
What If Your Autonomous Car Keeps Routing You Past Krispy Kreme? - kdazzle
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/01/what-if-your-autonomous-car-keeps-routing-you-past-krispy-kreme/283221/
======
ChuckMcM
Just one of a bazillion questions that comes up when your car is autonomous.
What happens when the sekrit tech elite want to kill you and so they make your
car drive off a cliff? Interesting questions to be sure and already being
examined on such shows as "CSI" in the US.

Basically one of the reasons new technology rolls out slowly is that there are
lots of people asking these sorts of questions and trying to have answers
before they ship. Sometimes that works well, sometimes not (cite battery
issues on 787).

~~~
ds9
Another case worse than partially-hijacked trips was mentioned in a slashdot
post, and if I recall correctly, there was a vague reference to the
autonomous-car-makers considering it, and it has bothered me ever since.

Imagine a situation where a crash appears to the AI of car C1 to be be
inevitable. But also, if C1 executes maneuver M1, its own occupants will be
saved from harm, but another car C2 will have a worse crash or will crash when
it otherwise would not - but if C1 does maneuver M2 instead, its own occupants
will be killed or suffer worse harm, but the occupants of C2 will be better
off. What if, in such a scenario, C1 would decide to "sacrifice" its own
occupants to minimize the total harm (e.g., C2 has more occupants)?

Self-driving cars might well be designed this way. It might be mandated by
law. Authorities would try to reassure objectors by saying the "avoidably
killed by your car" outcome is very unlikely and that you're better off in the
big picture of all risks.

Edit: On a closer reading I note that the linked page
[http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/the-
et...](http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/the-ethics-of-
autonomous-cars/280360/) covers, not exactly the above, but similar scenarios.

~~~
mcintyre1994
Apparently in the UK almost every inevitable crash will end with the driver
swerving right, usually putting his passenger in harm (driver sits on the
right). I'm told that's a natural and unavoidable reaction, so if it's true I
assume the opposite holds for America and etc. I guess that's another decision
the car has to make, do you hit an unavoidable obstacle head on or swerve,
presumably drastically changing the survival chances of each passenger. The
baseline human panic reaction is almost certainly easy to 'beat' but it's a
horrifying though that a car would have to make that decision.

~~~
tsunamifury
I've always thought that the protection part was a fallacy and the more
obvious conclusion is that they swerve in the direction they are used to
safely passing with.

------
A_COMPUTER
I had speculated about something like this with friends when it was announced
that Google was getting into autonomous driving cars. The combination of G+,
Maps, Zagats and a Google car that drives itself would give possible scenarios
like the car doing things like asking you:

"You haven't had lunch yet today. There's a highly-rated Italian place just
two minutes from here, would you me to take you there?" then afterwards, "what
did you think of your meal, on a scale of one to five? I'll share it with your
G+ circles."

The only thing that bothers me about this (besides the obvious data privacy
issue) is how much power it gives one entity Google, to subtly manipulate
nearly anything.

~~~
grahamburger
My phone already does this with Google Now.

~~~
kissickas
It suggests where to eat lunch if you haven't had it yet? Serious question,
that would be an awesome feature, but I couldn't find anything on it. I don't
regularly get lunch out but mine is always giving me "Places Nearby" which
seem to have nothing to do with my interests.

~~~
mcintyre1994
It's always seemed to me that places nearby is somewhat based on time, I'm
more likely to get the cinema in the afternoon and a restaurant in the
evening. It could just be coincidental but it'd make sense if it is influenced
by time. That's not as clever as knowing I haven't had lunch yet, but since I
often have it with me or buy it in a supermarket or something, they'd have no
way of accurately knowing anyway.

------
tomp
Why is this a hypothetical future scenario? AFAIK, Google is perfectly capable
of doing that even now, with route finding/guidance on Google Maps.

~~~
mixedbit
Right, Google was also recently granted a patent for something like this:
[http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=H...](http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,630,897.PN.&OS=PN/8,630,897&RS=PN/8,630,897)

------
mistercow
I don't think anyone is going to be dumb enough to try the specific scenario
this article outlines. The real world is noisy, and in practice, an objective
like "reroute path to include Krispy Kreme, but only if it isn't too far out
of the way" is going to have too many edge cases to do 100% reliably.

And it only takes one "my car made me 40 minutes late to work by trying to
take me by a Krispy Kreme in the next town" story to turn this idea into a
gigantic embarrassment for everyone involved.

