Re:Waymo: Google's self-driving car company
by trome on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @05:20PM
(#13171696)
Why should local municipalities foot the bill for adding beacons to stop lights, etc? I get trying to make infrastructure friendly towards self driving cars, but the general public should not be footing the bill for someone's life choice to buy such a vehicle.
Re:Waymo: Google's self-driving car company
by BurningFrog on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @06:56PM
(#13172529)
This is important traffic infrastructure, just like visual traffic lights and asphalt. That said, it can be paid for my many actors.
Re:Waymo: Google's self-driving car company
by walrus1066 on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @05:43PM
(#13171925)
Because if we do resolve these issues, our roads will be much, much safer with autonomous cars. 2k people die on the roads each year in the UK, multiples more sustain life long injuries. I was in an accident, which could have been prevented were it not for the 1 second it takes for a human to react to a situation.
Re:Waymo: Google's self-driving car company
by jimstr on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @05:22PM
(#13171709)
> so a remote driver can take over a car
nope. nope.
Re:Waymo: Google's self-driving car company
by BurningFrog on Tuesday December 13, 2016 @07:01PM
(#13172567)
Right. Just like we paint roads to tell humans (and camera driven cars) where the lanes are, we should have digital markings to tell self driving cars where the road is directly.
The remote takeover seems entirely separate, and both promising and terrifying.
I should also add: - very fast mobile data, with no blackspots, so a remote driver can take over a car that's confused by a situation - a replacement for GPS, it's not reliable enough, the signal is far too weak - digital signal beacons embedded in lane markings, and edges of the road, and on traffic cones for roadworks