Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Report: By 2035, Nearly 100 Million Self-Driving Cars Will Be Sold Per Year

samzenpus posted 1 year,3 days | from the take-me-home dept.

Transportation 325

Daniel_Stuckey writes "The rise of autonomous cars might turn out to be more rapid than even the most devout Knight Rider fans were hoping. According to a new report from Navigant Research, in just over two decades, Google Cars and their ilk will account for 75 percent of all light vehicle sales worldwide. In total, Navigant expects 95.4 million autonomous cars to be sold every year by 2035. That's pretty astonishing. For one thing, that's more cars than are built every year right now."

cancel ×

325 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

WTF (5, Insightful)

Arkh89 (2870391) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612051)

They start making up figures on a market that has not started yet?
Seems like a real great (and useful) idea to me...

Re:WTF (2)

Fly Swatter (30498) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612233)

It's called "looking for investors"

Re:WTF (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612419)

...once I have personally spent a few weeks taking one through the centre of London and across the mountains of Spain, rather than watched some other guy entirely choose what route to demonstrate it on.

Sure, I get it: driverless cars are far safer than human-driven cars according to tests performed under the auspices of a dozen people who with a heavy investment in driverless cars. Give random people in random countries some and see how they do.

Re:WTF (0)

slick7 (1703596) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612791)

It's called "looking for investors"

The biggest will be al-CIA-DUH.

Re:WTF (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612239)

By 2035 100 Million bloggers and expert-wannabes will be predicting things that may or may come true (and no one will remember or care that they were wrong).

Re:WTF (4, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612405)

They start making up figures on a market that has not started yet?
Seems like a real great (and useful) idea to me...

Because by then nobody will remember it. The volume of media these days will take something approximating Big Data mining just to find ordinary headlines, never mind piddly stuff like a weather or technology prediction

I predict over 150 million Veeblefetzers will be in private hands by then end of 2015.

And nearly 25 million homes will have at least one Potrzebie

Re:WTF (3, Informative)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612715)

And nearly 25 million homes will have at least one Potrzebie

I would imagine that most homes would have millions of potrzebies. [wikipedia.org]

(So I read this and thought...where have I seen this word before?)

Re:WTF (1)

mcgrew (92797) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612631)

Projections. TFA follows advances in cruise control, with newer tech added in slowly -- the technology already exists. It's social pressures and fear of litigation that's really what's holding it back.

It looked credible, read an article before you dismiss it as hogwash.

ABOUT FREAKING TIME (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612055)

took forever for this to happen!

Re:ABOUT FREAKING TIME (2)

tsa (15680) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612531)

It hasn't happened yet. Keep dreaming.

Predictions.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612059)

Predictions about something 22 years into the future aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on.

Re:Predictions.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612149)

“Did you know that disco record sales were up four hundred percent for the year ending 1976? If these trends continue . . . A-y-y-y!” – Disco Stu

Re:Predictions.. (1)

sheepofblue (1106227) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612183)

Sure they are and even more as the paychecks at the research company will show

Re:Predictions.. (2)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612227)

Look on the bright side: in 22 years, we'll be able to recharge these self-driving cars by plugging them into the fusion reactors we'll have by then.

Re:Predictions.. (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612249)

Flying DeLoreans!!!

Re:Predictions.. (2)

jonyen (2633919) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612265)

Predictions about something 22 years into the future aren't worth the paper they aren't printed on.

Yep, because we'll be going paperless by then.

Re:Predictions.. (1)

tsa (15680) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612543)

And Linux on the desktop will be just around the corner by then.

Re: Predictions.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612615)

This!

Re:Predictions.. (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612389)

I think the Amazing Criswell would disagree with you.

For the love of Junior Johnson... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612063)

No.

Just.. No.

HELL NO.

Someone let me off this rock, I think it's time for me to get off.

You will pry my steering wheel, and manual transmission, from MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!!

Just.. No.

Sigh.

Re:For the love of Junior Johnson... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612195)

Well you can opt for MarsOne, but they'll probably send automatic transmission vehicles up there too...

