Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

[Cor van de Water via EV]

Ed,
I wanted to thank you once again for letting me drive your leaf several years 
ago to get a feel for the car (this was around the same time that a colleague 
bought a Tesla Model S and since he knew I had an EV truck, he let me drive 
that a short trip as well. Nothing compares to a Tesla for sure, but the 
performance of a Leaf is plenty for me so I had no doubt saying "yes" when I 
had a good opportunity to buy one cheap.

I believe that the Tesla "auto-pilot" will actually complain if you take your 
hands off the wheel and not touch it for a while. Certainly as soon as the 
auto-pilot is not sure, it alarms the driver to take over again and I think 
there is no misunderstanding with anyone that the nut behind the wheel is 
responsible for the operation of the car at all times, no matter how much they 
would like to take a nap or be distracted for longer time. Driving on a clean 
and well-maintained freeway in good weather, that may actually be possible but 
it is the exception to the rule.
You can disagree and the impression with some drivers may be that the car is 
self-driving, but plenty drivers have wrong impression about rules of the road 
anyway, that is why there are so many accidents. I can't commute without 
usually seeing at least one and sometimes several crashes, every day. And I 
commute only 11 miles!

Cor van de Water 
Chief Scientist 
Proxim Wireless 
  
office +1 408 383 7626Skype: cor_van_de_water 
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130private: cvandewater.info 

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and 
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received this 
message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is 
prohibited.


-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Ed Blackmond via EV
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 7:34 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform


> On Jul 29, 2016, Cor van de Water wrote:
> 
> I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
> to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
> "You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
> and take over the driving as needed"
> when you engage "autopilot”.
> 

In response,

> On Jul 29, 2016, Chris Tromley wrote:
> 
> How often do you habitually click through ​dialog boxes on your way to
> opening a computer application?  (And how often has that caused a problem?)
> Could it be that confirming the Tesla on-screen message becomes blind
> habit after a few times?  I do understand that we're in a transition here,
> with cars becoming rolling computers.  But perhaps it's worth re-examining
> that user interface.  The consequences of not paying attention aren't so
> bad when you're launching a favorite feature in your entertainment system.
> It's quite another matter when it applies to vehicle guidance.

I’m going to have to agree with Chris Tromley here.  If Cor van de Water’s 
quote of the Tesla on-screen message is accurate, the message is way too long.  
Very few people will ever read it.

I’ve been driving my 2011 Nissan Leaf for 1 week less than five years now.  
Every time I power up the car, a message appears on the center console screen 
with the option to accept or cancel it.  The car runs just fine if I do 
neither.  I usually touch the cancel button when I notice it.  A friend riding 
with me will usually touch the OK button.  The car has just over 50,000 miles 
now and I doubt the message has ever been read.

I consider graphically rendered buttons on a touch screen display too dangerous 
for an automotive interface.  A physical button can be found and activated 
without taking my eyes off the road.  A button on a touch screen display 
requires looking away from the road and at the screen to get my finger to the 
correct place.

Ed
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

[Cor van de Water via EV]

That is the result of driving in an illegal manner...
(don't get me started about drivers swerving left and right without ever using 
a blinker)
I think we have reached the limit how far we can stray from the EV topic
on this list.

Cor van de Water 
Chief Scientist 
Proxim Wireless 
  
office +1 408 383 7626Skype: cor_van_de_water 
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130private: cvandewater.info 

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and 
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received this 
message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is 
prohibited.


-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of paul dove via EV
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 6:35 PM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

I was just having that conversation at work during lunch yesterday. A friend 
said he rented a big SUV and it had collision assist. He said if you tried to 
change lanes without the blinker it would jerk you back in the lane. He said it 
almost made he hit someone a couple of times so he had to turn it off. It would 
take some getting used to for sure. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 29, 2016, at 6:58 PM, Chris Tromley via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Cor van de Water via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
>> to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
>> "You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
>> and take over the driving as needed"
>> when you engage "autopilot".
> 
> 
> ​No, but it helps.
> 
> As quaint as this may sound, the world of computers is different from the
> world of cars.  At least in terms of user interface.
> 
> How often do you habitually click through ​dialog boxes on your way to
> opening a computer application?  (And how often has that caused a problem?)
> Could it be that confirming the Tesla on-screen message becomes blind
> habit after a few times?  I do understand that we're in a transition here,
> with cars becoming rolling computers.  But perhaps it's worth re-examining
> that user interface.  The consequences of not paying attention aren't so
> bad when you're launching a favorite feature in your entertainment system.
> It's quite another matter when it applies to vehicle guidance.
> 
> These are the things that turn up when you do a thorough human factors
> evaluation on a game-changing new use of technology.  Unfortunately it's
> frequently not done in the tech world because very few new tech apps are
> life-critical.  You know, just launch it and see how many people bite.  You
> can't do that with life-critical tech and blindly expect smooth sailing.
> 
> ​A long time ago you could get into any unfamiliar car and make use of all
> its features​.  That's been harder to do for the last decade or so and the
> trend continues, but driver aids or autonomy or whatever you want to call
> them are putting a distinct inflection point in that curve.  We need to
> deal with that.  At what point does one need training to properly drive an
> unfamiliar car, like a pilot needs training to fly a new type of aircraft?
> High tech being used properly by Everyman is actually a pretty difficult
> thing to pull off well.
> 
> Chris
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20160729/a809447e/attachment.htm>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[paul dove via EV]

I was just having that conversation at work during lunch yesterday. A friend 
said he rented a big SUV and it had collision assist. He said if you tried to 
change lanes without the blinker it would jerk you back in the lane. He said it 
almost made he hit someone a couple of times so he had to turn it off. It would 
take some getting used to for sure. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 29, 2016, at 6:58 PM, Chris Tromley via EV  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Cor van de Water via EV 
> wrote:
> 
>> I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
>> to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
>> "You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
>> and take over the driving as needed"
>> when you engage "autopilot".
> 
> 
> ​No, but it helps.
> 
> As quaint as this may sound, the world of computers is different from the
> world of cars.  At least in terms of user interface.
> 
> How often do you habitually click through ​dialog boxes on your way to
> opening a computer application?  (And how often has that caused a problem?)
> Could it be that confirming the Tesla on-screen message becomes blind
> habit after a few times?  I do understand that we're in a transition here,
> with cars becoming rolling computers.  But perhaps it's worth re-examining
> that user interface.  The consequences of not paying attention aren't so
> bad when you're launching a favorite feature in your entertainment system.
> It's quite another matter when it applies to vehicle guidance.
> 
> These are the things that turn up when you do a thorough human factors
> evaluation on a game-changing new use of technology.  Unfortunately it's
> frequently not done in the tech world because very few new tech apps are
> life-critical.  You know, just launch it and see how many people bite.  You
> can't do that with life-critical tech and blindly expect smooth sailing.
> 
> ​A long time ago you could get into any unfamiliar car and make use of all
> its features​.  That's been harder to do for the last decade or so and the
> trend continues, but driver aids or autonomy or whatever you want to call
> them are putting a distinct inflection point in that curve.  We need to
> deal with that.  At what point does one need training to properly drive an
> unfamiliar car, like a pilot needs training to fly a new type of aircraft?
> High tech being used properly by Everyman is actually a pretty difficult
> thing to pull off well.
> 
> Chris
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Ed Blackmond via EV]