~~~
scep12
> an objective like "reroute path to include Krispy Kreme, but only if it
> isn't too far out of the way" is going to have too many edge cases to do
> 100% reliably

Too many edge cases? I'm sure you would have said the same thing about self-
driving cars not too long ago. In a world where cars drive themselves,
choosing an alternate route based on traffic and waypoints is a relatively
easy problem to solve.

~~~
mistercow
It's a matter of risk vs. reward. The reward for self-driving cars is huge. If
it screws up once or twice and makes you late, you don't have a whole lot to
complain about. From the developer's point of view, it's not all that
embarrassing because it's naturally framed in the context of "yeah, but it's a
_self-driving car_."

But the situation is totally different with advertising. It's not "I was late
because my amazing scifi technology malfunctioned"; it's "I was late because
of a _crummy commercial_ ". The consumer doesn't get any tangible reward for
this, so they're just pissed off. And the developer and advertiser end up
embarrassed because they did something shady and it screwed someone's day up.

------
jupiterjaz
Honestly if autonomous cars can reduce even 10% of accidents caused by drunk
driving and other human errors then they will have payed their way and more.

~~~
derekp7
But speaking of paying, self driving cars also won't speed, turn right on red
without a full stop, etc. Which means traffic tickets would be a thing of the
past, along with the revenue they bring in.

~~~
VLM
Driving while black, failure to provide proof of ..., tail light out.

If a cop declares "your" car's driving was reckless or too fast for
conditions, how exactly do you fight that in court?

~~~
ewoodrich
You could probably fight it in court with the electronic logs that would
presumably be present in a self-driving car.

------
programminggeek
Between Glass and Google's self-driving cars, it is quite clear that the
future of advertising is going to be potentially quite distopian where virtual
billboards pop up based on your interest and location and where ads playing in
music are based on where you are and what time of day it is. They might be as
simple as a McDonalds ad for their mighty wings and your car will change
course if you say "I'm loving it!".

This is actually the sort of natural endpoint of what I thought would happen
with AR mobile apps and now that Google has Google Now on android, is doing
glass and self driving cars, it is pretty clear what the future looks like.

It's more ads.

~~~
davidgerard
Pohl and Kornbluth nailed it in the 1950s:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Space_Merchants)

------
ericcumbee
I am OK with this. as long as there is a web service that tells you when the
"hot" light is on.

------
melipone
Actually, I had a paper some time ago already on the issue of combining
preferences with optimization (shameless plug).
[http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16703681/homepage/mabrams...](http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16703681/homepage/mabramso/research/tcpabook.pdf)

------
DanielBMarkham
Better yet, would you trade ads and impulse buys for free rides?

So you never have to own a car, but every time you go anywhere your car is
actively trying to get you to spend time and money doing things you normally
wouldn't do -- play online games, visit donut shops, and so on. Would that be
worth never having to own a car?

~~~
GhotiFish
Consider that such base manipulation would be used primarily on the poor.

~~~
ericcumbee
I think it is a very long way down the road before the poor start getting self
driving cars.

~~~
maxerickson
If they work well they should be a more efficient use of capital than a normal
car (higher utilization, better adherence to maintenance schedules, etc). That
creates an opportunity for per mile charges to be cheaper than owning a car.

(they should obviously be some combination of more profitable and cheaper than
a taxi service...)

------
6d0debc071
> What if...?

Why not present the user with the option before their trip begins so that
you're not wasting a lot of fuel and so on? I can't see people being too happy
with you if you start routing their lives around your convenience. Advertising
currently costs the end user very little - but there's certainly a transaction
cost involved. If you start doing this to people, there'll be a significant
incentive for them to disable the system in some way, or opt for a different
one.

"Our cars only take you where you want to go." Would be a pretty good
advertising message. "Average 10% faster journey times from A to B. You're in
control. Take back your life." Etc.

------
maxerickson
This isn't that scary, in situations where the passenger does not own the
vehicle the route is probably going to be shown to them on the device that
they use to request the car, so there is plenty of opportunity for a
negotiated route (rather than a route determined strictly by the
vehicle/operator).

