Elon Musk Prediction
 

At a tech industry conference today, Tesla CEO and furious rumor-tweeter Elon Musk dropped a bombshell opinion on the future of human driving. "It's too dangerous," he said, adding that once autonomous driving becomes commonplace, he thinks the obvious move is to outlaw human driving.

The bold claim came at the NVIDIA GPU conference, an industry event hosted by the computer chip maker that's making concerted moves into supplying components for in-car electronics and advanced driver aid systems. Talking onstage with NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang, Musk wasn't modest about his views on the future of autonomous driving.

"It's much easier than people think" he said, noting that the most difficult aspect of driving for current autonomous tech is what happens between 15 and 50 mph. "That's where you get a lot of unexpected things," Musk said, including road closures, open manhole covers, pedestrians and the like.

"Once you're above 50 mph, it gets easier," he said. "The set of possibilities are reduced."

Musk thinks self-driving cars are poised to become a ubiquitous fixture in our transportation landscape. "It's like an elevator," he said. "There used to be elevator operators, and we developed some simple circuitry ... The car is going to be just like that."




When will that day come? Musk says a fully autonomous driving system might be as little as one year away. "Autonomy is about what level of reliability and safety you want," he said, noting that once these systems are proven to be safer than human drivers, it will likely take a few years for lawmakers to react. Once that happens, "we'll take autonomous cars for granted in a short period of time," he said. "It's going to be the default thing and it's going to save a lot of lives.

And while he thinks the technical know-how is almost figured out, it's the size of the world's automotive fleet that will make widespread adoption of autonomous vehicles a long-term project. "I think it is important to appreciate the size of the automotive industrial base," he said. "There's 2 billion of them." With annual automotive production worldwide coming in at around 100 million new vehicles, Musk thinks it would take about 20 years to get to a nearly complete autonomous vehicle takeover.

As for Musk himself? It sounds like he still prefers to do some of the driving himself: He told the keynote audience that when driving his Model S P85D, "I always have it in Insane Mode."

UPDATE: Apparently Musk was feeling the heat from the auto enthusiast community—almost immediately after his quotes about self-driving cars were published, he took to Twitter to clarify that Tesla is "strongly in favor of people being allowed to drive their cars and always will be."









http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1426689123.jpg

Someone needs to tell Elon that the driving experience is not just about feeling safe, in fact the opposite is equally true.

Plus how else save for some insane medical epidemic can we keep world population in check?
We're already overpopulated in my opinion. We need to be thinking of ways to reduce the population.
Ooooooooo, now I'm hitler right? Well it is a concern.

Technically he is right.

I am on the Innovation Board for an umbrella group heavily involved with all aspects of road way safety in all fifty states at the local, state and federal level: American Traffic Safety Services Association.

There are a number of initiatives aimed at coping with the largest single cause of traffic accidents: Impaired and distracted drivers. We are also looking at ways to solve the traffic situations where I&D drivers have the most difficulty.

In the aviation world, auto pilots are so much better than a human pilot in terms of pure piloting skill in non-emergency situations you really only need the pilot to placate the passengers...and I am a pilot.

For every Sully there is a 100 instances of pilot error being the sole causal factor in the accident.

Amen!!

In the airline world the pilot has to land the airplane in emergencies because the autopilot cannot. 99% of the time, the autopilot clicks itself off, or is to be disengaged by the pilot, at the first sign of trouble. Yes, if all engines are running and there are no serious controllability issues then the autopilot can fly while the two pilots run a dozen abnormal checklists, brief the stews, call Dispatch, deal with ATC (controllers) and make the PA to the passengers. Yes, in that instance the AP is very valuable. In the 737s I fly I routinely hand-fly and am routinely smoother than the autopilot and just as accurate (headings and altitudes) as the autopilot. Yes, Sully showed why airline pilots get paid and the best part was that he didn't act like an arrogant a-hole afterwards.

I would break-down your claim and say that, in Part 121 (airline) flying, for every "Sully" level of aviation disaster there is another Sully, trained and ready to handle something serious. Now, in Cessna 150s, your 1-for-100 claim is likely more accurate.

(I am an airline pilot. 17,000 hours total, military/military instructor and civilian/91/121.)

As for cars, we now have an arena where no one is really trained or tested. You can step off the airplane from anywhere in the world and get a driver's license with little or no effort. I often tell nervous airline passengers that they are much safer above 18,000 feet (above all the Cessnas) than they are in their own car. People in cars don't know what they're doing. Commercial pilots have to know and are tested, line-checked, simulator-checked, written tested until the cows come home. Outside of the U.S. I will admit that the aviation accident rate statistics go up.

Last thought. Raise your hand if you'll board an automated airliner. No pilots, no human in the cockpit. An airline employee (college intern) programs the autopilot and preflights the airplane--and then waves to the passengers and walks off of the airplane and closes the boarding door. Who's up for that? Oh, and no, the suits who run the airline will not pass the savings on to the passengers. Same price, pilot or no pilot. Raise your hand.

