Really impressive. I am curious how those cars will handle things like pot holes, snowy roads, heavy rain, etc. More companies and also governments need to collaborate to bring driverless cars to our roads.
Taxi drivers will riot, can't wait :D it will be so much fun to watch them try to stop an inevitable change with barbaric methods such as violent protests.
Mnakekeli Ngcamphalala Taxi drivers in my city, Lisbon, are crazy. They try to fight every new law that comes. They even made the government ban "Uber" from the city.Their reaction to SDCs will be very, very fun to watch. :D The sooner the better. The guy said 4.5 years. I hope so.
What it shows are people who are awakened and aware of their rights as living sentient human beings, unlike braindead, brainwashed drones like you who will agree to anything that they're told to.
I had no idea that it was already this advanced. I am extremely impressed by what they've already accomplished, and am quite a bit more comfortable with the idea of letting a computer do the boring bits for me.
+TheMohawkNinja I'm sure it could be even farther along but the companies are terrified of causing the first crash and the public outcry that would cause. Humans are terrible at judging danger. Almost no one is scared of being a passenger in a car but plenty are scared to fly yet you run a much greater risk of dying in a car then a plane. If we were logical we would let these cars on the road and be happy with the number of deaths they prevent when compared to the tiny amount of deaths they cause.
+bensemus x true true. But I think google cars (right now) might have a very defensive driving style (probably to an extend that it's impractical) just to avoid accidents and thereby public outcry at all costs
Leo1239150 So my comment is about 6 months old and no offence but I don't see what your comment adds to mine... What you said "just to avoid accidents and thereby public outcry at all costs". What I said 6 months ago "companies are terrified of causing the first crash and the public outcry that would cause". I even go on to explain why humans are having a hard time accepting self driving cars.
In a situation like 13:17, a human driver would send warnings by honking his horn so that others don't run over the cyclists. I practically saved the life of a family in that manner. Shouldn't the google car implement this sort of communication as well? I mean, we're expecting a gradual take-over of self-driving cars, so they should have the capability to warn human drivers of impending danger.
Michaël De Bruyne I highly doubt the conservative or traditional thinking people will let us take away their sense of control over their car even though it's safer. For a time at least, there will probably be both types of vehicles on the road, so I think this is a much needed feature
i am just back from my 2 driving lesson. i would be soooo happy if a self driving car was already futher devolped and payable :p i am happy that i live in a country where they are alreday chanche laws for it :)
+Max Loh The lights where green, most cars still stopped; if someone honked, I would not take that as a warning for danger, I would take it as someone being in a hurry and annoyed I havent yet moved forward. So I dont think that would have been very helpful.
excellent presentation and helps allay some of the fears that people have of "a dumb, blind computer", as we can see the reality is that the technology is now so advanced it can make superior decisions over humans in almost all cases, and not only in realtime but also predictive. In ~100 of whatever (much less i guess) years people will look back "remember back when everyone drove cars and there were so many crashes and trafficjams!? so crazy!"
Civil Engineer professor told me 25 yrs ago of this concept would take place in the future which is NOW. There are cpt robots in warehouses that follow a metal line in the floor, drop the product and go get another. They also detect obstructions and stop and go when cleared but there are crashes when a human is driving a forklift. Good technology.
The biggest advantage will come when the majority of vehicles are self driving. They will be able to communicate with each other and all drive at the same speed, which should be the highest practicle speed for any given road condition or geometry. They will be able to co-ordinate junctions so that they will never need to stop at a cross road or traffic light - they will just thread seamlessly between each other. Should be a big improvement.
Could you imagine getting into your own short length bus sitting/ lying down to finish a late night sleepless night or maybe making coffee and breakfast as the bus drives itself on your commute.Those long commutes would fly by if you finished off sleeping on the way to work. The bus alerts you at your destination to wake you up.
Fun tech talk. What about insurance, regulation, standards, costs, etc.? Of the 37,133 people killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2017, 47% were not wearing seat belts. In 2017 alone, seat belts saved an estimated 14,955 lives and could have saved an additional 2,549 people if they had been wearing seat belts. NHTSA Buckle up for safety.
Bass Player I disagree, it's still quite legal to ride a bicycle, ride a horse, drive a farm vehicle on the road - recreational driving won't be banned. The licensing however may change.
They may cost more lives....& one could ask who gains most from these autonomous vehicles...is it the manufacturers including the technology & computer companies etc..because it dosn't seem like its your average person who will not be able to afford these very expensive vehicles...well beyond the reach of the average?
How would they cost more lives? Also, they may be expensive at first, but over time they'll be just as expensive as regular cars are now. And it will probably be a normal thing to have a self-driving car.
regarding 2:00 - time spent commuting to work is not really time wasted. That is a good time to be by yourself, reflect upon the life, listen to podcasts, music or talk with other passangers.
At 7:20, the driver will make a visual contact with the pedestrian to make sure that he saw him. The pedestrian can even wave to the driver to show him to pass, An autonomous car will never understand that.
Why does a pedestrian have to make eye-contact with a driverless car with the proper sensors and a program that tracks everything in its vicinity and doesn't get distracted? And if needed a simple signal to indicate that it is stopped, about to move, etc. could be added. Why does an autonomous car need to understand a wave? It just needs to obey traffic laws and possible safety threats.
@@limen7679 Pedestrians do that all the time, especially in parking lots or at stop signs. Traffic laws dont include all the little details of real life driving. If we both get at the stop sign at the same time, who has priority ? If I want to get in your parking space, maybe I will wait for you to get out and wave even if you have priority.
@@serlegar Depends on the law and the traffic markings, signs, signals, etc. Dragon teeth and continuous sidewalks can be used to explicitly indicate who has the right of way at intersections. As far as the parking spot just stop far enough away to let the other vehicle exit and put your turn signal on. And maybe you would change parking lot spaces closer to an entrance to go to conventional cars and farther spots to AVs because they can drop-off and pick-up passengers before and after parking.
Imagine, eventually traffic lights could disappear, along with speed limits and parking spots. Just these cars, with the ability to communicate with one another. Easy
Why are you making it out to be like we're going to forget about anyone who isn't on a car. The people developing this software have in mind a woman on a wheelchair chasing a duck on the middle of the street for fuck's sake. I don't think these cars will ever be allowed to go at very high speeds wherever there's a possibility of a cyclists/people suddenly getting in the way. On these streets, the flow of the traffic would only be improved from what it is now without further risking the lives of pedestrians. As showed in the video. But on highways, where the roads are designed for high speed vehicular traffic, I can surely see this "cars hurtling around at high speeds, in close proximity to each other, communicating with each other". Again, improving on what is already there. With the use of technology.
