Driverless Car Poll Finds Canadians Almost Evenly Split On Issue

[twizz]

Driverless Car Poll Finds Canadians Almost Evenly Split On Issue
17 hours ago | Updated 16 hours ago

Daniel Tencer Business Editor, Huffington Post Canada

If there was still any doubt that driverless cars are happening, the news coming out of the world's automakers this week ought to put it to rest.

General Motors announced a $500-million investment in ride-sharing company Lyft this week, in an effort to build a fleet of driverless cars that can be summoned by an app. Ford announced it's tripling the size of its self-driving vehicle test fleet, in an effort to speed up product development.

That's likely because it's racing to be ahead of companies like Apple, Toyota, Mercedes and Tesla in building an autonomous vehicle.

mercedes
This driverless Mercedes concept car was spotted on the streets of California in 2015. (Photo: Daimler AG)

"With companies like Google and major auto manufacturers obtaining permits to test autonomous technologies, these vehicles could be a reality in the next few years," said Andrew Lo, chief marketing officer and tech expert at online insurance marketplace Kanetix.

Kanetix commissioned a poll to find out whether Canadians are ready to give up driving and jump into the driverless car world. The poll found Canadians are about as undecided on the issue, collectively, as you can be on any issue.

Asked if they would use a driverless car, 25 per cent of respondents said yes, 23 per cent said no, and 52 per cent said maybe — depending on the technology.

Kanetix put together this infographic based on the poll numbers. The poll was conducted online by Ignite Lab in December, 2015, with 1,095 Canadians, and has a margin of error of +/-3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

http://m.huffpost.com/ca/entry/8940228

 

[shack]

The only reason I wouldn't want driverless is that I know I could get from point A to point B faster than a car driving the speed limit (I assume it wouldn't speed) and I can also find quick detours in event of traffic.

If time is not an issue I am OK with driverless.

 

[Keebler Elf]

What convinced me in favour was when someone pointed out that the safety IMPROVEMENT of driverless cars will more than offset the existing rate of accidents. So yes, there's still the problem of some kind of catastrophic software error but the chances of that are far outweighed by the routine accidents that occur day in/day out that will be eliminated by computer technology (e.g., distracted driving, following too close, unsafe lane changes, etc.).

I can't wait.

 

[Butler1000]

What convinced me in favour was when someone pointed out that the safety IMPROVEMENT of driverless cars will more than offset the existing rate of accidents. So yes, there's still the problem of some kind of catastrophic software error but the chances of that are far outweighed by the routine accidents that occur day in/day out that will be eliminated by computer technology (e.g., distracted driving, following too close, unsafe lane changes, etc.).

I can't wait.

The safety studies are on clean dry roads. And the same well mapped roads over and over.

I'm betting we are a long way off from being under real world conditions involving weather, accidents, bad drivers, bad pedestrians, bad bicyclists, animals running across the road. As well as construction, traffic signal issues, public transit(say behind a streetcar). On and on. And designing a computer system that can interface with cameras to not only react but predict(like humans do) erratic behavior.

Tougher than you think.

 

[Titalian]

The safety studies are on clean dry roads. And the same well mapped roads over and over.

I'm betting we are a long way off from being under real world conditions involving weather, accidents, bad drivers, bad pedestrians, bad bicyclists, animals running across the road. As well as construction, traffic signal issues, public transit(say behind a streetcar). On and on. And designing a computer system that can interface with cameras to not only react but predict(like humans do) erratic behavior.

Tougher than you think.

I agree, especially here in the northern hemisphere.

 

[canada-man]

driverless cars means the greedy dive test centres that fail people to make them pay more and the driving instructors who won't stop them will go out of business

 

[Keebler Elf]

Tougher than you think.

No one said it would be simple. But we'll get there, sooner rather than later. Pessimists don't innovate.

 

[Butler1000]

No one said it would be simple. But we'll get there, sooner rather than later. Pessimists don't innovate.

Keebler, it certainly isn't about working towards it. But, while I'm no expert I've spoken with some engineers and computer techs. They are all in agreement that interfacing and programing a system to recognize things on the road and all the variables is a fair way off.

We are talking about some very real AI coupled with visual acuity. It isn't just a matter of GPS and away you go. Not even close.

 

[jcpro]

Automated personal transport is a forgone conclusion. Right now, we're waiting for the technology to develop sufficiently to make it possible.

 

[Smallcock]

So yes, there's still the problem of some kind of catastrophic software error

Hackers and terrorists are going to have fun with this.

 

[jonstreets]

lets say after ayear or two of implementation that the stats show that driverless cars actually have significant decrease in car accidents. then how do you think the polls will go. if it turns out your 40% less likely to be in a car accident in a driverless car. thats huge and i think people opinions will change. then people who drive themselves will be seen as dangerous. "careful of that car hunny its got a driver in it"

 

[GameBoy27]

The safety studies are on clean dry roads. And the same well mapped roads over and over.

I'm betting we are a long way off from being under real world conditions involving weather, accidents, bad drivers, bad pedestrians, bad bicyclists, animals running across the road. As well as construction, traffic signal issues, public transit (stay behind a streetcar). On and on. And designing a computer system that can interface with cameras to not only react but predict (like humans do) erratic behavior.

Tougher than you think.

