
Google gets license to test drive autonomous cars on Nevada roads - aaronjg
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/05/google-gets-license-to-test-drive-autonomous-cars-on-nevada-roads.ars
======
DanielBMarkham
To me, there are only a few "out there" technologies that have a chance to
change everything. 3-D printing is at the top of my list, but that's going to
be a while before it really takes off. The others are robotics (also taking a
while) and self-driving cars.

If Google can work through not only the technical but the social and legal
problems associated with fully auto-drive cars, it could literally change the
world overnight. Instead of driving cars being a time sink, it could change
into something along the lines of being in a room that goes places. You could
sleep, read, play games, or otherwise occupy your time. It would literally
give the nation tens of billions of hours in added productivity time. It could
make the elderly more independent, eliminate drunk-driving, and a lot more.
Very cool stuff.

~~~
Homunculiheaded
The wide ranging impacts will be huge, as well as the unintended consequences.
I actually think the first thing to go will be truck drivers. There are some
social obstacles for regular cars, but once automated driving has proven
itself it's only a matter of time until the shipping/delivery industry says
"wait I can have 24/7 drivers that have less accidents per million miles than
the ones that can only do 11 hour days?" Just this one case has crazy
implications: 3.5 million jobs lost in a short time span, but you can order
from amazon at 6pm and have at it your doorstep before you wake up, all of the
trucks can drive at exactly optimal fuel efficiency, all businesses that rely
on truckers will likely go under, do you need distribution centers when you
have cheap, never sleeping drivers? this will take consume enormous amount of
energy... and I'm sure you can think of more just for that one case.

Personally I think the biggest impact this will have is the energy usage one.
Currently we stress about our abilities to meet future demands, but we aren't
stressed enough to really innovate. Automated driving will definitely change
that.

~~~
brc
Not sure about the truck drivers. I can see the benefits in making all the
long-range truck deliveries drive through the night. This could be encouraged
by time-of-use road charges for things like interstate highways, for a
discount in registration fees or fuel taxes, I guess.

But delivery trucks will still need someone in them to make the deliveries.
But what would change is that the delivery person could be doing things in the
truck while on the rounds - this could be related or unrelated work.

Generally, if a technology transition releases a lot of productivity, it also
drastically lowers cost of whatever is affected (delivered goods, which is
everything). This, by rights, should free up a lot of extra money for people,
which they can then spend on other things. The other things generally cause
more economic activity somewhere else, which should create the new jobs.

But a portion of truck drivers will lose their job, with it never to return.

However, this can't be, nor should it be, stopped.

~~~
davedx
"if a technology transition releases a lot of productivity, it also
drastically lowers cost of whatever is affected (delivered goods, which is
everything). This, by rights, should free up a lot of extra money for people"

And here is the problem. What actually happens is the people who control
"production" end up with most of this extra money.

~~~
CWuestefeld
_What actually happens is the people who control "production" end up with most
of this extra money._

This is not true. It's actually a pretty well-understood economic phenomena.

When changes to pricing is forced by changes in upstream costs, as with this
example, but also as forced by increased taxes/fees, etc., you can predict who
will bear the brunt of the cost (or enjoy the windfall) based on the
elasticity of the buyer.

For example, we know that the elasticity for gasoline is very inelastic,
because consumption only changes a small amount in response to price changes.
This means that an increase in taxes on the petroleum industry will be borne
mostly by the consumer, and not the producer.

However, for other industries where consumers are more likely to change their
spending habits in relation to price changes, it will be the consumers that
are on the winning side.

------
jes5199
I think this is one of those technologies that will go from "science fiction"
to "everyone uses one every day" very, very quickly.