No it isn't, I pulled the claim out of my butt.

Look, I held every possible rating as a Navy pilot, you name it, I had it: I was also an NATOPS check pilot, instrument check pilot, maintenance check pilot, etc...I get aviation.

The larger point is that the incredible advances in six axis gyros and accelerometers, navigation allow redundancy that was unimaginable 10 years ago. As well, auto pilots are simply amazing, especially in dealing with routine emergencies. In commercial UAS applications, I never hand fly our UAS. They are autonomous and fly the programmed route exactly, every time. I can also update the route either via mouse control or additional routes.

I am not suggesting replacement of pilots, only that technology had progressed to a point that in 99.9% of flying, they can be.

On one of the UAS I deployed off of Navy ships, the highest use item was wing spars since the UAS hit the same exact point on the wing during the arrested landing while at sea underway.

I'm on your team, I have just dealt with UAS for almost 14 years so I have heard every pilot vs UAS argument over and over.

I'm fully in favor of autonomous vehicles. In fact, I'm counting on them being common place 30 or so years from now, when I'm probably not going to be able to drive safely anymore. One of the hardest things my father had to do was give up his car keys. That loss of freedom almost certainly accelerated his decline in the last years of his life. With autonomous vehicles, I should never have to make that decision.

Most of cars I see lately seem to be driving themselves already. Unfortunately, the are not autonomous.

Not me.

I want someone sitting in front that's just as averse to dying as I am.

OMMV

This is a guy who bought a McLaren F1 at the age of 28, and then wrecked it. You'd think he would know.

That for sure will the first strong market for an auto-automobile. When I am no long able to drive myself it will be great to get in my car and say take me to to doctors office or the store.

I can see it being VERY popular with the average new driver. The get in and can keep texting and update Facebook and drive through big city traffic with no problems.

The big issue will be hackers. Right now we can't keep the hackers out of sensitive computers. What will happen when they hack a few million cars in LA?

Musk is full of dreamy ideas. Not good business sense.

Let's see him put full automated controls, let alone the data processor, in one of his cars and try to sell it.

At a profit.

First cloudy day, sun fart, or flock of geese, and you'll splat your billionaire customer into a fence post.

As far as it being popular with the average $40K office worker? Yeah ok.

I was opposed to self driving cars until every other car was driven by someone more interested in updating their facebook account. If these bozos start using self driving cars, it'll finally be safe for the rest of us to drive like we should. From what I've read about Musk and his love of cars, he probably feels the same way.

Might be time to invest in Nvidia....
I seem to recall hearing about some patents for these chipsets.

I would be happy if I did all my driving in race tracks and on public roads that fall in that 15-50 mph range he says is so hard for machines. I hate interstate driving. I can't see autonomous systems ever being set up on the little back roads where I do enjoy driving, so I'm good with it.

I wouldn't be hard to make machines better at announcements from the crew. "Sssssshhhhhh pppplllll phost wa wa wa thousand feet sssssshhhh wa wa flying squeeee Interstatic Airways pop...."

This, exactly.

Especially in an urban environment. One of the largest contributors to freeway closure/congestion is people driving 55 and then zero repeatedly when the avg speed is 20, and traffic would flow smoothly at 20.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1426725613.jpg
AeroMobil hopes to launch flying car in 2017 / Wali Zahid

For the brain-dead and appliance-drivers, I think self-piloting cars will be a boon. For those of us who like to DIY, not so much.

I certainly have no issues sharing the road with driverless vehicles--I just wouldn't be too keen on losing my right to drive my own as long as I was able to safely do so.

I can't wait to see the expression on the passengers face when he/she realizes that no matter how many buttons he/she pushes, the driverless car will not exceed the speed limit.

BAAAAAAAHHHHH.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. Although as someone who isn't even a fan of cars with an automatic transmission my opinion probably doesn't matter. :)

The first step to "self driving cars" is getting immunity legislation passed for manufacturers. Look at how we freaked out about a few Toyotas with crappy brakes...can you imagine the class action and congressional hearing backlash in the first major self driving car crashes?

Musk is the new Nader??

The roads will be safe because automobiles will be equipped with a plethora of electronic sensors, solenoids, computer chips and processors.
These electronic automotive parts always function perfectly, and last indefinitely, no matter the conditions.
If you walk into a modern car dealership's shop, the techs are only replacing brake pads, adjusting the cup holders and changing the oil, right?? Right??

Yes, and they will always continue to be available. Sort of like how I'm going to have to replace the entire transmission on our Volvo 960 because the solenoids are NLA anywhere. :mad:

Airbus.

That was only Toyota. They blamed it on floor mats, but there is the distinct possibility their systems were hacked remotely or OEM. That hacking has been proven to be very easy. GM has all those systems integrated into OnStar. Meanwhile, GM ignition switches hurt a lot more people than Toyota. Did the news ever cover that?

Blanket immunity for corporations in the courts? Welcome to 2009.
That can only get worse.

His public statement is the proverbial "camel's nose in the tent".
Once centralized control takes over transportation via omnipotent government regulations there is no going back.

