This jobs-related subject not only hasn’t quit for years,
but is intensifying, in both action and reporting and commentary. How can we sort it out to determine when we
are getting there? First, we review
what’s happened since our last posts.
In “Uber’s self-driving cars managed 20,000 miles last week
– with a lot of help” (Transport,
March 19), David Curry presented data leaked from this now thoroughly
beleaguered ridesharing company. In the
week of March 8, Uber’s driverless vehicles managed 20,300 miles, but needed a “driver
intervention” every 0.8 miles, with takeovers to avoid a “harmful event” 196
times, or once on average each 103 miles.
That’s not shabby at this point, and if that company were in better
shape otherwise we’d say they were well on track.
Six days later, though, per Mike Isaac in The New York Times, Uber was in trouble
again, with one of their driverless cars involved in an Arizona accident
causing minor injuries. It was not at
fault – the other driver did not properly yield – but the Uber car ended up on
its side, and the mishap pointed out the difficulty of programming vehicles to
account for others’ errors. The company
suspended their testing, but brought it back three days later after their
investigation, per The Wall Street
Journal. Uber still drew commentary
that same day asking “Is Uber’s self-driving program veering off track?” (Marco
della Cava, USA Today), including
concern that “testing in inclement weather is considered the Achilles heel of
autonomous vehicles” and compared Uber’s “headlong rush into the self-driving
car race” to the legendary Icarus flying too close to the sun. Here, I think the author was overly
influenced by Uber’s legal, ethical, and management problems, as everyone in
the industry, almost perforce given the stakes involved, is moving quickly. That company, though, was ranked 16th
of 18 in “Why Ford and GM Are Actually Way Ahead of Tesla and Uber in
Developing Self-Driving Cars” (Natalie Walters, The Street, April 6th), a piece which seemed not to
recognize that, with consortia forming, Ford, for example, will soon not mean only
Ford.
In “Smart cities need smart cars: In the future, your car will be able to “see”
through buildings” (Salon, March 26th),
Angelo Young described a demonstration at January’s Consumer Electronics Show
of late-development-stage autonomous car features, including electronically
determining from stoplights when they will change, detecting pedestrians
through their mobile phone’s signalling, and receiving information from nearby
cars even out of their line of sight.
These improvements constituting “V2X,” or “vehicle-to-everything,”
communications, are superb ideas, but the first two here depend on signals from
the environment, which, with consistency problems, is not the way to best implement
driverlessness. That opinion of mine was
underscored by another Angelo Young piece in the same publication,
“Self-driving cars vs. American roads:
Will infrastructure speed bumps slow down the future of transportation?”
(April 20th), which featured a Volvo executive from Scandinavia
complaining about the lack of consistent lane markers in this country. Determining the respective responsibilities
of infrastructure and the vehicles themselves is a good conflict to work on
now, even if my view that almost everything should fall on the latter does not
carry.
They seem to seek involvement in everything else, so should
it surprise us that “Amazon Wants to Use Self-Driving Vehicles” (Matthew Rocco,
Fox Business, April 24th)?
That company is quietly, by their
standards, moving into the field, with its Alexa virtual assistant going into Volkswagen,
Ford, and Mercedes-Benz cars, and a special interest in “autonomous forklifts
and big rigs.” Whether it materializes
as a producer or only as a massive user, it is as foolish to disregard Amazon
here as elsewhere.
We learned from April 25th pieces in Fox Business and The Wall Street Journal that Waymo, part of Google’s Alphabet, will
be using 500 Chrysler minivans to test a driverless vehicle program in
Phoenix. Along with putting their
current technology to an extensive trial, the effort’s goal is, once again, to
gauge customer acceptance of autonomous cars.
Although it is too early to expect any number of people to give up their
vehicles, there will be a few, and it is an excellent idea for them to try out that
concept as well. Three weeks later, we
saw “Lyft and Waymo Reach Deal to Collaborate on Self-Driving Cars (The New York Times, May 14th),
in which Mike Isaac confirmed that “the deal calls for the companies to work
together to bring autonomous vehicle technology into the mainstream through
pilot projects and product development efforts.” Isaac points out, presciently, that these
agreements have a “fluid nature” – although no large joint venture in this
field has yet collapsed, it is almost certain that some will – and that “many
believe” driverless technology “will ultimately be a multibillion-dollar
industry” (I hope he meant multitrillion). He added the unintentional comic relief that
Uber’s then-CEO Travis Kalanick called autonomous know-how “existential” to
Uber’s future – more than he himself proved to be, anyway.
Next week, we look at what has happened with driverless
vehicles in June. Two weeks after that,
you can expect the latest projected implementation timelines.
Why is Uber investing in this boondoggle? The whole secret to their success is they didn't buy a single one of the 100,000 cars that bring in their revenue. How will they buy all of these cars? What will an Uber trip cost? $2,500????
ReplyDelete