> On Jul 29, 2016, Cor van de Water wrote:
> 
> I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
> to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
> "You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
> and take over the driving as needed"
> when you engage "autopilot”.
> 

In response,

> On Jul 29, 2016, Chris Tromley wrote:
> 
> How often do you habitually click through ​dialog boxes on your way to
> opening a computer application?  (And how often has that caused a problem?)
> Could it be that confirming the Tesla on-screen message becomes blind
> habit after a few times?  I do understand that we're in a transition here,
> with cars becoming rolling computers.  But perhaps it's worth re-examining
> that user interface.  The consequences of not paying attention aren't so
> bad when you're launching a favorite feature in your entertainment system.
> It's quite another matter when it applies to vehicle guidance.

I’m going to have to agree with Chris Tromley here.  If Cor van de Water’s 
quote of the Tesla on-screen message is accurate, the message is way too long.  
Very few people will ever read it.

I’ve been driving my 2011 Nissan Leaf for 1 week less than five years now.  
Every time I power up the car, a message appears on the center console screen 
with the option to accept or cancel it.  The car runs just fine if I do 
neither.  I usually touch the cancel button when I notice it.  A friend riding 
with me will usually touch the OK button.  The car has just over 50,000 miles 
now and I doubt the message has ever been read.

I consider graphically rendered buttons on a touch screen display too dangerous 
for an automotive interface.  A physical button can be found and activated 
without taking my eyes off the road.  A button on a touch screen display 
requires looking away from the road and at the screen to get my finger to the 
correct place.

Ed
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Chris Tromley via EV]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Cor van de Water via EV 
wrote:

> I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
> to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
> "You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
> and take over the driving as needed"
> when you engage "autopilot".


​No, but it helps.

As quaint as this may sound, the world of computers is different from the
world of cars.  At least in terms of user interface.

How often do you habitually click through ​dialog boxes on your way to
opening a computer application?  (And how often has that caused a problem?)
 Could it be that confirming the Tesla on-screen message becomes blind
habit after a few times?  I do understand that we're in a transition here,
with cars becoming rolling computers.  But perhaps it's worth re-examining
that user interface.  The consequences of not paying attention aren't so
bad when you're launching a favorite feature in your entertainment system.
It's quite another matter when it applies to vehicle guidance.

These are the things that turn up when you do a thorough human factors
evaluation on a game-changing new use of technology.  Unfortunately it's
frequently not done in the tech world because very few new tech apps are
life-critical.  You know, just launch it and see how many people bite.  You
can't do that with life-critical tech and blindly expect smooth sailing.

​A long time ago you could get into any unfamiliar car and make use of all
its features​.  That's been harder to do for the last decade or so and the
trend continues, but driver aids or autonomy or whatever you want to call
them are putting a distinct inflection point in that curve.  We need to
deal with that.  At what point does one need training to properly drive an
unfamiliar car, like a pilot needs training to fly a new type of aircraft?
High tech being used properly by Everyman is actually a pretty difficult
thing to pull off well.

Chris
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Cor van de Water via EV]

I did not know you need to be a tech junkie
to understand and confirm the on-screen warning message
"You must keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times
and take over the driving as needed"
when you engage "autopilot".

Cor van de Water 
Chief Scientist 
Proxim Wireless 
  
office +1 408 383 7626Skype: cor_van_de_water 
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130private: cvandewater.info 

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and 
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received this 
message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is 
prohibited.


-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of Chris Tromley via EV
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2016 3:40 PM
To: Willie2; Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
(autonomous) Lyft platform

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Willie2 via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:

> On 07/29/2016 08:00 AM, Chris Tromley via EV wrote:
>
>> Trying to jump the gun, or even worse, calling what we have now
>> "autopilot"
>> is beyond idiotic.  I have a great deal of respect for Elon Musk, but that
>> is the stupidest thing I've seen him do.
>>
> Have you driven a Tesla with AutoPilot?


​No, and I fail to see how that is relevant.​

​I'm sure ​it does what it does very well.  But what it does is *not* what
would be expected by a non-technical person when you call it "autopilot."
 That is, being able to let the car drive itself.  (So you can watch a
movie.  Or sleep on the way to work.)

Don't start with an admonishment to read the manual.  It is well known that
many people don't.  When you call a feature or suite of features something
misleading, and that package is critical to passenger safety, tragic
results follow.  All so the public will perceive Tesla as being 'leading
edge' and at parity with Google and other automakers on the SDV bandwagon.

Musk is a very tech-savvy guy.  Most of the public is not.  Where I live it
seems there are as many Teslas as Mercedes.  What that should tell Musk is
that his customers are buying his cars because they are good cars and they
are a status symbol.  *Not* because those customers are tech junkies and
will see past the marketing spin that the term "autopilot" is in describing
Tesla's driver aids.  They are actually pretty clueless, taking the
description literally and putting themselves and others at risk.  Musk got
way ahead of himself on this one.

Chris
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20160729/3477be99/attachment.htm>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Chris Tromley via EV]

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Willie2 via EV  wrote:

> On 07/29/2016 08:00 AM, Chris Tromley via EV wrote:
>
>> Trying to jump the gun, or even worse, calling what we have now
>> "autopilot"
>> is beyond idiotic.  I have a great deal of respect for Elon Musk, but that
>> is the stupidest thing I've seen him do.
>>
> Have you driven a Tesla with AutoPilot?


​No, and I fail to see how that is relevant.​

​I'm sure ​it does what it does very well.  But what it does is *not* what
would be expected by a non-technical person when you call it "autopilot."
 That is, being able to let the car drive itself.  (So you can watch a
movie.  Or sleep on the way to work.)

Don't start with an admonishment to read the manual.  It is well known that
many people don't.  When you call a feature or suite of features something
misleading, and that package is critical to passenger safety, tragic
results follow.  All so the public will perceive Tesla as being 'leading
edge' and at parity with Google and other automakers on the SDV bandwagon.