Michael Stubbs I don’t care about my smartphone manufacturer. Switched from an s7 to an iPhone X and I’m now looking forward to the Samsung s10. If I like the product, I’ll buy it. Don’t really care who made it. There was a woman on a wheelchair chasing a duck on the middle of the street shown in the video itself as an example of how careful these people are being with the software for these cars. These companies only care about selling. You’re right. Therefore, they must care about the quality and safety of their products. If these cars fail to improve on our current traffic system as a whole, they won’t sell. Yielding to pedestrians wouldn’t all of a sudden be thrown out the window because of driverless cars. Space would still be there in between cars to allow for mechanical failure. I don’t understand why you insist on this bumper to bumper non sense. Hacking is definitely an issue.
Michael Stubbs Dear Mr. Stubbs. I don't agree with most of your stuff, cause we (the people, the society) decide in with way we want to have the new technology. But that means also, we have to decide! From rise of mankind on we are on a very long way from the past to the future. And don't forget! The future starts now. Just in this second. I know what you mean by saying: Don't trust them, they don't really care about us. And you're right, there must be external control. Too often we have seen, that maximize the profit is the only principle. It is a question of responsibility. Where I totally agree is you point about hackability. Everything that is digital is hackable. It's a question of capacity and crypt technology. So, there must! be an emergency button to stop any unfriendly action if, maybe NSA or your personal enemy want to overtake your car( your house etc.) Don't trust AI. 😄
pretty interesting how this car would react on puddles, especially the ones that cover potholes. Or on slippery road? Also come to think of it...just a trifle...but steering wheel is no longer required as well as pedals and etc. So an additional passenger could get in (!). And interior redesigning would be required then. By the way even mirrors wouldn't be necessary :D Hmm...what about trucks, international transportations? drivers would be required only for looking after loading/unloading and documents? And more than that, 'drivers' would be finally able to sleep when 'driving' :D Anyway, it's a really thrilling topic! Looks like utopia, but sounds really outstanding!
Pros of self-driving cars: -Optimized driving style allowing for higher MPG, more efficient energy usage, less pollution -Less accidents and increased safety as technology becomes more accurate and precise -Lower insurance cost as accident rates decline -No more road rage or driving drama -24/7 Personal DD for all the drunkards out there ;) -Less traffic, less stopping, and shorter travel time when technology is integrated with traffic system -Replace taxi cabs with community based self-driving cars, pay by trip -More available parking, implement the “drop off and pick up” system -Less need for traffic laws and traffic enforcement -No more DMV bullshit -Access to transportation for those unable to drive -Less use of cars as a symbol for social status as driving becomes more homogenous, displacement of insecurities onto other material objects
+greenboarder89 Hello. Did you ever think that laying down more and more asphalt and turning our landscape into a desert was ever a good idea? Mishandled charges tend to blow up in your face. I happen to be completely on board under the conditions that excess vehicles will be phased out in favor of function and necessity. Preferably as a cab service. Too many more cars will only cause more pollution and road widening. That said, we have been disregarding biology for material possessions for far too long. Nobody is born with a mobile phone in their skull or a key-chain in their gut; they need to be acquired. We are naturally equipped with (usually) functional legs to walk on. I think medical progress that enables the physically handicapped to walk would be a far greater gift to the world than to shove or coerce them into this. I always thought vehicles should be secondary, not primary. We lived without them for centuries, evidence that they aren't essential to the world. That said, if I can have a free cab, I will not squander it. Nor will I let it become a crutch.
+TheNotverysocial medical research is also done, just by other people. There have also been amazing breakthroughs every now and then. As for mankind not needing vehicles: It's true that we didn't have any for a long time but the quality of life was way inferior to ours today. To maintain said quality of life, we do need vehicles. And I'm not only talking about personal transportation here. Without ambulances for example or life expectancy would probably shrink significantly
Leo1239150 I never proposed getting rid of cars, only to cease using them like a crutch. I have little against service vehicles, but loads against addiction to driving, which has been nothing but detrimental to human health. Anyone who likes to drive should do so on a private track you need to pay a fee to use, and not endanger the public.
DaFroBroforeal Someday they'll stop making cars with manual controls, and the only way to have it will be to inherit preexisting ones, and maintain them to the hilt. Future generations won't give a damn whether they could drive or not. We're in for major changes in upcoming decades. I merely hope they will use them wisely. Because if the intent is to sell more of them as opposed to using them like a taxi, this would mean paving over even more of our over developed landscape. Maintaining an existing car is less polluting than manufacturing new ones. Let's not forget that efficiency doesn't create resources, it only makes us use them more wisely, a little going a long way. And a carbon neutral energy source doesn't change the fact that metal still needs to be smelted in order for us to use it, and that has it's own effect whether you use coal or not! To say nothing of the inherent pollution that comes with plastic, which is a given when you use electronics. Ultimately, the safest cars are automated, and have no human input, save entering the address/coordinates, or driving an old vehicle that's has no electronic components and requires you to wind it up, and use the throttle to shift. Everything that came between is more hazardous, as you become more likely to fall asleep or get distracted by tampering with radio. It's either all the input or none of it. The most common cars we have now put us at the greatest risk of a collision.
Somehow I think this car will only work in some places, like the US where the road is square-shaped and every sign, lights, street lights, and other infrastructures are good. Imagine this one in my country, where there are tons of motorcycle, lots of people not following the rule, where the traffic jam is 100 times worse than LA rush hour. I know that it has survived 3 million miles, but try this in Jakarta, Indonesia, let's see if it can survive just several hundred miles in the city without any damage to the car.
I love the idea of self driving cars, think of all the possibilities for new exterior and interior designs. If it can drive itself why not just have a vehicle with no seats and one big mattress to lay on or something. So many ideas!
Because it would give us new leases to spread our communities even further apart and isolate everyone even more. They would still take up the same amount of space in cities, and cities don't have room to spare. Car centered fixes to traffic will never work in cities.
