How much longer do you estimate it'll take for self-driving

>>1581200
>is it even worthwhile for young adults to take driving classes?
Considering that politicians will likely require a licensed driver in the car for the next 30+ years or so, yes, it could be worthwhile.

>>1581200
In first world countries: 20 years or more
In shitty 3rd world: 400 years

Driver assisted cars like Tesla's Autopilot? Next 10-20 years it'll be >50% market share. Completely driverless? Probably 50+ years simply because of regulation, not because the technology isn't there. People are premature ejaculating over self driving cars when the government hasn't even regulated self driving trains yet besides metros on their own rail systems at airports.

>>1581223
I thought the same thing about regulations, but the auto industry regulations are actually reactionary, so it could be sooner than what you think

>>1581233
When only a few cities have allowed Google to test their car and only allow it to go 25mph tops, it's no surprise when I read "Google's self driving car has never had an accident" click bait and other shit.

While some states has even banned Tesla sales, it's still got a long ways to go in getting government approval.

I also think clickbait makes people believe self-driving is coming sooner than we think. Most car manufacturers are making driver assisted technology, not self driving autonomous technology like Google.

>>1581234
I agree 100% with the clickbait and stuff, a lot of people just want to feel like they're on the "cutting edge" of things

As a kid I never really understood the world, but now it's really not that impressive.

Everyone dresses up their stuff to be shiny and look amazing when they're all just snake oil sales people, they know the truth but they won't admit it because $$

we still use fucking air compressors for manufacturing stuff, it's a slow evolution not this giant leap these companies tout

>>1581236
That brings up the commercial side of things. It's going to take a hell of a lot more than a self driving Freightliner to replace truck drivers. It would require the evolution of multiple industries to fill the duties of what the truck driver does besides driving. Commercial transportation is a huge beast of complicated logistics and fuckery that hasn't been improved on in decades, simply because the industry can't afford to with all the cut rate prices because of the mega company Jews that barely stay afloat because they rely on volume and revenue than profits.

I think within 10 years driver assisted technology will become the new "Navigation system and cruise control" advertised in new cars. Self driving cars? 30-50+ years. Commercial transportation being automated? Hasn't even begun. Warehouses would need ot be automated first, and only Amazon is doing that right now. It'll take decades before even that becomes standardized.

But taxi drivers are fucked if Uber doesn't go belly up developing their own self driving taxis.

ITT:
>man personal computers are never gonna take off
>iPhone? Nobody wants a computer in their pocket
>the internet is just a fad, it'll never exist outside of universities and the military

Extremely conservative estimate: 10 years until you can buy a fully autonomous vehicle off the lot.

Realistic estimate: 3-5 years.

>>1581250
ITT: neckbeard who wants to be on the "cutting edge of things"

as said, regulations would choke the fuck out of this if they weren't reactionary in the auto industry.

Either way it's not going to be 3-5 years you fucking shill.
~t. someone who actually works in the auto industry

>>1581250
>he thinks transportation is the same as person computers, cell phones, and the internet.

This website is for people 18 and older. Reported.

>>1581255
Changing oil at a dealership =/= working in the auto industry. Ford's head of autonomous vehicles said they expect a market-ready generally autonomous vehicle in 6 years.

>>1581258
>he thinks it has anything to do with cars
Pro tip: self-driving is technology, based on computers, cell phones, and the internet. It won't just accelerate as fast as phones did, it'll be much faster.

>>1581259
>assuming I work in a dealership

Kindly fuck off neckbeard.

>>1581259

DoT currently cares less about your technology meme and some states are trying to ban Tesla's Autopilot.

At it's current state, self driving technology is more of a meme like consumer 3D printers than cell phones or personal computers.

>>1581271
Just stop responding to the super 1337 kid who knows the future. He's obviously a CEO of a billion dollar tech company and knows better than us

File: Anon the dumb dumb has a bad opinion and gets his sour butthole blasted, to be continued October 10th, 2021 at about 7-40PM Eastern.png (56KB, 872x766px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 872x766px

>>1581270
>>1581271
>>1581272
You guys are going to feel really stupid in 4 years when a guy pulls up next to you in a new car, hands off the wheel, his seat all the way back, watching a movie on his phone.