Musk is a very tech-savvy guy.  Most of the public is not.  Where I live it
seems there are as many Teslas as Mercedes.  What that should tell Musk is
that his customers are buying his cars because they are good cars and they
are a status symbol.  *Not* because those customers are tech junkies and
will see past the marketing spin that the term "autopilot" is in describing
Tesla's driver aids.  They are actually pretty clueless, taking the
description literally and putting themselves and others at risk.  Musk got
way ahead of himself on this one.

Chris
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Willie2 via EV]

On 07/29/2016 08:00 AM, Chris Tromley via EV wrote:

Trying to jump the gun, or even worse, calling what we have now "autopilot"
is beyond idiotic.  I have a great deal of respect for Elon Musk, but that
is the stupidest thing I've seen him do.

Have you driven a Tesla with AutoPilot?

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Chris Tromley via EV]

I'm against SDVs now, but I also disagree they are a dead end.  The problem
here is that it's just plain stupid to try to go from zero autonomy to full
autonomy in one rapid sweep.  Not only is the tech not ready, the public
isn't ready.  This is a huge change, and we humans aren't well suited to
huge changes all at once.

Stop the marketing-driven "we were here first" wars and focus on genuinely
beneficial driver enhancements.  Do what Tesla is doing by extending the
perceptions of the driver, even stepping in to a limited degree when the
driver is not quick enough.  Take that farther than what Tesla has done by
adding IR vision, head-up display and other enhancements.

Enhanced driver aids will evolve into full autonomy on their own timetable
and be better for it.  Far more importantly, the public's understanding of
what this stuff does and does not do will evolve too.

Trying to jump the gun, or even worse, calling what we have now "autopilot"
is beyond idiotic.  I have a great deal of respect for Elon Musk, but that
is the stupidest thing I've seen him do.

Chris
On Jul 27, 2016 6:25 PM, "EVDL Administrator via EV" 
wrote:

> This discussion is technically off-topic for the EVDL, but it seems to
> strike a chord every time it comes up.  At least this time it's in
> connection with an EV, the Chevrolet Bolt (or is it now BoltEV?).
>
> At least here in the US, people barely tolerate human error.  That's why we
> have so many lawsuits.  They don't accept machine error any better  --
> maybe
> less well.  They blame the manufacturer or software author for foul-ups,
> and
> who can blame them?
>
> In day to day conversations I already find that this is what the average
> person now knows and says about Tesla:  that their autopilot killed a
> driver.  That's a pretty dubious distinction for Tesla to have, no?
>
> Now imagine how parents -- and the media -- will react the first time a SDV
> accident kills a kid or two.
>
> Proably well-designed SDVs will have a better accident record than normal
> vehicles. That won't make any difference to Americans, though.  It's my
> observation that Americans are, by and large, not especially rational.
> They're ruled by their emotions.  Advertising and politics prove that every
> day.
>
> That regrettable orientation continues to spread round the world.  So not
> only American consumers, but probably those in most other nations, will
> reject SDVs unless they're 100% perfect, completely accident-free, or at
> least fatality-free.
>
> Economically, SDVs will never be viable in the US unless the automakers
> manage to convince either congress or state legislatures to give them
> blanket immunity from liability.  Otherwise the cost of defending
> themselves
> against the inevitable lawsuits from the families of their victims will
> make
> it impossible for them to make a profit on SDVs.
>
> Even if they do get such legislation passed, the bad PR from accidents
> (which you KNOW will be MUCH more widely reported than conventional vehicle
> accidents) will choke off sales.
>
> IMO, SDVs are a dead end.  Better we should take all the money going into
> SDV research and apply it to expanding light rail service.  Now THAT'S a
> safe and proven "self-driving vehicle" experience.
>
> David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
> EVDL Administrator
>
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not
> reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
> email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Paul Dove via EV]

LOL!

See its started already

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 27, 2016, at 11:40 PM, Chris Meier via EV  wrote:
> 
> Stop blaming Tesla, the vendors equipment doesn't look that high. US trucks 
> should have guards,  put your energy there, please. 
> -Chris
> -- 
> -Chris
> 
>> On July 27, 2016 2:05:05 PM CDT, Collin Kidder via EV  
>> wrote:
>> I agree, people can be dangerous. If we could figure out the software
>> I think self driving cars could be really safe. And, they'd be faster
>> too because the road could be run with very little gap between cars so
>> long as all of the cars are communicating and the cars are self
>> driving. But, being a software developer, the failures terrify me. I'm
>> too familiar with the way software is written and how buggy it tends
>> to be to be all that comfortable in a 70MPH 3500lb missile. However,
>> I'm already doing that in a drive by wire car. So, I guess it's just a
>> matter of perception. But, manufacturers are going to have a lot of
>> those perception issues to deal with. I think insurance will be kind
>> of tough at first too. If a crash happens who do you blame? What if
>> both cars were self driving? Will the automakers have to fight each
>> other in court? What if the self driving car mistook your semi for the
>> open sky (as just happened in the Tesla fatality)? I'm kind of leery
>> of the millions of ways a computer could mistake the video coming in.
>> Humans have a very finely tuned visual system and we still get it
>> wrong sometimes. But, I don't think nearly anyone would have been
>> fooled by the semi truck looks like the sky issue. I could see that it
>> was a semi truck if I were driving. Apparently cars can't always.
>> Though, I'm sure it'll improve. It's sort of a chicken and egg
>> situation. I won't trust a self driving car with my own life until it
>> is bulletproof but getting it there requires a lot of on the road
>> testing.
>> 
>>> 
>>> I think that once the self driving cars can demonstrate they can
>> avoid more accidents on the road than the typical human, adoption will
>> be rapid.  Mostly what they would be avoiding would be humans that
>> weren't paying attention.  Once more humans are removed, the overall
>> safety will increase again.
>>> 
>>> We would like to think that all drivers are very careful and fully
>> engaged in driving, but what I see on a daily basis isn't that.  I
>> think that cars that are more predictable and can dodge humans are a
>> good thing.
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> 
>> ___
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Chris Meier via EV]

Stop blaming Tesla, the vendors equipment doesn't look that high. US trucks 
should have guards,  put your energy there, please. 
-Chris
-- 
-Chris

