trucks are parts of Komatsu technologies, who try to get millenary contract for replacement and maintenance. Until now the company Codelco is happy but the 75 drivers or 75 families they are not. Anyway, in South America we close the eyes a minute and follow again because agains the progress nothing to do
Because they have an incentive to do so. Either that, or they are complete idiots. One thing for sure, objectivity and journalistic integrity is not part of the BCC best business practices.
At the start you say 'find out what happens when the tech goes wrong' then show a clip from the famous Uber accident. It must be noted that that was NOT a case of the tech going wrong. That was a case of Uber putting a car on the road that was NOT capable of safe self driving (and they knew it) and either failed to communicate that fact to the person supposed to be monitoring the system, or that person failed to do their job. Either way, the tech in question was not designed to stop for pedestrians crossing the road, and didn't. It is more a case of money being more important than safety considerations. Hopefully the resulting bad press has made Uber realize that safety and money can go hand in hand.
He's right, it's really stupid to use Lidar since it's unnecessary, big and expensive. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean people won't use it in driver less cars, it just means that they are going the other tech path (like in civilization games etc.)
Cameras are way cheaper, no moving parts. Lidar or cameras, the real magic is in the computer's unwavering attention and lightning reflexes. Does anyone know if Lidar will interfere with other Lidar and confuse signals? Certainly can't say that of cameras.
Nothing can beat general A.I. + vast database. Only cameras and basic radar are required, when you have the right software on the back end. The system truly learn to drive on its own, in any conditions and improve over time.
Listening to old people is a waste of time to be honest, and drivers, in the long run, are going to lose their jobs. Just think for a second what a waste of human talent, intelligence and all other things it is to be sitting, living and driving the trucks.
Well if the guy who said " what am I supposed to do " is any indication, not losing much. I am 55 so I resent that comment. Less than 5 years for autonomous with no safety driver and millions of them on the road. Bloomberg, who has just the worst record in predicting things, said Nokia had absolutely nothing to worry about from the Iphone. They say 30% electric by 2040 and same for autonomous, the're nuts. They don't get that once one trucking company has them they all have to or you can't compete. Same with taxis etc . It will be adopted like lightning. If you are younger than 58 and are driving a truck you will not make it to 65. So start planning.
I’d rather go into a self driving car, than one in which the driver were texting, reading their social media messages and notifications and trying to use google maps. My Uber driver the other day bumped into the rear of the car in front of him because his eyes were down on his google maps trying to fiddle with the thing. Self driving cars shouldn’t try and replace people obviously, but complement them. It’s a balance.
Had the uber watcher, been watching the road (Her Job) she could have avoided the accident. Yes this technology is a good idea, as for the lorry drivers, they will still be required with different skill's, as-in: mechanical knowledge as well as some computer knowledge (maintenance). What I personally would like to see is a system that needs fitting to every vehicle NOW , A sensor that checks the distance of the vehicle ahead of you on the road ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, with the ability to SLOW you down if you get to close. Tailgated Kill's. It also distracts the driver being tailgated.
Know why everyone keeps going on and on about that one pedestrian fatality in that level of self driving vehicle? It's because it's the only one so far. As time goes on, bugs are squashed and the programs get better and better, it grows less and less likely we'll see another fatality any time soon. And if we do, the problems will be fixed again, and the next fatality will be further off. In roughly ten years time we'll see human drivers replaced by vehicles that rarely are the cause of a fatality. People will complain, but we're paying money and blood for the ability to drive ground rockets, it's not fair to the victims if we don't at least try to make things safer.
@@DeusExRequiem This is the first I had heard of the accident ,and the clip showed she was not monitoring the vehicle , simply stating had she been watching the road as she was supposed to , it may not have happened. Yes I agree with you there may never be another (hope that is true).But it proves that the humans attention span wonders. The cars will not, after it has learned.
Tesla is level 2 semi autonomous along with its competitors. However the amount of miles tesla has is far more than these companies. Tesla OTA updates slowly upgrading it to level 5 over the next few years to pre-existing cars is in my opinion the most important transition to self driving. BBC should have mentioned Teslas mission to update slowly to full level 5 self driving.
You can have ten trillion miles of data, but if it's just a potatovision camera with some substandard radar added it is worth very little. Quantity alone is not enough. I like Tesla's progress, but I think it is wise to recognize a Waymo today can drive itself vastly better than any autopilot Tesla. Tesla/ Musk are known to overpromise on timeline. Besides that, it it is definitely not the only car company pursuing self-driving. Reading from the youtube comments, the one thing Tesla is very good in it seems is letting everyone at least think they are at the forefront...
I contend that if you give many drivers the slightest idea that they don't have to pay attention, they won't. And if you take the responsibility for driving away from people and put it on the car, now the liability is shifted to the deep pockets of the car manufacturer and lawyers are going to go nuts after an accident. I just can't believe that given the myriad of difficult driving situations, this technology will ever make it to general public transportation.
jan simonides Ha you’re just commenting peoples comments who are pro-self driving cars. You’re not even adding anything to the conversation you’re just insulting and releasing your hate of self driving cars. They’re the future and nobody can’t stop it. Its inevitable.
Biased reporting. Why the F~?k was Tesla not been mentioned. Tesla is way ahead of the game with millions of miles of data and probably 10x the range of the next best without intervention. I see a sinister intention to paint a bad picture for autonomous vehicles.The Uber accident was shameful. Three LIDARs and cameras. No excuse for not seeing well ahead. The camera quality was also very poor,. clearly bad low light performance and to not enable automatic breaking is shocking. The system should have reduced speed as soon as it saw an object in the way regardless of classification.
You will still need someone on board trucks. Security of cargo, responsibility of cargo, delivery unloading communication and signatures,, cleaning dead bugs off of the self driving cameras.
its different when your carrying hundreds of passengers. but replacing a trucker does not add any risk, it just reduced the risk of that trucker being injured in a potential accident.. but i do not think that truckers will be replaced in the near future because there needs to be a human to do repairs on the trucks when something goes wrong. the truck cant fix itself.
Why is a newspaper reporter showing such a strong opinion against self driving cars? Aren't they supposed to just report facts? Love this show. You could have made a better choice than to interview him, unless you share his opinion. How about the fact that she was crossing the street in the middle of the block, there's no crosswalk, it was dark, and this always gets me; who crosses the street without looking at the cars coming at you? IMHO she kind of walked in front of that car. I suppose it could have avoided her but I wonder if I would have. Can't say definitively cuz I wasn't there. Just saying it seems the person crossing the street had the greater chance to avoid the car.
