January 6, 2008
ELIMINATE HUMAN ERROR AND THEY'RE SAFE:
GM Researching Driverless Cars (TOM KRISHER, 1/06/08, AP)
Cars that drive themselves—even parking at their destination—could be ready for sale within a decade, General Motors Corp. executives say.GM, parts suppliers, university engineers and other automakers all are working on vehicles that could revolutionize short- and long-distance travel. And Tuesday at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will devote part of his speech to the driverless vehicles.
"This is not science fiction," Larry Burns, GM's vice president for research and development, said in a recent interview.
The most significant obstacles facing the vehicles could be human rather than technical: government regulation, liability laws, privacy concerns and people's passion for the automobile and the control it gives them.
Insurance rates will force the switch over. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 6, 2008 8:34 PM
At least it can programmed to drive itself to the shop when there is a recall.
I'd be happier if they built a car that wasn't a piece of crap.
Dittos for Ford and Cerberus.
Geez, this is up there with 'heated windshields' and 'idiot lights'. Will they program them to drive slow in the left lane if you are of the correct ethnic group?
At least I have a bit for my show tomorrow.
Posted by: Bruno at January 6, 2008 9:05 PMCerberus could build a 'Collateralized Driving Obligation' that drives itself to the repo man when you miss your payment.
Posted by: Bruno at January 6, 2008 9:17 PMI think the opposite, that insurance rates for the liability insurance for the manufacturer will keep these off the street for a decade or two past their technological feasibility. The first time one of these cars makes an error and kills someone (which will happen) it's game over for the manufacturer.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at January 6, 2008 10:42 PMIf this is true, then why should we be spending tens of billions of dollars on the infrastructure to support inflexible 19th Century transportation systems like trolleys? (This implies that systems like Puget Sound's "light rail" will be obsolete before they are even finished.) Instead we should be rebuilding and upgrading our highways in anticipation of the day when these are ready to go.
They will be trains, just with individual cars. Public policy should disfavor atomization and support civic society
Posted by: oj at January 7, 2008 7:37 AMActuaries aren't hysterics.
Posted by: oj at January 7, 2008 7:39 AMEliminate human error in a system designed by humans, built by humans, run by humans, and used by humans?
Um, okay...
Posted by: Mikey at January 7, 2008 7:55 AMThey'll have to pull the steering wheel from my cold dead hands first.
Posted by: erp at January 7, 2008 9:16 AMOJ,
As brilliant as you are, don't you notice the paradox between your promotion of "the end of history" (see other post) and attacking "atomization."
I know that Fukuyama and other "EOH" promoters don't see it, but libertarian atomization is the eventual endpoint of their society.
The irony is evident in this post. Your love of trains, combined with the technology outlined in this post, will likely yield "atomized" trains, where the "cars" (likely to look like "smartcar" pods) will attach to some moving train, only to detatch at the proper "exit."
(think high speed "quad lifts" at the ski area, where the chair actually detaches)
You'll get your trains, and you'll get atomization. Such is the march of toward 'end of history.'
Posted by: Bruno at January 7, 2008 9:56 AMYes, Fukuyama is wrong about the End of History. It's Christian, not libertarian.
Posted by: oj at January 7, 2008 3:13 PM