On July 27, 2016 2:05:05 PM CDT, Collin Kidder via EV  wrote:
>I agree, people can be dangerous. If we could figure out the software
>I think self driving cars could be really safe. And, they'd be faster
>too because the road could be run with very little gap between cars so
>long as all of the cars are communicating and the cars are self
>driving. But, being a software developer, the failures terrify me. I'm
>too familiar with the way software is written and how buggy it tends
>to be to be all that comfortable in a 70MPH 3500lb missile. However,
>I'm already doing that in a drive by wire car. So, I guess it's just a
>matter of perception. But, manufacturers are going to have a lot of
>those perception issues to deal with. I think insurance will be kind
>of tough at first too. If a crash happens who do you blame? What if
>both cars were self driving? Will the automakers have to fight each
>other in court? What if the self driving car mistook your semi for the
>open sky (as just happened in the Tesla fatality)? I'm kind of leery
>of the millions of ways a computer could mistake the video coming in.
>Humans have a very finely tuned visual system and we still get it
>wrong sometimes. But, I don't think nearly anyone would have been
>fooled by the semi truck looks like the sky issue. I could see that it
>was a semi truck if I were driving. Apparently cars can't always.
>Though, I'm sure it'll improve. It's sort of a chicken and egg
>situation. I won't trust a self driving car with my own life until it
>is bulletproof but getting it there requires a lot of on the road
>testing.
>
>>
>> I think that once the self driving cars can demonstrate they can
>avoid more accidents on the road than the typical human, adoption will
>be rapid.  Mostly what they would be avoiding would be humans that
>weren't paying attention.  Once more humans are removed, the overall
>safety will increase again.
>>
>> We would like to think that all drivers are very careful and fully
>engaged in driving, but what I see on a daily basis isn't that.  I
>think that cars that are more predictable and can dodge humans are a
>good thing.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>___
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[EVDL Administrator via EV]

This discussion is technically off-topic for the EVDL, but it seems to 
strike a chord every time it comes up.  At least this time it's in 
connection with an EV, the Chevrolet Bolt (or is it now BoltEV?).

At least here in the US, people barely tolerate human error.  That's why we 
have so many lawsuits.  They don't accept machine error any better  -- maybe 
less well.  They blame the manufacturer or software author for foul-ups, and 
who can blame them?  

In day to day conversations I already find that this is what the average 
person now knows and says about Tesla:  that their autopilot killed a 
driver.  That's a pretty dubious distinction for Tesla to have, no?  

Now imagine how parents -- and the media -- will react the first time a SDV 
accident kills a kid or two.

Proably well-designed SDVs will have a better accident record than normal 
vehicles. That won't make any difference to Americans, though.  It's my 
observation that Americans are, by and large, not especially rational.  
They're ruled by their emotions.  Advertising and politics prove that every 
day.

That regrettable orientation continues to spread round the world.  So not 
only American consumers, but probably those in most other nations, will 
reject SDVs unless they're 100% perfect, completely accident-free, or at 
least fatality-free.

Economically, SDVs will never be viable in the US unless the automakers 
manage to convince either congress or state legislatures to give them 
blanket immunity from liability.  Otherwise the cost of defending themselves 
against the inevitable lawsuits from the families of their victims will make 
it impossible for them to make a profit on SDVs.

Even if they do get such legislation passed, the bad PR from accidents 
(which you KNOW will be MUCH more widely reported than conventional vehicle 
accidents) will choke off sales.

IMO, SDVs are a dead end.  Better we should take all the money going into 
SDV research and apply it to expanding light rail service.  Now THAT'S a 
safe and proven "self-driving vehicle" experience. 

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not 
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my 
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Lawrence Harris via EV]

According to 
https://seriousaccidents.com/legal-advice/top-causes-of-car-accidents/ the #1 
reason for an accident is distracted driving.

In this case that would seem to be the cause.  It is certainly clear that the 
technology involved might have increased the chance that the driver felt they 
didn’t need to constantly watch the road but never the less the actual cause 
was probably not watching where they were going and reacting appropriately.  I 
would like Tesla and others to continue to work on the safety aspects of the 
vehicle systems to help prevent more of these sort of incidents and it’s clear 
in other videos that the collision avoidance system do in fact work, just not 
100% of the time.

Examples where it worked:

http://bgr.com/2016/04/10/watch-teslas-autopilot-feature-prevent-an-accident-with-a-merging-truck/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X-5fKzmy38

So I don’t know, maybe we aren’t ready for fully autonomous but the sort of 
things that autopilot does are quite useful.  Maybe have the car sense if you 
are not looking forward and/or take your hands off the wheel and beep - sort of 
like the snooze waring some long haul truckers use, but let’s not dismiss the 
technology out of hand.

Lawrence

> On Jul 27, 2016, at 12:05, Collin Kidder via EV  wrote:
> 
> I agree, people can be dangerous. If we could figure out the software
> I think self driving cars could be really safe. And, they'd be faster
> too because the road could be run with very little gap between cars so
> long as all of the cars are communicating and the cars are self
> driving. But, being a software developer, the failures terrify me. I'm
> too familiar with the way software is written and how buggy it tends
> to be to be all that comfortable in a 70MPH 3500lb missile. However,
> I'm already doing that in a drive by wire car. So, I guess it's just a
> matter of perception. But, manufacturers are going to have a lot of
> those perception issues to deal with. I think insurance will be kind
> of tough at first too. If a crash happens who do you blame? What if
> both cars were self driving? Will the automakers have to fight each
> other in court? What if the self driving car mistook your semi for the
> open sky (as just happened in the Tesla fatality)? I'm kind of leery
> of the millions of ways a computer could mistake the video coming in.
> Humans have a very finely tuned visual system and we still get it
> wrong sometimes. But, I don't think nearly anyone would have been
> fooled by the semi truck looks like the sky issue. I could see that it
> was a semi truck if I were driving. Apparently cars can't always.
> Though, I'm sure it'll improve. It's sort of a chicken and egg
> situation. I won't trust a self driving car with my own life until it
> is bulletproof but getting it there requires a lot of on the road
> testing.
> 
>> 
>> I think that once the self driving cars can demonstrate they can avoid more 
>> accidents on the road than the typical human, adoption will be rapid.  
>> Mostly what they would be avoiding would be humans that weren't paying 
>> attention.  Once more humans are removed, the overall safety will increase 
>> again.
>> 
>> We would like to think that all drivers are very careful and fully engaged 
>> in driving, but what I see on a daily basis isn't that.  I think that cars 
>> that are more predictable and can dodge humans are a good thing.
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
> ___
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 

___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Collin Kidder via EV]

I agree, people can be dangerous. If we could figure out the software
I think self driving cars could be really safe. And, they'd be faster
too because the road could be run with very little gap between cars so
long as all of the cars are communicating and the cars are self
driving. But, being a software developer, the failures terrify me. I'm
too familiar with the way software is written and how buggy it tends
to be to be all that comfortable in a 70MPH 3500lb missile. However,
I'm already doing that in a drive by wire car. So, I guess it's just a
matter of perception. But, manufacturers are going to have a lot of
those perception issues to deal with. I think insurance will be kind
of tough at first too. If a crash happens who do you blame? What if
both cars were self driving? Will the automakers have to fight each
other in court? What if the self driving car mistook your semi for the
open sky (as just happened in the Tesla fatality)? I'm kind of leery
of the millions of ways a computer could mistake the video coming in.
Humans have a very finely tuned visual system and we still get it
wrong sometimes. But, I don't think nearly anyone would have been
fooled by the semi truck looks like the sky issue. I could see that it
was a semi truck if I were driving. Apparently cars can't always.
Though, I'm sure it'll improve. It's sort of a chicken and egg
situation. I won't trust a self driving car with my own life until it
is bulletproof but getting it there requires a lot of on the road
testing.