Actually, autonomous road-vehicles are old-hat. Ever since the arrival of the first movies we’ve been accustomed to seeing vehicles magically driving themselves while their human so-called “drivers” have their faces pointing towards their front-seat passengers for several seconds at a time.
Again Yuval Noah Harari right many years before it happened, so incredible prediction abut not only the job losses but about the phylosophycal implications of this technology
I'm glad the advocate _for_ this technology acknowledged how unforeseeable the problems of perfecting it will be. I personally am certain that self driving cars will never dominate the roads. On the contrary, it is impossible to avoid accidents with this tech. people will die in terribly tragic ways and the community will not allow it to continue. It won't matter that _fewer_ people come to grief in these vehicles than in human controlled ones.
Let me tell you what it's like to be governed. Do you know what a governor is ? We have one on a lawn. It's to keep things from over-revving. In other words just put governors on cars. So they only go so fast. Slow the Fuck Down
In ten years time we're gonna start seeing ads for cars akin to ads for MADD. Since numbers aren't impactful enough, lets use equivalent numbers, there's one world trade center death count worth of fatal accidents in the US every month. As in, in every fatal accident at least one person dies, the death count is probably higher. Would you have humans manage all the systems in a nuclear power plant, no automation? At one point that's how things were done. With the NRX reactor disaster at chalk river, a human forgot to hang up the phone when trying to fix a problem. Humans make mistakes, and the more steps that have a human involved, the more mistakes are made. We're rapidly exiting the era of dumb machines that can't make decisions, and once we do, humans will simply be more error prone, cost more, etc. The main use for a human is knowing a broad field of subjects, machines specializing in one thing. People might feel self driving cars are less safe at first. It took thirteen years to go from first cars on the road to only one horse in historic photos so I would expect as much. Technology solves problems, and this time the problem is cost and safety.
@@DeusExRequiem People too easily imagine that they are on one side of a binary issue without realizing that the issue is not as clear cut as they believe. I am not a Luddite and I am as excited about technological possibilities as anyone can be. There is no such thing as artificial intelligence or else there is and you have defined it differently than me. I personally know and understand the meanings of the words 'possible' and impossible'. The word 'possible' is applicable to certain propositions and 'impossible' to others. There are practical, physical and logical reasons why space travel cannot exceed light speed and why self driving cars cannot succeed as modes of transport on the same roads as manually driven cars. No machine will ever be conscious and absent consciousness the unforeseen will be unprepared for and the anticipated will be wrongly interpreted. Faith is a glorious thing to bask in but reality is discernible and it is really the case that self driving cars will cause tragic deaths that will have been easily avoided by a human driver. Those deaths will motivate the people to outlaw self driving cars.
Truck drivers might be among the next buggy whip makers. I wonder how many buckboard drivers learned to drive horseless carriages, (trucks), at the turn of the 20th century.
Just take a minute to think - 1 million people are KILLED on our roads in this world EVERY year! - I personally know 2 people who have died and another who is paralyzed because of it, you? That doesn't even go into the people it has affected! There will still be deaths and injury in an autonomous future but a LOT less, and that's the point, even 1% better is worth it. I know it's going to take time, there will be problems to start but it will get better and focusing on the negatives like this film does, doesn't help. Once autonomous vehicles, become the norm you won't know how you lived without it and the benefits it will do for the elderly and disabled are going to be amazing. One other benefit is its a way of reducing our carbon footprint as we will need fewer vehicles! - most cars are only used 10% of the day and sat in car parks or at home, it's such a waste - imagine just calling up a car/van/Suv just when you need that type of vehicle, using rideshare, all being electric - the benefits are going to be huge with more land for housing, less road infostructure, the cost savings are going to be massive - I see a bright future once we get there, just give it time!
I can't wait for self driving cars on motorways. My daily commute involves traveling 60 miles a day on them. All I can see is plus points with stopping humans driving on motorways. During busy times journeys would be quicker, use less fuel, be considerably safer and I'd be less tired and stressed when I got home. The standard of average human driving is just about good enough to stop us crashing and killing each other. However there's a fairly high number of people (maybe 1 in 10) who drive aggressively. I see this almost everyday there's no need for it and taking the human out of the loop would be better for everyone in the long run.
You can even see a sign behind the commentator while he is blaming Uber. The sign indicates "No Crossing" and it was there at the time of the accident. The biker was not paying attention
Literally nothing can come even remotely close to Autopilot, and not even a mention of this technology, or Tesla. Either entirely biased against Tesla, or completely stupid.
@@UTUBESUCK666 I would say its mostly ignorance in case of Click. They usually go after mainstream content, and dont really research the topic to deep. Once tesla will go full FSD then we can expect proper content about this.
China is treating autonomous driving as an exciting advance in Technology not a threat to their "manhood" that will be resolved in Arizona by the US obsession with personal weapons.
There are delivery robots, with similar capacity to a shopping trolley, being tested in the community. If they prove to be successful, you may well find various super markets deploying them.
It a;; comes down to the data. When it is statistically safer to go around in a self driving vehicle compared to the average driver, then you will see widespread adoption. And as self driving vehicles supply masses of data on all sorts of metrics about driving, this adoption may happen soon than people think.
jan simonides Ha you’re just commenting peoples comments who are pro-self driving cars. You’re not even adding anything to the conversation you’re just insulting and releasing your hate of self driving cars. They’re the future and nobody can’t stop it. Its inevitable.
I support Self Driving cars all the way. Fuck everyone who is against it. Change is good. It will release the pressure of people having to rely on a car to just go places. People will save money by not needing to buy a car. Cant wait for Uber to release their Self driving Transportation here in Dallas
Exactly. How the BBC could go for 25 minutes, on a self driving segment, in 2019, without even mentionning Tesla or Autopilot? And those morons thought no one would notice???
All of this talk about convenience & how wonderful the self-driving car is & not one word about the health effects of this wireless technology....a known carcinogen & yet not mention of that!!!!
Unfortunately the town crier was upset when the newspaper came and the newspaper people were upset when the radio came and the radio people were upset when the TV came and the port person with television was upset when cable came and that industry was upset when the internet came there's room out there for everybody they need people to fix those cars in those are going to be new jobs coming up in the technology area and they will come up by the time this generation passes on
tommy aronson LoL you have no idea about Tesla’s tech. It has better self driving tech then some of the tech shown here. If you can’t google it your self I will be more than happy to send you some videos.
After watching this video I realized how far ahead Tesla is, it’s not even close. And that’s from a guy who works 40 hours Tesla , 40 hours SpaceX, still have enough time for boring, neuralink etc.