But hey, I guess we'll see, right? Pic related, I'll be keeping track.

>>1581278
You're making a lot of assumptions. You're assuming the regulations won't react by shutting it out.

You're assuming that something won't cause a delay in production.

No one denied self driving cars will exist, but you shills who think it'll be here tomorrow are dumb as fuck.

It's hilarious when engineers tell me they wouldn't trust their life with a self driving car, so either way I don't count on mass adoption for a LONG time.

One final thought, I bet you're one of those idiotic shills who actually believe uber and lyft will put automakers out of business. Who the fuck is going to manufacture the cars in this case where magic self driving taxis rule the world?

>>1581281
>engineers tell me they wouldn't trust their life with a self driving car
... who? Autonomous vehicles are already orders of magnitude safer than human drivers, and they're only in their infancy.

>uber and lyft put automakers out of business
I've literally never heard this. They're going to make taxis (and taxi drivers) obsolete, who the fuck told you they'd put car manufacturers out of business? That doesn't make sense.

>>1581281
>It's hilarious when engineers tell me they wouldn't trust their life with a self driving car

As an engineer I will trust a system that has reaction times in milliseconds over any human driver.

I can see the tech being fully developed by 2020, but it won't be common until 2030. Regulators are going to allow it because it will reduce traffic deaths.

>>1581290
Electrical engineers and Mechanical engineers.

Shills doing investment news have literally said that uber and lyft would put ford out of business. Can't remember the article but it was the dumbest shit I've ever read. Their logic was

>Everyone will be using self driving taxis to get everywhere
>no one will buy new cars
>ford and others will go out of business

>>1581303
Alright those journalists are retarded, nobody with a brain would ever think that.

But those engineers are retarded too. I agree with >>1581301

The BEST human drivers in the world can maintain ~120-150ms reaction times for up to a few hours at a time. Racing Formula 1 vehicles. Reaction times for an average human driver are somewhere between 500ms and about a second, and that's for "expected" situations. For exceptional ie completely non-standard situations (like someone driving the wrong way on the road), the average human takes several SECONDS to react.

A computer can take in data, process it, and begin reacting within 10 milliseconds at all times, is always 100% alert, never blinks, doesn't get tired or drunk, doesn't talk on the phone, doesn't do its makeup or mess with the radio, doesn't get distracted by things happening on the side of the road.

Yeah I think I'll take the computer.

>>1581278
And i would laugh when he gets a ticket, like all of the Autopilot cucks are getting because they think they don't need to be at attention

>>1581290
>Autonomous vehicles are already orders of magnitude safer than human drivers, and they're only in their infancy.

Autonomous cars don't exist yet retard. And driver assisted cars have already caused some deadly wrecks with confusion with who is at fault, hence why states are already trying to ban them until further regulation.

>>1581310
>humans program computer
>program has flaw
>dead

wewieohio its as if though software isn't as perfect as you shills think it is

>>1581318
Autopilot couldn't even see a tractor trailer and killed the driver.

>>1581321
>1581321
hurr durr b-but muh self driving cars only have to be safer than human drivers!! there will always be accidents!!

>>1581301
2030 is still extremely optimistic. It has taken 26 years for ACC to improve and get the government nod to only build 30% market share, but completely autonomous vehicles are going to take over the market in 14? Seems legit.

>>1581313
>>1581318
>>1581321
>>1581331
>>1581332
You people are retarded. Who is paying you to say this shit? Like... taxi companies?

Honestly I can't figure it out. I'm out of this thread, but you morons (assuming you aren't being paid) can continue thinking your stupid bullshit. Have fun.

>>1581339

Try not to get arrested making your 1337 hax CEO

>>1581342
He probably went broke on the 3D printer meme and now he's shilling the next meme.

It's funny people are saying it'll control the market in 3-5 years when no manufacturer is even creating autonomous technology yet. I guess they believe driver assisted is the same as autonomous, when it isn't and why the government is attacking Tesla to change the name of Autopilot. People like him have been saying the same thing since the 90s actually. Remember when solar energy was supposed to power at least 50% of the world by now? lol

>>1581349
I think he's an autist that might know a little bit of coding, titles himself a software engineer and thinks everything is perfect

i bet he also thinks robots are going to take over the world in 5 years and automate everyone out of a job, meanwhile we're still using fucking air compressors to do shit and cheap chinese/indian labor will replace people before robots.

the world is not as "advanced" or high tech as these neckbeards like to sell. It starts with investment shills making something look shiny and making it sound good. It's entirely different from reality.

