Maxillius

I don't know about the first version of the Prius, but I know the current version has electric steering, electronic brake force control, electronic throttle and the gear selector is a little joystick in the dash. You turn it on by pushing a button and the key only has to be inside the car. I don't think there's even a slot to put the key in. If the computer in that goes haywire there's no way to stop it or steer it, but they somehow convinced someone that's safe. Even the parking brake is electric. My father in law's '13 Taurus starts with a button and the key only has to be near it to start (I haven't tried to see how far away the key can be to keep it running) and judging by the completely computerized interior, I wouldn't be surprised if it's 100% drive-by-wire as well. My 2001 Cavalier, on the other hand, is just about as old-school as it gets. It doesn't even have power locks or windows!

Maxillius

I've just thought of something else: insurance. If an accident happens with a robocar, who is liable if, despite every precaution, it hits someone? Legal precedent is that, even of the pedestrian is drunk and falls into the road, the driver is at fault, so what happens if a drunk falls into the road in front of a robocar and doesn't have time or distance to stop or swerve before hitting him? Is the passenger of the car held accountable? The car's owner? The manufacturer?

KD5NRH

Electric steering assist; just like power steering, except that the power source is electric. Same for the brakes since there's no full-time vacuum system for regular power brakes. Both can be overridden by simply using more force on the wheel or pedal. I'd still want something to be able to physically break the link between engine and wheels, but that really hasn't been available with any automatic transmission made in the last several years; the lever just tells the transmission what to do, rather than physically taking it out of gear or engaging the park pawl.

genec

That involves a long training regimen... Therefore you are not likely to get hardly anyone off the ground... hey, problem solved.

JoeyBike

Good luck with that where I live. That computer will end up wishing it was with me and not bogged down in ridiculous traffic with only the rear bumper of the car ahead of it to project any likely (or unlikely any time soon) movements.

keyven

If we fear every complication that would surely arise from change, we would still be chasing dinosaurs with oversized sticks.

dougmc

There is an electric motor connected to steering system, and so is your steering wheel. If you lose power, you can still steer, though with considerable effort.

However, if the circuit/computer that controls that motor doesn't lose power but instead commands the wheel to turn at full strength when that's not what it should do ... you probably won't be strong enough to stop it.

That said, I haven't really heard of this happening, so I guess they've done a good job at designing the system so this doesn't happen.

But people certainly have been killed by software before. Maxillius tells us that "Anyone who knows anything about cars doesn't buy a car with drive-by-wire", so I guess that means the people driving Toyotas don't know anything about cars. (That said, it's not quite clear what the problems really were. I imagine the floor mats were the problem in some cases, operator error in others ... but they seem to think that software problems could have caused it too.)

Other cases where people were killed by bad software? The Therac-25 killed a few people due to a software problem.

KD5NRH

It might be interesting to intentionally break one to test that; it doesn't appear to be, nor is there any real need for it to be a very powerful motor. It's just doing the same thing that little bitty power steering pumps have been doing for decades, but with electronic sensors instead of a rotary valve. Having had hydraulic power steering fail completely and instantly during a low speed turn, (when PS is doing most of its work) and having driven a car with completely failed PS for over a year, I have a fair idea of how much assist is generally provided, and while it's significant, even a reversed assist shouldn't be so much as to overpower a person of average upper body strength. The real danger would be for it to happen suddenly at speed, and the driver not react quickly enough. OTOH, assist really shouldn't be operating at all when the car is going over parking lot speeds. (My PS pump has a bypass that kicks in at highway speeds to reduce engine load, but I've never been able to tell a real difference between working and non working PS over about 15mph.)

InOmaha

Mechanical systems fail. Electrical systems fail. Mechanical/Electrical/Hydraulic/Pneumatic systems fail.

I've had carberators stick before, throttle cables break, hydraulic systems fail, pedals break, tires go flat, shifters and transmissions not work. Wait are we talking about cars or bikes again.

The key to containing catastrophic failures is designing a proper limp or safe mode for each system. Seperating key systems into smaller autonomous systems, that pass information through a main system with backup and a safe shutdown, etc.

KD5NRH

The problem is what it usually is; hubris on the part of the engineers. If they build in a failsafe at all, it's often still dependent on electronics rather than good old fashioned physically airgapping the failed system from the essential ones that could still work without it. To use the example of the electric power steering, you need a way to completely physically disengage that motor from the steering system, not just tell the software to stop turning it or cut power and have to drag against it.

Maxillius

A shrink would have a field day trying to figure out how you saw fear in what I posted. Besides, someone has to ask those questions before the problem happens.

Change for change's sake isn't always better.

Maxillius

Like having one belt running the power steering, alternator and water pump so if the power steering pump goes it'll take the charging and cooling systems with it, thus stranding you. Or, in the case of the runaway Toyotas, 100% drive-by-wire that won't allow you to shut the engine off or take it out of gear if the computer malfunctions. That is one example of change for change's sake not being better. Why fix what wasn't broken?

genec

Actually it probably isn't the engineers... it is probably program or product management... wanting to cut costs, increase bonuses, or meet some fake deadline... Engineers tend to be rather conservative in design thinking. Think Mr Scott on Star Trek as a simple metaphor... it was always "management" that wanted warp drive at the wrong moment.

