Google Driverless Car — Search Engines to Cars
Oct 19th, 2010 | By Gene A. Wright | Category: Breakout Topics, Feature, General, Information Technology, Innovation, New Product Management, Technology, Technology StrategyArticle on Manufacturing Business Technology
ABC News Video and Comentary on Engadget Check out the Video Reporter walking in front of car
Amazing? How long will it be before we realize this is a reality, not science fiction? Should we be developing this further?
What do you think?
I think it’s great! I cannot wait till I can get in car in the morning and tell it to take me to work and it will take me the whole way there while I eat my breakfast and watch TV. I do think there will be challenges integrating the cars with existing cars and with people’s aggressive driving.
Being somewhat of a self proclaimed car fanatic, I have thought about the idea of a driverless car quite a bit. The potential greater safety and having the ability to activate an autopilot on a long trip are intriguing to me. On the other hand, I like driving. I even take it one step further by only purchasing and driving manual transmission vehicles. I feel that automatic transmissions take away from the overall driving experience. Now consider the driverless car and all of the driving experience would be taken away. The driver just sits there and that doesn’t sound like much fun to me.
I think the driverless concept is a great idea in certain situations. One that comes to mind is if you are out with friends and accidentally had too much to drink. A way to put the car on autopilot to get home is a wonderful idea. I than think of how lazy society as a whole is becoming and if we had a driverless car how much more lazy might we become. I also think that people’s patience would be seriously tested because a driverless car will follow all rules of the road and most people do not drive text book style, they are very aggressive and idiotic in some cases.
I believe that this is ludicrist(I have never wriiten this word before so I am guessing on the spelling). It seems that google is trying to create another avenue where people can use their product. I am relieved to see that there is a backup driver in the test car. Google is probably not the first to use this type of technology, Mercedese Benz is advertising this type of technology for lazy/sleepy/inattentive drivers. Since goolgle has oogles of money, whoy not use it for R&D.
I saw this on the news and I thought that the reporter was pretty bold to step out in front of the car. That being said, this is a very promising technology that has been dreamed about for many, many years. Google’s use of their map technology really opens up an opportunity for this to actually work. There are many barriers to overcome, but from a cost perspective and from a safety/regulation perspective. However, there are some great opportunities here in the right situations. Perhaps allowing driverless cars to operate on freeways or maybe driverless taxis in major cities.
I can see upsides and downsides. The upsides are that people can use their technology without worring about hitting someone. IE texting, computing, talking on the phone, etc. This would be invaluable to the salesman and a taxicab owner. The downside is that we become more and more enabled to do less. I am not sure what Googles motivation is, but I could see them using this as a vehicle to allow people to be more connected. Since Google has made so much money, maybe they figure, if they don’t develop it, someone else will. This will allow them to get their operating system into vehicle manufactures computers?
I think is a cool technology, and has the potential of getting better which will eventually be incorporated in many vehicles. However, one of the auto manufacturers has to take a risk to implement this technology, and sadly it is to say, I think it will only take one fatal accident to ban these types of cars. Even though humans driving cars have a higher accident percentage, its just there is low tolerance for technological mistakes. Therefore, it might be embraced at first, but how long will that last.
The first thing I thought about when I saw this report was “Great!! I don’t have to drive thru traffic on my way to work”. I hate having to sit there for an hour just braking and accelerating. With this technology I can relax, hear the radio station and do my makeup hehehehe. However, I do agree with the other comments about how this technology would reduce the driving experience. I love to drive when doing roadtrips, so on those moments the driverless car would be turned off.
I’m amazed with how much progress they have made compared with the pretty crude auto driving systems in the military challenges of just a few years ago. There are many people who will pay for this product, but a lot of safety and legal issues need to be worked out. With no human actively involved, whose fault will it be when an accident occurs? Ideally, this would follow the model of mechanical reliability issues — most mechanical failures while operating do not result in a life-threatening situation, just great inconvenience. The occasional inconvenience is insurable or simply borne by the operator. The major, systemic failure leads to product recalls, tarnished corporate images, and class-action lawsuits. So, the manufacturers have a lot of incentive to get this right. The car has a lot of utility as-is, but is not ready for the “driver” to not be paying close attention to the road; clearly that’s where they’re going, though.
I would pay anything to get a car like that. I would love to sit in my car and could read or sleep while my car is driving me from A to B. But I am not sure why Google is making a big deal out of it. A friend of mine is a research engineer by Mercedes Benz and he told me that they have car like this for years. However, they have not brought it on the market due to liability concerns.
I am hybrid strategy guy. I enjoy driving and would like to have this option when I am tired and want an ‘auto pilot’.
Building upon Eric and JDB’s comments: I believe liability is the only limiting factor here. Advances along this line of technology have exponentially expanded over time, but our ability to accept the risks and personal responsibility that goes with it has not. It would be great if, during my next family roadtrip to see relatives in the southeast, that we could pack up RV and head out for non-stop drive on our own accord (no bus, plane or train). Plug in the GPS route and sit back and relax. No boundries from being sleepy, restroom breaks, stopping for meals, etc. Like Ronco – “Set it and forget it!” Well, except for the fuel stops – still gotta have those for now. But the risk of “what if something goes wrong” will prevent this from becoming a marketable product for quite some time. I also foresee the various industries that will rail against the idea when it does start hitting mainstream – rest areas, restaurants, hotels, etc. losing revenue because people don’t stop anymore. The interstates killed the “Route 66″ mom and pop shops. Now the driverless vehicle could kill the interstate exit chains. Everything changes.