AV-uddites - will the humans respond? Instead of road rage, there will be av-rage. BTW, I am irritated when I have to check a box stating "I am not a robot" to use a web site. I would rather check a box, "I am a human" I thought this was a good video on AV safety. It talked about AVs being attached by humans. As automation displaces workers, there will be frustration, Luddites attacked textile machinery as a form of protest of losing their jobs. Will AV-uddites do the same in the 21st century?
Tesla is closer to comprehensive autonomous vehicle technology in the widest case use - across the world, rather than one small town in Arizona. They have more than 500,000 vehicles on the roads today, feeding back information to the AI system constantly learning from the billions of miles driven by these cars. Updates to the onboard software are made to the entire fleet as the system learns from every choice human drivers make (in shadow mode.) Tesla is making exponential progress on the problem, and claim that the technical challenges will be solved by the end of 2019 (EM time = 2020 in Earth time ;-) Then the next barrier will be regulatory approval, and despite the highly publicised accidents, Tesla's autopilot is already 4x safer than human drivers. I predict China will adopt AVs before other countries and in 100 years, historians will look back at this time and identify it as the fulcrum point when China overtakes the USA as the world leader in technology.
The BBC clearly can't be trusted to provide unbiased information. General purpose A.I. is the key to level 5 autonomy and Tesla is alone on top. To not even mention Tesla or Autopilot in that context is journalistic malpractice.
Tesla is a threat to BBC's friends and pays no adds to their network. Journalistic integrity is optional at the BBC as they didn't even mention Tesla or Autopilot by name!, despite Tesla being light years ahead of anything else on the market.
Machines makes mistakes but humans also makes mistakes a lot of times. So all in all, humans and machines are imperfect. Accept that fact. But that aside, the only thing that governments around the world are pushing for autonomous vehicles is because criminals can't use a get-away car. When all autonomous vehicles are used on the streets, no one can get away from a police car. They can shut down your autonomous vehicle from the 5G network with a few touches on a remote computer keyboard somewhere around the world. That's why people fear there is no chance of a revolution if there comes a time that needs one. Although they are very cool technologies, but 5G networks and autonomous vehicles are just the first steps to make the entire Earth a prison of the human race. Who or what species really planned for this imprisonment of the human race on the entire planet? Was David Icke right all along?
@jan simonides hummm buddy, I own one, and the autopilote is simply amazing! It drove itself 99% of my trip from Quebec to Miami. And these aren't mapped streets like Uber and Google's cars. So please, talk only when needed Jan. K thanks bye
This is coming, unavoidable, also really fucking cool WHO THE FUCK IS AGAINST these things: ROBOTS/TECH/FUTURE COOL MAGIC STUFF) like AI, LASERS, MOON BASE, MARS CITY, SUPER HUGE ROCKETS, FUSION CORES, FUSION GOGITO/VEGITO etc. The future is gonna be fucking AWESOME GUYS GET HYYYYPED!
lmao at the idea of people being "empowered and mobilized" by autonomous driving. It's about "mobility of people, the aged, the young, the ill". Never mind any of the above can already hail a taxi and/or uber with a human driver 24/7/365 for a very reasonable price and high degree of safety. What exactly are you offering them again? Bring AI into the loop and almost nothing changes except the employment opportunity for the driver that exists for this use case is generated elsewhere (IT and support centres based wherever). Some of these glistening eye weasels are selling communities and leaders a feel good fantasy for a living
What could happen if the WHOLE SYSTEM get hacked???. How can you stop it??? and what about the unemployment rate??? Do we really need this technology????
How do you stop someone who has sneezed, passed out, having a seizure???? Do we really need humans??? Of course, we need this technology it's much more reliable than humans.
One autonomous car hits a jaywalker by night, and it's a scandal. How many human drivers have killed pedestrians since then?
The scandal was not compared to human drivers, but to their competitors. Uber are relatively latecomers to the self-driving car scene and managed to have a fatality early on in their program.
Whereas their rivals had taken a much more cautious approach to their program, which although not accident free, had managed to avoid any fatalities. And had clocked up many many more safe miles in between incidents (an order of magnitude more).
The other reason why it achieved so much attention is because it was precedent setting. Who would be held to account? The corporation who controlled the test? The (clearly negligent) safety driver? The State, for not regulating the tests better? More than one of the above?
All that said though, you do make a good basic point. It is just that Uber did not make a good system, and there is no way that the accident which occurred should have happened. The system should have been able to detect the victim easily under the circumstances.
@jan simonides are you talking to me?
@jan simonides You might want to work on your 'civilised discourse' skills, if you actually want to persuade folks.
If you came across as being reputable, we might accept the numbers you quote. If they are reliable your argument would be insightful.
As it is though, you don't and the distaste at your attitude puts me off investing any time in verifying or debunking your argument.
Many
Problems like this will exist for a little while . With over the air updates similar to our cell phones, once a fix is made for the problem all cars will no longer make that same mistake. If only drivers could learn from each other's mistakes. Humans constantly drink and drive. Humans constantly use their cell phone or get distracted while driving. We know it's bad but never learn. This is a critical difference and will allow self-driving cars to exceed humans at safety. Generally speaking I think the technology is good. No one speaks about how fast or slow the cars go or how mechanical their driving style seems. I could see it getting very annoying and disturbing to human drivers when there are many self diving cars everywhere. When road rage becomes robot rage.
What opponents are not seeing is the safety that automated driving brings (if evolved to perfection). The computer will not blink, will not get tired or sleepy, will not put on make up, will not get distracted by calls or other things, has multiple cameras, will not have road rage and will follow road rules.
Not a mention of the responsibilty of pedestrians to NOT walk out in front of cars. Tragic nonetheless.
Sometimes people get distracted while walking or don't see a fast moving vehicles. Drivers are always at fault because they're moving faster and it's their responsibility to always pay attention while driving.
Sometimes it doesn't matter who is at fault. In this case, even if the Uber was at fault it won't help her.
You can see the sign in the video indicating "No Crossing"!
It was just as much her responsibility to pay attention.
Why the BBC has not mentioned Tesla? Tesla has far more miles under their bonnet. Their database of over one billion miles is what will take to give autonomous vehicles the 'intelligence' required to be on our roads.
Francesco3000 very true, Tesla are way ahead and look normal. No spinning sensors, no beacon on the roof. I can only think that this might be clear evidence that the impartial BBC are nothing like impartial. Anti Tesla scare story
Perhaps.? . Electric cars like Tesla are hundreds of times safer than the average driver. Maybe it's an old obsolete documentary. Budah of Birmingham
Yes, I was shocked Tesla wasn't mentioned..... their data is billions of miles versus everyone else's 100,000s of miles.