Re:For the love of Junior Johnson... (5, Insightful)

djupedal (584558) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612425)

Auto trans
self-locking doors
auto ride control
auto headlights/self-diming & on-off
automatic seat belts
airbags
proximity keyless entry
ABS
lane drift monitoring
auto brake on object detect

...what part of 'automatic' snuck up on you over the last 50 years?

I personally wouldn't trust (2, Interesting)

Stan92057 (737634) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612093)

I personally wouldn't trust any auto driven care made by anyone. Its all about control baby and i want full control.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612147)

Trade in your wetware if you want control.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (4, Insightful)

fustakrakich (1673220) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612177)

You want full control? You can't handle full control! Nobody can. Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. It will be that much safer. The proof is in the airline industry. Operator error is by far the most important factor in all accidents.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (3, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612211)

You want full control? You can't handle full control! Nobody can. Self driving cars will save thousands of lives. It will be that much safer. The proof is in the airline industry. Operator error is by far the most important factor in all accidents.

You mean, the same airline industry that is now questioning whether pilots rely too much on automation technology? [yahoo.com]

Hindsight - it's always 20-20.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612327)

That's funny, because if they had left San Francisco to the machines, the accident wouldn't have occurred. It's pure ego & vanity that motivates people to resist automation.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

0123456 (636235) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612547)

You mean, if they'd let the computer land the plane with no working navigation aids?

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612359)

Yes, somebody still needs to watch over the system (I, too, believe a pilot should know how to fly an airplane), but basically it's hands off, and the numbers prove we are much better off for it. Check out the stats some time. We should all be pretty impressed considering how one little mistake can kill hundreds in a millisecond.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612367)

Of course i can handle it ya need to think a little harder about that statement. We all have full control of driving our cars. I will more then likely be dead by the time theses "cough" cars will be on the market. And dont forget humans program the cars so they WILL be imperfect. Parts break so they will be imperfect They need the ticket money so they will be banned as well by most states and countys that money will have to be replaced by higher tax's if not banned. Its a lot more involved then just being somewhat safer. Might as well just take public transportation,Trains but the rail system that was removed will have to be taken back and new rails be put up.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

mcgrew (92797) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612717)

And dont forget humans program the cars so they WILL be imperfect. Parts break so they will be imperfect

Parts break now. Software can and will be tested. Google's driven theirs thousands of miles without a mishap.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612773)

We all have full control of driving our cars.

To claim that precludes any understanding of physics.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612203)

Says the man using an electronic, automatic control system for device capable of burning down his house while he sleeps (i.e. a thermostat).

It's not about actual control, it's about your perception of control. If you'd like to trust an automated car all you need to do is *convince* yourself that you're in control, they same way you convince yourself you control anything else in your life.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (5, Insightful)

Valdrax (32670) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612207)

I personally wouldn't trust any auto driven care made by anyone. Its all about control baby and i want full control.

I trust other drivers far less than I trust engineering, and I find driving long distance to be a tedious chore.

So I can't wait until driverless cars are on the market. I just hope I'll be able to afford them when they are, and I hope they won't require any oversight from me by the time I'm old and gray, so I can happily nap at the wheel.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612423)

Engineering is done by humans as as the thousands of poorly engineered building,bridges, cars, planes,trains, consumer products killing thousands/millions have shown us is that engineering is no guarantee of safety. So why should i trust Google to engeneer a car when thaey cant even make a safe OS? Or fix it in a timlee manner or just say its an old version buy a new one. A little silly but not far fetched.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (2)

tsa (15680) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612567)

Oh yes, we have daily crashes of buildings, planes, trains and bridges here where I live, just like you have at your place.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612645)

Sorry, I can't remember the last poorly engineered consumer product to have killed millions. Citation needed.

Where is Google's incentive to make a secure OS? Nobody gets fined for making crappy admin software - the mass computing companies don't see the requirement (or maybe see a different requirement from Virginia....)

On the other hand, they have plenty of incentive to market a well engineered car: product recalls, negligence claims etc. would make a poorly engineered self-driving car a very expensive mistake even for Google. That's largely why they aren't available already (I worked on the technology in the late '90s).