Those are all good points. I would like to know how these things will read a cop's hand signals when he's on point duty at an intersection with malfunctioning traffic lights. Apparently these cars will not drive aggressively, exceed the speed limit or "break the law". With that in mind, I can think of many occasions where I've needed to put my foot to the floor to merge with traffic when entering a highway as the flow was travelling 20 km/h above the posted limit. I have also stood on the gas pedal to avoid a collision when applying the brakes and/or steering would have gotten me creamed.

Then there's this. How many times have you been driving down a one-way side street where there's a row of parked cars and only room for one lane of traffic. You come upon a delivery truck and the only way by is to drive up on the sidewalk to get around it.

Or as in the case of my neighborhood, the lane is blocked by a garbage/compost/recycling truck every week. Again the only way past is to "break the law" and drive up on the sidewalk. A driverless car would have to wait until the truck was able to move out of the way to get around it. That could take 20 minutes or more depending upon the street. And what does one of these things do if it gets dinged by another vehicle? Will it drive itself to the collision reporting centre?

I know they're little things but I think we're still a long way off. Then there's the insurance liability aspect. That's going to be a tricky one.

I forgot to mention how much these things will cost and I can't imagine they'll retain their value once it's out of warranty. If you thought cars today were complicated!

 

[fuji]

Initially they will likely be deployed as a sort of transit service they only drive on major roads that have been carefully mapped and potentially upgraded with special signaling equipment.

Then imagine you call for one using an Uber like app and it picks you up on its grid and drops you off on its grid. You would then walk the last block from the major road it can drive on.

Over time as the tech improves it would expand into more and more roads. This eliminates the complexity of having to deal with any possible road by limiting it to make roads and initially potentially technologically upgraded roads.

Reading hand signals isn't that hard, a computer could recognize that, especially if they use those have held lights.

 

[IM469]

I wonder what the poll results would have been when cruise control was first introduced in 1958.

 

[Butler1000]

Initially they will likely be deployed as a sort of transit service they only drive on major roads that have been carefully mapped and potentially upgraded with special signaling equipment.

Then imagine you call for one using an Uber like app and it picks you up on its grid and drops you off on its grid. You would then walk the last block from the major road it can drive on.

Over time as the tech improves it would expand into more and more roads. This eliminates the complexity of having to deal with any possible road by limiting it to make roads and initially potentially technologically upgraded roads.

Reading hand signals isn't that hard, a computer could recognize that, especially if they use those have held lights.

I already have that....

It's called the TTC.

 

[rhuarc29]

The safety studies are on clean dry roads. And the same well mapped roads over and over.

I'm betting we are a long way off from being under real world conditions involving weather, accidents, bad drivers, bad pedestrians, bad bicyclists, animals running across the road. As well as construction, traffic signal issues, public transit(say behind a streetcar). On and on. And designing a computer system that can interface with cameras to not only react but predict(like humans do) erratic behavior.

Tougher than you think.

My guess is that we are at least 25 years away from driverless cars becoming mainstream. That's a long time and anything could happen during that period; including a totally new direction for transportation.

 

[GameBoy27]

Initially they will likely be deployed as a sort of transit service they only drive on major roads that have been carefully mapped and potentially upgraded with special signaling equipment.

Then imagine you call for one using an Uber like app and it picks you up on its grid and drops you off on its grid. You would then walk the last block from the major road it can drive on.

Like Butler1000 said, We already have that, it's called the TTC. I have an app which tells me where and when the next bus or streetcar is arriving. I also have the option of calling a cab or UberX. I many logistical problems with the driverless service you suggest, and no advantage.

Over time as the tech improves it would expand into more and more roads. This eliminates the complexity of having to deal with any possible road by limiting it to make roads and initially potentially technologically upgraded roads.

Again, what is the advantage over existing transportation options?

Reading hand signals isn't that hard, a computer could recognize that, especially if they use those have held lights.

According to everything I've read so far, determining the difference between a police officer, a construction worker, a crossing guard and a homeless guy is proving to be quite a challenge. For example, if the driverless car approaches a red light it must recognize that the police officer is in control. Then proceed through the red light if waved to do so, which goes against everything they're programmed to do.

I'm not against technology. There's many safety innovations that will and have already made it into current automobiles. I'm just saying there's so many variables these things will have to deal with. And this technology won't come cheap.

I wonder what the poll results would have been when cruise control was first introduced in 1958.

As I recall, everyone I knew was super excited to own/drive a car with cruise control when it became available.

 

[Big Sleazy]

I wouldn't buy a driverless car unless somebody else was going to pay for the maintenance.

I would rather have high speed trains. There is over 14,000 miles of high speed trains in the World and Canada doesn't have any. Are we a Third World Country ?

 

[Butler1000]

I wouldn't buy a driverless car unless somebody else was going to pay for the maintenance.

I would rather have high speed trains. There is over 14,000 miles of high speed trains in the World and Canada doesn't have any. Are we a Third World Country ?

No. A sparsely populated one. To make them work you need density so many take it. Places like Japan, Europe have X amount of people per Sq km so it makes sense.

In our case we have pockets of high density. But not enough to support the high speed lines. Our nation has 35 million. Japan has about 128 million. On that island as compared to the largest nation on earth. See the difference?

 

[twizz]

No. A sparsely populated one. To make them work you need density so many take it. Places like Japan, Europe have X amount of people per Sq km so it makes sense.

In our case we have pockets of high density. But not enough to support the high speed lines. Our nation has 35 million. Japan has about 128 million. On that island as compared to the largest nation on earth. See the difference?

In Toronto/Gta we could use something like high speed trains, conjestion is an issue.