Actually, if you were going to commit a murder, put your cell phone into the car and send it driving itself all over town and then to meet and pick you up somewhere when the deed is done. Instant alibi.

 

every car comes with a bomb sniffer and facial recognition that links to google maps and shows your face live on a google maps interactive website so you see who the f@#k just cut you off on the I10.

it's evolution of the vehicle - it will have it's place in time in certain locations.

Nothing like a 1700lb Smart Car swirving in and out of traffic around vehicles that average over double the weight. I just see IDIOT signs above those that do. Maybe these idot smart car people will use these type of cars instead?

 

Ummm, what?!?

Why is it important that we "embrace [nonsense]" for the sake of nonsense? Trains already are confined to a set path without the ability to deviate and that hasn't prevented catastrophe on a pretty regular basis. The idea that "technology" is failsafe and perfect is an idea born from ignorance. The higher the number of autonomous vehicles the higher the incidence of failure. The idea that somehow Google or state legislation are doing things "all the right way" is ludicrous - it's not like there are a large number of organizations out there taking alternate paths rampant with failure.

The only reason Google is pouring money into this is for the press exposure. Anyone who has every used a computer professionally or even reads the newspaper regularly knows that technical flaws routinely cause unforeseen issues.

Yes, human drivers are not perfect. On the other hand, human drivers have the ability to learn and improve. Electro-mechanical systems lack the ability to adapt to unforeseen circumstances and utterly fail at fixing themselves when gross error is apparent to any observer. Adding a computerized control system hasn't resulted in cars that don't break down.

A company like Google has employees that are very familiar with the concept that successful operation in small numbers does not imply successful execution in very large numbers. Hard drives are just the first example that comes to mind - you might never have an issue with your only hard drive, but when you try to run hundreds in a large number of arrays catastrophic drive failure becomes a common occurrence. We aren't hearing from those employees because their experience doesn't jive with the Google PR machine.

 

id love this. Id love to be able to take a nap while the car drives. I get absolutely no enjoyment in doing a NYC hell commute.

 

Didn't see that in the article and I just read it again; I presume you're following this development elsewhere.

 

no. I'm making fun of it. I have no idea if what I said is true. that last part is a good idea though. Google chat while you are in the car. it's already going to be track everywhere you go.. .

 

California just passed a law that you can't nap in an autonomous car.