>
> I think that once the self driving cars can demonstrate they can avoid more 
> accidents on the road than the typical human, adoption will be rapid.  Mostly 
> what they would be avoiding would be humans that weren't paying attention.  
> Once more humans are removed, the overall safety will increase again.
>
> We would like to think that all drivers are very careful and fully engaged in 
> driving, but what I see on a daily basis isn't that.  I think that cars that 
> are more predictable and can dodge humans are a good thing.
>
> Mike
>
>
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Mike Nickerson via EV]

I think you might have an argument about whether you need liability insurance, 
but you will still need collision and comprehensive insurance, because stuff 
happens.  Hit and run accidents, gravel and rocks on the roads, tree falling, 
etc.

If the auto manufacturer is willing to cover the liability insurance for a self 
driving car, that is a huge discount to the owner.

I think that once the self driving cars can demonstrate they can avoid more 
accidents on the road than the typical human, adoption will be rapid.  Mostly 
what they would be avoiding would be humans that weren't paying attention.  
Once more humans are removed, the overall safety will increase again.

We would like to think that all drivers are very careful and fully engaged in 
driving, but what I see on a daily basis isn't that.  I think that cars that 
are more predictable and can dodge humans are a good thing.

Mike


On July 26, 2016 4:48:24 PM MDT, paul dove via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:
>Why would you need to insure it? You are not driving
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jul 26, 2016, at 5:32 PM, damon henry via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will
>never trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as
>the insurance companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto
>insurance :)
>> Damon
>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +
>>> To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a
>driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>> From: ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> 
>>> The thing is Peri,
>>> There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test
>software enough to know 
>>> that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there
>is a crash and I am sitting 
>>> in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the
>damage, injuries or possible death?
>>> Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it
>will ever move away from that model.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>      From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a
>driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>> 
>>> I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the
>crashes. 
>>> While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers 
>>> today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by
>reacting 
>>> and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result
>includes a 
>>> fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a
>moment, 
>>> consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.
>>> 
>>> With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic.
>
>>> That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending 
>>> crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation. 
>>> Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people
>
>>> will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear
>being 
>>> involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.
>>> 
>>> In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be 
>>> statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in
>one 
>>> where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain
>the 
>>> statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe
>not 
>>> for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>> Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>> 
>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>> No problem - you are free to disagree.
>>>> I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those 
>>>> distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in 
>>>> contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and 
>>>> keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will
>gladly 
>>>> give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-drivin

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[paul dove via EV]

Why would you need to insure it? You are not driving

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 26, 2016, at 5:32 PM, damon henry via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will never 
> trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as the insurance 
> companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto insurance :)
> Damon
> 
>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +
>> To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
>> (autonomous) Lyft platform
>> From: ev@lists.evdl.org
>> 
>> The thing is Peri,
>> There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test software 
>> enough to know 
>> that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a 
>> crash and I am sitting 
>> in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the damage, 
>> injuries or possible death?
>> Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
>> move away from that model.
>> 
>> 
>>  From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
>> (autonomous) Lyft platform
>> 
>> I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes. 
>> While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers 
>> today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting 
>> and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a 
>> fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment, 
>> consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.
>> 
>> With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic. 
>> That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending 
>> crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation. 
>> Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people 
>> will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being 
>> involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.
>> 
>> In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be 
>> statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one 
>> where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the 
>> statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not 
>> for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.
>> 
>> Peri
>> 
>> -- Original Message --
>> From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>> Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>> 
>>> Hi Paul,
>>> No problem - you are free to disagree.
>>> I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those 
>>> distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in 
>>> contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and 
>>> keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly 
>>> give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-driving car in 
>>> the same way that you hire a driver today to bring you without the 
>>> stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
>>> Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today 
>>> there are plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because 
>>> humans take a risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided 
>>> that they should try to cross the street coming from behind a van 
>>> blocking the view of oncoming traffic.
>>> 
>>> Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today. 
>>> Totally preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by 
>>> sunlight.
>>> 
>>> I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that 
>>> long distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money 
>>> can be found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still 
>>> have one human on board (compared to two today, where they drive 
>>> alternatingly today to keep the vehicle on the road as much as 
>>> possible). In future the truck will drive itself while lumbering along 
>>> on t

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[paul dove via EV]

Very true. But would you stake your life on it? I work for NASA as an avionics 
engineer and yes I suppose I'm being pessimistic but the stakes are much bigger 
here. I doubt they will ever say you are not responsible for a crash.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 26, 2016, at 5:48 PM, Peter C. Thompson via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
> wrote:
> 
> While Peri does have a point, it is extremely pessimistic to say that we will 
> never get to the "good enough" stage.
> 
> There are some very talented software engineers working on this problem.  
> Working in a similar fashion to coding for the space program. When  you have 
> enough talented engineers working on a difficult problem, with enough 
> latitude to fix what needs fixing, you will get the problem solved to the 
> "good enough" stage. Nothing will ever be perfect, and to try to aim for 
> perfect on the first try is to doom your product to failure - because you 
> will never reach the market.
> 
> As an example, remember when Apple tried to outdo Google with their own map 
> program?  Sure, it failed, and in very public ways. However, compare now - 
> they are quite close in reliability. Voice recognition is another area that 
> has rapidly improved - when was the last time Siri didn't understand you?
> 
> There is an engineering axiom:  "Don't let Perfect be the enemy of the Good". 
>  This is nothing new - Confucius said something similar a long time ago.
> 
> There's another old saying:  "Never say never."  :)
> 
> Cheers, Peter
> 
> 
>> On 7/26/16 3:32 PM, damon henry via EV wrote:
>> I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will never 
>> trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as the insurance 
>> companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto insurance :)
>> Damon
>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +0000
>>> To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>> From: ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> 
>>> The thing is Peri,
>>> There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test 
>>> software enough to know
>>> that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a 
>>> crash and I am sitting
>>> in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the 
>>> damage, injuries or possible death?
>>> Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
>>> move away from that model.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>>  To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>>  Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
>>>  Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>>I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes.
>>> While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers
>>> today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting
>>> and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a
>>> fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment,
>>> consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.
>>> 
>>> With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic.
>>> That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending
>>> crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation.
>>> Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people
>>> will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being
>>> involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.
>>> 
>>> In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be
>>> statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one
>>> where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the
>>> statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not
>>> for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.
>>> 
>>> Peri
>>> 
>>> -- Original Message --
>>> From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>> Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Lawrence Harris via EV]

I think that it’s only a matter of time.  The limiting factor is probably 
getting all the non autonomous vehicles off the road or requiring them to add 
transponders so the autonomous cars can be on the lookout for them.  The Tesla 
t-boning the semi is nothing new, if you google about a bit you will find lots 
of cars under semi trailers that did not have any computer controlled 
autonomous functions.  Some because the human driver decided to try to 
autonomously drive under them, some for who knows what reason.  Accidents 
happen and we learn from them.  The airline industry studies each crash and 
then updates safety procedures and issues mandatory updates, inspections and 
repairs as needed why not cars too (cost maybe?)