Believe me, Google can afford plenty of good software engineers. It's perfectly possible to have computerised automated systems that work to an extremely high integrity level (see spacecraft controls, nuclear reactor controls, warship / submarine controls etc.) and if the requirement is there a suitable investment in programmers and testing will generally reach whatever quality level is required. But you don't pony up for all that without a good requirement.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612655)

+fucking+

I can't wait until I can just get in my car and say "Home" and have it take care of the driving while I take a nap, read /. or whatever.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612253)

I personally wouldn't trust any auto driven care made by anyone. Its all about control baby and i want full control.

The trouble is that most people overestimate themselves - for instance in matters of spelling and capitalization. They often don't even notice the errors they're making. Yet they want us to believe they are the best navigators of two tons of steel traveling at high velocities.

Personally, I'm still kicking myself for a fender bender with a guard rail on an icy curve twenty-two years ago, but it's the other drivers I worry about most of the time. Yes, those fine young lads who want to pay attention to everything but the road and still think they're in control of their vehicles.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612471)

well spelling isn't going to kill me im 57 so thats my proof.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612551)

If you're 57, why do you write like you're 11?

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

jxander (2605655) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612317)

You might want control, and maybe you can handle it safely ... but in the grand scheme of things, the less meat puppets we have operating heavy machinery, the safer we'll all be.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (1)

Stan92057 (737634) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612433)

And and breathing,walking, eating, drinking, kills us slowly too.

Re:I personally wouldn't trust (2)

mcgrew (92797) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612689)

I personally wouldn't trust any auto driven care made by anyone. Its all about control baby and i want full control.

I hope you drive better than you type...

High numbers (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612095)

The numbers are that high because so many of the cars crash into each other and people need to buy more.

Re: High numbers (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612163)

Very true....These numbers are all made up..

Re:High numbers (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612637)

I just assumed that after about 2030 the botcars gained sentience, started mowing down the humans, and also started replicating on their own, which meant the roads could be packed more densely with botcars without the problem of human reaction times forcing them to be further apart.

Hey, it's about as likely as the fanciful "predictions" in the article.

They will all be sold (1)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612101)

in China.

Re:They will all be sold (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612171)

If there's a place that needs cars that drives themselves, it's China. I'm not racist or anything, but if you search for "china car accident" on YouTube, you'll find some insane shit.

Re:They will all be sold (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612439)

It's not racist, it's true. China's focus is getting more people mobile, and car industries employ a lot of people and are big consumer markets. At the rate they sell cars there, they couldn't possibly provide enough driver's education there too. Getting a driver's license is filling out a form. At least here in the US we're required to take a week of classes and student driver courses.

When I did some work for a company in Beijing I was talking to an expat there. He was not allowed to drive a car; it was 10% of the cost to hire a driver than it was to insure him as an ex-pat driver in Beijing. Their company had about 10+ drivers on hand to help drive the ex-pats around at any time of the day for all personal trips as well as business related. Those drivers would tell us the tips to driving in China, for example the plates were all sequential, and most new cars were bought by new drivers. So they would always give a wide berth to anyone in the current crop of plates being distributed, because odds are the driver was inexperienced and was a danger to everyone around.

Re:They will all be sold (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612263)

Just like entire "ghost" cities poorly built and slowly falling appart are being sold to chinese who can't afford them.

ZEV vehicles. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612117)

Hooray, just like how 10% of all vehicles sold in California will be zero emission by 2003!

Oh, wait...

Don't believe (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612123)

The true future of transportation by that year will be horses and mules.

Can we get a Roomba that doesn't get stuck (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612127)

in the fucking corner before we start predicting stats for self driving cars? How about self driving pedicabs first.

and in other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612129)

by 2045 over 600 billion Flying Cars with lasers will be sold every day

At least by 2015 ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612141)

At least by 2015 we will have flying cars.

