No Driver License? Autonomous driving coming to off-road?

[Aimless1]

I just returned from a seminar on the future of auto insurance and artificial intelligence. The moderator made a rather stunning statement: "Children born today will never know what a driver license is".

After thinking it over that makes sense. Alexa shows how far AI (artificial intelligence) has come. Most websites using instant chat features have AI responding to your questions and comments. Big Blue beat a chess champion a few decades back and Watson beat the world champion Go player recently.

Yes there have been some issues and one pedestrian killed. But the field is changing rapidly and AI seems very capable of learning from experience. No doubt 16 years from now most vehicles will be self driving operated by AI. That is not to say we will not be able to drive. Rather, it will be more like travel by horse giving way to travel by automobile.

Does this apply off road? Time will tell. Change is coming and it is here.

Sponsored

 

[ERIXJLUR]

I'm way too much of a control freak to let a car drive me around in the next 16 years.

That said I'm a huge fan of Tesla, especially the P100D with L mode.

 

[Sean K.]

Actually, the stated goal of ride share organizations is to completely automate ALL driving in the US. Then you will be forced to pay one of the few monopolies that control transportation to travel anywhere. After all, (the argument will go)....humans are unsafe drivers (mostly b/c they have the attention span of gnats today) and for everyone's safety....driving a vehicle will eventually be prohibited. People trade liberty for the promise of security all the time...no reason to expect that will get better in the future.

 

[OldGuyNewJeep]

No doubt 16 years from now most vehicles will be self driving operated by AI

Most? Nah, doubt it. Some.

Also, DMV won’t be able to phase out licenses in 16 years. Some people may still be waiting in line 16 years from now...

 

[Sean K.]

BTW, if one looks at the Articles of Confederation, several SCOTUS and lower court rulings and even the United Nations Charter of Human Rights....right to travel (by the normal conveyance of the day) is an established natural right. The fact that it has been corrupted and bastardized and given legal standing by the state into a "privilege" makes it no more binding than any other abridgment of a natural right by government. In short, an unjust law ought not be followed.

 

[Torero]

I am all for autonomous vehicles, let them bring me the pizza, let them carry cargo cross country, but I will not be a passenger on one for a leisure trip. No way. I have admire the Tesla and its technology. Test drove one and what a disappointment. Like a silent farth. I did not know my brain was so tuned with engine noise!!
(After all I drive a manual transmission.)

 

[mwilk012]

I don't see licenses ever going away. With automated systems, SOMEONE has to have the backup of manual control and know what to do.

 

[Shooting or Jeeping]

It will come in phases. One lane for auto drivers. Then two. Then the open lane will be the one with humans in it.

 

[RussJeep1]

BTW, if one looks at the Articles of Confederation, several SCOTUS and lower court rulings and even the United Nations Charter of Human Rights....right to travel (by the normal conveyance of the day) is an established natural right. The fact that it has been corrupted and bastardized and given legal standing by the state into a "privilege" makes it no more binding than any other abridgment of a natural right by government. In short, an unjust law ought not be followed.

Yes, laws restrict us Sean;. make us less free. I hope I get where you are coming from. But good laws, I think, are ones where the restrictions imposed on us are far outweighed by the increased quality of life we enjoy as a society as a result of them. When the technology by which we travel became more complex and prone to catastrophic accidents not known by mere horse and buggy, restricting travel by this means as driver (not travel itself as passenger or by other means) to those trained in and who follow its best practices has proven (at least I, and many others think) the lessor of two evils, the other being the loss of property/life/health associated with granting those freedoms to anyone.

You'd certainly want a plane you board, or those flying in your vicinity being flown by those competent to pilot it, right?

Are some laws that limit are freedom stupid. You bet. Rediculous laws not enforced (and that couldn't be enforced today) but still on the books that limit, for example, in Florida I believe, the number of single women that can live in the same dwelling--dating back to notions of brothels, are today ridiculous. But that's a far cry from making travel safer.