It's in the title and explained in the first few minutes. They could go to a single location and learn a lot. Not least because the Uber crash lifted the veil on a lot of details that all these companies, including Tesla, consider trade secrets at this time.
@@Markle2k Nothing in this justify not even mentionning the undisputed leader of the autonomous driving industry that is Tesla. NOTHING. Got that?
The BBC had an incentive not to even mention Tesla, that much is obvious. Unsubscribed because if this lack of journalistic integrity.
"It's the hardest problem in technology ..."
Nuclear fusion? Robots which are indistinguishable from humans? Colonising exoplanets?
@tommy aronson Self driving cars are indeed very hard to develop, and I do not own a corporation. But that lack is not a bar to me commenting on it.
However I can write a script which does not make false claims. It blatantly is not the hardest problem in technology. I would not have quibbled with it saying "one of".
Incidentally resorting to insults does reveal a lack of emotional maturity, which does not lend credence to your comment.
Getting my programs to work and without crashing every 5 minutes
Agree with you Mark. Fusion has been a hard nut to crack for decades. Self driving should be achievable within a decade if not much sooner. Sorry you were the target of personal abuse on this thread.
How could you forget Tesla and their self driving capabilities? Not even a mention....
The media acts like Elon never said a word about it. Elon has backed up his words with action every single time, 6 months late maybe, but he delivers. They also act like 6 months late on going from a hand assembly line to a modern assembly line, with the safest vehicle ever made and the highest score ever by consumer reports is the end of the world.
Some say 10 years away. They have a short memory when it comes to tech adoption speed. Bloomberg says 30% autonomous by 2040, and 30% electric same date. They are out of their minds. Same people who predicted $250 oil in 2008 when I bought options in June for 40$ oil by December, not much mind you everyone had me thinking I was nuts. The greatest fortune in the history of man is waiting to be made. As Tony Sheba says, it will not get rolling by 2030, electrification and autonomy will be all over by then.
Tesla is driver assist, not self-driving
Tesla is thorn in the flesh for the lobbies, that's why the media never talk about it. Also, do you know how much Tesla spend in advertising? Zero!
@@raybod1775 We all know that. Tesla estimates that full self drive will be ready by next year.
But still way ahead of all the competition for everything needed to achieve Self-Drive. Tesla simply aren't calling it self-drive until they are happy it is safe enough and reliable enough to cope with all edge case problems faced by road users but the hardware is there for self drive and that is their goal. Uber and Waymo will be out of business when that day comes.
It will be interesting to see what solutions they use in colder climates where snow and ice regularly cover vehicles (and their sensors). I grew up in Maine and for several months of winter the lane markings are mostly or sometimes entirely hidden under snow.
It will happen. The reason is financial. Imagine the money you can make by having a fully autonomous fleet of trucks, taxis etc around the world.
Correct. The first mover will win. If regulators say 'no', then the prize goes to the first moving jurisdiction. If the US says 'no' then it risks giving a huge advantage to China or Japan.
Just picture a world where everyone fetches water with buckets. Word gets around about piped water. One jurisdiction says "oh no, that will put our water carriers out of a job". Another says "yes", installs piping and promptly wins 2-3 hours per citizen per day. The winner suddenly has millions of man-hours of labour ready for anything else... manufacturing, education, healthcare, etc.
@One Efficiency leads to financial savings. No one will invest this amount of money for safety.
@One I didn't say I did. I said the companies that are investing billions into this technology are thinking about profits. This is privately funded not publicly.
For real. Who wants to do such bad Jobs, it is hard to get thru this time, but once we are there, everyone is going to love it. I see me telling my Kids and grandkids later About how life was when I drove a car and how awful it was. @@CarFreeSegnitz
They know they are going to make a lot of Money, otherwise they wouldn´t do it@@VSS1
'How catastophic it would be with a truck.' In the way it happens all the time all over the place?
This show doesn't get enough attention. I really find it enjoyable, good work.
It's interesting that only a few examples of companies developing this technology were referenced, and Tesla (I believe the company with the highest number of autonomous miles driven to date) not referenced at all. I really like the 20(ish) minute videos you guys produce, but I think that this would have been a great opportunity to make a multiple part series of videos showing more opinions expressed, and more companies in the mix trying to get this tech off the ground. Thanks for another great video!
I can't get excited about Tesla autopilot anymore, the slow progress over the last few years makes me think it'll probably be another decade before they reach full autonomy. Companies like Waymo and Zoox have shown far more progress than Tesla, although they only plan to be level 4 not 5 like Tesla.
The BBC clearly has an anti Tesla agenda, or are terribly stupid for not even mentionning Autopilot and Tesla themselves.
Mr. Musk is intentionally laying low in regard to autonomous driving. He is focusing on the human brain ... When he is finished, the human mind will be controlled anyways. The cars are gonna be a piece of cake. This kinda shit is just to keep everyone content in the matter.
"people are mad at the vehicle driving the speed limit and following the law" that's the real reason they didn't choose California, everyone drives 15 over the speed limit and don't give a F$#%
Why fight? Why complain? We are at the point of human ability to, and no doubt will, create anything we ever imagined from now on. It is the reality we have created. Some movies are documentaries of our future.
See.
Hear.
Soon, taste and feel.
You already know this.
climate change
The BBC is telling only part of the story in respect of so called self driving vehicles. That was almost a paid for commercial for WAYMO/UBER.
The program is ignoring the part being played by Tesla and other EV Auto makers striving to bring Autonomous vehicles to market. No mention was made of Electric Vehicles - all the vehicles shown were ICE vehicles.
The BBC is losing the respect it once had for bringing balanced programs.
I Drive a semi truck for a living. If I lose my job to a self driving truck, it's totally worth it. This is awesome.
Are you serious?
such a curve ball LOL
To everyone wondering why Tesla wasn't featured in this video. *No publicly available Tesla has level 5 autonomy.* I don't understand how people don't get that. The Tesla "AutoPilot" feature is *not* level 5 autonomy.
Nor are the other companies 'Level 5' as they require a safety driver. You should watch the 'Autonomy Investor Day' presentation. Tesla is years ahead and their 'actual' millions of miles driven on autopilot are used to train their AI. As Musk said, "self driving is easy, it's the edge cases that are years away". Check it out, it's really illuminating.
I am all for auto-vehicles. Drivers are getting costlier by day plus UBER/OLA aren't cheap anymore.
Cars don't need to feed there family.
By the time semi trucks are autonomously self driving without a human, that old guy will be long dead. It's not as soon as most truckers think. Trains are still manned. Trucks will be too for liability and safety reasons for a long time. Yes they might be self driving, but there will be a human in the truck as well. There's this giant fear by truckers that they're going to lose their job here soon and that's not the case.