There are already trains, buses, special buses, limos, taxis, bikes and plenty of delivery services for the minority who can't legally drive.
Ask your city council if they aren't available now. Or move.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VfbJYWrXS9I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I like "briefing the Stews" part...

Elon is such a pimp...taking govt cheese to keep his crappy cars on da road. With an Auto pilot car you might as well be taking public transportation.

Driverless cars..... hacker orgasmic.

With all these geniuses and Musk pipedreams, why can't they make a mobile phone reliable and able to use everywhere? And those 'stupid' phones streaming vids, you have to sometimes wait and watch a rotating arrow...lol. No longevity to any of this 'high tech' products. Non replaceable batteries, etc. Most of this is novelty garbage.

BTW: 400hp + cars are becoming commonplace. Average speed in suburbia USA is 40mph. Where's the 150mpg with 400 mile range cars?

My opinion has not changed. I just don't think a driver-less cars will be common on the roads for many years. I do see it as possible for areas like a business campus, retirement communities or even a college campus. The wealthy people will like having a vehicle that can carry 6 people across campus or the neighborhood quickly and weather tight. To have a vehicle that can take you to a specific address through regular traffic on public roads is many years off. For that to be mandatory is a long way off.

It will be even longer before that car can make a cross country trip.

No doubt that my own mother in law would buy one right now if it were under 45 grand and the vehicle could get her on a 400 mile round trip safely and with her not driving. She only has a car because it is a necessary appliance. It would have to be serviced at a common brand like the major brands. Getting a Honda repaired is easy. Mercedes or Audi requires living in a major metropolitan city.

I would be thrilled if, on the road trip from Oregon to California, I could drive to Hwy 5 and then doze off while my car drives 600 miles, waking me up only when it needs gas.

Now, that may not be a Tesla, since it won't drive 600 miles without a time-consuming recharge. But I gather they will soon be offering quick swaps of the battery. Better yet, how about my car automatically summons a special truck to rendezvous with us, they tether (like aerial refueling), and we drive down the highway as my car charges or refuels, all while I'm sleeping.

This idea appeals to pie-in-the-sky wacko hippies more I think, than Gen Xers who are used to being promised techy crap that disappoints. When my phone, computer, and other basic stuff starts working 100% of the time, then I'll think about putting my life in the hands of egghead programmers. Until then, driving is far too dangerous to think about my car or truck becoming a risk-free giant computer prophylactic bubble, just floating on a happy cloud down I-5.

Wonder those who transition to driver-less cars will step on that imaginary brake pedal all the time...

Basically:
What people say they want is a hands-off situation for a long regular commute.
They want their car still available for complete freedom of personal movement and choice.
Freedom of choice.
The problem is point B.
The inner city or different city.
Storing/renting a different car there will be difficult to set up and expensive to maintain.

Think of the distant future:
Trains can easily carry cars and off-load at speed using a parallel track.
Alarms can warn bad drivers with bad habits.

But give up control of the steering wheel and right peddle?
Sacrebleu!

Cars driven by humans are dangerous. The statistics show this to be true. If you take the human out of the equation, a car can be 100% safe, just like the airline passenger industry (well, close enough anyway). Its just a matter of time before autonomous cars will rule the road. The catch is, you gotta have 100% compliance for the scheme to work. Throw one crackhead in a '98 Civic into the mix and there's the potential for some bad PR.

Then exactly what the fk will U be good for? What will be your function in life? John Lennon said, "Holding your co(k in your hand don't make you a man." So what will it be?

Musk loves to make headlines and be talked about. He's an amazing self-promoter. Now if he could just make a profit.......

A true usable self-driving car is a lot more than one year away. In fact, I would argue that you really need some form of AI to make them feasible. Even compared to aviation there are exponentially more variables to deal with in a car. Not to mention the liability........oh my God can you imagine the feeding frenzy when the first driverless car crashes into somebody. Moving the liability from the driver to the manufacturer means the pockets just got a LOT deeper. I think it will happen someday, but I think that day is quite some time from now.

So those Airbus crashes where the computer would not allow the pilot to make the necessary corrections to remain airborne is something we should just ignore?

I love my computers and gadgets but every single one of them needs to be restarted at inopportune moments to get them to simply function after a lockup. I am real sure I don't want to be the passenger in a car that just locked up and needs a complete re-boot while driving down the interstate in heavy traffic.

How many redundant sensors are enough for every single function needed to get down the road. Three, Five? They will have to operate in sub-zero degree snow storms and 120 degree heat of Arizona.

Take the complexity of the 918 and multiply that by 10 and try to find someone to repair that in the middle of eastern Colorado or Montana.

It will happen someday but I suspect like artificial intelligence it is a long way off before it is common and practical.

Now that would be interesting... we have family about 1,500 miles away and the trip requires an overnight stop halfway there because the wife doesn't want to drive. Having the car be able to continue on its own overnight would be pretty cool so long as there was a decent way to sleep in there.