This is great, but we shouldn't eliminate getting your drivers licence. The worlds biggest issue is it's poor education and rules on driving. If everyone was trained to drive a car like a pilot was trained to fly a plane, maybe we would see a much different world of drivers. But then of course there needs to be consistent strict rules on driving, with much more disciplinary action for bad behaviour and poor car conditions such as bald tyres. Another issue is that someone from another Country with very minimal driver education can get their international licence when in a Country not of their own, and drive around - now that poorly educated driver is in your Country with the potential to inflict harm because they lack the required training and knowledge. With World Class Leading Education on Driving, Stricter Laws and Rules with strong Disciplinary Action along with Recurring Education and Car Maintenance, then maybe "Driverless Cars" wouldn't need to eliminate bad drivers and getting your licence, but be a mere luxury...
Apjooz there is no lane driving, traffic rules are used as nice to knows instead of being followed correctly, board are not placed properly or are lacking completely.
+Vaibhav Gupta Self-Driving cars will first be a U.S. thing only. Then it will slowly expand to Western Europe, Australia, and China. India won't be getting it for a while, but not because of road infrastructure. While the lack of lanes and road signs does pose a threat, the car would still be able to easily detect incoming vehicles and pedestrians. The big issue would be politics. India's political laws discourage international companies from competing there. It's why there are zero official Apple Stores in India, and why Tesla and other luxury car brands don't directly do business in India. Also, self-driving cars would cost around $100,000 - $200,000 in its first decade of existence, thus pricing out nearly 98% of the Indian population, making selling self-driving cars there a large waste of time and money.
All we need to do really would be to put the cell phone for map viewing and it will capture images with camera and give feed back to the engine control unit by the cigarette lighter charging cable. Every car can have an auto pilot in the future
The worst thing about a TED Talk is it's always informative and it always seems It's hard even put this into words but you have to have a good brain I guess to be able to see through it so it's hard to explain exactly what's wrong a person will come on we'll talk about some new age idea or how people got to love one another or in this case driverless cars and it's always in addition to what we have already in our existence so it seems like another step up never do they ever discuss what benefits or what reasons there are four why we are the way we are now it's just that were in a progression to another level and they're going to explain to us their version of the best way to get there. Such nonsense the fact is people do drive shity but what you could see by all of the technology he was having to have his driverless cars learn was how amazing people are they taking so many factors as they are driving that there's a billion cars on the road a day and there's only a few dozen people that died even with machines they give out and they'll still be people dying again this is the stupidity of a TED Talk they actually never covered the chance that even one in a million of those cars malfunctions I'm not talking about the ones that are hacked or anything else just breaks down healthy people dying no matter who drives us. Last I benefit a lot from the skills I got having done things mechanically in my life I've seen the Next Generation have other skills but completely lose the ability to do what I could do I've seen people literally asked me how to turn an LED light on I had to tell the person 20 of course I had to tell that twenty-year-old turn it clockwise they then asked how to turn it off see a bunch of mindless people and a Planet of the Apes scenario is not necessarily going to make us smarter in other ways Silgan stupid tedtalk hopes that you are new age and won't question what are the factors there are to consider perhaps the lack of skill motor skill pardon the pun that we lose as a result of this adds to our stupid decision making and lack of skill physically in some other area who knows whether we lose two dozen a day and some other area because we no longer have the skills from driving but again this isn't all about the skills of driving it's just to make a point that they always push a TED talk as if they were bringing you to the new age improved better human level and they never really discuss why we naturally all the way we are now it's just that we haven't gotten to some other stage yet we're just in a metamorphosis as if we're never meant to be where where are at the given moment
I feel this is a problem with technology as a whole! the more advanced we get, the dumber we become. and every ted talk starts from like the 2/3 of a movie that can never present a perspective that is all enveloping. every ted talk topics seems so different to another, it might seem like its for the normal general, but really, its not meant for all
I rarely apply the breaks while on the freeway, while I see some cars spend more time on the breaks then off the breaks. Don't tailgate and look past the car in front of you and it is possible to have the need to break less.
I see these cars driving through Mountain View Calfornia every day. Another thing I wonder about is what about construction zones where there is a worker directing traffic that has a stop or slow sign and manually routes someone through the zone?
Based on the first 5 min of his talk, I think we should inspect the driver rather than replacing the driver by machine. The former is realistic and the latter is a headache problem because the autonomous car can fail in an unpredictable way.
11:36 LOL? btw, super curious to see the cam of the wheel chair chasing the duck super excited to see this take off, also curious to see how it'll be priced
what will be its reaction when it sees a pot hole. imagine on a main road their are two parallel potholes, and the car cannot go through the normal road A) Will it go down the pot hole. B) It will go on pedestrian side walk(which is illegal to drive on) C) In the event if it proceeds with A, and unfortunately gets struck in pothole, will it continue to burn fuel D) it will reverse and take another route.
I watch those algorithms at work and all I can think about is how AGI will change everything.
8 лет назад
I think you could just connect self driving cars with assisting cars in network where self driving cars could warn assisting systems of 'manual' car about danger. This way you can have both worlds at the same time. People who want to sleep, work, read etc. while going somewhere and people who want to drive.
Very promising!! i'm blind in my right eye and considerable vision loss in my left. There's light at the end of the tunnel! When i can't legally drive, it's nice to know I won't be stranded in my home
This diver-to-driverless revolution will take a long time to proceed. We not only need all the cars connected to the network and interact, but also the road monitoring systems participated. As long as the we put attention and energy into this revolution, it will happen.
It would seem like a real possibility for self-driving cars in the US, but what about in cities in undeveloped countries like Bangkok (or worse) where roads are badly built, unmarked, and many places don't follow standard rules at all? For example, what if random materials are used for road obstructions instead of traffic cones/sign? Parking lots that the slots are not clearly marked? Roads that don't have lines on the road to mark the lanes? Single lanes in old neighborhoods that use hand gestures from inside other cars to signal who will go first? Not all roads in the world are so standardized as American roads. There are many places in the world where even human drivers would have a difficult time understanding and making judgement, let alone a computer that has to be explicitly taught every single thing.
But I guess there is no technology to make that kinda traffic completely safe in a jiffy. Clear traffic rules and organization would need to come first
The real question is how are we going to deal with the lose of jobs in the economy. Transportation jobs alone are nearly around a one third of the available jobs out there right now.
the issue isnt how well it works when it is working, the issue is how well does it work when there is a computer failure or something on the automated driving system breaks? of course as long as Microsoft doesn't make the software, it might work. that being said, if it performs better than the avg driver, then it is still net benefit.