You're right the old guy will be long gone.
www.carscoops.com/2019/06/bmw-shows-off-7-series-prototype-with-a-level-4-autonomous-driving-system/
BMW and Mercedes both say they'll have level 4 autonomous driving cars for sale by 2024, and Tesla, even sooner. I believe this will mean that driving positions will begin phasing out by 2025. Since Big Trucks spend the vast majority of time on open highways, they'll be able to do without level 5 systems before ditching drivers.
It's just as well, seeing all of the distracted drivers (of all ages) on the road staring at their phones. This is going to happen, so we might as well get into it, before other nations do it first. We didn't wait for the Soviets to get to the moon after they beat us to space, so why wait for Germany, China, Japan or Korea to beat everyone to full autonomy? You have to push forward with technology to stay on top, and we've been slipping over the recent decades.
Then there's the "But muh Job!" argument, which is valid. If you look at the actual spectrum upon which AI and Autonomy can operate at, you'll see that online retail has already started to kill off millions of sales jobs. They already killed off stock trading. Warehouses are already partially automated (with more incoming). McDonald's and Pizza Hut already have the tech to replace most of their employees. Lawyers and some Doctors jobs (understanding how drugs work together and reading images/charts) can be replaced with tech we already have. If you're stuck in a 20th century frame of mind, it's easy to get scared, but if we don't push for change, someone else will do it anyway, and we'll have more strife and trouble when it does reach us.
I understand that no one wants to live off of a welfare state (or most anyway), but we won't be able to "create more jobs" to offset all of the displaced ones. The only person running for office I've seen address this is Andrew Yang ( #Yang2020 ), whom had come to the same conclusions I had, before hearing about him. A UBI (Freedom Dividend), funded by the tech giants that don't employ tons of people and get around taxes already is the best starting place for taking care of people affected. It'd allow more people to work part time, allowing the jobs left to be split up, and supporting a grassroots economy instead of piss on economics, which supports aristocracy. His policies (over 100 of them) are very much pro small business, and help the poor, which would help 90% of the population. Sorry for getting political, but it's just too relevant to the discussion at hand, as no one else (Repub or Dem) is even addressing the issue seriously...
No mention of Tesla, and the difference in opinion between those running a few hundred LIDAR-centric vehicles, on mapped streets, and those with a fleet of almost half a million cars on the road, feeding info & data to the hive mind, 24x7. The massive earthmovers are great, but there are even BEV versions now, that are scaling mountains, empty, and charging the batteries on the downward trip, fully laden. The negligence displayed by that “safety” driver, combined with the engineering decision to disconnect/disable the safety system, were human failures, and should not cast a shadow on the self driving technology (however crippled it is, by its reliance on LIDAR). Incomplete, BBC.
The BBC clearly lack journalistic integrity. General purpose A.I. is the only viable solution to level 5 autonomy and Tesla is light years away in that regard.
When you do a 25 minutes segment on self driving, in 2019, and you don't even mention Tesla or Autopilot, you clearly have an anti Tesla agenda.
Not sure how you can do a 25 minute piece on autonomous driving without even mentioning Tesla...arguably further ahead in this area than anyone else. Notice how all the experts agree that the most important enabler for self driving is the "training" and data? Tesla is the only company in the world with a fleet hundreds of thousands strong collecting this data
The BBC must have an incentive to avoid even mentionning Tesla or Autopilot by name. Very much biased journalism.
"if you're still using ladar for self driving autos... You're doomed.... Doomed!". - Elon Musk
The ones that attack the vehicles are extremely emotional people that feel threatened by intelligent people and their achievements. This type of Technophobia is often fed by age-driven Neophobia, in which a person considers anything that was invented after they are 20-years of age as evil on three basis: 1- they don't understand it, 2- they have a difficult time learning to use it and 3- It simply did not exist when they were learning to cope with the world. Funny thing is, they are perfectly comfortable with existing technologies that might have caused the same effect when they were invented, such as guns or bicycles.
Or they are teenagers seeing how they can mess with autonomous vehicles, they are like a bored teenage dream.
Although the fatal Uber accident showed serious flaws with Uber self-driving I have never once seen a video criticizing the woman for crossing and not checking the road was clear. You can see she is not even looking in the direction of the car.
Also, like at the time of the accident you can see a 'No Crossing" sign behind the commentator. The fact that the commentator did not bring up these facts is because they are inconvenient to his argument that Uber was 100% to blame. Personally, I give 80% of the blame to the woman crossing for not checking the road was clear.
Didn't expect a futuristic tech program such as BBC click to be such cynical about a future tech. The Tech is already here and it has a long way to go and yet, it's already orders of magnitude safer than people driven vehicle. The total number of accidents run in single digits and people cause accidents in thousands every single day. About the job loss, with every new tech the existing job will be replaced with a more comfortable job. That's what happened when agriculture adopted technology, that's what happened when industrial revolution happened. We don't have jobs anymore, where people used to gaslight the street lamps or knock on windows of houses to wake up people. But, we have jobs like astronauts, youtubers, AI programmer now. With advent of tech, more jobs are created, albeit with more comfort, less physical effort. Move your primitive urge of resisting the change and doubting anything new aside. That's expected from an oldtimer truck driver, not you BBC Click.
A self driving car, I saw one back in 2014 that was being driven by a human and it was taking note of the streets and road ahead, but now we are in 2019, many people have died from a car, and their lives could of still been living if the technology was there to stop the car from collision.
Now speaking about the UBAR car accident, yes the car should of saw the woman at a earlier time and the car should of had the number of cameras a truck does, just in case one of its cameras is unable to view its destination.
Plus these self driving trucks don't smoke and get loads of hay on fire. As I've seen twice in Maricopa.
Look forward to it. 👍
In Chile, one of the biggest mining companies Codelco have 25 heavy truck this model, self driving running on test for one year total, right now they completed almost 6 months. All this trucks are parts of Komatsu technologies, who try to get millenary contract for replacement and maintenance. Until now the company Codelco is happy but the 75 drivers or 75 families they are not. Anyway, in South America we close the eyes a minute and follow again because agains the progress nothing to do
Why no talk about Tesla? 😡😡😡
Because they have an incentive to do so. Either that, or they are complete idiots. One thing for sure, objectivity and journalistic integrity is not part of the BCC best business practices.
At the start you say 'find out what happens when the tech goes wrong' then show a clip from the famous Uber accident. It must be noted that that was NOT a case of the tech going wrong. That was a case of Uber putting a car on the road that was NOT capable of safe self driving (and they knew it) and either failed to communicate that fact to the person supposed to be monitoring the system, or that person failed to do their job. Either way, the tech in question was not designed to stop for pedestrians crossing the road, and didn't. It is more a case of money being more important than safety considerations. Hopefully the resulting bad press has made Uber realize that safety and money can go hand in hand.
lon Musk said LIDAR is not needed for autonomous driving.
