
Autonomous truck cleared to drive on US roads for the first time - edward
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27485-autonomous-truck-cleared-to-drive-on-us-roads-for-the-first-time.html#.VU-vqfSNFuE
======
patcheudor
It's interesting that on the "what could go wrong" discussions on HN, the
focus has been on the discussion of insurance and events like truck-jacking.
Those are the issues of today. I think there's a far more interesting future
at play.

These trucks can and will put people out of work. Right now a large majority
of the testing of autonomous vehicles is focused on "perfect environments".
Yes, Google will say that test driving autonomous cars in San Francisco is far
from a perfect environment; however, in a future where people are loosing
their livelihoods, ways to hack autonomous vehicles will be explored, and I'm
not talking about just hacking a vehicle CAN bus. All of these vehicles rely
on technologies like radar, LIDAR, IR vision, etc. None of which are fool-
proof and each of which could fall to very specific attacks. I hope that the
auto manufacturers are considering this future. After all, we have
technologies today like GNU Radio and the HackRF One which have brought what
was once the domain of the nation state to the general public.

~~~
elchief
25% of Americans were farmers 80 years ago. Now it's 1%.

~~~
patcheudor
Farming is actually a great example. There were farmers who did fight back
against farm machinery. Sabotage of tractors and equipment was an actual thing
here in the US and abroad. You can even find whole groups of anti-tractor
types in the American Amish country.

These days it's sabotage against GMO crops. You'll find Monsanto and other
companies will place their GMO test fields in regions of the country known to
be sympathetic and/or will keep them under armed guard.

~~~
baddox
The views of the Amish regarding technology have absolutely nothing to do with
employment rates.

~~~
patcheudor
But yet everything to do with this topic. The Amish believe one must work in
harmony with nature. Tractors as an example threaten this harmony. I'm just
waiting for some religion somewhere to state that self-driving vehicles are
the work of the devil, or a threat to the Protestant work ethic. There might
even be some political aspects of this a they are a signal of the coming
"liberal leisure society."

~~~
baddox
> The Amish believe one must work in harmony with nature.

I don't quite like that description either. I think it's more that they want
to encourage interdependence within the community. They are not opposed to
technology that they believe doesn't threaten that community dynamic.

------
tokenadult
The article reports about this model of truck, "the first to be cleared to
drive on US roads," but I think that is a factually incorrect exaggeration,
based on other reporting I have read about this same model of truck. A
Washington Post report[1] says,

"Daimler’s tractor-trailer, called the Inspiration Truck, relies on cameras
and radar to guide itself. It does not use LIDAR, a sensor that is being used
by other self-driving vehicle makers such as Google. Like all autonomous
vehicles today, the Inspiration Truck has some limitations. It can’t drive on
its own during heavy rain, snow or crosswinds above 30 or 40 mph.

"Daimler developed a training system for its drivers that Nevada’s department
of motor vehicles approved. It’s fairly simple, teaching them how to activate
and deactivate the autonomous driving system. It says it picked Nevada because
of how thorough its rules are for autonomous vehicles."

A thorough National Public Radio report[2] also describes this as a one-state,
limited program of experiments.

[1]
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2015/05/0...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/wp/2015/05/06/how-
self-driving-tractor-trailers-may-reinvent-what-it-means-to-be-a-truck-
driver/)

[2]
[http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2015/05/10/405598...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2015/05/10/405598189/coming-
soon-to-a-highway-near-you-a-semi-truck-with-a-brain)

------
biesnecker
Yet another Simpsons' prediction come true:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Homerdrive](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_Homerdrive)

------
ahelwer
Similar to a train. An operator is present, waiting to take control if
necessary. I bet there'll be a dead man's vigilance device[1], just like in
the rail industry.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead-
man%27s_vigilance_device](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead-
man%27s_vigilance_device)

------
legulere
Autonomous trucks will be there probably earlier than autonomous cars. For
cars it would be a feature for people, but for trucks you would be able to
save tons of money with it.

