A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old October 10th 17, 07:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,044
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 12:49 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 11:20:58 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 11:32:54 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Now, back to my question. How much are you willing to relinquish for
the privilege of riding your bicycle on the driverless highway of the
future? Are you ready for robo-bike?


I'm not willing to relinquish my right to travel by bicycle.
- Frank Krygowski


I didn't say you couldn't ride your bicycle. I said that you couldn't
ride if safely on the highway of the future. At worst, all it would
require is that you carry or attach several thousand(?) dollars in
technology so that the driverless vehicles would be able to detect and
avoid hitting you on your bicycle.


I just don't expect that situation to arise. Again, I doubt most streets
will see any infrastructure changes at all, simply because the cost
would be almost infinite. There are too many streets to retrofit. So the
capability will almost entirely be built into the cars.

Those working on the cars know that they must detect pedestrians,
including kids on bikes. I can't imagine a social environment that would
allow laws requiring several thousand dollars of equipment on a $99
Wal-mart kids bike. So bikes will have to be detected by other means.

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #72  
Old October 10th 17, 07:30 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,044
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 1:10 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:55:03 -0500, DougC
wrote:

I think eventually self-driving cars will be a lot more efficient than
what we have now...


Maybe. Personally, I see some initial problems where a line of
self-driving vehicles proceed at the speed of the slowest vehicle.
Even if a passing algorithm is perfected, there will still be a
tendency for similar speed vehicles to "clump" together in traffic. My
guess(tm) is that the self-driving vehicle will be the equivalent of
filling the highway with very conservative drivers, that follow every
driving regulations, never go past the speed limit, and are courteous
to other vehicles to the point of paranoia.


Sounds nice! ;-)


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #73  
Old October 10th 17, 07:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,044
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 1:10 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:55:03 -0500, DougC
wrote:

I think eventually self-driving cars will be a lot more efficient than
what we have now...


Maybe. Personally, I see some initial problems where a line of
self-driving vehicles proceed at the speed of the slowest vehicle.
Even if a passing algorithm is perfected, there will still be a
tendency for similar speed vehicles to "clump" together in traffic. My
guess(tm) is that the self-driving vehicle will be the equivalent of
filling the highway with very conservative drivers, that follow every
driving regulations, never go past the speed limit, and are courteous
to other vehicles to the point of paranoia.


Regarding "clumping": That can be beneficial on freeways. Especially if
they communicate, self-driving cars can draft each other, forming a de
facto train on the pavement. Car occupants could relax and read, work,
look at scenery, whatever. Gas mileage (or electricity consumption)
would be reduced.

Yes, travel time might slightly increase, but the difference would be
small. For freeways, it's easy to calculate. Driving 70 miles at 70 mph
saves only about 5 minutes over driving at 65.

And this scheme would remove one of my personal frustrations. I use
cruise control on freeways, but it seems most drivers do not. (I guess a
system with four buttons is just too complex.) Anyway, very frequently
my car on cruise will approach a slower car, so I'll move left to pass.
But as soon as the driver notices me, he's reminded that he can indeed
drive a bit faster. So he speeds up, often matching my speed and keeping
me stuck next to him in the left lane. In some cases, he'll speed up and
pull ahead; then when he loses concentration he slows back down. Rinse
and repeat.

If everybody just locked into a convoy, that annoyance would go away.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #74  
Old October 10th 17, 09:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,826
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:15:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/10/2017 12:16 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 22:37:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

I wasn't doubting that auto-cars will exist and become popular. I was
doubting that the government will "shove them down our throats."


Well, let's pretend that the "Smart Driverless Highway of the
Future(tm)" is funded with our tax dollars, in order to provide a
suitable arena for testing driverless vehicles.


But they're testing these things now on ordinary streets. They're
attempting to make the cars, not the highway, "smart."


That's only temporary. Today's driverless cars need to squeeze into
the existing infrastructure because it would be too expensive to
upgrade the roads. For example, how difficult would it be to bury a
single wire down the middle of every lane so that driverless cars
could follow the wire instead of trying to guess where the lane lines
are located from optical recognition (which fails in the rain) to GPS
(which fails if the DOP (dilution of position) is too large)? After a
few regrettable incidents, such aids to navigation will need to be
done, but not immediately.