It can still be useful :D
He's right, it's really stupid to use Lidar since it's unnecessary, big and expensive. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean people won't use it in driver less cars, it just means that they are going the other tech path (like in civilization games etc.)
Cameras are way cheaper, no moving parts. Lidar or cameras, the real magic is in the computer's unwavering attention and lightning reflexes.
Does anyone know if Lidar will interfere with other Lidar and confuse signals? Certainly can't say that of cameras.
Nothing can beat general A.I. + vast database. Only cameras and basic radar are required, when you have the right software on the back end. The system truly learn to drive on its own, in any conditions and improve over time.
Listening to old people is a waste of time to be honest, and drivers, in the long run, are going to lose their jobs.
Just think for a second what a waste of human talent, intelligence and all other things it is to be sitting, living and driving the trucks.
Well if the guy who said " what am I supposed to do " is any indication, not losing much. I am 55 so I resent that comment. Less than 5 years for autonomous with no safety driver and millions of them on the road. Bloomberg, who has just the worst record in predicting things, said Nokia had absolutely nothing to worry about from the Iphone. They say 30% electric by 2040 and same for autonomous, the're nuts. They don't get that once one trucking company has them they all have to or you can't compete. Same with taxis etc . It will be adopted like lightning.
If you are younger than 58 and are driving a truck you will not make it to 65. So start planning.
And accidents. ~95% of accidents are down to human error. Deaths, injuries, property damage.
perhaps that is their choice, or was
@EmpireFall that's where universtal income comes in
In the 1980s we had 4 wheel steering cars (i.e. Honda) that tech could be added plus better AI and cars would be more agile.
I’d rather go into a self driving car, than one in which the driver were texting, reading their social media messages and notifications and trying to use google maps. My Uber driver the other day bumped into the rear of the car in front of him because his eyes were down on his google maps trying to fiddle with the thing. Self driving cars shouldn’t try and replace people obviously, but complement them. It’s a balance.
Had the uber watcher, been watching the road (Her Job) she could have avoided the accident.
Yes this technology is a good idea, as for the lorry drivers, they will still be required with different skill's, as-in: mechanical knowledge as well as some computer knowledge (maintenance).
What I personally would like to see is a system that needs fitting to every vehicle NOW , A sensor that checks the distance of the vehicle ahead of you on the road ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, with the ability to SLOW you down if you get to close. Tailgated Kill's. It also distracts the driver being tailgated.
Know why everyone keeps going on and on about that one pedestrian fatality in that level of self driving vehicle? It's because it's the only one so far. As time goes on, bugs are squashed and the programs get better and better, it grows less and less likely we'll see another fatality any time soon. And if we do, the problems will be fixed again, and the next fatality will be further off. In roughly ten years time we'll see human drivers replaced by vehicles that rarely are the cause of a fatality.
People will complain, but we're paying money and blood for the ability to drive ground rockets, it's not fair to the victims if we don't at least try to make things safer.
@@DeusExRequiem This is the first I had heard of the accident ,and the clip showed she was not monitoring the vehicle , simply stating had she been watching the road as she was supposed to , it may not have happened. Yes I agree with you there may never be another (hope that is true).But it proves that the humans attention span wonders.
The cars will not, after it has learned.
What happens in major power outage and suddenly traffic lights goes off?
Bro at 20:57 - 21:07 knows what's up for sure
Tesla is level 2 semi autonomous along with its competitors. However the amount of miles tesla has is far more than these companies. Tesla OTA updates slowly upgrading it to level 5 over the next few years to pre-existing cars is in my opinion the most important transition to self driving. BBC should have mentioned Teslas mission to update slowly to full level 5 self driving.
You can have ten trillion miles of data, but if it's just a potatovision camera with some substandard radar added it is worth very little. Quantity alone is not enough. I like Tesla's progress, but I think it is wise to recognize a Waymo today can drive itself vastly better than any autopilot Tesla. Tesla/ Musk are known to overpromise on timeline. Besides that, it it is definitely not the only car company pursuing self-driving. Reading from the youtube comments, the one thing Tesla is very good in it seems is letting everyone at least think they are at the forefront...
I contend that if you give many drivers the slightest idea that they don't have to pay attention, they won't. And if you take the responsibility for driving away from people and put it on the car, now the liability is shifted to the deep pockets of the car manufacturer and lawyers are going to go nuts after an accident. I just can't believe that given the myriad of difficult driving situations, this technology will ever make it to general public transportation.
it can certainly do trucks in long distance , mining etc while everyday work for people may not happen soon .
We waste too much effort on moving things or people here and there. It's time to release human from driving.
jan simonides Ha you’re just commenting peoples comments who are pro-self driving cars. You’re not even adding anything to the conversation you’re just insulting and releasing your hate of self driving cars. They’re the future and nobody can’t stop it. Its inevitable.
I'm willing to bet all the companies explicitly said you couldnt reference "Tesla" which is why you didnt...
will the uber crash make us have to sign a TOS every trip we take
In the Galaxy?! 1:45 How sure are you?
Biased reporting. Why the F~?k was Tesla not been mentioned. Tesla is way ahead of the game with millions of miles of data and probably 10x the range of the next best without intervention. I see a sinister intention to paint a bad picture for autonomous vehicles.The Uber accident was shameful. Three LIDARs and cameras. No excuse for not seeing well ahead. The camera quality was also very poor,. clearly bad low light performance and to not enable automatic breaking is shocking. The system should have reduced speed as soon as it saw an object in the way regardless of classification.
Tesla general purpose A.I. Is putting every other self driving system to shame. To not even mention Tesla or Autopilot in that context is clear bias.
All the commenters mentioning Tesla, yeah that system failed too.
You will still need someone on board trucks. Security of cargo, responsibility of cargo, delivery unloading communication and signatures,, cleaning dead bugs off of the self driving cameras.
unlicensed autopilot is in the aircraft for years, are we going to sit in a pilot-less plane?
:/ Planes are more complicated than cars.
And your asking the wrong question.
When a car can drive from a to z why use a driver?
its different when your carrying hundreds of passengers. but replacing a trucker does not add any risk, it just reduced the risk of that trucker being injured in a potential accident.. but i do not think that truckers will be replaced in the near future because there needs to be a human to do repairs on the trucks when something goes wrong. the truck cant fix itself.
@@oregonobservations Very few truckers repair their own trucks. Most all repairs are done by support services.