Obvious scenario (1)

gakn8r (731456) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612157)

At some not-so-far-in-the-future point a person who is [still] self-driving their car is going run over someone else and kill them. There will be public hysteria and the knee-jerk reaction will be to completely outlaw the use of cars that are not auto-driven. safety at all costs. -g

Re:Obvious scenario (1)

ganjadude (952775) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612173)

followed by the death of someone by a fully auto car, which as everyone knows will cause the heads of those who damned the "normal" cars to the junkyards heads to explode because how could a system fail right?

Re:Obvious scenario (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612273)

Nah, cognitive dissonance will cause them to place the blame on anything besides the auto-car. Swamp-gas-reflecting-the-light-from-Venus type shit.

Then again, maybe by that point Mental Gymnastics will be an official Olympic sport, and the aforementioned folks can field our team.

Re:Obvious scenario (1)

0123456 (636235) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612569)

If aviation is anything to go by, the computer will hand control back to the driver a split second before the crash, and the car manufacturer will blame 'driver error'.

DUIs first (0)

Firethorn (177587) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612307)

I figure that DUI convicts will be the first to be required to use self-driving cars, it's a logical step up from the breathalyzers which already run a couple thousand. Of course, it depends on just how 'self driving' the car is. I'm picturing a 'there isn't even a driver's seat' level of automatic control, as opposed to a really advanced autopilot, but there's still usable controls/overrides in a driver's control.

Then you go from there to 'bad drivers', insurance eventually starts being cheaper for self-driving vehicles, leading to the legislature eventually ending what's currently effectively limited liability for people NOT using self-driving cars, and yeah, once it reaches a certain point nearly every car produced will be self-driving. Exceptions would be off-roading vehicles.

I once calced out that a self-driving vehicle would be worth roughly $2k/year for me.

Re:Obvious scenario (3, Interesting)

captainClassLoader (240591) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612383)

They won't have to outlaw them. You don't need laws when you have insurance companies. Once self-driven cars are declared safer, insurance rates will skyrocket for manually driven cars, so only the rich will be able to have one.

Wait a minute (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612181)

Self-driving cars in the future? You mean regular cars on the road, still? Where's my jetpack, damnit!

Lets get these cars rolling (3, Insightful)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612209)

I just spent over 300K on a new house so I can take the train to work. A self driving car that could drive me to work while I take a nap. They will sell like crazy.

Re:Lets get these cars rolling (1)

tooslickvan (1061814) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612351)

Are you saying that 300K for a house is cheap or expensive? Honestly, I can't tell.

Re:Lets get these cars rolling (2)

Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612369)

Where I live it is a bargain. But it is still a lot of money. I expect a self driving car would be cheaper though.

I will begin to trust driverless cars... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612215)

...once I have personally spent a few weeks taking one through the centre of London and across the mountains of Spain, rather than watched some other guy entirely choose what route to demonstrate it on.

Sure, I get it: driverless cars are far safer than human-driven cars according to tests performed under the auspices of a dozen people who stand to make bank from driverless cars. Give random people in random countries some and see how they do.

and by 2040 (1)

rubycodez (864176) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612221)

world hunger and thirst will be solved by flying magic ponies that poop colored manna and piss purple mineral water

on what the fuck did this "institute" base their figures, tea leaves?

Sharing will soar (3, Insightful)

swilver (617741) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612229)

Ridiculous. If a car can drive itself, it is much easier to share with others. No need for a family to have 3 cars anymore if you can just send one to go pick some one up.

There'll be a taxi style service, or cars shared by people living in the same block, and cars will just go where they're needed.

Re:Sharing will soar (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612725)

Ridiculous. If a car can drive itself, it is much easier to share with others. No need for a family to have 3 cars anymore if you can just send one to go pick some one up.

It also creates a market for a box-on-wheels that is not intended for human transport. You send it to the dry-cleaners. They load it with your clothes and send it back to you. Every single delivery or drive-thru business model can use this. No need for expensive seats, seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, roll bars, etc. It doesn't need a long range or a high-performance engine. This can immediately replace 75% of the traffic from "running errands"

What's even better is that you don't even need to store it. When it's not in use, it drives to some nearby fleet facility that handles refueling, maintenance, etc. You don't even need to own it because it's an impersonal, fungible box-on-wheels. You just rent it and let some company benefit from the economy of scale.