Heres one where the semi-trailer was parked.  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDN-MrptYUc 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDN-MrptYUc>

Lawrence

> On Jul 26, 2016, at 15:48, Peter C. Thompson via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org> wrote:
> 
> While Peri does have a point, it is extremely pessimistic to say that we will 
> never get to the "good enough" stage.
> 
> There are some very talented software engineers working on this problem.  
> Working in a similar fashion to coding for the space program. When  you have 
> enough talented engineers working on a difficult problem, with enough 
> latitude to fix what needs fixing, you will get the problem solved to the 
> "good enough" stage. Nothing will ever be perfect, and to try to aim for 
> perfect on the first try is to doom your product to failure - because you 
> will never reach the market.
> 
> As an example, remember when Apple tried to outdo Google with their own map 
> program?  Sure, it failed, and in very public ways. However, compare now - 
> they are quite close in reliability. Voice recognition is another area that 
> has rapidly improved - when was the last time Siri didn't understand you?
> 
> There is an engineering axiom:  "Don't let Perfect be the enemy of the Good". 
>  This is nothing new - Confucius said something similar a long time ago.
> 
> There's another old saying:  "Never say never."  :)
> 
> Cheers, Peter
> 
> 
> On 7/26/16 3:32 PM, damon henry via EV wrote:
>> I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will never 
>> trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as the insurance 
>> companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto insurance :)
>> Damon
>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +0000
>>> To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>> From: ev@lists.evdl.org
>>> 
>>> The thing is Peri,
>>> There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test 
>>> software enough to know
>>> that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a 
>>> crash and I am sitting
>>> in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the 
>>> damage, injuries or possible death?
>>> Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
>>> move away from that model.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>>  To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>>>  Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
>>>  Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
>>> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
>>>I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes.
>>> While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers
>>> today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting
>>> and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a
>>> fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment,
>>> consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.
>>> 
>>> With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic.
>>> That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending
>>> crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation.
>>> Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people
>>> will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being
>>> involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.
>>> 
>>> In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be
>>> statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one
>>> where you are in control - or v

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Peter C. Thompson via EV]

While Peri does have a point, it is extremely pessimistic to say that we 
will never get to the "good enough" stage.


There are some very talented software engineers working on this 
problem.  Working in a similar fashion to coding for the space program. 
When  you have enough talented engineers working on a difficult problem, 
with enough latitude to fix what needs fixing, you will get the problem 
solved to the "good enough" stage. Nothing will ever be perfect, and to 
try to aim for perfect on the first try is to doom your product to 
failure - because you will never reach the market.


As an example, remember when Apple tried to outdo Google with their own 
map program?  Sure, it failed, and in very public ways. However, compare 
now - they are quite close in reliability. Voice recognition is another 
area that has rapidly improved - when was the last time Siri didn't 
understand you?


There is an engineering axiom:  "Don't let Perfect be the enemy of the 
Good".  This is nothing new - Confucius said something similar a long 
time ago.


There's another old saying:  "Never say never."  :)

Cheers, Peter


On 7/26/16 3:32 PM, damon henry via EV wrote:

I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will never 
trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as the insurance 
companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto insurance :)
Damon


Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +
To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
(autonomous) Lyft platform
From: ev@lists.evdl.org

The thing is Peri,
There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test software 
enough to know
that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a crash 
and I am sitting
in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the damage, 
injuries or possible death?
Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
move away from that model.


   From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
  To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org>
  Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
  Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
(autonomous) Lyft platform

I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes.

While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers
today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting
and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a
fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment,
consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.

With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic.
That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending
crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation.
Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people
will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being
involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.

In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be
statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one
where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the
statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not
for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.

Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a
driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform


Hi Paul,
No problem - you are free to disagree.
I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those
distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in
contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and
keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly
give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-driving car in
the same way that you hire a driver today to bring you without the
stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today
there are plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because
humans take a risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided
that they should try to cross the street coming from behind a van
blocking the view of oncoming traffic.

Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today.
Totally preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by
sunlight.

I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that
long distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money
can be found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still
have one h

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[damon henry via EV]

I still say that the majority of American drivers who think they will never 
trust an autonomous vehicle will change their minds as soon as the insurance 
companies offer them $5 less a month on their auto insurance :)
Damon

> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:15:04 +
> To: pe...@kotatko.com; ev@lists.evdl.org; ev@lists.evdl.org
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
> (autonomous) Lyft platform
> From: ev@lists.evdl.org
> 
> The thing is Peri,
> There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test software 
> enough to know 
> that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a 
> crash and I am sitting 
> in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the damage, 
> injuries or possible death?
> Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
> move away from that model.
> 
> 
>   From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
>  To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
>  Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
>  Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
> (autonomous) Lyft platform
>
> I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes. 
> While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers 
> today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting 
> and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a 
> fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment, 
> consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.
> 
> With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic. 
> That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending 
> crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation. 
> Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people 
> will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being 
> involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.
> 
> In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be 
> statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one 
> where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the 
> statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not 
> for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.
> 
> Peri
> 
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
> To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
> Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
> driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform
> 
> >Hi Paul,
> >No problem - you are free to disagree.
> >I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those 
> >distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in 
> >contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and 
> >keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly 
> >give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-driving car in 
> >the same way that you hire a driver today to bring you without the 
> >stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
> >Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today 
> >there are plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because 
> >humans take a risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided 
> >that they should try to cross the street coming from behind a van 
> >blocking the view of oncoming traffic.
> >
> >Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today. 
> >Totally preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by 
> >sunlight.
> >
> >I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that 
> >long distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money 
> >can be found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still 
> >have one human on board (compared to two today, where they drive 
> >alternatingly today to keep the vehicle on the road as much as 
> >possible). In future the truck will drive itself while lumbering along 
> >on the freeway while the human sleeps/rests. At source and destination 
> >as well as at (recharge) stops, the human will take over and drive the 
> >truck and do all that is necessary to load/unload.
> >
> >But hey, I have been wrong before so, as always: time will tell.
> >
> >The fact that many dozens of Google self-driving cars are already on 
> >the road and without much problems, tells me which direction we are 
> >headed.
> >
> &g

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[paul dove via EV]

The thing is Peri,
There are so many possibilities while driving how can one ever test software 
enough to know 
that you have covered every likely possibility. Even so, when there is a crash 
and I am sitting 
in the backseat letting the vehicle drive who is responsible for the damage, 
injuries or possible death?
Tesla leaves the responsibility on the driver and I'm not sure it will ever 
move away from that model.


