Driverless cars

[Chris Thauberger]

Everything breaks down including driverless cars.  The general rule of entropy governs all both great and small.  My question then becomes, when said driverless car breaks down and causes a chain reaction of death and mayhem, who will be liable?  The owner of the car for failure to maintain?  The car manufacture for products liability i.e. design defect, manufacturing defect?  All of the above?  Interesting times await.

Richard E.

When driverless car "breaks down" all other cars are notified and slow down simultaneously, merge into lanes not blocked by "breakdown" and continue on there way.  No rubber necking means no secondary issues.

[papa scoops]

we all said the same thing about them automatic transmissions and juice brakes. it's not for the car enthusiast, it's about transportation. phreddy

[deathsled]

Everything breaks down including driverless cars.  The general rule of entropy governs all both great and small.  My question then becomes, when said driverless car breaks down and causes a chain reaction of death and mayhem, who will be liable?  The owner of the car for failure to maintain?  The car manufacture for products liability i.e. design defect, manufacturing defect?  All of the above?  Interesting times await.

Richard E.

When driverless car "breaks down" all other cars are notified and slow down simultaneously, merge into lanes not blocked by "breakdown" and continue on there way.  No rubber necking means no secondary issues.

Ding ding ding!  Excellent point.  Downside is a catastrophic failure.  But I'm with yah.  There will be far fewer accidents.

[Chris Thauberger]

Everything breaks down including driverless cars.  The general rule of entropy governs all both great and small.  My question then becomes, when said driverless car breaks down and causes a chain reaction of death and mayhem, who will be liable?  The owner of the car for failure to maintain?  The car manufacture for products liability i.e. design defect, manufacturing defect?  All of the above?  Interesting times await.

Richard E.

When driverless car "breaks down" all other cars are notified and slow down simultaneously, merge into lanes not blocked by "breakdown" and continue on there way.  No rubber necking means no secondary issues.

Ding ding ding!  Excellent point.  Downside is a catastrophic failure.  But I'm with yah.  There will be far fewer accidents.

Not sure what your definition of catastrophic failure is. Cars communicate with other vehicles within a certain range wirelessly. Primary communication would be with master system. Redundant communication means likelihood of catastrophic failure due to loss of situational awareness of other vehicles highly unlikely. Most likely a full communication loss would result in a parking lot.

[ricur2]

it will never happen states would lose to much money on dui arrest.

[deathsled]

Computer failure is my thought due to corrosion.  Software failures  Rust belt area driverless cars would be most prone.  But you're right.  Solution would be water tight boxes for the computers (already the case).  It will get sorted out though.  You are correct.  It's going to be a brave new world.  Even more highly regulated I believe.  We can revel in the fact that we are at the tail end of the art of driving and the freedoms associated therewith.

Richard E.

As an addendum, most accidents are the result of driver error versus mechanical failure so driverless cars are a coming in full force. 

[Stubee]

Geez...

21 over... were you slowing down?...

Stubee

[deathsled]

Nothing nearly so dramatic.  Happened in my Towncar.  56 in a 35.  I was more likely doing about 65 but saw that big black Ford SUV and my detector went off far too late.  I need a new detector.  Cordless and the range on cordless is not as far.  Area was a forest preserve.  Not some built up residential neighborhood.  35 is ridiculous for the area.  Must have been a holdover from the 1930s  when cars couldn't handle the speed like present day cars.

[jguyer]

Everything breaks down including driverless cars.  The general rule of entropy governs all both great and small.  My question then becomes, when said driverless car breaks down and causes a chain reaction of death and mayhem, who will be liable?  The owner of the car for failure to maintain?  The car manufacture for products liability i.e. design defect, manufacturing defect?  All of the above?  Interesting times await.

Richard E.

When driverless car "breaks down" all other cars are notified and slow down simultaneously, merge into lanes not blocked by "breakdown" and continue on there way.  No rubber necking means no secondary issues.

Ding ding ding!  Excellent point.  Downside is a catastrophic failure.  But I'm with yah.  There will be far fewer accidents.

Not sure what your definition of catastrophic failure is. Cars communicate with other vehicles within a certain range wirelessly. Primary communication would be with master system. Redundant communication means likelihood of catastrophic failure due to loss of situational awareness of other vehicles highly unlikely. Most likely a full communication loss would result in a parking lot.

EMP. (electromagnetic pulse) That's when you'll wish you still had points in your distributor.

[Chris Thauberger]

Everything breaks down including driverless cars.  The general rule of entropy governs all both great and small.  My question then becomes, when said driverless car breaks down and causes a chain reaction of death and mayhem, who will be liable?  The owner of the car for failure to maintain?  The car manufacture for products liability i.e. design defect, manufacturing defect?  All of the above?  Interesting times await.

Richard E.

When driverless car "breaks down" all other cars are notified and slow down simultaneously, merge into lanes not blocked by "breakdown" and continue on there way.  No rubber necking means no secondary issues.

Ding ding ding!  Excellent point.  Downside is a catastrophic failure.  But I'm with yah.  There will be far fewer accidents.

Not sure what your definition of catastrophic failure is. Cars communicate with other vehicles within a certain range wirelessly. Primary communication would be with master system. Redundant communication means likelihood of catastrophic failure due to loss of situational awareness of other vehicles highly unlikely. Most likely a full communication loss would result in a parking lot.

EMP. (electromagnetic pulse) That's when you'll wish you still had points in your distributor.

...or martians. Don't forget about martians.

[deathsled]

Mars already has driverless rovers.

[Chris Thauberger]

Mars already has driverless rovers.

Zactly

[557]

On the positive side no more DUIs...On the negative 1 well placed computer hack or signal interference and we all die......

[Chris Thauberger]

On the positive side no more DUIs...On the negative 1 well placed computer hack or signal interference and we all die......

Systems are hackable because administrators are either lazy or lack the knowledge to secure their network. Can't hack a closed system.  . Besides your missing the point of autonomous cars. Their programming is in ROM (read ONLY memory) can't be written to by hacking.

Additionally weak user passwords are to blame for many security breaches.  Here are 25 common passwords. Recognize any? 

123456
123456789
qwerty
12345678
111111
1234567890
1234567
password
123123
987654321
qwertyuiop
mynoob
123321
666666
18atcskd2w
7777777
1q2w3e4r
654321
555555
3rjs1la7qe
google
1q2w3e4r5t
123qwe
zxcvbnm
1q2w3e

[Don Johnston]

  I foresee an "Italian Job" event.