Driverless taxi in San Francisco: We spent a few days over there. These things are everywhere. They are controversial. They have caused incidents where they have interfered with...

therwol Loc: USA

We spent a few days over there. These things are everywhere. They are controversial. They have caused incidents where they have interfered with emergency vehicles and driven over fire hoses. Two quick pictures with my cell phone, one when we were following the thing in my daughter's car and one from the side. Two passengers. No driver.

(Download)

NMGal Loc: NE NM

I’m not brave enough to ride in one of those.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

You're kidding me! A driverless Jaguar

therwol Loc: USA

NMGal wrote:

I’m not brave enough to ride in one of those.

I wouldn't dare. There was an incident where one of them pulled out in front of a fire truck and got clobbered. There was an incident last month where they all stopped in the middle of the road at once, probably a computer issue. One of them recently drove through wet cement. People are putting cones on the hoods, which seems to immobilize them. I wouldn't say that there is no future for driverless cars, but they're not ready for prime time, and to turn them loose in San Francisco, not the easiest city to drive in, seems reckless. But there is a lot of money behind this.

bcheary Loc: Jacksonville, FL

therwol wrote:

We spent a few days over there. These things are everywhere. They are controversial. They have caused incidents where they have interfered with emergency vehicles and driven over fire hoses. Two quick pictures with my cell phone, one when we were following the thing in my daughter's car and one from the side. Two passengers. No driver.

Not for me.

Ollieboy

Only an idiot would get into one of these. They are many years from being safe if ever. Just my opinion.

terryMc Loc: Arizona's White Mountains

I just read about the Cal. governor vetoing a bill that would have required a safety monitor/driver in automated trucks and cabs. Something about it was the future, and he didn't want to stand in the way of progress. The bill was heavily lobbied against by the trucking industry and was supported by just about everybody else.

I was a teamster. I don't think I'd have liked losing my job to a truck that can't stay out of the way of a fire truck. But then maybe they can send fire trucks to fires by themselves too, and it will just be the Crashes of the Autobots...I wonder if the firefighter-less fire trucks will know where to point the hoses when they get there?

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Ollieboy wrote:

Only an idiot would get into one of these. They are many years from being safe if ever. Just my opinion.

They may still have a few problems, but their safety record is already better than human drivers. I live in San Francisco and I see them driving around. As a pedestrian, they always yield when I am trying to cross a crosswalk, which I can't rely on with human drivers. They always appear to be obeying traffic laws, don't speed, signal their turns, etc.

Burtzy Loc: Bronx N.Y. & Simi Valley, CA

Curmudgeon wrote:

You're kidding me! A driverless Jaguar

Wouldn't you know that they would build a driverless car into a Jag...a car that has always had electrical and now electronics issues. It must be the first wave of the Terminators.

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

therwol wrote:

We spent a few days over there. These things are everywhere. They are controversial. They have caused incidents where they have interfered with emergency vehicles and driven over fire hoses. Two quick pictures with my cell phone, one when we were following the thing in my daughter's car and one from the side. Two passengers. No driver.

Like EVs, driverless vehicles may be part of the future, but they will require so much more research and experimentation, not to mention the need for additional infrastructure across the country. When horeseless carriages were first introduced, there were many fewer methods of transportation and smaller fraction of travellers on the roads. I'll stick to operating a vehicle myself and feel safer. No driverless cars (or trucks) for me.

Ollieboy

Nobody discusses the insurance costs. The premium will probably be as high as the vehicle's cost.

therwol Loc: USA

JohnSwanda wrote:

They may still have a few problems, but their safety record is already better than human drivers.

In my opinion, better than human drivers is a pretty low bar. They probably won't roll through stop signs, run red lights, speed or zig-zag at 100 mph across lanes of the freeway. And they won't drink alcohol and drive either, but there have been troubling incidents with them in San Francisco, and this will continue until they're "perfect." When will that happen? Incidents that result in injury or death will result in lawsuits, and I can see cities that allow these vehicles on their streets having to assume some of the liability in those. "Have you or a loved one been injured or killed in a mishap involving a driverless car? Call 1-800......." Some things can be predicted.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

therwol wrote:

In my opinion, better than human drivers is a pret... (show quote)

I think the driverless safety record is enough better to justify testing in real traffic. People who object remind me of people who are afraid to fly even though it is statistically safer than driving. Yes, there have been I believe three or four incidents where they had problems, which were heavily covered in the media, but I doh't think there have been any injuries or deaths or they would have been covered for sure and meanwhile drivers have injured and killed people.

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

NMGal wrote:

I’m not brave enough to ride in one of those.

Just recently...might be well advised to stay out of these cars, San Francisco as well. Its obvious they're not ready for Prime Time, if ever.

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/robotaxi-san-francisco-woman-hit-pinned-fifth-street-market/

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Just another way to take a job away from somebody.