>>1581359

I've witnessed it first hand. It costs more to hire 1 person to maintain an automated extrusion line than it does to hire 2-3 people to run the machinery manually. Self check out lanes has been sitting in grocery stores broken for years because it's cheaper to hire some 17 year old cashier than a replacement.

Technology is there, but the capital and willingness to evolve isn't, so these tech companies have to shill and IPO to cash out. Start up bubble needs to pop so we can get back to reality. We are a capitalist country. We are going to drain every last resource we can before we move on to the next. That's why tech companies still use silicon instead of graphene.

>>1581200
Not until they're commonly affordable. Look at how few people can afford hybrids.

There also needs to be a final ruling on whose fault it is when a self-driving car crashes.

>>1581370
this is another big thing, BMW has openly accepted they are at fault if their self-driving fails


This id the only option automakers can take, because consumers will not buy the vehicle and then accept fault for the computer wreck.

I can't wait until these automakers put themselves out of business with self-driving vehicles. Completely forgot about this point.

We a constitutional amendment to guarantee our right to drive a vehicle. I feel all the self driving cars will lead to people wanting to ban human drivers

This shit will never take off, it will cost too much to have self driving cars. It will be a niche market.

Private ownership of self-driving cars probably won't ever be a large-scale thing. There'll be no advantage of buying over renting per fare. Self-driving cars are going to replace private ownership of vehicles, taxi services and public transit. Every large city is going to have a fleet of vehicles and you'll order them with an app (or whatever communication device we'll be using). The car shows up and takes you wherever you want to go. You hop out and the car goes to the next fare.

My city (European capital city) is already commissioning studies on how to use the space recovered from parking lots and street-side parking, because under the new system they reckon we'd need somewhere between only 1/3 or even zero parking space (they could just cruise indefinitely and would only need to stop to recharge at night when there's less traffic anyway).

The jump from self-driving cars to a nation-wide automatic grid is less than the jump from privately owned manual vehicles to self-driving cars. And it offers way more benefits - fewer cars, fewer accidents, even faster travel without the need for signalling, etc. Every additional car joining the grid is improving the whole system so there's real regulatory incentive to push for automatisation. It's going to be fucking sweet! I hope it happens in my lifetime.

Think about it, it's the logical progression. We used to own software. Then we licensed it. Now there's sofware as a service. The same will happen with cars. First they'll only license you the car, then driving as a service will come.

>>1581370
>when a self-driving car crashes.

You mean when a human driver crashes into a self-driving car then blames it on the latter.

There was a story being pushed hard that a self driving car failed and caused an accident when the reality was some moron rear ended it at a stop light.

>>1581450
Tesla's Autopilot failed to see a tractor trailer because of the sun and drove into the rear of it killing the passenger.

>>1581450
And a study published in October 2015 found that self-driving cars are more likely to be in an accident. The study, conducted by the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute, found that per million miles traveled, self-driving cars had a higher crash rate than traditional cars. At the time of the study, no self-driving cars had been found at fault for the crashes they were involved in.

>>1581455
Tesla's "Autopilot" is a misnomer. It's a glorified cruise control.

>>1581464
>no self-driving cars had been found at fault for the crashes they were involved in.

yes exactly

File: 1434320599479.gif (1MB, 202x202px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 202x202px

38,300 people were killed on U.S. roads in 2015

Self driving cars are going to come quick!

>>1581472
Autopilot is literally what every other manufacturer is creating. Nobody is making autonomous besides Google which means nothing.

>>1581473
Sensing hardware, spatial maps, and software algorithms will vary among manufacturers of self-driving vehicles, resulting in variability of on-road performance—as is the case with humans

Their exposure has not yet been representative of the exposure for conventional vehicles. Visual and sensing performance of self-driving vehicles in inclement weather is not yet sufficient. Current self-driving vehicles have not yet been tested thoroughly under a variety of demanding conditions because the Government has not yet allowed them to.On-road performance of some current self-driving vehicles is not yet perfect, even in good weather.