I guess I should mention that the first automobiles ran on dirt roads,
full of potholes and ruts, that were originally intended for horse
trails. This video might be enlightening.
"Magic Highway, U.S.A. (1958)"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7icGIHPOviQ

It's not just the highway that needs to be "smart". The same can be
done to obvious road hazards, cyclists, and pedestrians. Fast forward
to the vehicular Nirvana of future, where driverless cars will never
crash into another driverless car, because they have transponders. It
would not take much to design a personal transponder for pedestrians,
joggers, skateboarders, and cyclists. If you're cheap, some pattern
that the optical recognition system would recognize as a human, brick
wall, manhole, or telephone pole, would be a big seller if not a
survival requirement. Simply stenciling the word "HUMAN" on your
riding jacket will serve as a talisman to protect you from being
clobbered by a driverless vehicle.

However, these ideas are in the future, where the number of driverless
cars can justify their existence. For right now, the designers are
doing their best with what they currently have to work with.



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #75  
Old October 10th 17, 09:29 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,826
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:28:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/10/2017 12:49 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 11:20:58 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 11:32:54 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Now, back to my question. How much are you willing to relinquish for
the privilege of riding your bicycle on the driverless highway of the
future? Are you ready for robo-bike?


I'm not willing to relinquish my right to travel by bicycle.
- Frank Krygowski


I didn't say you couldn't ride your bicycle. I said that you couldn't
ride if safely on the highway of the future. At worst, all it would
require is that you carry or attach several thousand(?) dollars in
technology so that the driverless vehicles would be able to detect and
avoid hitting you on your bicycle.


I just don't expect that situation to arise. Again, I doubt most streets
will see any infrastructure changes at all, simply because the cost
would be almost infinite. There are too many streets to retrofit. So the
capability will almost entirely be built into the cars.


It certainly will take a long time to add navigation aids to the
streets, roads, and highways, but the cost is not infinite if spread
over a fairly long period. 40 years ago, when I first moved into the
area, we had one defective traffic light on Hwy 9. Today, we have 5
signal lights and several push button pedestrian crosswalks. The cost
of the added signals were about $150,000 each. However, without
proper justification, none would have been built. Unfortunately, the
only justification that could get the attention of the State was to
kill off a few kids at each intersection, thus justifying the
expenditure in the name of safety. My guess(tm) is that the streets
with the most driverless vehicle accidents and fatalities, will be the
first to be retrofitted with navigation and recognition aids. It may
be 50 years before all the streets are modernized, but like wheel
chair ramps at intersection, pedestrian walk buttons, signal lights
everywhere, computerized traffic management, and emergency vehicle
bypass, upgrades will happen.

Those working on the cars know that they must detect pedestrians,
including kids on bikes. I can't imagine a social environment that would
allow laws requiring several thousand dollars of equipment on a $99
Wal-mart kids bike. So bikes will have to be detected by other means.


My guess(tm), is I can build a mm wave transponder for about $20.
Retail cost would be about $70. If the design is standardized and the
quantities sufficiently large, it would cost much less. If that's
unacceptable, I mentioned a pattern or word printed on clothes or a
striker that would help the driverless car recognize pedestrians. Last
resort might be an LED flashlight, that transmits a flashing pattern
that the vehicle recognizes as "don't run over me".

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #76  
Old October 10th 17, 09:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,826
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:44:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

If everybody just locked into a convoy, that annoyance would go away.


Way back in college daze, I took a traffic engineering class in which
me ran computah simulations of various traffic patterns. The
tailgaters convoy, where everyone drives very close together and at
the same speed works great as long as nobody enters or leaves the
convoy. When that happens, one part of the convoy will need to speed
up or slow down to accommodate the addition or reduction in length.
The reaction time of each driver or vehicle is different resulting
spacing variations. Eventually, the convoy starts to look and act
like an accordion. I've confirmed this behavior when talking to
friends who regularly attend mobile home and camper trailer rallys.

Please note that it is quite likely that driverless vehicle will be
programmed to rigorously follow traffic laws which are designed to be
more stringent than practical. For example, speed limits are often 10
mph below what would be considered safe, on the assumption that
everyone drives a few mph faster than the speed limit. The problem is
that if everyone actually followed the speed limit, traffic flow would
come to a halt.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #77  
Old October 10th 17, 10:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,044
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 4:42 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:44:23 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

If everybody just locked into a convoy, that annoyance would go away.


