I don't agree. Anything that gets grandma and soccer mom out of the left lane is ok by me!

Besides, planes take off and land by themselves every day.

Are you sure, I thought that's when autopilot was removed; for take-off and landing?

Yeah but just think about it this way...you'll have both hands hand free for firearms! I hate road raging when I have to drive with my knees!

Quite. They've been doing it for decades. They just don't talk a lot about it for obvious reasons.

Autoland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The US Air Force just landed an unmaned and unguided (computer control) fighter on an air craft carrier.

Edit: In fact I would bet its use will become more and more widespread, outside of bad weather primarily today, since with it you 'could' fly planes closer together.

There is a market. But I'm allowed to state my opposition to it. A lot of people assume it will all be better than human drivers. My faith in software isn't as strong, and lives are at stake.
Yes, and the mercedes that stops automatically. Safety gimmicks in luxury cars are nothing new.

But does it? Do we know how the automaton drives? Could be just as bad.

Ah, figured it was military related. :tup:

I'm assuming by your comments and general attitude that you are a late adopter of most technologies.

The software won't be released untested. Google has had fully autonomous vehicles on the road for awhile now. Nissan is the first OEM to release a statement and they are targeting 2020. That's a substantial amount of time for testing.

I'm confused as to how you consider crash avoidance systems a gimmick? To be honest, the algorithm is pretty simple and tens of thousands people die in automotive accidents every year in the United States alone.

Out of curiosity, how would YOU make vehicles safer moving forward?

Autonomous cars would be the best thing for safety and speed. However the challenge is the liability. Today we can blame the driver, tomorrow we would blame the "system". Insurance companies are going to have a fit! Less revenue!

This statement must mean something different to both of us. This does not mean Google has cars driving around to random places intermingled with varying levels of human traffic and other autonomous cars in a practical manner. As such, controls tests aren't enough for me.

Seven cars logged over a quarter million miles in San Francisco in 2010 and the only accident was when one of them was rear ended at a stoplight by a human driver.

There are problems with autonomous vehicles. I envision it a bit like a rail system, except our seats can break off to turn while the majority of the group continues on. Then my seat goes where I want.

In the US, we have a ridiculously litigious culture. We like yearn to blame someone/something else for any slight problem. This system won't be perfect, and as such makers of such vehicles are going to feed many a lawyer for life... Heaven forbid someone dies due to an accident or is late getting to a hospital. Or we have arguments about manual mode being engaged or not...

Road work/maintenance is going to have an additional challenge of needing to update car software/mapping. We start relying on software/connectivity/satellites for movement rather than our eyes, hands, and a mechanical vehicle under our control, and we're going to have annoying problems.

I suppose car headlights will sense green/red lights. I see money in selling green flashlights in the future. Or red ones, for that matter.

There are more, but I just think it's not a great idea without actual in place systems.


But no, really, I look forward to Google-powered cars that move on their own and deliver to me ads in my car based on where I am and the things in my vicinity. Kinda like a tour guide "driven" by ad sales.

Source? I'd be fine reading up on it.