There are no self-driving cars available right now. It may be hard to believe with all the hype surrounding the emerging technology, but it’s still just hype—excited fanboys buoying a new piece of hardware far above its actual capabilities. It’s dangerous rhetoric. However, automakers and tech companies are racing to introduce the technology to the masses. Except the masses may not even want self-driving cars, at least not yet, according to an American Automobile Association study highlighted by Bloomberg.Â
Seven out of 10 of those surveyed want nothing to do with the technology even as 55 percent of those surveyed believed most cars would have the ability to drive themselves by 2029. Much of the apprehension with the technology likely stems from the unknown. Fifty-three percent of those surveyed said they’d be comfortable using a fully autonomous vehicle at low speeds like a people-mover at an airport. However, only 44 percent of respondents said they’d be comfortable with autonomous delivery vehicles. And only 19 percent said they’d feel comfortable putting a child or family member into a self-driving car.Â
But it’s not all doom and gloom for autonomous vehicles. Cars equipped with automated driver assistance systems such as automatic emergency braking and lane-keep assist appear to make people more likely to trust fully autonomous vehicles—68 percent of respondents, according to the study.Â
Growing consumer trust is key to the success of autonomous vehicles. Cruise Automation, Waymo, and 22 other organizations formed Partnership for Automated Vehicle Education (PAVE), a coalition designed to familiarize the public with self-driving cars through test rides, educational workshops, and informational materials.Â
There will need to be a massive educational push as autonomous vehicles become more ubiquitous to ensure passengers understand the capabilities and limitations of the technology—and the differences between make and models. Not correctly educating consumers on how the new technology operates could lead to consequential failures, injuries, and death. Driver education in the U.S. is already abysmal, and the influx of self-driving cars could complicate an already poorly implemented educational program.Â
Comments
I’ll take a fleet of self-driving cars any day over the exhausted, impaired, distracted and texting drivers I see on the road everyday.
I’ll even take an A.V. over my wife’s driving.
Where in the county was the survey done? The demographics are important..
There is so much to like about AEVs so within several years, perceptions should easily change to +90% acceptance.
Why, everbody knows them thar infernal contraptions’ll never replace a good horse! !
Everybody also knows that in order for a horse to be good transportation it has to be tamed, broken, and trained. Everybody also knows that the rider needs to keep a “firm hand on the reins” as a loose (autonomous) horse can be dangerous to itself and others. It took humans a long time to learn these facts; probably the first passengers on a wild (autonomous) horse found out the hard way.
Yeah, and I want to fly on a 737, too.
You are correct. Demographics matter. In my area, I bet it’s 90% disapproval!
What are people afraid of? These things are already safer than humans and will only get better with time.
It is way too early to declare these drones safer than humans. Take all human backups out of the equation and we we’ll see how safe these things REALLY are.
Apparently you have no clue how technology, electronics, sensors and navigation systems work. Or don’t when they start to age or are programmed incorrectly. And lets nor forget the inferior lower cost cutting components like car batteries that last half as long as they used to that manufacturers use to help the bottom line. Your life doesn’t matter to them. The bottom line does and as we all know this huge push is all about the money!
Some parts of this article are dishonest.
How is excitement around a developing technology that will save lives “dangerous rhetoric”? What harm is it causing anyone?
Also, saying that AV hype is just “excited fanboys buoying a new piece of hardware far above its actual capabilities. ” is misleading as well. These AVs exist now and drive around daily in busy urban areas. It’s true that they still have a human sitting behind the wheel, but the technology is already impressive.
I see nothing dishonest in this article; in fact it is remarkably balanced and factual for a GMA article. It seems to me that GMA generally tries to support GM management where possible, but the “betting of the company” on autonomous vehicles is quite a stretch for any rational person or publication, in my opinion. The article really only suggests the business problem of trying to get a very doubtful consumer base to accept a radical new technology that directly impacts customer perception of safety. The “rhetoric” is “dangerous” if it causes the technology to be rushed to market before it is really proven and acceptable to the customers; mostly it will be economically dangerous to the business (GM?), no matter how statistically “safer” it is supposed to be.
News flash: this technology is not about saving lives. It is about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ plain and simple. Of course the purveyors like GM will claim how much more safe the technology is, but at the end of the day it is all about how much money can be raked in by Wall Street investors that have no concept of the tech to begin with. For Waymo, GM, Uber, etc. lives are secondary compared to how much money can be made.
Picture this: Heavy rush hour traffic on a five-lane freeway in LA, moving at 75 to 80 MPH with an average separation distance of one to two car-lengths. Half of the cars are autonomously driven. Suddenly one or two of the AD cars are hacked by some kid in China, causing the cars to swerve violently. All drivers immediately hit the brakes. The result would be akin to “the big one” on the last laps of any NASCAR race at Daytona . . . on steroids!