Is there anywhere we can go to see the rate (and severity) of accidents that these driverless cars have had? It'd be interesting to see the graphs of accidents per kilometers driven, as time goes on and they improve the programming. Wanna watch that progress
Self-driving cars will be very confused in the UK. Cars parking all over the road and the entire road as wild as 1 lane in the USA. I can't wait to see how it will work out
The first "fact" he stated is wrong. With 120M people driving an average of 50 min/day is still 50 min of driving everyday, not 6B minutes and not 162 lifetimes wasted on driving...
at the end he said said "driver-assisted car systems like Tesla are a dead-end because they can only improve it so much". That's a bit out of date. Tesla is making cars with fully autonomous software.
echsomat well yes that is true. However they have made more steps into fully autonomous vehicles. I don't believe people trust the Google fully autonomous cars yet, because it's such a foreign idea to many people.
The only question that comes to my mind is how insurance will work for those vehicle. Would it be company based, depending on who you purchased it from?
The justification for driverless cars seems to be based on these assumptions: - Safety is far more important than anything else, e.g. freedom, enjoyment of life etc. In fact it's the only thing that matters. - Commuting to and from your job is the most worthy use of cars. - The ever increasing number of people in the world isn’t the real problem to be addressed when talking about traffic levels. - Problems addressed by driverless cars would not be better addressed by removing reliance on cars as commodities and freeing them up for the leisure uses they used to be more associated with. (Better city planning, stop moving jobs away from residences.) - It’s fine to increase the number of cars on the road or car journeys made (which will happen if anyone can drive, at any time) so long as those cars are not burning fossil fuels and being controlled by people.
well that similar system did not pickup the uber fatal incident in march 2018... far from being safe even after 3+ years of acumulating more data... that system isn't perfect...
Every single driverless car would have to work perfectly all the time. I do not see that happening. Then there is how long will they work perfectly? Their computers and all the connections would have to be flawless, and so would their repairmen. I don't think that will happen. They might be able to do this for 18 wheeler commercial applications on highways, but you would still need a driver to be awake at the wheel. There would need to be redundant backup control. There is still an unanswered question of liability, and I would bet it will not be the manufacturer somehow.
No they don't, thats a ludicrous demand. If we put humans to these standards, driving would be completely illegal. Liability for autonomous cars should lie with the manufacturer, but only if the car is actually at fault. It's not the car's fault if someone else causes the accident. We don't blame human drivers if a red light runner crashes into their car.
I got a guestion. What happens when someone decides to weaponize a self driving level 5 car, as in load it up with explosives. Just a wondering. Not saying anyone would ever do that.
Honestly, there's nothing stopping that from happening right now, even without autonomous capabilities. Many if not most inventions can be weaponized and for the most part, safety comes with a compromise on functionality. Though, cybersecurity might be a valid concern.
7:33, a driver assist system could issue an alert to notify driver of uncertainty. I remain skeptical that any system will attain full autonomy without mass adoption.
I wonder if they are making a mistake programming them SO passively, especially in the initial stages when you'll have a mixed driver/driverless roadway. I.e. drivered vehicles/pedestrians will take advantage of their 100% yield rates. I can foresee some very happy carjackers sticking their hand up (as we see the virtual cop do in the video) and stopping your car.
Chris now runs Aurora, which bought Uber's self-driving division.
In this useful talk, Chris Urmson exhibits how a driver-less car sees the road. Highly futuristic and informative. Recommended to everyone.
Sorry Officer.
The car is drunk...
Ethanol in the fuel
Really impressive. I am curious how those cars will handle things like pot holes, snowy roads, heavy rain, etc.
More companies and also governments need to collaborate to bring driverless cars to our roads.
***** these cars have much better reaction and situational awareness, so i believe self driving cars will handle those problems better than human do.
***** AFAIK Googles car can't operate in heavy snow or rain due to it interfering with the cars sensors.
dachr2 machine vision will be able to deal with it, maybe not now, but soon enough for LIDAR problems to go away
Taxi drivers will riot, can't wait :D it will be so much fun to watch them try to stop an inevitable change with barbaric methods such as violent protests.
Mnakekeli Ngcamphalala Taxi drivers in my city, Lisbon, are crazy. They try to fight every new law that comes. They even made the government ban "Uber" from the city.Their reaction to SDCs will be very, very fun to watch. :D
The sooner the better. The guy said 4.5 years. I hope so.
I wanna see more dumb and funny moments from the testings like the car driving in middle of the 2 cars and that woman chasing a duck lmao.
rich get richer smh :/
This is the kind of videos I want from TED! this was amazing.
I love these comments, it shows how people are afraid of the unknown..
I like driving sometimes, I'm gonna miss it. But there are too many stupid people on our roads today and they can't be trusted.
+young 95 texting
What it shows are people who are awakened and aware of their rights as living sentient human beings, unlike braindead, brainwashed drones like you who will agree to anything that they're told to.
I had no idea that it was already this advanced. I am extremely impressed by what they've already accomplished, and am quite a bit more comfortable with the idea of letting a computer do the boring bits for me.
TheMohawkNinja It's great.
+TheMohawkNinja I'm sure it could be even farther along but the companies are terrified of causing the first crash and the public outcry that would cause. Humans are terrible at judging danger. Almost no one is scared of being a passenger in a car but plenty are scared to fly yet you run a much greater risk of dying in a car then a plane. If we were logical we would let these cars on the road and be happy with the number of deaths they prevent when compared to the tiny amount of deaths they cause.
+bensemus x i agree
+bensemus x true true. But I think google cars (right now) might have a very defensive driving style (probably to an extend that it's impractical) just to avoid accidents and thereby public outcry at all costs
Leo1239150 So my comment is about 6 months old and no offence but I don't see what your comment adds to mine...
What you said "just to avoid accidents and thereby public outcry at all costs".
What I said 6 months ago "companies are terrified of causing the first crash and the public outcry that would cause".
I even go on to explain why humans are having a hard time accepting self driving cars.
In a situation like 13:17, a human driver would send warnings by honking his horn so that others don't run over the cyclists. I practically saved the life of a family in that manner. Shouldn't the google car implement this sort of communication as well? I mean, we're expecting a gradual take-over of self-driving cars, so they should have the capability to warn human drivers of impending danger.