~~~
jfoster
Where does the saving come from if they still require a driver? From the
article, it sounds like the biggest gain is probably in hiring. Possibly also
additional savings in fewer accidents. (lower overall fatigue)

~~~
to3m
Semi-autonomous road trains, assuming - and I admit this isn't a minor thing
;) - only the lead lorry need be occupied, would let you get more lorry-hours
per driver hour. This might not actually improve the driver:lorry ratio, but
by spreading one driver over multiple lorries you could operate the lorries in
shifts with that same ratio.

Say currently one driver can drive 8 hours per day. So if you need to drive
for 24 hours, it's going to take 3 days. If you had 3 lorries doing that
journey, it would take 3 days.

But say you had your semi-autonomous road train. Now you could do the journey
in 24 hours. One driver drives for 8 hours, then the next guy, then the next
guy. The two lorries behind just tag along.

Imagine 3 x 25 hour journeys, where the destinations didn't quite match.
Previously this would take 4 days. This time: there's 24 hours of shared
journey and an extra unshared hour of travel at the end of the route. Now your
drivers have to split up at that point. The guy who was driving the road train
last will have to wait 16 hours, so his journey takes 24+17 = 41 hours; the
guy who was driving before him will have to wait 8 hours, so his journey takes
24+9 = 33 hours; the other guy can jump in his lorry and go straight away, so
his journey takes 25 hours.

~~~
grkvlt
> Semi-autonomous road trains

Actually, why aren't there _fully_ autonomous freight trains on railways yet?
We have driverless commuter trains (Docklands Light Railway) why not the same
for long distance freight? The infrastructure is there - automated signalling
devices in cab, it doesn't seem too big a leap. One hurdle might be unions, I
recall ASLEF or someone got upset about the DLR when it first appeared?

~~~
tacticus
There are.

in Australia there are a few automation projects for mining rail.

------
protomyth
"In the meantime, several issues still need to be addressed. It is not yet
clear how insurance companies might cover self-driving vehicles, for instance,
or where blame would be attributed in a road accident."

Who is responsible is going to be the big make / break for all self-driving
vehicles. I get the feeling this is going to be very messy.

~~~
NeutronBoy
I don't always understand this POV. My current car has radar guided cruise
control and auto braking - if these fail, who's responsible? Isn't auto-
driving cars the same thing on a larger scale?

~~~
gsnedders
You have controls to override the car if they fail and you shouldn't be purely
relying on them, so you're at fault. If you don't have any means to override
them and you're expected to purely rely on them, surely you can't be at fault
because what could you have done?

~~~
NeutronBoy
How do I override the automatic brakes if they decide to engage while I'm
driving down the freeway?

~~~
gsnedders
I always assumed it was similar to cruise-control insofar as it can be turned
off?

------
trimble-alum
There are a raft of unaddressed safety and licensing issues to verify that
autonomous navigation feedback systems can sense danger and perform evasive,
ingenious maneuvers sufficiently to preserve life and property. This is one of
the reasons why incremental features are less risky than going all in to
uncharted waters.

------
sschueller
If trucks become completely autonomous what will prevent someone from standing
in front of one causing it to stop and then robbing it?

Unlike with human drivers that may not stop if they believe they are in danger
of getting carjacked I assume an autonomous system will be required to avoid
hitting a human at all cost.

~~~
Someone
There are laws against robbing trucks. I guess they will stay about as
effective as they are now; it is not as if there aren't ways for would-be
robbers to stop a truck now (for example by crashing a stolen car in front of
it)

As others said, the truck might call 911 before it has come to a stop. Also,
911 operators might get a remote override switch that allows them to instruct
the truck to take some evasive action.

