Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Self driving automated shuttles are not operating on any US public streets, except for isolated testing vehicles. The technology is not fully developed yet and it will be years before these become commonplace. I do question the $ 50 k grant for developing, constructing and implimenting new vehicles. More of a publicity gag IMO. NCSU's shuttle is still a work in progress, but they feel comfortable to use it on campus. If an accident occurs, it will immediately be scrapped. For now, it's a novelty.
It's important to note that the limited systems available now, including NCSU's and the one referenced in Grand Rapids, do not operate without a human "attendant" on board at all times - because the technology is not sufficient at this time for it to be trusted. Still a novelty.
They already are operating on public streets. Grand Rapids put them in place on their downtown streets last year. Also there are no laws federal prohibiting them from operating on city streets. The states are in control of laws. They will be allowed on Greensboro city street, at least driverless public transportation vehicles.
These things are not developed in a vacuum. There will be no truly autonomous vehicles until advances in AI and advanced computing allow the "brains" of the vehicle to mimic a human driver. That's years away.
In the meantime, universities like NCSU are working on quantum computing and AI improvements. A&T may be doing the same thing.
These things are not developed in a vacuum. There will be no truly autonomous vehicles until advances in AI and advanced computing allow the "brains" of the vehicle to mimic a human driver. That's years away.
There is A LOT of smart technology involved with these vehicles. Can they still get in accidents? Yes but so does vehicles with drivers. You'd be surprised how many sensors are on those vehicles. But this is the reason why they are being allowed for public transportation. Of course there are issues that have to be worked out before millions of individuals have them on the roads.
I read the article and understood that it was a grant. Move on please.
Well I mean, apparently not....
Nobodys trolling you. Just calling you out on very obviously trying to discredit what gsoboi posted. For no reason. Doesn't matter if there were 500 driverless shuttles in every other city in the NC. Now Greensboro is helping A&T develop a system. That's all the post was.
Don't victimize yourself when people push back a bit. Either back off it or continue to dig your heels into a topic you clearly know very little about. That choice is up to you. Calling out intent or countering inaccuracies isn't trolling my friend.
The Grand Rapids system is a one-year PILOT program which runs until July 2020. The jury is out as to whether or not it will be cost effective to continue, it if enough people will even use them. For now, they are basically large toasters that run on predetermined routes at max 25 mph.
If you read the article, this is a test program.
These systems are not banned by the government, you are correct, but the first time that there's an accident, injury or death, that will change. They will then become tightly regulated.
Nobodys trolling you. Just calling you out on very obviously trying to discredit what gsoboi posted. For no reason. Doesn't matter if there were 500 driverless shuttles in every other city in the NC. Now Greensboro is helping A&T develop a system. That's all the post was.
Don't victimize yourself when people push back a bit. Either back off it or continue to dig your heels into a topic you clearly know very little about. That choice is up to you. Calling out intent or countering inaccuracies isn't trolling my friend.
Nope. I simply made a comment that NCSU had a system (brand new actually) and you jumped to all sorts of conclusions. In multiple posts, not just one. Trolling.
Nope. I simply made a comment that NCSU had a system (brand new actually) and you jumped to all sorts of conclusions. In multiple posts, not just one. Trolling.
I questioned your initial intent. You explained your intent. Your intent seems to be buried deeply in your personal opinion on the matter instead of around the facts. You continue to hold on to your opinion of the matter no matter how many times it has been proven to be inaccurate. Further making your explained intent seem even less believable. All of which seems to make you more and more flustered. None of which is mine or anybodies else fault. And is certainly by definition, not trolling.
I made a benign comment about NCSU having an automated vehicle similar to what Greensboro wants to receive from A&T. They specially asked for two of these vehicles in exchange for the $ 50 k grant. In additional posts, I stated that NCSU recently purchased a similar vehicle from a company who already produces them, the technology is not yet mature enough for mass deployment and the systems in use today are test - pilot programs.
Then, in multiple posts, you question my original post's meaning, my intent, what subliminal message that I am supposedly conveying, and that I am somehow "wrong" in expressing my opinion that the technology is not currently available for these vehicles. You claim to understand my intent by reading my mind etc.
We can disagree without the drama and the insults. Let's move on.
The Grand Rapids system is a one-year PILOT program which runs until July 2020. The jury is out as to whether or not it will be cost effective to continue, it if enough people will even use them. For now, they are basically large toasters that run on predetermined routes at max 25 mph.
If you read the article, this is a test program.
These systems are not banned by the government, you are correct, but the first time that there's an accident, injury or death, that will change. They will then become tightly regulated.
No one saying driverless vehicles will be perfect. Of course they are not and there will be accidents. But I can't even begin to count how many accidents there are every day with drivers, many resulting in deaths. Driverless vehicles have to begin somewhere and these public shuttles are baby steps until we reach a technological point where every individual has one. The driverless vehicles today are already extremely smart. They implement technology in todays cars like adaptive cruise control with sensors. They have sensors that tell whether a traffic light is green, yellow or red. The current vehicles in place are going no more than about 20 or 30 miles per hour. They detect when a person or object is in front, behind or beside the vehicle. They are very smart and state governments feel they are safe enough to allow cities to put them on the streets.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