+Max Loh don't know. maybe they are working on it. but if all cars are self driving it isn't needed anymore since all self driving cars see it ;)
Michaël De Bruyne I highly doubt the conservative or traditional thinking people will let us take away their sense of control over their car even though it's safer. For a time at least, there will probably be both types of vehicles on the road, so I think this is a much needed feature
i am just back from my 2 driving lesson. i would be soooo happy if a self driving car was already futher devolped and payable :p i am happy that i live in a country where they are alreday chanche laws for it :)
+Max Loh The lights where green, most cars still stopped; if someone honked, I would not take that as a warning for danger, I would take it as someone being in a hurry and annoyed I havent yet moved forward. So I dont think that would have been very helpful.
+Max Loh It should yes, the car should have some kind of threat-meter, if the car predicts a dangerous situation, it should honk, of course!
Looks like his sons had to get their drivers licence after all
Awesome! Those guys who said "Make the world a better place" should see this car.
I'm in the future 2024
excellent presentation and helps allay some of the fears that people have of "a dumb, blind computer", as we can see the reality is that the technology is now so advanced it can make superior decisions over humans in almost all cases, and not only in realtime but also predictive. In ~100 of whatever (much less i guess) years people will look back "remember back when everyone drove cars and there were so many crashes and trafficjams!? so crazy!"
Kk
Civil Engineer professor told me 25 yrs ago of this concept would take place in the future which is NOW. There are cpt robots in warehouses that follow a metal line in the floor, drop the product and go get another. They also detect obstructions and stop and go when cleared but there are crashes when a human is driving a forklift. Good technology.
Now it's 2020, I am wondering if his older son has got his driver's license :D
Now it is 2023 and still
@@handakinatamerat5418its 2024 and
I want one.
I want one now.
...I want it to be affordable too.
will it stop for a hitchhiker?
Only if the hitchhiker is a beautiful woman. If you purchase the upgrade package, the car diagnoses if the woman's secretly a man.
Only in Winslow, Arizona
The biggest advantage will come when the majority of vehicles are self driving. They will be able to communicate with each other and all drive at the same speed, which should be the highest practicle speed for any given road condition or geometry. They will be able to co-ordinate junctions so that they will never need to stop at a cross road or traffic light - they will just thread seamlessly between each other. Should be a big improvement.
It is June, 2019. As the technology gets better, the challenge of self driving car continues to grow bigger.
Its February 2024, The Technologie getting better .
Could you imagine getting into your own short length bus sitting/ lying down to finish a late night sleepless night or maybe making coffee and breakfast as the bus drives itself on your commute.Those long commutes would fly by if you finished off sleeping on the way to work. The bus alerts you at your destination to wake you up.
14:10 Now it's 4 years later. Are the Google kid going to get a driver's license or a self driving car? I want answers!
Maybe they'll just give him some Google glasses instead. "Here, now you can pretend you're in a self driving car."
Fun tech talk. What about insurance, regulation, standards, costs, etc.?
Of the 37,133 people killed in motor vehicle crashes in 2017, 47% were not wearing seat belts. In 2017 alone, seat belts saved an estimated 14,955 lives and could have saved an additional 2,549 people if they had been wearing seat belts. NHTSA
Buckle up for safety.
It won't be long until *you* driving will be illegal!
Bass Player Good :)
Bass Player I could definitely see health/life insurance being more expensive for drivers who choose to self-drive.
Bass Player That would be horrible.
Bass Player The only people driving cars would be racers
Bass Player I disagree, it's still quite legal to ride a bicycle, ride a horse, drive a farm vehicle on the road - recreational driving won't be banned. The licensing however may change.
Torn. Self driving cars solve a lot of problems and will save lives .. but I like driving!
Beautiful mountain road in the sunshine? OK! Long-range highway driving in heavy traffic at night in the rain? No thanks!
Will cause a lot of problems also?
Self-driving cars are evil.
They may cost more lives....& one could ask who gains most from these autonomous vehicles...is it the manufacturers including the technology & computer companies etc..because it dosn't seem like its your average person who will not be able to afford these very expensive vehicles...well beyond the reach of the average?
How would they cost more lives? Also, they may be expensive at first, but over time they'll be just as expensive as regular cars are now. And it will probably be a normal thing to have a self-driving car.
regarding 2:00 - time spent commuting to work is not really time wasted. That is a good time to be by yourself, reflect upon the life, listen to podcasts, music or talk with other passangers.
Two words. Natural selection.
At 7:20, the driver will make a visual contact with the pedestrian to make sure that he saw him. The pedestrian can even wave to the driver to show him to pass, An autonomous car will never understand that.
Why does a pedestrian have to make eye-contact with a driverless car with the proper sensors and a program that tracks everything in its vicinity and doesn't get distracted? And if needed a simple signal to indicate that it is stopped, about to move, etc. could be added.
Why does an autonomous car need to understand a wave? It just needs to obey traffic laws and possible safety threats.
@@limen7679 Pedestrians do that all the time, especially in parking lots or at stop signs. Traffic laws dont include all the little details of real life driving. If we both get at the stop sign at the same time, who has priority ? If I want to get in your parking space, maybe I will wait for you to get out and wave even if you have priority.
@@serlegar Depends on the law and the traffic markings, signs, signals, etc. Dragon teeth and continuous sidewalks can be used to explicitly indicate who has the right of way at intersections.
As far as the parking spot just stop far enough away to let the other vehicle exit and put your turn signal on. And maybe you would change parking lot spaces closer to an entrance to go to conventional cars and farther spots to AVs because they can drop-off and pick-up passengers before and after parking.
We live in exciting times.
when every car is self driving they'll be able to communicate with eachother and it'll be much more effective
@Peter Kazavis ?
I'm a huge supporter of self driving and i really hope they succeed.👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
I cant wait to play gran turismo while siting in my driverless car!
I'll replace gran turismo with Mario Kart.
I better buy my own track before human driving becomes illegal
Big brain man
Imagine, eventually traffic lights could disappear, along with speed limits and parking spots. Just these cars, with the ability to communicate with one another. Easy
Why are you making it out to be like we're going to forget about anyone who isn't on a car. The people developing this software have in mind a woman on a wheelchair chasing a duck on the middle of the street for fuck's sake.
I don't think these cars will ever be allowed to go at very high speeds wherever there's a possibility of a cyclists/people suddenly getting in the way. On these streets, the flow of the traffic would only be improved from what it is now without further risking the lives of pedestrians. As showed in the video. But on highways, where the roads are designed for high speed vehicular traffic, I can surely see this "cars hurtling around at high speeds, in close proximity to each other, communicating with each other". Again, improving on what is already there. With the use of technology.
