>>52173136
>without manual overrides
I'm afraid noone will let them do that.

>>52173176
Not yet no... Thankfully the California MVC has some sense. But with the botnet really pushing hard and with their deep pockets also funding campaigns for people passing the laws, I wonder if it is just a matter of time...

>>52173208
I really doubt that will ever happen.
It's not about google's convincing the entire planet their system is flawless and totally-not-like-the-other-software.

I just don't believe that anyone would agree to put a completely autonomous machine in a not-controlled environment (and road traffic definately is one) with people around.
This will simply not happen because it doesn't happen anywhere at all.

>>52173712
And yet we have the world's biggest conglomerate pushing for it. The rest of the machinery may follow along in due time.

We're numbing ourselves too much before we realize it's too late.

>>52173136
>mfw muh Android phone glitches and reboots once in a while
Pure android doesn't glitch or reboot since, I dunno, like, 4.4. You should probably blame your phone manufacturer for that.

I hate to tell you this OP, but the prospect of self driving cars will be based on reality, not your extrapolations.

If, even with these bugs, self driving cars are safer, then you should expect no manual override.
And it looks like they will be.

Also, the kind of devices like chromecast and android are no-where close to the level of bug testing that a car will be, mostly for one reason: You are not the customer with these devices, you are the product which these devices are slicing up and serving to serve advertisers.

>>52174442
>We're numbing ourselves too much before we realize it's too late.
It's okay. You manual driving faggots will clear yourself out of the gene pool over the long run.
Self driving cars will make driving as safe as flying.

Actually it's more likely that manual override will be outlawed, as idiots keep overriding the car and crashing it.

>>52173136
Actual drivers are more dangerous than a fleet of autonomous vehicles driving themselves, obeying traffic rules, and talking to each other.

>>52173712
As more and more people have self driving cars the perception of the road as a uncontrolled environment will shift.

Chromecast seems to work like a dream until it shits itself and everything goes fubar. Such is modern technology

>>52173136
there are slightly different priorities in chromecast stick project than in fucking driveless car project
>nasa send people to the moon
>their website had retarded newbie sql injection hole one time
>therefore nasa shouldn't send people in space because they can't do their website right

>>52173176
>I'm afraid noone will let them do that.
I hope it becomes illegal for faggots to drive cars manually. Do you know how many dumb fucks die when Winter rolls around because they think they can go 70 with a layer of snow on the highway?

My biggest worry about self driving cars is that they might be networked.

Self driving cars should not network on principle. They should not rely on GPS.

That's why it's taking so long, if you could have them rely on GPS and network around to probe for threats they'd be on sale already.
Problem is, GPS can be spoofed and you could send a car that relies on it into a pond.
And networking just opens the car up to being attacked remotely.

Not a fan of remote access. Having the car go into 'no network mode' when it senses an attack is only a stopgap measure, since a proper attack will trick the car into thinking it's not being attacked.

Self driving cars are going to take a lot of development:
1. getting them driving safely (pretty much done already, gotta have the millions of hours on the road to iron out those 1 in a million bugs)

2. Securing their networking.
This is going to be harder than getting them to self drive safely.

Yeah, humans never fuck up and wreck their car.

>>52173712
>I just don't believe that anyone would agree to put a completely autonomous machine in a not-controlled environment (and road traffic definately is one) with people around.

Not to burst your bubble, anon, but we already do this. Have you not seen the latest drone weapons? We not only allow them to move independently and act on their own, but we went ahead and said "fuck it" and put missiles on the bitch.


Compared to that, self driving cars is pretty trivial, imho.

>>52173136
>he thinks people glitch less than machines

>>52174792
its called natural selection

>>52173136
>>> mfw this same Google wants to push driverless cars without manual overrides onto the streets
well from studies they did with driverless cars, they found that the driver of said vehicle was most often not paying any attention to the road when the car was driving. So if said car experienced a glitch, the human would be able to do fuck all anyway.

What the fuck is the purpose of a self-driving car if you have to pay attention to the road all the time in case the car fucks up?

Second google's self driving car without a steering wheel is targeted as a Taxi.

>>52175851
What? Predators are still flown by pilots. Just remotely.

>>52176094
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Taranis

That's just one of them. There are more, and the newest models are anticipated to be fully autonomous.

>>52174522
>>52174546
>>52174616
>>52174792
>>52175874

I think that is Q.E.D. here.

Not even the laws can save you morons from falling off a cliff.

The fact that these young 'uns here are contradicting themselves all over the place is testament to the uncertain future in the OP.

>>52174505
Son, if you think you'll be the customer with anything Google, even an autonomous car, you're highly mistaken.

>>52176379
Goddammnit... Did I say "laws"?
Meant to say,

Not even the LAWD can save you morons from falling off a cliff!

>>52176477
>subscription-based cars