Until a few months ago, I had no idea that the technology was as far along as
it is; it seems like they've cracked the hard problems already. That means
it's a social problem now - and there's reason to believe that the biggest
motivator in adoption of automobile technology (and related public policy) is
the insurance industry. As soon as these cars are statistically safer than
human drivers (and my expectation is that they may _already_ be safer - humans
are crap at driving) then there will be strong incentives to get them to the
public.

~~~
MaxGabriel
I think you're right about insurance companies playing a big role, we've
already seen 20% discounts for having Adaptive Cruise Control in Europe. But I
don't think this will be a quick change.

First, people take awhile to replace their cars. I don't know the stats for
this, but 10-year old vehicles don't seem atypical. The good news is that
gives a chance for reducing costs. It was back-of-the-envelope calculation
based on parts only, but one article I read estimated 5-10k would be added to
Cadillac's self driving car if they introduced it by 2015. [1]

Second, there are still some hard problems to solve. According to Thrun, they
don't have a solution for snowy roads that block the car's vision of the lane
markers, and Cadillac's vehicle has the same problem. That'll also be a
problem in areas of construction where line markers aren't accurately marking
the road.

There's also some major regional challenges. In Pittsburgh, per a convention
known as the Pittsburgh Left, a driver stopped at a red light will pause after
the light turns green to allow the “first driver in the oncoming traffic... to
make a left turn.” Thrun's team is working on collecting massive amounts of
data to overcome niche issues like that, but is that something every car
manufacturer will have access to?

I think we can also expect some legal barriers to be a problem. I don't have
the best grasp on this, but from a RAND report I read it sounds like state
tort law, combined with the complete lack of state or federal laws concerning
autonomous cars, could create liability issues for manufacturers. Maybe that
would necessitate some lobbying and court battles before manufacturers risk
masses of autonomous cars? It's hard for me to tell how important these issues
are because the biggest player, Google, isn't focused on the market now.

Ultimately you're clearly right, autonomous cars are definitely the future,
but I'm feeling more of a gradual shift as problems are ironed out and the
prices of sensors are reduced.

[1][http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/126841-cadillac-
promises-...](http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/126841-cadillac-promises-
self-driving-cars-by-2015)

~~~
smokinn
I think you're making OP's point quite well albeit inadvertently.

Personal ownership of a self-driving car is a ridiculous concept. Why would
the car have to wait around in the parking lot all day while you're at work?
It could easily keep running around ferrying people places. And yet many
people will want to own one simply because they think they should own a car.

I think the real future is a market for renting car time. Prices will be high
during peak periods (morning and evening commuters) but cheap during the mid-
afternoon.

The lack of a large up-front cost will likely drive adoption faster than many
expect, especially given the new resistance to car ownership coming from
younger people: [http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/why-
dont...](http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/03/why-dont-young-
americans-buy-cars/255001/)

I live in a city, as do pretty much all my friends. I walk almost everywhere
and occasionally take a taxi when going out in the evenings. On rare occasions
a friend with a ZipCar membership will ferry us out of town if we're going
somewhere far. None of us actually own a car. We're the target market for the
self-driving cars since we've already made the social adjustments.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
On the flip side, I'm a parent of four who would _jump_ on this as a way to
reduce from two to one cars while also reducing the pain of ferrying kids
around to school, lessons, practice, recitals, etc.

True self-driving (as opposed to "licensed driver paying attention but not
needing to hold the wheel") will be adopted _very_ quickly.

~~~
brc
You bring up an interesting point. Would you, as a parent, be happy with a
driverless car going to collect your child from school/wherever? At what age
of the child would you be happy with that?

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Eventually, yes, but not until they are of an age that they can reliably
recognize their own car and are comfortable being alone forthe trip (sevenish,
probably, but also depends on how long the trip is), though I can easily
imagine some simple tools that would help pair child and car and comfort the
child (nothing like watching videos to keep Tommy entertained on a drive).

------
Schwolop
Since a lot of the discussions here are about the benefits of autonomous cars
compared to other solutions, I'd like to point out an excellent Quora question
on the matter: [http://www.quora.com/Transportation/Why-do-we-want-self-
driv...](http://www.quora.com/Transportation/Why-do-we-want-self-driving-cars-
rather-than-better-mass-transit)

I am a roboticist who works on autonomous vehicles for mining applications,
and I've always thought the two least obvious advantages are that a)
autonomous vehicles will increase the utility of a single vehicle to the point
that owning multiple vehicles becomes less necessary, and b) autonomous
vehicles will increase the utility of road networks such that their existing
capacity will be sufficient for far longer than expected under manned vehicle
assumptions.

------
calebmpeterson
As the only adult in my household capable of driving (due to my wife's vision
limitations), I'm quite excited by this - and so is my wife.

------
nextparadigms
Google should work with Tesla Motors to implement it in one of their models at
least. I figure people who are the early adopters for all-electric vehicles
might be early adopters for self-driving cars, too.

~~~
rscale
Also, a fleet of self-driving Model S's would make a fantastic taxi service.

