I suspect the below-"Level 5" driving systems will become more of an "augmented driving". I've driven in newer vehicles with automatic lane centering, pedestrian detection, etc. and they don't really seem like they're even doing anything, you still feel like you're the one driving, except that it's more precise with the occasional interruption by the car when it perceives risk of a collision.
These augmented systems will probably reduce the risk of accidents so greatly that the value proposition for Level 5 driving systems just won't be there.
"Augmented driving" is Level 2. That's where commercial products (GM, Mercedes, Tesla) are now.
Volvo was talking about level 3 back in 2017, but they gave up.[1] Level 3 means that the system may ask the driver to take over, but if the driver does not do so, the system must get the vehicle to a safe condition. Preferably pulled over out of traffic, but as least stopped without hitting anything. The driver is not required to watch the road.
The serious players are trying to get to level 4, where the driver is not expected to take over but the set of roads you can use is limited.
The leveling system is a bit off. Level 3 doesn't mean "better" than Level 2. A Level 2 system might actually offer the best safety profile of any of the Levels. That's what I'm getting at: there's a lot of runway in Level 2 systems, and I think they'll be so good that it will kill momentum for Level 3+ systems.
Yes. Eliminating or vastly reducing the head-on collisions caused by drivers drifting across the center line, and the rear-end collisions where they don't see the stopped or slow car ahead of them, are a huge win. I'd trade full self-driving for really effective lane departure warnings and auto-braking collision avoidance any day of the week. Next step (or included) would be reacting to red lights/stop signs if it appears that the driver is not stopping. Deal with those things well and you've eliminated the causes of most serious accidents.
The problem is that when a level 2 system gets too smart it can confuse drivers and lead to bad reactions in response.
e.g. let's say you have a level 2 system which starts auto-evading, suddenly steering without user input, the user is likely to reflexively try counter-steering in response.
I think Mercedes has level 4 on highways now? I think this is the way forward actually, let cars drive cars themselves on the long boring bits (which are actually easy for AI) and leave the driving to the humans everywhere else. Having tried many augmented systems I don't believe in self driving in varied conditions within 10 years. I think the locations where waymo operates is a good indication of what is possible at the moment.
> These augmented systems will probably reduce the risk of accidents so greatly that the value proposition for Level 5 driving systems just won't be there.
I've driven a lot for decades and frankly enjoy driving. I drove from TPA to SLC via PHX and back for fun. But I will pay $500/mo level-5 subscription for a comfortable car that drives itself.
Having level 5 available honestly opens up tons of options that were not available before. A 90 minute commute is so much more palatable when you can be sleeping. So are road-trips.
I'm not sure making 90 minute commutes more palatable is going to be a good thing overall, unless we somehow incentivize reduced travel in other ways. Better distribution of amenities and logistical improvements, maybe... More distributed work environments, perhaps coworking spaces, but with a less-stupid business model.
$500 seems reasonable compared to loan payments, full insurance, and parking. The math may not make as much sense if you would otherwise own your car outright, though.
That's $17/day. If it gives you an extra hour a day and eliminates driving-based stress then it seems very well priced. Especially if it includes the car
I'll also add that I think what Waymo is doing right now is closer to a semi-autonomous streetcar. There's probably immense value in that approach, especially as an alternative to mass-transit systems that have costly labor, but it's not clear that they are imminently close to "anywhere, anytime" self-driving.
> These augmented systems will probably reduce the risk of accidents so greatly that the value proposition for Level 5 driving systems just won't be there.
The value proposition of L5 systems is also the not driving part.
These augmented systems will probably reduce the risk of accidents so greatly that the value proposition for Level 5 driving systems just won't be there.