Rollfast

Since I first heard of this I could only speculate that the slow, super cautious vehicles were a sitting duck for gangs of highwaymen (pun intended).

wphamilton

My first reaction was superficial: you'll still need liability insurance, and for product liability whoever has the deepest pockets.

But this does pose a legal question and it's not so easy. Usually the driver is responsible, and it occurs to me that "driver" is usually defined (in the statutes) as the person causing the vehicle to move. He doesn't have to be steering it, he doesn't have to be in control, it doesn't even have to be in powered motion. Push a wagon down a hill and you're the driver of the vehicle. So does sitting in the car and telling it to take you to the store make you the driver? Or can the software be the driver? After all, I'm not driving when I tell a cab where to go, so would the same actions with an AI make me a driver? It could be argued both ways; it's not clear.

genec

Good point... what if someone with a robot car lease card called a robot car... who is responsible if it collides in that case? I think it may come down to ownership of the vehicle... if you own the car, and have commanded it, then likely you would be responsible. (it may also depend on the actual driving conditions at that point... which no doubt will be recorded... the google car has collided, but it was being driven by a human at that point)

If you leased the car, with an aforementioned card, from some company (the robot equivalent of a taxi), likely the company that owns the vehicle would be responsible (especially since such cars may be offering service to folks who themselves are not qualified drivers... such as blind folks or elderly). This latter situation might actually encourage both the service company to maintain the vehicles and to discourage private ownership of self driving cars.

Of course any collision of a lease type vehicle might be contested by by the lease company and they would have the deep pockets to go after the manufacture... at which point, a lawsuit would determine the ultimate responsibility... for something like a design glitch, such as the Toyota gas pedal situation.

So the answer is "it's complicated." But if you own it, likely finger pointing will start with you.

wphamilton

Right, and there's something else that makes it even more complicated. I haven't studied law and I don't know the legal jargon or precedents, but the basic concept is that if a product has enough general benefit the producer isn't held liable, even when the damage or fatality is foreseeable. The extreme examples are pharmaceutical or drug companies. They know that the drugs are going to kill people, or cause some horrendous side effects to a certain number of people, but if the normal use is helpful enough in general, those casualties are acceptable. They aren't liable. On the other hand you can't sell a toaster or lawnmower that you know will kill or injure someone during normal or even reasonable use. Where will the autonomous car fit into that spectrum, between the toaster and prescription drugs? It's going to save lives and property, is that enough to shield them from liability lawsuits? If so, is anyone at all liable? If you're not liable, you wouldn't even need insurance since proving that you're able to cover your financial responsibility is the sole purpose of requiring insurance. This could wind up being a huge benefit to owning (or using) one of these cars - no liability, no insurance. I don't know the answers to any of these questions.

genec

Indeed... no doubt this will be hashed over on a state by state case by case basis.

At this time there are no states that permit driverless cars without drivers... thus the driver still has liability and the responsibility to push the "panic button."

But no doubt as self driving cars prove to be better drivers than humans, this situation change. If self driving cars prove safer than human driven cars, then that will open up all sorts of new issues.

steve0257

For more on self-driving vehicles, Australia leads the way. Admittedly, the trucks are in a mine, but there is nobody in the cab.

Australia has monstrous self-driving trucks | Stuff.co.nz

KD5NRH

At least in the case of a broken belt, you've still got the ability to go a few miles or more (often lots more in the daytime) with complete control to get to a safe place or a mechanic. Plenty of the other failures result in very dangerous conditions.

KD5NRH

Which defeats the main arguments in favor of them for most drivers; you won't be legally permitted to be drunk, asleep or otherwise absorbed in a way that prevents noticing a problem and hitting the button. Honestly, it sounds pretty annoying to me too; I would have trouble staying awake on a lot of trips if I was just staring out the windshield waiting for the car to do something wrong.

genec

Hey, baby steps... for some folks just the novelty of being driven will be enough to see them.

And no doubt as the cars prove themselves and the technology gets stronger, the laws may change.

Of course if automakers keep doing stuff like the GM key problem, and the Toyota gas pedal problem... people may never trust self driving cars.

I-Like-To-Bike

A little dose of reality that might wake up the day dreamers; but I doubt it:

"Perhaps one day tech enthusiasts will be able to visit a Museum of the Future That Never Was, where the Jetsons’ hover car and the Google super-robocar will sit side-by-side as showcase exhibits. Expect long lines for both, because the demos will be sensational."

Google self-driving car: It may never actually happen.

genec

I also suspect the google self driving car may never happen... I expect that the current automakers, that are working on their own self driving cars, will take precedence over a car built by a software company.

Looigi

"Blue screen of death" takes on a whole new meaning.