------
ck2
Police drones that can fly around your city for two days straight, self-
driving cars that can crawl neighborhoods to take photos....

I am not sure I am ready or happy about this future. Maybe I am just old.

~~~
emmett
No more drunk driving. Vastly more efficient shared transportation
infrastructure. Greater freedom for people too old (or young) to drive
themselves safely.

~~~
philwelch
That already exists; it's called public transit and every other civilized
country in the world figured it out already.

~~~
axefrog
Your bus shows up on your doorstep on demand and will go wherever you want it
to go? Your taxi will drive you for two hours to see your parents, then wait
around for a few more hours to take you all to the beach and only charge you
as though you're the car's owner?

~~~
lmm
I've seen it argued that in TCO terms the taxi (well, two taxis in that use
case) is cheaper for that.

~~~
axefrog
Perhaps, but add to that all of the incidental trips to the store, to visit a
friend, to go to the bank and so forth and it probably starts to level out a
bit.

------
steve8918
I saw a Google Self-Driving car on 280 in the Bay Area about a month ago with
2 people in it. I guess they already have the license for California?

As a side note, I (illegally) took a video of it with my iPhone as I passed by
it, but when I tried uploading it to Facebook it was denied twice because I
used a copyrighted song as the background (Cars by Devo and then an obscure
version of Crosstown Traffic by Living Color, which I thought would have
passed the algos but I guess not).

~~~
lucian1900
How is capturing video in a public place illegal?

~~~
eavc
I assumed it was taken while the poster was driving.

------
jwr
Why does Google do it?

I can't understand what business purpose it could possibly serve for Google.
And if it is just a side R&D project, how come the shareholders do not revolt?

~~~
jeffool
Off the top of my head, they're probably the most widely known brand in both
consumer maps and local search. While "not-driving" people will often be
online, and I imagine often searching for places to go.

Also, there's the "Bell Labs" of it. How do you know what you can do unless
you push boundaries into new places, which necessitate new ideas?

The idea that companies should stick to what they know and that shareholders
should expect nothing else of them, is to me akin to the idea companies should
be expected to fight progression/expansion for fear of losing the market they
have.

Look at the RIAA. Imagine if they had more than a legal arm, but a research
group. What if they had been looking into audio compression and transfer? They
may have founded the first successful online music store, and before Napster.
The industry could have its own iTunes, instead now they try to herd snakes
back into a pen that can't contain them, with lawsuits. That, to me, is
irresponsibility.

In pushing for new fields, Google pushes for new markets. And in being the
popular party doing so, they're seen as "first" in many people's eyes.

------
splatzone
The license plate thing is interesting. Why is it necessary to explicitly
distinguish it as an autonomous vehicle?

~~~
unimpressive
So people know to be wary.

Not everyone has as much faith in these things as the HN crowd.

~~~
jfoutz
It's all in the black box. After an autonomous vehicle crash, all of the
decision making state will be available so no autonomous car makes the same
mistake ever again. Unlike teenagers, which can merely be encouraged to drive
appropriately.

~~~
ghshephard
Even better - not only will the code/telemetry equipment that made that
mistake be replaced, ideally the design/implementation procedures that
resulted in that mistake in the first place will be reviewed. Given how
frequently it will be used, I'd hope to see the same level of methodology we
see with Space Control Software. See:
<http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/06/writestuff.html> for a nice article on
this sort of software. I like the following comment: "Bill Pate, who's worked
on the space flight software over the last 22 years, says the group
understands the stakes: "If the software isn't perfect, some of the people we
go to meetings with might die."

------
SudarshanP
Orthogonal to this trend, is a probable reduction in how much we actually
travel every day. Would it make sense if a kid was dropped to a very nearby
school, where learning happens by interacting with teachers in close proximity
as well other teachers on another continent(not just cheaper ones). It may
even be a micro school where just 25 students from the neighborhood attend and
have a weekly meetup on a large campus. As technology improves, that actual
benefit of being at particular spot diminishes. Of course some professions
like nursing/sales may need direct presence every day. For many others
occasional meetups would more than suffice. Would we not drive a lot lesser if
technology allows us a lot more seamless communication?

------
rodh257
It's good that Nevada is facilitating this, I'm expecting that industry lobby
groups that will be affected by this (truck drivers, taxis, car companies
without this technology, insurance companies perhaps) will throw everything
they have at shutting this down so it's good to see that at least local
governments are open to the idea. It means that it stays in the USA rather
than Google launching it in a country more open to the idea.