. . . and ya think that we’re gonna have autonomously-driven vehicles that are safe?
Me tinks not, at least until they can be proven to be one hundred percent reliable and unhackable and that will never happen.
Montana Bob
I have a news flash for you, Bob. Any car with an outside data connection (OnStar, for example…) can be hacked and since the circuit board on which all of the driving controls are placed is the same as that of the outside connection, your scenario is already possible. Just give it time and something along those lines will occur, autonomous vehicles or not.
. . . but, Elon, I still have a steering wheel which is mechanically connected to the front wheels and I still have hydraulically actuated brakes which are foot operated. I can still, throw the transmission into reverse. I can still actuate the emergency brake. Lastly, I can still kill the power to the engine manually, so should the car be hacked through On-Star, I am still in control. With the projected autonomously-driven vehicles those options are not available. Take a look at the photo in the article, no steering wheel.
Montana Bob
According to this study the more comfortable people are with the technology the more likely they are to use it. Given this and GM’s own admission of wanting to move to an all AV future, why aren’t they including the automated safety features they have now as standard features on every car? Instead they are options no one wants to pay extra for.
Mark,
Ford was the first to have seat belts. That was in the mid-fifties. They were an option.
Montana Bob
If memory serves (and not too well anymore), was there not a problem back then on the Crown Vic with the optional seat belts when combined with the optional automatic power seats? The story I remember is that the driver/passenger would get in the car, fasten and tighten the seat belt, then close the door. The seats automatically pulled back when the door was opened, and returned to the programmed driving position when the door was closed. Problem was if the seat belts were cinched tight with the door open, the power seat would proceed to crush their pelvis when the door was closed. Ford had to quickly disable the features.
My point being that if so-called “safety” features are not carefully designed and tested, they can do more harm than good. The 737 Max stall override issue and perhaps autonomous vehicles in general come to mind.
As to the claims that today’s AV technology is almost ready, I have a 2018 Volt with “Lane Assist” technology and I am amazed at how many times it does not properly sense the roadway edge in my state, which, admittedly, is known for its poor roadways. Good thing it still has a steering wheel.
People feel this way about any type of major new technology as one has to think if a survey was conducted prior to the introduction of automatic transmission, there was a lot of hesitation; autonomous driving of some type or another can be helpful as systems can prevent a driver from making a serious mistake by working in the background like a big brother or a full autonomous system that can take you home after a long day at work.
Omegatalon,
I understand your premise but I do not believe that it applies in this situation. It is human nature to control and autonomous driving removes that. An example is Amazon’s Alexis. That is a recent technology that has been widely accepted. Another example is the Internet of Things (IoT). (FWIW, I wouldn’t have either, as my privacy trumps all!) In both of my examples, control remains in the hands of the user, contrary to AD, which removes control. A HUGE difference.
BTW, one could even argue that AD is worse in that it relinquishes control to any capable hacker.
Just my opinion.
Montana Bob
And this will soon give more control to law enforcement, the government, insurance companies and anyone else that thinks they need to big brother over your life. So now if you have an outstanding parking ticket they could disable your vehicle or if your a day late paying your insurance the State/DMW could render your driving privilege forfeit meaning your not getting to work today. technology is fine in certain applications. When it can totally take over like this is when people should be raising a huge red flag. Thinking is your friend! So is freedom.
Joe,
The problem is that, as stated previously by Elon Muskrat, that capability already exists technically with on-Star. That said, I am certain that eventually some law enforcement entity will exercise some sort of control, or outright deactivation, over a private vehicle, for purposes as you describe, it would be challenged in court. My guess is that that scenario could possibly end up in the SCOTUS.
Last evening I saw an ad for On-Star advertising the capability of it to bring a stolen car to a stop, proving that it can be done already.
Montana Bob
You are aware that Onstar can easily be disabled and rendered useless right? How do you disable a fully autonomous vehicle?
Joe,
An AD can be disabled by disconnecting the battery(ies), but then all that you have is a yard ornament!
Montana Bob
Great! Each site in this list is necessary and very useful for students in the education questions. I would also like to add to the list this service – https://ukessay.com/essay-help. There are very high-quality professional writers and tutors, who provide the essay help. Many sources were previously unknown to me and it’s cool that in the last year I managed to find something new.
It is always a difficult choice for a graduate. It is necessary to take into account your desires and opportunities. For the final student work, I recommend this service AresearchGuide which will help you choose a topic and read Edubirdie review.