  From: Peri Hartman via EV <ev@lists.evdl.org>
 To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <ev@lists.evdl.org> 
 Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 1:09 PM
 Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless 
(autonomous) Lyft platform
   
I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes. 
While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers 
today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting 
and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a 
fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment, 
consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.

With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic. 
That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending 
crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation. 
Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people 
will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being 
involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.

In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be 
statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one 
where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the 
statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not 
for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.

Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

>Hi Paul,
>No problem - you are free to disagree.
>I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those 
>distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in 
>contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and 
>keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly 
>give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-driving car in 
>the same way that you hire a driver today to bring you without the 
>stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
>Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today 
>there are plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because 
>humans take a risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided 
>that they should try to cross the street coming from behind a van 
>blocking the view of oncoming traffic.
>
>Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today. 
>Totally preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by 
>sunlight.
>
>I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that 
>long distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money 
>can be found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still 
>have one human on board (compared to two today, where they drive 
>alternatingly today to keep the vehicle on the road as much as 
>possible). In future the truck will drive itself while lumbering along 
>on the freeway while the human sleeps/rests. At source and destination 
>as well as at (recharge) stops, the human will take over and drive the 
>truck and do all that is necessary to load/unload.
>
>But hey, I have been wrong before so, as always: time will tell.
>
>The fact that many dozens of Google self-driving cars are already on 
>the road and without much problems, tells me which direction we are 
>headed.
>
>Cor van de Water
>Chief Scientist
>Proxim Wireless
>
>office +1 408 383 7626                    Skype: cor_van_de_water
>XoIP  +31 87 784 1130                    private: cvandewater.info
>
>http://www.proxim.com
>
>This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential 
>and proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you 
>received this message in error, please delete it and notify the sender. 
>  Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part 
>of this message is prohibited.
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of paul dove via 
>EV
>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 7:03 AM
>To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
>Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launchas 
>adriverless(autonomous) Lyft platform
>
>Cor,

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Peri Hartman via EV]

I think the big issue will be dealing with the nature of the crashes. 
While we have plenty of accidents and fatalities with human drivers 
today, most of the time those humans mitigate the accident by reacting 
and doing something. That probably helps, even if the result includes a 
fatality (but some survivors). Putting statistics aside for a moment, 
consider that you are "helpless" in an autonomous car crash.


With autonomous vehicles, I see most failures as being catastrophic. 
That is, the software will be completely unaware there is a pending 
crash. Of course, it depends on the details of the situation. 
Regardless, I think - if enough autonomous car deaths occur - people 
will fear the prospect of a catastrophic crash more than they fear being 
involved in a mitigated human-controlled crash.


In other words, if you are a safe, alert driver, will you be 
statistically more likely to die in an autonomous car crash then in one 
where you are in control - or vice versa? Overall, I'm quite certain the 
statistics will point to the autonomous car being safer. But maybe not 
for a small percentage of truly careful drivers.


Peri

-- Original Message --
From: "Cor van de Water via EV" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
To: "Electric Vehicle Discussion List" <ev@lists.evdl.org>
Sent: 26-Jul-16 10:57:17 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a 
driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform



Hi Paul,
No problem - you are free to disagree.
I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those 
distracted drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in 
contact with their family, answering customers and colleagues and 
keeping their Facebook status updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly 
give the challenges of navigating the road to the self-driving car in 
the same way that you hire a driver today to bring you without the 
stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today 
there are plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because 
humans take a risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided 
that they should try to cross the street coming from behind a van 
blocking the view of oncoming traffic.


Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today. 
Totally preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by 
sunlight.


I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that 
long distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money 
can be found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still 
have one human on board (compared to two today, where they drive 
alternatingly today to keep the vehicle on the road as much as 
possible). In future the truck will drive itself while lumbering along 
on the freeway while the human sleeps/rests. At source and destination 
as well as at (recharge) stops, the human will take over and drive the 
truck and do all that is necessary to load/unload.


But hey, I have been wrong before so, as always: time will tell.

The fact that many dozens of Google self-driving cars are already on 
the road and without much problems, tells me which direction we are 
headed.


Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless

office +1 408 383 7626Skype: cor_van_de_water
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130private: cvandewater.info

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential 
and proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you 
received this message in error, please delete it and notify the sender. 
 Any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part 
of this message is prohibited.



-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of paul dove via 
EV

Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 7:03 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launchas 
adriverless(autonomous) Lyft platform


Cor,
I disagree completely. It is likely we will never have self driving 
vehicles on the freeway or in any other venue.Personally I think this 
is an exercise doomed to failure. The road is a complicated place and 
cannot be compared toair flight where few obstacles are encountered. 
This is evidenced by the Tesla that drove under the Semi.
One day I was driving and the vehicle in front of me swerved because of 
an obstacle in the roadway and of courseI ran over it. It was a piece 
of tire from a Semi which flipped up and tore a gash in my drivers 
door. How are
sensors going to detect things like that? Or lets say there's a sudden 
downpour, or you crest a hill and there's blindingsunlight I believe 
that many will attempt this and it will end in failure. It's one this t 
insure individuals it's a wholenew thing to insure software. after 
all if the cars driving then the cars at fault... who pays?

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless (autonomous) Lyft platform

[Cor van de Water via EV]

Hi Paul,
No problem - you are free to disagree.
I predict that within 10 years nobody wants to deal with all those distracted 
drivers who are trying to drive while also staying in contact with their 
family, answering customers and colleagues and keeping their Facebook status 
updated. (Almost) everyone will gladly give the challenges of navigating the 
road to the self-driving car in the same way that you hire a driver today to 
bring you without the stress and fatigue of driving yourself.
Indeed, there will be accidents and fatalities. But face it - today there are 
plenty of those as well without the machines, simply because humans take a 
risk. Yesterday I almost crashed because someone decided that they should try 
to cross the street coming from behind a van blocking the view of oncoming 
traffic.

Blinded by glaring sunlight? Indeed a cause of many crashes today. Totally 
preventable with good sensors. Radar is not bothered by sunlight.