Michael Stubbs I don’t care about my smartphone manufacturer. Switched from an s7 to an iPhone X and I’m now looking forward to the Samsung s10. If I like the product, I’ll buy it. Don’t really care who made it.
There was a woman on a wheelchair chasing a duck on the middle of the street shown in the video itself as an example of how careful these people are being with the software for these cars.
These companies only care about selling. You’re right. Therefore, they must care about the quality and safety of their products. If these cars fail to improve on our current traffic system as a whole, they won’t sell.
Yielding to pedestrians wouldn’t all of a sudden be thrown out the window because of driverless cars. Space would still be there in between cars to allow for mechanical failure. I don’t understand why you insist on this bumper to bumper non sense.
Hacking is definitely an issue.
Michael Stubbs Dear Mr. Stubbs. I don't agree with most of your stuff, cause we (the people, the society) decide in with way we want to have the new technology. But that means also, we have to decide!
From rise of mankind on we are on a very long way from the past to the future. And don't forget! The future starts now. Just in this second.
I know what you mean by saying: Don't trust them, they don't really care about us.
And you're right, there must be external control.
Too often we have seen, that maximize the profit is the only principle.
It is a question of responsibility.
Where I totally agree is you point about hackability.
Everything that is digital is hackable.
It's a question of capacity and crypt technology.
So, there must! be an emergency button to stop any unfriendly action if, maybe NSA or your personal enemy want to overtake your car( your house etc.)
Don't trust AI. 😄
pretty interesting how this car would react on puddles, especially the ones that cover potholes. Or on slippery road?
Also come to think of it...just a trifle...but steering wheel is no longer required as well as pedals and etc. So an additional passenger could get in (!). And interior redesigning would be required then. By the way even mirrors wouldn't be necessary :D
Hmm...what about trucks, international transportations? drivers would be required only for looking after loading/unloading and documents? And more than that, 'drivers' would be finally able to sleep when 'driving' :D
Anyway, it's a really thrilling topic! Looks like utopia, but sounds really outstanding!
Self-driving cars would certainly make Forza less exciting.
lol
:))))) real talk
didn't know forza could get any less exciting
Pros of self-driving cars:
-Optimized driving style allowing for higher MPG, more efficient energy usage, less pollution
-Less accidents and increased safety as technology becomes more accurate and precise
-Lower insurance cost as accident rates decline
-No more road rage or driving drama
-24/7 Personal DD for all the drunkards out there ;)
-Less traffic, less stopping, and shorter travel time when technology is integrated with traffic system
-Replace taxi cabs with community based self-driving cars, pay by trip
-More available parking, implement the “drop off and pick up” system
-Less need for traffic laws and traffic enforcement
-No more DMV bullshit
-Access to transportation for those unable to drive
-Less use of cars as a symbol for social status as driving becomes more homogenous, displacement of insecurities onto other material objects
+greenboarder89 Hello. Did you ever think that laying down more and more asphalt and turning our landscape into a desert was ever a good idea? Mishandled charges tend to blow up in your face. I happen to be completely on board under the conditions that excess vehicles will be phased out in favor of function and necessity. Preferably as a cab service. Too many more cars will only cause more pollution and road widening.
That said, we have been disregarding biology for material possessions for far too long. Nobody is born with a mobile phone in their skull or a key-chain in their gut; they need to be acquired. We are naturally equipped with (usually) functional legs to walk on. I think medical progress that enables the physically handicapped to walk would be a far greater gift to the world than to shove or coerce them into this. I always thought vehicles should be secondary, not primary. We lived without them for centuries, evidence that they aren't essential to the world.
That said, if I can have a free cab, I will not squander it. Nor will I let it become a crutch.
+TheNotverysocial medical research is also done, just by other people. There have also been amazing breakthroughs every now and then. As for mankind not needing vehicles: It's true that we didn't have any for a long time but the quality of life was way inferior to ours today. To maintain said quality of life, we do need vehicles. And I'm not only talking about personal transportation here. Without ambulances for example or life expectancy would probably shrink significantly
Leo1239150 I never proposed getting rid of cars, only to cease using them like a crutch. I have little against service vehicles, but loads against addiction to driving, which has been nothing but detrimental to human health. Anyone who likes to drive should do so on a private track you need to pay a fee to use, and not endanger the public.
TheNotverysocial No way José, us enthusiasts aren't going anywhere.
DaFroBroforeal Someday they'll stop making cars with manual controls, and the only way to have it will be to inherit preexisting ones, and maintain them to the hilt. Future generations won't give a damn whether they could drive or not. We're in for major changes in upcoming decades. I merely hope they will use them wisely.
Because if the intent is to sell more of them as opposed to using them like a taxi, this would mean paving over even more of our over developed landscape. Maintaining an existing car is less polluting than manufacturing new ones.
Let's not forget that efficiency doesn't create resources, it only makes us use them more wisely, a little going a long way. And a carbon neutral energy source doesn't change the fact that metal still needs to be smelted in order for us to use it, and that has it's own effect whether you use coal or not! To say nothing of the inherent pollution that comes with plastic, which is a given when you use electronics.
Ultimately, the safest cars are automated, and have no human input, save entering the address/coordinates, or driving an old vehicle that's has no electronic components and requires you to wind it up, and use the throttle to shift. Everything that came between is more hazardous, as you become more likely to fall asleep or get distracted by tampering with radio. It's either all the input or none of it. The most common cars we have now put us at the greatest risk of a collision.
Somehow I think this car will only work in some places, like the US where the road is square-shaped and every sign, lights, street lights, and other infrastructures are good. Imagine this one in my country, where there are tons of motorcycle, lots of people not following the rule, where the traffic jam is 100 times worse than LA rush hour. I know that it has survived 3 million miles, but try this in Jakarta, Indonesia, let's see if it can survive just several hundred miles in the city without any damage to the car.
Nah, it will take more time, but with enough data machines are still better than humans in predicting humans in behaviors like driving.
I love the idea of self driving cars, think of all the possibilities for new exterior and interior designs. If it can drive itself why not just have a vehicle with no seats and one big mattress to lay on or something. So many ideas!
+denshi The only logical thing is to put a Jakuzzi inside.
Because it would give us new leases to spread our communities even further apart and isolate everyone even more. They would still take up the same amount of space in cities, and cities don't have room to spare. Car centered fixes to traffic will never work in cities.