If successful, this would be an amazing technology! I can easily see how it would be safer and more efficient. It seems that the hours in the day have dwindled since our parent’s days. Today people just seem busier – more work, more school, more activities, more fun…and there is a huge waste in between each event. Having an efficient car – or mode of travel will help these individuals (who are not interested in public/mass transit) earn back some hours of their day. I do wonder how this will affect the job market – for example, I imagine that car mechanics will need to know computer programming.
I appreciate the technology and the work someone put into developing this product but I don’t think it should be released to the public. It’s bad enough there are a lot of bad drivers on the road but to give them the false pretense that this car will make them safer drivers is a disaster waiting to happen. Just like JDB said, “liability.” If this car would hit the streets I would hope that there would be some sort of regulations on who drives them and some indepth training and tests to pass in order to be licensed for one.
Amazing…the sad part is, if everyone had this technology in their car, the roads would probably be safer. But I’m sure insurance rates starting off will be so high most people won’t be able to afford it. Also if people are looking for being able to read, text, call while getting from one place to the next, while also saving the environment, improvements to public transportation would probably be better, if people could accomodate that.
I’m not sure exactly how I feel about giving up control of a vehicle moving at 60-70 mph…Granted if it were ever commercialized one would think it would have had to been tested and retested to ensure safety, but then again I’m sure Toyota never thought there would be an issue either. On the positive side, it could go a long way towards preventing auto fatailities by keeping safer distances and acting as a redundancy for distracted drivers.
Well, for me, I am not going to agree to apply it in my daily driving. Although it helps us when we really need to answer a call or something else needs our concentration, I feel anxious and nervous if my hands are away from my steering wheel. It means I lose control of my car. And I don’t know whether this kind of self-driving system has potential problems. It makes things unpredictable because I cannot make any move with my skill if I pass the driving totally to the automatic system.
I’d be more apt to adopt this technology under the premise that the “driverless” part is more of a tool to the driver rather than a solution for the driver. I don’t think we’re at the point where we can just let a speeding hunk of machinery do its thing while texting, snacking, sleeping or whatever. I think this technology, to be successful & accepted, should be considered a tool at first… much like we consider cruise control a tool. Cruise control makes driving easier and more fuel efficient but the driver is still very much involved and equally, very much still responsible for the automobile.
I have two points on this matter. First, many people, including the reporters are amazed that Google has a driverless car. I don’t quite see this as an amazing departure from their current capabilities. After all, Google already makes a mobile operating system (Android), has tons of information on traffic + maps (Google Maps), public transportation (Google Transit), geography + elevation (Google Earth), and is even actively looking for a place to setup a new Google Broadband service (1Gbps). The driverless car simply makes use of many of these technologies to augment the driver’s ability (or lack thereof). Plus, the head researcher (Sebastian Thrun) of that team was the winner of DARPA’s Grand Challenge 2005, and placed second in DARPA’s Urban Challenge 2007. At that time, Sebastian was working at Stanford, and his software-based solution to a driverless vehicle proved to be quite robust in both competitions.
Second, Google is a technology company, though it grew and became a worldwide organization through its search functionality. So, while many people associate Google with searching, and even the word “google” has become synonymous with conducting a search online, it’s by no means the only market this company focuses on. Google invests on new technologies constantly, including solar panels, battery-powered car charging stations, and ways to make transportation through its campus easier, healthy, emissions-free, and fun (Shweeb).
Therefore, Google is a very broad-thinking company that looks towards the future in whatever market(s) they can best leverage core competencies. The driverless car just puts a lot of Google’s technologies to use concurrently within a single platform. Google is a very innovative company, and it shows.
Whoa! How crazy! Google’s really got their hands in a lot of pies! It’s crazy that Google is taking an interest in so many different ideas and technologies but when you think of what they are – a search engine – they are always on the forefront because they know what the forefront is and where the future is headed in so many different industries.
I think this car is really cool but right I don’t think people can have the brave to drive it.
However, I do think GOOGLE’s attitude about exploring so many different technologies is important. That’s why our society keeps going forward.
Maybe after 100 years, everybody will drive a car like this and maybe even up in the air. Who knows?
Google is once again at the forefront! I personally find this technology to be very frightening. Driving should always remain under the domain of human direction. A malfunction or infiltration be some type of virus could leave entire cities looking like a parking lot. Technology has to stop somewhere, and I think it has reached its limit here. Besides, some of us LIKE to drive!
I hope this car isn’t depending AT&T’s 3G service for real-time driving instructions! This sure would be nice though if it ever comes to fruition. I have about a 35 minute commute to work every day and I’ve often thought about how much more I would get done in a day if I weren’t stuck behind the wheel of my car for a little over an hour every day. I wonder what effect this would have on road rage.
This is very cool, but I am a bit skeptical about it. It would be amazing to be able to preset your destination and accomplish something else or relax on the way, but I will avoid this until it is on the market long enough and all of the kinks are worked out.