The Supreme Court, like it or not, has many cases where it has reduced freedom, even basic freedoms like religious expression, when it felt that higher causes were served, like national defense. For example soldiers have been told through court cases that dressing in uniform fashion (i.e. support of national defense) trumped their right to the wearing of religious garb while on duty.

 

[1quick1]

In my drive in Denver 30% of drivers are glued to their phone (Jeep gives a unique birds eye). What's the difference..

 

[RussJeep1]

For the foreseeable future non-autonomous travel will remain, despite the OPs correct notions that automated transportation is inevitable. As pointed out, backups for such systems need to remain, and people will still want to take the wheel in certain situations, like off roading, where it is the trip itself, not the destination, that gets vehicle owners into their rigs.

 

[Aimless1]

Kodak used to own the photography market. One of their employees invented digital photography. Kodak didn't do anything with it. Sony and others did. Look what happened. Is Kodak still in business? Can you still buy non digital cameras? Sure, but for the most part they expensive Nikons and Canons with $1000s spent for lens. What used to be normal is now high end for small and select market with prices reflecting that.

AI technology is changing at an incredible pace. See a chat box on a web site, like your jeep dealer? AI responds to those comments and questions. Alexa can call and make doctor appointments and dinner reservations. The Google automated cars have the operator/observer sit in the back seat, not with the controls. Hilarious side note. One of the issues they need to resolve with these vehicles is once they get in a cul de sac they can't figure out how to get out. Round and round they go

Much like cameras changed, and lightning fast the change was too, so too will our vehicles change. Talked to the owner of a chain of body shops. He told me that on some of the new vehicles if you replace the tail light the car needs to be reprogrammed because that is where the sensors are for lane detection and backing up. If you're thinking most vehicles will not be autonomous you could be right, but based on technology's history, you are most likely wrong.

Think "Red Barchetta"

 

[Jo's Jeep]

Take away the Smartphone, iPad, and laptop; most people under the age of 35 become about as intelligent as a potted plant. Don't believe me? Hide the remote for the TV/cable box and see who turns it on. Technology has the capability to do wonderous things but we should never rely on it completely lest we become a slave to it. I can live on the grid but I make sure that my family and I can live off it as well.

I don't mean to sound like a grumpy Gus, it's just an observation from a guy who has lived his life straddling both sides of the technological fence.

 

[TIDALWAVE]

I live in a rural area with absolutely no public transportation. I would buy a small autonomous vehicle, if available, for the occasion that I break a leg or need eye surgery.

 

[Sean K.]

Yes, laws restrict us Sean;. make us less free. I hope I get where you are coming from. But good laws, I think, are ones where the restrictions imposed on us are far outweighed by the increased quality of life we enjoy as a society as a result of them. When the technology by which we travel became more complex and prone to catastrophic accidents not known by mere horse and buggy, restricting travel by this means as driver (not travel itself as passenger or by other means) to those trained in and who follow its best practices has proven (at least I, and many others think) the lessor of two evils, the other being the loss of property/life/health associated with granting those freedoms to anyone.

You'd certainly want a plane you board, or those flying in your vicinity being flown by those competent to pilot it, right?

Are some laws that limit are freedom stupid. You bet. Rediculous laws not enforced (and that couldn't be enforced today) but still on the books that limit, for example, in Florida I believe, the number of single women that can live in the same dwelling--dating back to notions of brothels, are today ridiculous. But that's a far cry from making travel safer.

The Supreme Court, like it or not, has many cases where it has reduced freedom, even basic freedoms like religious expression, when it felt that higher causes were served, like national defense. For example soldiers have been told through court cases that dressing in uniform fashion (i.e. support of national defense) trumped their right to the wearing of religious garb while on duty.

You're making the "good of the many outweigh the rights of the few" argument known as collectivism. I simply don't subscribe to that theory as it's been proven to lead to "tyranny of the majority".

Sponsored