I do expect additional laws in the area of autonomous cars, but not to prevent
robberies. If autonomous cars become really, really, good and ubiquitous,
there is no reason for pedestrians to watch out for cars when crossing a
street. That will lead to some funny, but disruptive (for the flow of road
traffic) videos on YouTube (yes, you can play Frogger on a 8-line highway with
your eyes closed and survive. The crocs aren't robots yet, though)

~~~
the8472
> yes, you can play Frogger on a 8-line highway with your eyes closed and
> survive.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I don't know about the US, but here in
Germany the autobahn is supposed to be off-limits for people (and vehicles
with a design speed below 60km/h for that matter). This is obviously to allow
drivers to drive with the assumption that they don't have to be ever-vigilant
about cyclists or children crossing the street.

Autonomous vehicles will likely operate on the same assumptions to behave more
optimally given the constrained environment, i.e. drive in a more aggressive
manner than they would do in a city.

I.e. strolling at moderate pace over a highway would probably have about the
same risk as hiding ducked behind a parked car to jump in front of a bus in
the city. Both are situations that no sane person should engage in and both
are considered acceptable risks not worth defending against.

~~~
Someone
Cars on the autobahn will not want to hit deer, people getting out of their
car while parked on the emergency lane, or people walking on the road to place
a warndreieck
([http://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warndreieck](http://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warndreieck))
warning for their stranded car, a few hundred meters on, either.

And I expect that what constitutes an acceptable risk will go down and down,
as long as technology allows for it. It's already happening al the time. Seat
belts are compulsory, air bags are compulsory, ABS is compulsory, etc.

But yes, the frog get thing is not something I would advise to do. On the
other hands certainly, in cities, it will be much, much safer for pedestrians
to step out into traffic without paying much attention to that traffic. That
will affect how pedestrians behave.

~~~
the8472
> And I expect that what constitutes an acceptable risk will go down and down,
> as long as technology allows for it.

Well, I do think that the risk of pedestrians on the autobahn isn't something
we optimize for.

In the city? Yes.

Reducing the risks of occupants? Yes.

Driving defensively on the autobahn because someone might walk into the
traffic? No.

The potential optimizations for the restricted environment that will be made
there will be for increased traffic flow, more flexible lane switching or
things like that. Maybe even saving fuel by driving in the tailwind of another
vehicle.

------
olivermarks
truck driving is the most common job in the western states.

~~~
gtirloni
I have many truck drivers in the family. That's no way to live a life and they
constantly talk of quitting. I think this news is very welcome.

~~~
infinotize
What would they do if their jobs were all eliminated overnight? Would they go
get a job that will give them a better life? Probably not, because they would
have done that already.

~~~
dylanjermiah
Autonomous vehicles will not show up and take over overnight. My prediction
will be close to full saturation(in most areas) in ~50 years. Improving the
technology, infrastructure and regulatory hurdles will all be rolled out
incrementally.

------
JulianMorrison
Driving jobs go byebye.

------
tonetheman
when AI takes over it will be easier for them to run us down, or cut off
supply chains.

~~~
ionwake
Which is why I for one, welcome our new robot overlords.

------
maxmcd
"But they are not totally driverless. A human driver still sits behind the
wheel, ready to take over in case of a lane change or unexpected hazard."

Autonomous with a requirement for a human driver doesn't sound like real
progress. Title might be a little misleading.

~~~
chc
Does automated factory equipment with a human overseeing its operation and
correcting error cases sound like real progress over what came before? If so,
why doesn't it sound like progress when we have an automated truck with a
human overseeing its operation and correcting error cases?

~~~
MichaelApproved
Though, I agree this is progress, I don't think your analogy is correct here.
The progress you're referring to allows 1 person to oversee machines that do
several people's work. 1 person = 10 jobs.

With the trucks, you have the same person overseeing his own job, except that
it'll be done safer. 1 person = 1 job (safer).

Your analogy would make more sense if the trucks were remotely supervised and
1 person could oversee several trucks via remote connection.

~~~
gtirloni
In time, all of that will happen. Right now there is too much (warranted)
skepticism that society won't let a driverless truck running around alone. In
a few years, after proving that the number of incidents is much less than with
human drivers, everybody won't care.