I think Tesla and others are onto something good when they see that long 
distance transportation and taxi services are where a lot of money can be 
found, though I suspect that a long-distance truck will still have one human on 
board (compared to two today, where they drive alternatingly today to keep the 
vehicle on the road as much as possible). In future the truck will drive itself 
while lumbering along on the freeway while the human sleeps/rests. At source 
and destination as well as at (recharge) stops, the human will take over and 
drive the truck and do all that is necessary to load/unload.

But hey, I have been wrong before so, as always: time will tell.

The fact that many dozens of Google self-driving cars are already on the road 
and without much problems, tells me which direction we are headed.

Cor van de Water 
Chief Scientist 
Proxim Wireless 
  
office +1 408 383 7626Skype: cor_van_de_water 
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130private: cvandewater.info 

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and 
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received this 
message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any unauthorized 
use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of this message is 
prohibited.


-Original Message-
From: EV [mailto:ev-boun...@lists.evdl.org] On Behalf Of paul dove via EV
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 7:03 AM
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List
Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launchas 
adriverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

Cor,
I disagree completely. It is likely we will never have self driving vehicles on 
the freeway or in any other venue.Personally I think this is an exercise doomed 
to failure. The road is a complicated place and cannot be compared toair flight 
where few obstacles are encountered. This is evidenced by the Tesla that drove 
under the Semi. 
One day I was driving and the vehicle in front of me swerved because of an 
obstacle in the roadway and of courseI ran over it. It was a piece of tire from 
a Semi which flipped up and tore a gash in my drivers door. How are 
sensors going to detect things like that? Or lets say there's a sudden 
downpour, or you crest a hill and there's blindingsunlight I believe that many 
will attempt this and it will end in failure. It's one this t insure 
individuals it's a wholenew thing to insure software. after all if the cars 
driving then the cars at fault... who pays?

  From: Cor van de Water via EV 
 To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List  
 Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:57 AM
 Subject: Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as 
adriverless(autonomous) Lyft platform
   
Paul,

The reason they only go 25 MPH is simply that Google wanted a car fast
and so had to choose to classify them as NEV. Any other 4-wheeled
vehicle would have needed crash testing which is not only expensive and
difficult but also a lengthy process. It makes no sense if you are just
creating a testing platform with a few hundred vehicles.
Of course 25 MPH helps in getting slightly longer reaction times due to
low speed, but that is not a concern for Google, they wanted experience
with a self-driving platform in daily traffic situations and that is
what they are getting, never mind that these vehicles can't go on the
freeway - the freeway is not a very interesting place for a self-driving
vehicle.

Cars being for sale or not has no bearing on the concerns from the
posters stating that they do not want to be around self-driving cars,
well in downtown Mountain View you can't avoid that...

Cor van de Water 
Chief Scientist 
Proxim Wireless 
  
office +1 408 383 7626                    Skype: cor_van_de_water 
XoIP  +31 87 784 1130                    private: cvandewater.info 

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and
proprietary information of 

Re: [EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

[brucedp5 via EV]

As Cor posted, Google's nEV is a R platform, see
https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/
Google Self-Driving Car Project
To start, we're building prototype vehicles that are designed to take you
where you want to go at the push of a button—no driving required. Watch
video ...

Goog also has an auton (TMC, Lexus, Ford, Fiat, ?more) hybrid fleet
[images
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Toyota-Prius-Google-Autonomous-640x400.jpg

https://cnet4.cbsistatic.com/img/62X5mh1op-4Yo2uhwueTlbZtV3U=/570x0/2011/08/05/e721c1bc-fdb5-11e2-8c7c-d4ae52e62bcc/google-driverless-car.jpg

http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/51/google-is-my-co-pilot-what-can-go-wrong-inline-1-photo-469797-s-original.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-awctcj8kWjo/VnKsdkKH2uI/JW4/tLeM-p__ztA/s1600/GOOGLE-4.jpg

http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2015/12/Ford-Fusion-Autonomous-Self-Driving-Car-California1.jpg

http://images.techtimes.com/data/images/full/199544/google-car.jpg

https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/google-self-driving-car-team.jpg?quality=80=all=1600

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/03183/ensor_car_3183562b.jpg

http://www.industryweek.com/site-files/industryweek.com/files/imagecache/large_img/uploads/2015/05/051215-google-autonomous-selfdriving-cars-accidents-california.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QfICqoKrghw/maxresdefault.jpg

http://images.technewstoday.com.s3.amazonaws.com/tnt/google-and-fiat-chrysler-team-up-for-autonomous-minivans.jpg

http://images.bidnessetc.com/img/960-general-motors-company-work-google-autonomous-cars.jpg

http://roa.h-cdn.co/assets/cm/14/47/768x511/546a9b74a17e6_-_google_van-lg.jpg
]

 And Goog isn't the only auton in town:



[dated]
http://fortune.com/2016/05/03/fiat-google-self-driving-minivans/
Google And Fiat Have a Plan to Make Self-Driving Cars Totally Uncool
MAY 3, 2016
...
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/130010/20160203/jaguar-land-rover-joins-self-driving-car-party-with-7-9-million-investment-program-to-test-autonomous-vehicles.htm
Jaguar Land Rover Joins Self-Driving Car Party With $7.9 Million Investment
Program To Test Autonomous Vehicles
3 February 2016
...
https://www.engadget.com/2015/09/12/honda-self-driving-cars-get-california-approval/
Honda will test self-driving cars on California streets
09.12.15
...
http://blog.caranddriver.com/in-2020-nissan-will-drive-you-but-will-anyone-let-it/
Nissan Promises Autonomous Car ...
AUGUST 29, 2013
http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Nissan-Leaf-at-Nissan-Autonomous-Drive-announcement-placement-626x382.jpg
...
http://www.gizmodo.co.uk/2013/07/forget-google-volvos-sneaking-out-automated-cars-that-you-can-actually-buy/
Forget Google, Volvo's Spitting Out Under-the-Radar Automated Cars That You
Can Actually Buy
08 Jul 2013
http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Volvo-Car-Driving-by-itself.jpg




For EVLN EV-newswire posts use: 
http://evdl.org/evln/


{brucedp.150m.com}

--
View this message in context: 
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/Fwd-EVLN-GM-s-1st-200mi-EV-will-launch-as-a-driverless-autonomous-Lyft-platform-tp4683056p4683065.html
Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at 
Nabble.com.
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

[EVDL] Fwd: EVLN: GM's 1st 200mi EV will launch as a driverless(autonomous) Lyft platform

[paul dove via EV]

While technically Google cars can drive around they only travel a max speed of 
25mph. They are intended as couriers and they aren't for sale as far as I know.
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)