Should we pass a law to held those people who damage self driving vehicle, which is a property of someone or company, accountable?
Why is a newspaper reporter showing such a strong opinion against self driving cars? Aren't they supposed to just report facts? Love this show. You could have made a better choice than to interview him, unless you share his opinion. How about the fact that she was crossing the street in the middle of the block, there's no crosswalk, it was dark, and this always gets me; who crosses the street without looking at the cars coming at you? IMHO she kind of walked in front of that car. I suppose it could have avoided her but I wonder if I would have. Can't say definitively cuz I wasn't there. Just saying it seems the person crossing the street had the greater chance to avoid the car.
Hyperloop everywhere from city to city and also within cities will solve our surface transportation problems.
Actually, autonomous road-vehicles are old-hat. Ever since the arrival of the first movies we’ve been accustomed to seeing vehicles magically driving themselves while their human so-called “drivers” have their faces pointing towards their front-seat passengers for several seconds at a time.
Our future is the technology, the opposition will be always old people living and attached to their sad past
Again Yuval Noah Harari right many years before it happened, so incredible prediction abut not only the job losses but about the phylosophycal implications of this technology
It looked to me like that person deliberately walked right in front
that car
24:24 posted 24 min ago, nice
I'm glad the advocate _for_ this technology acknowledged how unforeseeable the problems of perfecting it will be. I personally am certain that self driving cars will never dominate the roads. On the contrary, it is impossible to avoid accidents with this tech. people will die in terribly tragic ways and the community will not allow it to continue. It won't matter that _fewer_ people come to grief in these vehicles than in human controlled ones.
Let me tell you what it's like to be governed. Do you know what a governor is ? We have one on a lawn. It's to keep things from over-revving. In other words just put governors on cars. So they only go so fast. Slow the Fuck Down
In ten years time we're gonna start seeing ads for cars akin to ads for MADD. Since numbers aren't impactful enough, lets use equivalent numbers, there's one world trade center death count worth of fatal accidents in the US every month. As in, in every fatal accident at least one person dies, the death count is probably higher.
Would you have humans manage all the systems in a nuclear power plant, no automation? At one point that's how things were done. With the NRX reactor disaster at chalk river, a human forgot to hang up the phone when trying to fix a problem.
Humans make mistakes, and the more steps that have a human involved, the more mistakes are made. We're rapidly exiting the era of dumb machines that can't make decisions, and once we do, humans will simply be more error prone, cost more, etc. The main use for a human is knowing a broad field of subjects, machines specializing in one thing.
People might feel self driving cars are less safe at first. It took thirteen years to go from first cars on the road to only one horse in historic photos so I would expect as much. Technology solves problems, and this time the problem is cost and safety.
@@DeusExRequiem People too easily imagine that they are on one side of a binary issue without realizing that the issue is not as clear cut as they believe. I am not a Luddite and I am as excited about technological possibilities as anyone can be. There is no such thing as artificial intelligence or else there is and you have defined it differently than me. I personally know and understand the meanings of the words 'possible' and impossible'. The word 'possible' is applicable to certain propositions and 'impossible' to others. There are practical, physical and logical reasons why space travel cannot exceed light speed and why self driving cars cannot succeed as modes of transport on the same roads as manually driven cars. No machine will ever be conscious and absent consciousness the unforeseen will be unprepared for and the anticipated will be wrongly interpreted. Faith is a glorious thing to bask in but reality is discernible and it is really the case that self driving cars will cause tragic deaths that will have been easily avoided by a human driver. Those deaths will motivate the people to outlaw self driving cars.
Will WE let it happen? As if WE will get a say in it, just like 5g.
Truck drivers might be among the next buggy whip makers.
I wonder how many buckboard drivers learned to drive horseless
carriages, (trucks), at the turn of the 20th century.
Just take a minute to think - 1 million people are KILLED on our roads in this world EVERY year! - I personally know 2 people who have died and another who is paralyzed because of it, you? That doesn't even go into the people it has affected! There will still be deaths and injury in an autonomous future but a LOT less, and that's the point, even 1% better is worth it. I know it's going to take time, there will be problems to start but it will get better and focusing on the negatives like this film does, doesn't help. Once autonomous vehicles, become the norm you won't know how you lived without it and the benefits it will do for the elderly and disabled are going to be amazing. One other benefit is its a way of reducing our carbon footprint as we will need fewer vehicles! - most cars are only used 10% of the day and sat in car parks or at home, it's such a waste - imagine just calling up a car/van/Suv just when you need that type of vehicle, using rideshare, all being electric - the benefits are going to be huge with more land for housing, less road infostructure, the cost savings are going to be massive - I see a bright future once we get there, just give it time!
I can't wait for self driving cars on motorways. My daily commute involves traveling 60 miles a day on them. All I can see is plus points with stopping humans driving on motorways. During busy times journeys would be quicker, use less fuel, be considerably safer and I'd be less tired and stressed when I got home. The standard of average human driving is just about good enough to stop us crashing and killing each other. However there's a fairly high number of people (maybe 1 in 10) who drive aggressively. I see this almost everyday there's no need for it and taking the human out of the loop would be better for everyone in the long run.
Was the biker jaywalking, and not at a crossroads walk.
I would love to have one since am legally blind
They were jaywalking.
You can even see a sign behind the commentator while he is blaming Uber. The sign indicates "No Crossing" and it was there at the time of the accident. The biker was not paying attention
Waymo what a rip ... expected Tesla
Yeah its waymo promo show. Tesla is far more advanced in the beta version.
Literally nothing can come even remotely close to Autopilot, and not even a mention of this technology, or Tesla. Either entirely biased against Tesla, or completely stupid.
@@UTUBESUCK666 I would say its mostly ignorance in case of Click. They usually go after mainstream content, and dont really research the topic to deep. Once tesla will go full FSD then we can expect proper content about this.
Do Ai Cars Cause a runaway when the system malfunctioning?
nice
Your truck job days are numbered #yanggang2020
If you find yourself in Chandler, AZ, don't cross the street unless you have terminal cancer.
1989 4WD Honda Prelude
China is treating autonomous driving as an exciting advance in Technology not a threat to their "manhood" that will be resolved in Arizona by the US obsession with personal weapons.
Well said!
Imagine self driving trollies, they can return themselves to the store after you used them, be cool
There are delivery robots, with similar capacity to a shopping trolley, being tested in the community. If they prove to be successful, you may well find various super markets deploying them.
It a;; comes down to the data. When it is statistically safer to go around in a self driving vehicle compared to the average driver, then you will see widespread adoption. And as self driving vehicles supply masses of data on all sorts of metrics about driving, this adoption may happen soon than people think.