Way back in college daze, I took a traffic engineering class in which
me ran computah simulations of various traffic patterns. The
tailgaters convoy, where everyone drives very close together and at
the same speed works great as long as nobody enters or leaves the
convoy. When that happens, one part of the convoy will need to speed
up or slow down to accommodate the addition or reduction in length.
The reaction time of each driver or vehicle is different resulting
spacing variations. Eventually, the convoy starts to look and act
like an accordion. I've confirmed this behavior when talking to
friends who regularly attend mobile home and camper trailer rallys.


That sounds like a problem that a good physics and software team could
solve in a day.

Please note that it is quite likely that driverless vehicle will be
programmed to rigorously follow traffic laws which are designed to be
more stringent than practical. For example, speed limits are often 10
mph below what would be considered safe, on the assumption that
everyone drives a few mph faster than the speed limit. The problem is
that if everyone actually followed the speed limit, traffic flow would
come to a halt.


???


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #78  
Old October 10th 17, 10:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,556
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 1:16 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:

On Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 1:19:43 AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 22:37:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 10/9/2017 3:13 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 11:30:40 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski wrote:

I wasn't doubting that auto-cars will exist and become popular. I was
doubting that the government will "shove them down our throats."

I wonder whether they will ever become popular given that they quite
obviously will be more expensive, perhaps much more expensive, I am
reading numbers as large as $75,000 for Google's autonomous driving
vehicle. Didn't SMS recently post something about buying a new car? I
seem to remember numbers in the range of a third of that value.


I imagine you're right, that in the short term these things will be
expensive. But I expect that long term the price difference will be
greatly reduced. (I imagine the phone in my pocket would have been
worth ten thousand dollars 10 years ago, if it existed at all.)

But what do you get for this money? After all probably everyone
reading this is capable of driving an automobile so what advantage
does this, rather expensive, self-driver provide?


Well: To my astonishment, I find that I'm driving long distances much
more often since I retired. It's not just retirement that influenced
that (although it enabled it); there have been family matters that
have arisen, new obligations and avocations, different circles of
friends, etc. But driving an hour each way is now far, far too
common. And sitting behind a steering wheel always seems damned
unproductive.

Even if self-driving worked only on limited access freeways, it would
ease a lot of frustration. I think it would make the experience of
freeway driving much more like the experience of riding a train in a
private compartment. The couple times I've done that, I found it to be
fairly pleasant.

Another problem that might arise. Will a self-driver work if one
visits Canada, or Mexico?


I guess it would depend on whether the system required a two-way
communication network. If so, Canada might achieve that before the
U.S. did. (I assume a bunch of U.S. states would declare this to be a
muslim or communist conspiracy and refuse to buy into it.)


With current technology recognition of traffic signs is still very
brittle, see for example:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-...ing-algorithms

or

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/09...-driving-cars/

An octagonal red sign may scream "stop" to you and me, even if it
actually says "alto" or "pare", but we're not machine vision programs,
which are "taught" to recognize signs without anything like
understanding of the concepts human beings use. For example, flat
surface, road sign, octagon ...

I suspect that if the powers that be (not all strictly government)
desire widespread autonomous vehicles that some system of transponders
not intelligible to unaided human beings will be required, and
pedestrians and cyclists and drivers of antique vehicles will have to
adapt or be squashed. To many of those powers this is a feature, not a
bug.


Fleet drivers in 2017/2018 18-wheelers are already
experiencing troubles such as random panic braking by
computer where no danger exists. The first complaint I heard
was last spring from a driver who came near a lane split sign:
http://www.trafficsignstore.com/merc...0001/W12-1.jpg

and the truck brakes locked up, followed ten seconds later
by a call from dispatcher, "Why did you brake?"

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #79  
Old October 10th 17, 10:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,556
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 1:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/10/2017 1:10 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 14:55:03 -0500, DougC

wrote:

I think eventually self-driving cars will be a lot more
efficient than
what we have now...


Maybe. Personally, I see some initial problems where a
line of
self-driving vehicles proceed at the speed of the slowest
vehicle.
Even if a passing algorithm is perfected, there will still
be a
tendency for similar speed vehicles to "clump" together in
traffic. My
guess(tm) is that the self-driving vehicle will be the
equivalent of
filling the highway with very conservative drivers, that
follow every
driving regulations, never go past the speed limit, and
are courteous
to other vehicles to the point of paranoia.