This is great, but we shouldn't eliminate getting your drivers licence. The worlds biggest issue is it's poor education and rules on driving. If everyone was trained to drive a car like a pilot was trained to fly a plane, maybe we would see a much different world of drivers.
But then of course there needs to be consistent strict rules on driving, with much more disciplinary action for bad behaviour and poor car conditions such as bald tyres.
Another issue is that someone from another Country with very minimal driver education can get their international licence when in a Country not of their own, and drive around - now that poorly educated driver is in your Country with the potential to inflict harm because they lack the required training and knowledge.
With World Class Leading Education on Driving, Stricter Laws and Rules with strong Disciplinary Action along with Recurring Education and Car Maintenance, then maybe "Driverless Cars" wouldn't need to eliminate bad drivers and getting your licence, but be a mere luxury...
Why is it that every TED Talks has no water for the speakers? Give a thumbs up, so that TED Talks gives them a glass of water!
But the pros are that the younger generation doesn’t have to learn how to drive but it’s more expensive and I hate corona virus 🦠
imagine +sensors ,stunning idea like other machines work. no human misunderstanding .no tension no memoryloss
That is why I subscribed to TED.
will they be able to drive itself in cities like delhi, nairobi, etc
Vaibhav Gupta With training I'm sure.
Apjooz there is no lane driving, traffic rules are used as nice to knows instead of being followed correctly, board are not placed properly or are lacking completely.
Vaibhav Gupta well that's an infrastructure problem, sorry.
BunnyCentauri that was kinda what I was asking. does the maps stores the data about speed limit or it can only read sign post.
+Vaibhav Gupta Self-Driving cars will first be a U.S. thing only. Then it will slowly expand to Western Europe, Australia, and China. India won't be getting it for a while, but not because of road infrastructure. While the lack of lanes and road signs does pose a threat, the car would still be able to easily detect incoming vehicles and pedestrians. The big issue would be politics. India's political laws discourage international companies from competing there. It's why there are zero official Apple Stores in India, and why Tesla and other luxury car brands don't directly do business in India. Also, self-driving cars would cost around $100,000 - $200,000 in its first decade of existence, thus pricing out nearly 98% of the Indian population, making selling self-driving cars there a large waste of time and money.
All we need to do really would be to put the cell phone for map viewing and it will capture images with camera and give feed back to the engine control unit by the cigarette lighter charging cable. Every car can have an auto pilot in the future
I've seen a graph! I'm sold!
THIS is why I subbed to TED.
Rest In Peace Michael Hastings.
The worst thing about a TED Talk is it's always informative and it always seems It's hard even put this into words but you have to have a good brain I guess to be able to see through it so it's hard to explain exactly what's wrong a person will come on we'll talk about some new age idea or how people got to love one another or in this case driverless cars and it's always in addition to what we have already in our existence so it seems like another step up never do they ever discuss what benefits or what reasons there are four why we are the way we are now it's just that were in a progression to another level and they're going to explain to us their version of the best way to get there. Such nonsense the fact is people do drive shity but what you could see by all of the technology he was having to have his driverless cars learn was how amazing people are they taking so many factors as they are driving that there's a billion cars on the road a day and there's only a few dozen people that died even with machines they give out and they'll still be people dying again this is the stupidity of a TED Talk they actually never covered the chance that even one in a million of those cars malfunctions I'm not talking about the ones that are hacked or anything else just breaks down healthy people dying no matter who drives us. Last I benefit a lot from the skills I got having done things mechanically in my life I've seen the Next Generation have other skills but completely lose the ability to do what I could do I've seen people literally asked me how to turn an LED light on I had to tell the person 20 of course I had to tell that twenty-year-old turn it clockwise they then asked how to turn it off see a bunch of mindless people and a Planet of the Apes scenario is not necessarily going to make us smarter in other ways Silgan stupid tedtalk hopes that you are new age and won't question what are the factors there are to consider perhaps the lack of skill motor skill pardon the pun that we lose as a result of this adds to our stupid decision making and lack of skill physically in some other area who knows whether we lose two dozen a day and some other area because we no longer have the skills from driving but again this isn't all about the skills of driving it's just to make a point that they always push a TED talk as if they were bringing you to the new age improved better human level and they never really discuss why we naturally all the way we are now it's just that we haven't gotten to some other stage yet we're just in a metamorphosis as if we're never meant to be where where are at the given moment
I feel this is a problem with technology as a whole! the more advanced we get, the dumber we become. and every ted talk starts from like the 2/3 of a movie that can never present a perspective that is all enveloping. every ted talk topics seems so different to another, it might seem like its for the normal general, but really, its not meant for all
I rarely apply the breaks while on the freeway, while I see some cars spend more time on the breaks then off the breaks.
Don't tailgate and look past the car in front of you and it is possible to have the need to break less.
I see these cars driving through Mountain View Calfornia every day. Another thing I wonder about is what about construction zones where there is a worker directing traffic that has a stop or slow sign and manually routes someone through the zone?
Based on the first 5 min of his talk, I think we should inspect the driver rather than replacing the driver by machine. The former is realistic and the latter is a headache problem because the autonomous car can fail in an unpredictable way.
It's been a few years since this video. How about posting a link to an update on their progress.
11:36 LOL? btw, super curious to see the cam of the wheel chair chasing the duck
super excited to see this take off, also curious to see how it'll be priced
+Timothy Wu - $30,000 ish to start. The SDC electronics package costs about $5,000.
Driverless cars are the future of road line striping technology.
what will be its reaction when it sees a pot hole. imagine on a main road their are two parallel potholes, and the car cannot go through the normal road
A) Will it go down the pot hole.
B) It will go on pedestrian side walk(which is illegal to drive on)
C) In the event if it proceeds with A, and unfortunately gets struck in pothole, will it continue to burn fuel
D) it will reverse and take another route.
best thing about driverless cars is more time for myself while i get to work. time is the most precious thing there is.
Fantastic! Great presentation!👍
Just think, no more drunk drivers, red light runners, speeders, all that. Sane roadways.
Except that these cars can't even stop at a red light unassisted..... And there are millions of those every single day.
I watch those algorithms at work and all I can think about is how AGI will change everything.
I think you could just connect self driving cars with assisting cars in network where self driving cars could warn assisting systems of 'manual' car about danger. This way you can have both worlds at the same time. People who want to sleep, work, read etc. while going somewhere and people who want to drive.
Very promising!!
i'm blind in my right eye and considerable vision loss in my left. There's light at the end of the tunnel!