The government does not like self-driving technology because during the transition period when conventional and self-driving vehicles would share the road, safety might actually worsen, at least for the conventional vehicles.

The current best estimate is that self-driving vehicles have a higher crash rate per million miles traveled than conventional vehicles, and similar patterns were evident for injuries per million miles traveled and for injuries
per crash.

For about 62% of Americans, self-driving
vehicles currently are not likely to result in an improvement in productivity.

The most frequent preference for vehicle automation continues to be for no self-driving
capability, followed by partially self-driving vehicles, with completely self-driving vehicles
being the least preferred choice.

Overall public (and government) opinion has been remarkably consistent over the two years that this survey has been conducted. The general patterns of responses have not changed over the course of these two surveys, despite the increased media coverage of self-driving vehicles

>>1581495
My mistake, 2 other companies are developing and testing self-driving vehicles. Delphi and Audi.

File: EV.png (47KB, 1238x525px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1238x525px

Well, I don't know at what rate the car fleet of a country gets replaced. I know it's very slow in Norway, because cars are really pricey, and therefore we have one of Europe's oldest car fleets (avg. 10,5 years).

I assume that if they can get affordable versions from the get-go, they will capture a fairly large portion of the new car sales. Electrical vehicles are in Norway at the moment very incentivised, and currently every one in five new cars sold is an EV.

The charts to the right is which counties have the most EVs, which happen to be the richest and most trafficked counties. I assume self-driving cars will be popular with the same crowd, and with some perks the self-driving cars will grow at the very least at the same rate, probably much quicker.

But guys, think how much more data people are going to use once their cars are self-driving. AT&T and Verizon?

>>1581485
Thats the only /fit/ youtube channel I subscribed too.

worth

>>1581532

Channel name?

>>1581549
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ooohbabybeast

I ride a horse but don't have my license.

>>1581376

for somone who laughed about click bait its ironic that your opinions are based on clickbait
you have no idea what you are talking about
and you do not work for an OEM

you clearly have no idea what you are talking about
stop posting and go outside.

#1 industry effected by self driving cars = Insurance.

None of them have this on their radar.


It's going to be regulated to death
The tech is not ready
Things get really legally complicated due to long standing laws about not making cars non-serviceable by owners yet needing to make cars an IoT but not open source.
Cheap throw away cars are what matters now. VW just surpassed Toyota in sales and they make the current definition of a throw away car that is literally glued together. If you want to make an expensive self driver I can make a car that doesn't self drive for 1/2 the cost and sell it to the world while you search for the 'premium' customer.

>>1583638
A car insurance company's favorite customer is someone who pays small premiums and never gets into an accident, so it seems to me that they'd love SDC.

>It's going to be regulated to death
It's possible, but there are industries pushing for SDC as well as against.

>The tech is not ready
That is true for now, but it has already been demonstrated as being technologically possible and feasible. It might not be ready yet, but it will be soon.

>Things get really legally complicated due to long standing laws about not making cars non-serviceable by owners yet needing to make cars an IoT but not open source.
I'm not familiar with the exact wording of the laws there, but does it even apply to the car's software? Most cars have a computer in them that is closed source and largely not modifiable by the consumer. And anyway, why not just let them be open source? Car companies aren't selling the software, they're selling the car.

>Cheap throw away cars are what matters now.
Why can't cheap throw away cars be self-driving? The reason the Model S is so expensive now is because 1) The sensor technology is brand new and 2) because it's intended to be a luxury sedan. The Model 3 is intended to sell for $35,000 base price. That's comparable to plenty of mass market cars without self-driving features, and there's clearly plenty of demand for it. Once the tech matures for a few years and several major car companies start building up a supply chain on sensor components for mass market, the cost will drop even more.

>How much longer do you estimate it'll take for self-driving cars to become commonplace?
10+ years at least. wouldnt surprise me if it took 20-30 years.
>Do you think they'll really take over the market, or will they fail to?
they will not come close to taking over the market.
>With all that in mind, is it even worthwhile for young adults to take driving classes?
if you want to use a car for transportation, yes.