~~~
eavc
What I love about Nevada doing it is the tie-in with tourism. If it becomes a
staple of that city, you expose people from all over the country to it in
relatively short order.

------
pbw
The google car is great, but I wonder when will they be able to drive with the
visible spectrum only, like humans do. No radar, laser range finder, GPS, or
pre-mapping the roads. Just the view through the windshield on an unknown
road, we can all do that. I would say keep all the other devices if they
improve safety, but to really be a human-level driver I think you need to be
able to do without them in a pinch.

------
bbotond
I'm surprised no-one talks about the psychological and social implications of
(serious or lethal) accidents caused by autonomous cars. However rare, I think
these will set back their adoption by years because people will be too scared
to sit in a machine that makes decisions on its own. Decisions that, when
wrong, can kill them and they can do nothing about it.

------
dutchbrit
This reminds me, even though the technology isn't as cool as Google's cars, of
the Phileas Bus in The Netherlands, which also drives by itself, which I sit
in daily - see: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phileas_(public_transport)>

------
egypturnash
Man I can't wait for this to become mature enough that cars can drive
themselves without anyone "behind the wheel". I've never learnt to drive, and
I would get a Zipcar membership the DAY that happened.

------
dutchbrit
I already imagine a scene where the 2 people, that are suppose to sit in the
car, are having a coffee break, and the car starts driving off without them :)

------
darylteo
I like this... but I like driving too :(

~~~
ShabbyDoo
No one is saying you can't drive, yet. Presuming that computers eventually are
better than people at driving, can we as a society continue to allow humans to
self-control death machines in close proximity to each other?

~~~
bad_user
We should also ban knives too and let robots do all the cooking.

Also, the presumption that computers can get better at driving is wishful
thinking. Good enough definitely, more efficient probably, but better? I don't
think so.

From a technical perspective, the human brain is the best pattern matching
processor in existence and when driving it's the edge cases that cause
accidents ... a deer or child stepping in front of your car, bad weather
conditions leading to muddy roads or glazed frost, potholes, traffic
congestions, human-powered vehicles (like bikes) and the list goes on, with
the number of variables and possible outcomes possible being really big.

And for instance a processor can't know your safety priorities. Say a child
steps in front of your speeding car, would your risk pulling the wheel and
going off-road to avoid the hit? I would. But what if your own son is in the
backseat? Then I would hit the breaks and hope for the best. But what if
you're going 90 miles on the highway and a cat steps in front of your car?
Personally, I wouldn't even hit the breaks, even though I love cats, because
sudden breaking on the highway is very dangerous.

------
tadfisher
OT: What is Ars doing on this page that breaks the Back button?

~~~
jeffool
Working fine for me on Chrome?

------
mkramlich
One negative about the self-driving car approach which is inherent to the
approach is that most of the hard problems it has to solve come about from the
fact that the driving environment is so chaotic, open and uncontrolled.
Weather. Pedestrians. Jaywalkers. Animals. Kids. Shopping carts. Bad objects
on the road. Other vehicles, many of which are human-driven. Or perhaps
automated as well, but malfunctioning.

The obvious alternative approach is to create a transport system where the
environment is more uniform, controlled, closed, stable. For example, a system
of underground tunnels or above-ground tubes. With some kind of train or
individual cabins that can move within it. Like subways but more advanced,
efficient and end-to-end. Imagine a single common inter-locked system that
everyone could use to do both their local daily commutes, and long distance
travel, and round trips to orbital stations (via rides in carrier ships like
Virgin Galactic is planning, or something like a space elevator.) There is one
particular project like this that I've heard of, that has these qualities,
called Evacuated Tube Transport. I like the idea of it. It sounds elegant and
efficient and scalable. But has some challenges of its own. (Last mile access,
industry pushback, safety/failsafe in the face of emergency situations, etc.)
There's a specific company called ET3 which is supposedly trying to flesh out
and build an implementation of it.

------
mkramlich
this plus the recent Planetary Resources launch, plus the upcoming SpaceX
rendezvous with the ISS are all pretty exciting milestones. some folks out
there are pushing the human race forward. not just making trivial fadish photo
sharing websites, etc.

~~~
sage_joch
In defense of the people making photo sharing websites, they are doing leaps
and bounds more than the vast majority of the population.