The trick is convincing enough people that they should pay attention to the
route they pay for.

~~~
VLM
This already doesn't work with human powered autonomous vehicles aka taxi cab.

------
bronbron
Maybe I'm missing something, but..

Doesn't this basically already happen? I would imagine retail space along main
thoroughfares (e.g. "Main street" or space right next to a very popular
highway exit) is substantially more expensive than one that sees 5 cars a day.
Retailers already basically know what route you're likely to be taking - the
one that most other people take.

Granted they don't physically stop your car and ask if you would like Krispy
Kremes, but it seems like that bidding war could get expensive quickly - now
Krispy Kreme has to compete for retail space along Main street, and they also
have to bid against Dunkin Donuts/etc. in the traffic routing business.
Further, If Krispy Kreme is routing 25% of all traffic past their store, then
the municipality in question either has to:

a) Outlaw this

b) Add additional roads, etc. to the road near Krispy Kreme, thus making this
road the new "Main street" anyway. It'd drive up the cost of that real estate
where Krispy Kreme is.

All in all, I just don't see it being economically viable for anyone.

------
VLM
Back when in dashboard GPS was a thing, wasn't access to the device cut off
while the vehicle was in gear? I wonder how that will interact with an
autonomous vehicle.

There are some interesting financial issues where driving me, slowly, past
every McDonalds would waste a lot of time and gas. How much gasoline will I
have to buy because a retailer purchased X number of drivebys?

For a variety of interesting and irrelevant dietary reasons I don't eat at
McDonalds. Presumably a smart enough socially connected car would understand
that and not waste my gasoline, time, mileage, and a restauranteurs purchased
drivebys so it would not route me past McDonalds. There are two amusements.
The first is lying and suddenly according to social media 90% of americans are
now following a paleo vegan diet, or never eat any cuisine except Bolivian
(because to the best of my knowledge there are no centers of Bolivian cuisine
anywhere nearby me) The second is the car equivalent of "swatting" where you
fool a social network into believing the victim is a huge supporter of NORML
so it routes the car thru some interesting neighborhoods, or endless fun with
rightwingers who are now "in the closet" per social media so they get routed
past certain bars and bathhouses and such.

One significant problem is autonomous vehicles would remove the need to pay as
much attention outside... so advertising would seem fairly pointless. I use
mythtv at home to skip legacy TV network commercials; coming up with an
exciting new technology to tailor TV commercials to me, which I'm going to
skip anyway, sounds very much like horseshoe mfgrs trying to tailor their
horseshoes to appeal to the new automobile invention a century or so ago. If
no one's looking out the window any more, why spend all that money on signs?
Just send them email spam. You can sent a lot of social media spam for the
cost of running a giant neon sign 24x7 for a decade.

~~~
endianswap
The modern cars I've driven with LCD dashboards (modern as in like MY2013)
have all allowed screwing with everything while driving, even GPS. I remember
when it wasn't allowed, but at some point they relaxed those rules?

------
drawkbox
This brings up very interesting ideas and questions that will happen with
autonomous cars.

Routes and retail along those routes will enter a new era. Building a store
you have to take into account algorithms of the vehicles. Slight changes to a
widely used system could shut down a business faster than individual human
choice (although it may also make other businesses seen more as it distributes
traffic across more roads - hot spots could become medium and less travelled
areas could become more lucrative).

Also, wouldn't it lessen ad hoc pulling into McDonalds on the way home? If the
machine is in control then you might not go get a donut even if it is along
the route, you'd schedule it in more ahead of time. In the same way e-commerce
is more direct, traveling will be more direct and the items at the checkout
are not as distracting, same as passing other stores, you'll be busy doing
other things like passengers possibly.

~~~
nightski
I don't see any reason to believe why you are in any less control with a
autonomous car. If anything, you would be in _more_ control because making
that quick decision turn into McDonalds would be as stressful as pushing a
button.

~~~
greeneggs
You think there's going to be a "McDonalds" button on the dashboard? No,
you'll have to press half a dozen buttons to reroute, and so you'll have past
the restaurant and won't bother. Whereas currently, your control is direct and
immediate.

Although (to argue against myself), why _shouldn 't_ there be a display that
shows you the upcoming businesses along your route, that you can click on to
reroute? Perhaps businesses who pay extra get slightly larger visuals or video
ads, or get shown for a larger radius (for example, the default is to show
businesses just to the immediate left and right, but pay extra to get shown a
block to the left or right). Quick, file a patent. :)

~~~
jack-r-abbit
I use Waze on my phone for my car nav. When I am stopped, it will often pop up
a small advert for something near by (usually offering some sort of deal) with
a single button that says something like "Go there". Tapping that button will
reroute me. If this was built into the car nav of an autonomous vehicle, I
don't see why it would need to be more complicated than what we already have
in other apps today.

------
perlpimp
There is limit for decisions for entire day one can have some if some
decisions are made for you, you can focus on other things. Technically it is a
small slice of your decision allotment but I guess if software can assist me
then it is great. However it should not apply to people with less intensive
mental labour, for those this might suddenly become habit forming for whatever
purpose car decides to stop over or not.

So in general it is ok for a car to stop by only if the car can roughly
estimate your health, blood sugar level etc. I mean if the car can assist me
for better living that would be great!

my 2c

------
rcthompson
Well, one solution to this is to have it show you the route in advance and
have you confirm it (or even edit it first). If it picks an obviously
suboptimal route, you know something's up. If Krispy Kreme is already on your
optimal route, then too bad.

Basically, as long as the thing doing the navigating is also showing your the
route it plans to take, then it can't pull any funny business like this
without you noticing.

------
calinet6
This shows surprising parallels to Net Neutrality, highlighting the importance
of getting this legislation correct for future technologies.

We almost need a new "Bill of Rights" for the 21st century to deal with all
the ambiguities brought about by technology.

------
saipenguin
What if your news article keeps buzz marketing Krispy Kreme?

------
nodata
Tell it to stop.