I’m pro self driving
jan simonides Ha you’re just commenting peoples comments who are pro-self driving cars. You’re not even adding anything to the conversation you’re just insulting and releasing your hate of self driving cars. They’re the future and nobody can’t stop it. Its inevitable.
#Yang2020
watch the boomers get mad about not driving xd
Boomers logic I just like to drive while using the phone and in my time belts where optional
They will be glad when the laws are changed and they are all declared not fit to drive.
Some of the highest interest in EVs comes from people in their 60s and 70s, contrary to what your ageism might be telling you.
I support Self Driving cars all the way. Fuck everyone who is against it. Change is good. It will release the pressure of people having to rely on a car to just go places. People will save money by not needing to buy a car. Cant wait for Uber to release their Self driving Transportation here in Dallas
Tesla?
Exactly. How the BBC could go for 25 minutes, on a self driving segment, in 2019, without even mentionning Tesla or Autopilot? And those morons thought no one would notice???
That nut with a gun? That was just a nut with a gun.
'No one wants to eliminate a job…" bwaahhhhahahahah
Chandler is a town?? Could it "be anymore wrong?"
Historically humans are hysterical.
All of this talk about convenience & how wonderful the self-driving car is & not one word about the health effects of this wireless technology....a known carcinogen & yet not mention of that!!!!
ikr
Unfortunately the town crier was upset when the newspaper came and the newspaper people were upset when the radio came and the radio people were upset when the TV came and the port person with television was upset when cable came and that industry was upset when the internet came there's room out there for everybody they need people to fix those cars in those are going to be new jobs coming up in the technology area and they will come up by the time this generation passes on
24 minutes and not a mention of tesla.what is wrong with you bbc
yang2020
THERE ARE NO MINES IN CAPE TOWN
Did they forgot about TESLA ???
tommy aronson LoL you have no idea about Tesla’s tech. It has better self driving tech then some of the tech shown here. If you can’t google it your self I will be more than happy to send you some videos.
tommy aronson for starters check this out. ruclips.net/video/tlThdr3O5Qo/видео.html
After watching this video I realized how far ahead Tesla is, it’s not even close. And that’s from a guy who works 40 hours Tesla , 40 hours SpaceX, still have enough time for boring, neuralink etc.
How the BBC could avoid even mentionning Tesla or Autopilot by name, for a self driving segment, unless they have an anti Tesla agenda?
AV-uddites - will the humans respond? Instead of road rage, there will be av-rage. BTW, I am irritated when I have to check a box stating "I am not a robot" to use a web site. I would rather check a box, "I am a human"
I thought this was a good video on AV safety. It talked about AVs being attached by humans. As automation displaces workers, there will be frustration, Luddites attacked textile machinery as a form of protest of losing their jobs. Will AV-uddites do the same in the 21st century?
Uber Lyft's absolute first priority is eliminate all drivers in any cost.
Tesla is closer to comprehensive autonomous vehicle technology in the widest case use - across the world, rather than one small town in Arizona.
They have more than 500,000 vehicles on the roads today, feeding back information to the AI system constantly learning from the billions of miles driven by these cars.
Updates to the onboard software are made to the entire fleet as the system learns from every choice human drivers make (in shadow mode.)
Tesla is making exponential progress on the problem, and claim that the technical challenges will be solved by the end of 2019 (EM time = 2020 in Earth time ;-)
Then the next barrier will be regulatory approval, and despite the highly publicised accidents, Tesla's autopilot is already 4x safer than human drivers.
I predict China will adopt AVs before other countries and in 100 years, historians will look back at this time and identify it as the fulcrum point when China overtakes the USA as the world leader in technology.
The BBC clearly can't be trusted to provide unbiased information. General purpose A.I. is the key to level 5 autonomy and Tesla is alone on top. To not even mention Tesla or Autopilot in that context is journalistic malpractice.
I like Click - but seriously, TESLA?!????
Why does someone slash the tires the answer Jobs
....Tesla?
Tesla is a threat to BBC's friends and pays no adds to their network. Journalistic integrity is optional at the BBC as they didn't even mention Tesla or Autopilot by name!, despite Tesla being light years ahead of anything else on the market.
Machines makes mistakes but humans also makes mistakes a lot of times. So all in all, humans and machines are imperfect. Accept that fact. But that aside, the only thing that governments around the world are pushing for autonomous vehicles is because criminals can't use a get-away car. When all autonomous vehicles are used on the streets, no one can get away from a police car. They can shut down your autonomous vehicle from the 5G network with a few touches on a remote computer keyboard somewhere around the world. That's why people fear there is no chance of a revolution if there comes a time that needs one. Although they are very cool technologies, but 5G networks and autonomous vehicles are just the first steps to make the entire Earth a prison of the human race. Who or what species really planned for this imprisonment of the human race on the entire planet? Was David Icke right all along?
Ooops! They only forgot to mention the #1 leading brand : TESLA
@jan simonides hummm buddy, I own one, and the autopilote is simply amazing! It drove itself 99% of my trip from Quebec to Miami.
And these aren't mapped streets like Uber and Google's cars. So please, talk only when needed Jan. K thanks bye
This is coming, unavoidable, also really fucking cool WHO THE FUCK IS AGAINST these things: ROBOTS/TECH/FUTURE COOL MAGIC STUFF) like AI, LASERS, MOON BASE, MARS CITY, SUPER HUGE ROCKETS, FUSION CORES, FUSION GOGITO/VEGITO etc. The future is gonna be fucking AWESOME GUYS GET HYYYYPED!
Wtf. the nutter pulled a gun out in disgust of a automated car?
lmao at the idea of people being "empowered and mobilized" by autonomous driving. It's about "mobility of people, the aged, the young, the ill". Never mind any of the above can already hail a taxi and/or uber with a human driver 24/7/365 for a very reasonable price and high degree of safety. What exactly are you offering them again? Bring AI into the loop and almost nothing changes except the employment opportunity for the driver that exists for this use case is generated elsewhere (IT and support centres based wherever). Some of these glistening eye weasels are selling communities and leaders a feel good fantasy for a living
Lower price -> more accessible. Not a hard concept to understand.
I'm sorry I'm still not understanding this concept Joseph please explain
"Safety driver"
What could happen if the WHOLE SYSTEM get hacked???. How can you stop it??? and what about the unemployment rate??? Do we really need this technology????
You can already hack all new cars and take over control.
How do you stop someone who has sneezed, passed out, having a seizure???? Do we really need humans??? Of course, we need this technology it's much more reliable than humans.
before getting hacked system has to improve so that it can drive auto LOL
#yanggang2020 educate yourself