More rapid? Not really. (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612241)

The rise of autonomous cars might turn out to be more rapid than even the most devout Knight Rider fans were hoping.

Considering that Knight Rider was first on the air in 1982, I don't think I can agree.

Re:More rapid? Not really. (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612801)

Hey, I've been waiting for them since 1965 [wikipedia.org] .

I predict... (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612245)

That the rise of automated cars will not come from the congested highways filled with passenger cars, but from the likes of UPS, Amazon, USPS, WalMart, supermarkets-- all looking to slash the cost for delivery of goods. ISPs aren't the only one's who pay big to overcome 'the last mile' problem...

Predictions: Any Asshole Can Make 'Em (1, Interesting)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612257)

I predict in the next 20 years or so, shit is going to go so horrifically fucking wrong for humanity that "auto-cars" will be removed from the List of Stuff Society Cares About. Whether it be full-on nuclear war, a complete, global totalitiarian state, or a big fucking asteroid obliterating all life, something bad is gonna happen, that makes us, collectively, stop giving a shit about trivial, non-survival nonsense like flying auto-cars.

I guess we've got 'till 2033 to see who's right. I'll go get some beer and lawnchairs.

Meh... but yeah... (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612275)

Meh... predictions that far out obviously garbage

Yeah... for most people, most of the time, once robots are safer at driving than we are, why would you want to drive yourself? I commute weekly and have a 640 mile round trip - about 10 hours. Lots of people with shorter commutes spend a similar amount of time in their cars. Wasted time. When I take the train instead of the car I can get on with something useful - work, reading, even sleeping so I'm refreshed on arrival. When I drive, I have to concentrate on driving for 5 hours. If a computer can do that for me, great! Similarly, when driving a bit further for a family vacation, why would I want to be concentrating on driving (with my wife yelling at the kids "don't do that, it's distracting Daddy!") when I could be relaxing, playing games etc. as my robot chauffeur takes me where I want to go?

Sure, I get the "I like the excitement of driving" thing - sports cars, track days and their ilk will never go away - but for 95% of my driving I'd rather not have excitement, or high performance, I just want to get from A to B at my greatest convenience (hence private transport over public transport).

At the moment it requires relatively complex sensors, relatively high computing loads and is relatively unproven safety-wise. As soon as the competence and safety of autopilot is proven someone will mass produce it as an option (probably a high end maker like Mercedes, BMW first), all the other companies will follow suit to kill the first provider's competitive advantage, prices will crash and at that point why would you not want it? Put it this way, how much time per year do you spend concentrating on driving? How much would it cost you to buy back that much extra leave from your employer?

Even on a sporting model, if you can turn it off you can still have the track day experience.

For young drivers, it promises an end to high insurance premiums - everyone is driven by autopilot, the risk level is all the same.

Hell, why even think about young drivers? This becomes transformational. Working late? Little Bobby needs picking up from football? Send the car. Bobby has a smartcard that lets him into the car and once you know he's in you have your mobile tell the car to drive him home.

No need to worry about parking tickets, the car will drop you off, find a parking space (letting you know where it is); no need to worry about speeding violations. Computers don't speed. By linking in to routing information, live traffic, intelligent traffic distribution systems, the cars will manage traffic density more effectively.

My only criticism of the report is I reckon it will happen sooner - maybe a decade sooner. We systematically over-estimate the extent of short term change and under-estimate the extent of long term change.

First market is trucks not cars.. But don't tell t (1)

xtal (49134) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612289)

This tech is commercially viable for longhaul trucking right now. That is the first market.. Not passenger vehicles.

Nobody will say this, of course, because it is going to make an entire industry obsolete overnight.

Not the industry (1)

Radical Moderate (563286) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612803)

We'll still have trucking....we just won't have truckers.

Re:First market is trucks not cars.. But don't tel (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612805)

This tech is commercially viable for longhaul trucking right now. That is the first market.. Not passenger vehicles.