When i can't legally drive, it's nice to know I won't be stranded in my home
This diver-to-driverless revolution will take a long time to proceed. We not only need all the cars connected to the network and interact, but also the road monitoring systems participated. As long as the we put attention and energy into this revolution, it will happen.
It would seem like a real possibility for self-driving cars in the US, but what about in cities in undeveloped countries like Bangkok (or worse) where roads are badly built, unmarked, and many places don't follow standard rules at all? For example, what if random materials are used for road obstructions instead of traffic cones/sign? Parking lots that the slots are not clearly marked? Roads that don't have lines on the road to mark the lanes? Single lanes in old neighborhoods that use hand gestures from inside other cars to signal who will go first? Not all roads in the world are so standardized as American roads. There are many places in the world where even human drivers would have a difficult time understanding and making judgement, let alone a computer that has to be explicitly taught every single thing.
I believe this will be a first world thing (at first)
But I guess there is no technology to make that kinda traffic completely safe in a jiffy. Clear traffic rules and organization would need to come first
I think with enough time (enough data and neural training), SDC can do better than humans in those places.
Technologies like this one will enable a transition to a radically new and better world for all people. Please investigate a resource based economy.
The real question is how are we going to deal with the lose of jobs in the economy. Transportation jobs alone are nearly around a one third of the available jobs out there right now.
I can't wait!
the issue isnt how well it works when it is working, the issue is how well does it work when there is a computer failure or something on the automated driving system breaks? of course as long as Microsoft doesn't make the software, it might work. that being said, if it performs better than the avg driver, then it is still net benefit.
it's a good idea for things like going to and from work because that's when people are the most stressed. but I would much rather drive a car myself.
This guy is awesome
How can the car drove without the driver. So unbelievable.
I am curious what kind of simulation method they used to simulate the environment on the road for the autonomous? Really appreciate!!!
Is there anywhere we can go to see the rate (and severity) of accidents that these driverless cars have had? It'd be interesting to see the graphs of accidents per kilometers driven, as time goes on and they improve the programming. Wanna watch that progress
Self-driving cars will be very confused in the UK. Cars parking all over the road and the entire road as wild as 1 lane in the USA. I can't wait to see how it will work out
I'm so looking forward to this. When people driving is what cops look for.
The first "fact" he stated is wrong. With 120M people driving an average of 50 min/day is still 50 min of driving everyday, not 6B minutes and not 162 lifetimes wasted on driving...
We're ready for this things people! stop promoting it and start selling it!!
honestly i think we need a new type of road or car to make this really effective.
xingx355 Why? A computer just do the same things a driver do, except doing them better. He "sees" better, react faster and doesn't distract :P
Novaliam Skynet uh I mean computers are definitely superior to humans.
at the end he said said "driver-assisted car systems like Tesla are a dead-end because they can only improve it so much". That's a bit out of date. Tesla is making cars with fully autonomous software.
Nope. As long as there is a steering wheel and the driver can tanke control it is not fully autonomous.
echsomat well yes that is true. However they have made more steps into fully autonomous vehicles. I don't believe people trust the Google fully autonomous cars yet, because it's such a foreign idea to many people.
Hey Chris, did you boy get the licence finally? :P
2 TED videos in a row that aren't about identity politics? This must be bizarro TED
This is really cool and exciting!
I support this tech...
The only question that comes to my mind is how insurance will work for those vehicle. Would it be company based, depending on who you purchased it from?
+dustin munro Could work.
The other day somebody on my left put signals going to the right into the road I came from, but drove forward.
The justification for driverless cars seems to be based on these assumptions:
- Safety is far more important than anything else, e.g. freedom, enjoyment of life etc. In fact it's the only thing that matters.
- Commuting to and from your job is the most worthy use of cars.
- The ever increasing number of people in the world isn’t the real problem to be addressed when talking about traffic levels.
- Problems addressed by driverless cars would not be better addressed by removing reliance on cars as commodities and freeing them up for the leisure uses they used to be more associated with. (Better city planning, stop moving jobs away from residences.)
- It’s fine to increase the number of cars on the road or car journeys made (which will happen if anyone can drive, at any time) so long as those cars are not burning fossil fuels and being controlled by people.
well that similar system did not pickup the uber fatal incident in march 2018... far from being safe even after 3+ years of acumulating more data... that system isn't perfect...
fantastic stuff
It will stop accidents and increase insurance for businesses and Corporations!
Every single driverless car would have to work perfectly all the time. I do not see that happening. Then there is how long will they work perfectly? Their computers and all the connections would have to be flawless, and so would their repairmen. I don't think that will happen.
They might be able to do this for 18 wheeler commercial applications on highways, but you would still need a driver to be awake at the wheel. There would need to be redundant backup control. There is still an unanswered question of liability, and I would bet it will not be the manufacturer somehow.
No they don't, thats a ludicrous demand. If we put humans to these standards, driving would be completely illegal. Liability for autonomous cars should lie with the manufacturer, but only if the car is actually at fault. It's not the car's fault if someone else causes the accident. We don't blame human drivers if a red light runner crashes into their car.
My God ...THE CAR IS LEARNING.
Can it learn to fly?
Thiis is amazing technology! I've been literally dreaming about this since I was a kid. Can't wait to have my own personal chauffeur :P
BrutusAlbion I'm 11 and want to actually have fun and drive on my own
Fascinating! They are doing an amazing job.
I got a guestion. What happens when someone decides to weaponize a self driving level 5 car, as in load it up with explosives. Just a wondering. Not saying anyone would ever do that.
Honestly, there's nothing stopping that from happening right now, even without autonomous capabilities. Many if not most inventions can be weaponized and for the most part, safety comes with a compromise on functionality.
Though, cybersecurity might be a valid concern.
The best place to test this vehicle is probably India.
Great work!
I'm really looking forward to never having to drive again. That said, how do they handle snow and ice?
7:33, a driver assist system could issue an alert to notify driver of uncertainty. I remain skeptical that any system will attain full autonomy without mass adoption.
I wonder if they are making a mistake programming them SO passively, especially in the initial stages when you'll have a mixed driver/driverless roadway.
I.e. drivered vehicles/pedestrians will take advantage of their 100% yield rates.
I can foresee some very happy carjackers sticking their hand up (as we see the virtual cop do in the video) and stopping your car.
Does the car recognize potholes and speedbumps? It'll be a very bumpy ride if it doesn't...
Those cars see the road better than humans