Regarding "clumping": That can be beneficial on freeways.
Especially if they communicate, self-driving cars can draft
each other, forming a de facto train on the pavement. Car
occupants could relax and read, work, look at scenery,
whatever. Gas mileage (or electricity consumption) would be
reduced.

Yes, travel time might slightly increase, but the difference
would be small. For freeways, it's easy to calculate.
Driving 70 miles at 70 mph saves only about 5 minutes over
driving at 65.

And this scheme would remove one of my personal
frustrations. I use cruise control on freeways, but it seems
most drivers do not. (I guess a system with four buttons is
just too complex.) Anyway, very frequently my car on cruise
will approach a slower car, so I'll move left to pass. But
as soon as the driver notices me, he's reminded that he can
indeed drive a bit faster. So he speeds up, often matching
my speed and keeping me stuck next to him in the left lane.
In some cases, he'll speed up and pull ahead; then when he
loses concentration he slows back down. Rinse and repeat.

If everybody just locked into a convoy, that annoyance would
go away.



What? _five more minutes_? That's just crazy talk!

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


  #80  
Old October 10th 17, 11:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,556
Default DRIVERLESS ELECTRIC CARS

On 10/10/2017 3:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 14:28:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 10/10/2017 12:49 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 9 Oct 2017 11:20:58 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 11:32:54 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Now, back to my question. How much are you willing to relinquish for
the privilege of riding your bicycle on the driverless highway of the
future? Are you ready for robo-bike?

I'm not willing to relinquish my right to travel by bicycle.
- Frank Krygowski

I didn't say you couldn't ride your bicycle. I said that you couldn't
ride if safely on the highway of the future. At worst, all it would
require is that you carry or attach several thousand(?) dollars in
technology so that the driverless vehicles would be able to detect and
avoid hitting you on your bicycle.


I just don't expect that situation to arise. Again, I doubt most streets
will see any infrastructure changes at all, simply because the cost
would be almost infinite. There are too many streets to retrofit. So the
capability will almost entirely be built into the cars.


It certainly will take a long time to add navigation aids to the
streets, roads, and highways, but the cost is not infinite if spread
over a fairly long period. 40 years ago, when I first moved into the
area, we had one defective traffic light on Hwy 9. Today, we have 5
signal lights and several push button pedestrian crosswalks. The cost
of the added signals were about $150,000 each. However, without
proper justification, none would have been built. Unfortunately, the
only justification that could get the attention of the State was to
kill off a few kids at each intersection, thus justifying the
expenditure in the name of safety. My guess(tm) is that the streets
with the most driverless vehicle accidents and fatalities, will be the
first to be retrofitted with navigation and recognition aids. It may
be 50 years before all the streets are modernized, but like wheel
chair ramps at intersection, pedestrian walk buttons, signal lights
everywhere, computerized traffic management, and emergency vehicle
bypass, upgrades will happen.

Those working on the cars know that they must detect pedestrians,
including kids on bikes. I can't imagine a social environment that would
allow laws requiring several thousand dollars of equipment on a $99
Wal-mart kids bike. So bikes will have to be detected by other means.


My guess(tm), is I can build a mm wave transponder for about $20.
Retail cost would be about $70. If the design is standardized and the
quantities sufficiently large, it would cost much less. If that's
unacceptable, I mentioned a pattern or word printed on clothes or a
striker that would help the driverless car recognize pedestrians. Last
resort might be an LED flashlight, that transmits a flashing pattern
that the vehicle recognizes as "don't run over me".


Oh, Jeff you are so naive.

A government required unit at $20 mfr base price could
easily be several hundred dollars once you factor in the
usual graft/corruption/inefficiency, maybe more with some
mandated percentage of "free" transponders to targeted groups.

There are very good reasons that in The War On Poverty,
poverty won.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Electric cars in the wet NEMO UK 3 February 16th 15 04:09 PM
OBIT ELECTRIC CARS kolldata Techniques 2 October 30th 11 09:49 PM
Charging points for cars but what about electric bicycles? Doug[_3_] UK 17 February 27th 10 06:10 PM
Electric Car Conversion Companies: Alternatives To Gas Powered Cars n41beyha Unicycling 0 November 27th 07 04:40 PM
An Electric Car Conversion Kit Will Not Affect Your Cars Speed OrPick-Up n41beyha Techniques 0 November 27th 07 04:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.