Yeah, but that's where it provides the least benefit. Longhaul truck freight moves many more ton-miles per man-hour than passenger cars. We're talking 3 orders of magnitude difference.

Brought to you by (1)

danlip (737336) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612313)

The Institute of Pulling Numbers Out of Our Arse. We are responsible for 95.3% of the statistics available on the internet.

Also in 2035 (1)

NotFamous (827147) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612333)

In the year 2035, there will still be a large number of speculative tech articles predicting ridiculous things in the decades to come. Really!

What's not to like? (1)

DadLeopard (1290796) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612341)

All the convenience of a Chauffeur, only without having to pay one, but you get to wash the car and pull maintenance yourself! I'd love to be able to sit back and read my book while the car drives itself to my destination!

Yeah, sure.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612355)

...and genetic engineering will make pigs fly. I can see it happening if the insurance companies start making countries adopt it for safety reasons, but it will be a real challenge to take away control from human beings. You can't make people obey speed limits or drive responsibly now and you can be dang sure the first time you're not allowed to speed there will be riots in the streets.

Be an interesting Slashdot poll, this.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612379)

..would you, as a presumably tech-knowledgable person, trust a self-driving car?

- for me, on a long drive - German Autobahns being decidedly less interesting than you may imagine, have you never has the ocassion to try - in this scenario, when faced with hour-long monotony where software nav probably would indeed be safer, I would doubtless take my chances ocasionally with autodrive. Inner-city, short journeys and being otherwise reasonably awake, hell no, thanks.

Interesting is the European concept of not allowing large vehicles/trucks on the roads at weekends (well, Sundays at any rate) and holidays. It is actually the only time I will attempt long-distance drives at all nowadays; Berlin to Munich (for example) on a Monday morning remains an utter nightmare.

As with everything (and as already stated), be the lawyers who decide if the technology wins. Lets face it, there *are* going to be accidents, and if you personally were involved in a no-fault (or software fault) crash, or lost a loved one or similar, youd probably be dialling 1-800-SUETHEMALL as well.

Automatic valet (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612385)

What I want is a car that drops me off where I need to go, then heads off to park itself. When I'm done with my meeting/dinner/errand I'll press a button on my phone and the car will come pick me up again (if I walked down the block, it would track my phone location to pick me up where I am). My commute recently got much shorter, but while I worked further away from home I would have killed for a car that would take over the driving once we hit the freeway, and let me read the news and enjoy a cup of coffee in peace.

It's all coming, I'm sure. The trick is going to be what we do during the transitional period when only some people have the automatic cars and others still drive around in their manual control clunkers getting in the way and crashing into us...

Don't see why I would need one. (1)

johnlcallaway (165670) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612397)

It doesn't get me to work any faster since it will probably obey the traffic laws and not go over the speed limit. It won't get me to any destination faster, since it probably will not go over the speed limit. It probably won't speed up half a block away to 10 over the speed limit to catch a green light. And I have no desire to sit and play video games while my car is driving itself. I'm sure the driver will still need to pay attention anyway in case anything goes wrong, especially with early models. I'm sure we will see laws that prevent the driver from watching videos or texting even in a self-driving car.

Having a car with smart cruise control or alerts me to cars in blind spots or a host of other things that automatic cars have to have I would like. But I actually enjoy driving and don't see it as a chore. When my wife and I go places, we enjoy watching the scenery go by and pulling over for unplanned stops. We sing along with the radio and watch for neat little places to stop. We do this thing called 'talking' while we drive to pass the time instead of burying our heads into our tablets or video screens.

I don't think any car is ever going to be 100% automatic. So we will end up with people that don't drive very much, and become far worse drivers, in areas where they have to have the best skills ... parking lots. Or close-quarter driving where a GPS is useless. Or places where the GPS hasn't defined roads yet so no route is known.

Just another bad reason for people to withdraw into their little shells and not have to interact with other people except on a video screen.

Maybe when I can't drive myself it will be worthwhile. I just don't see much of a benefit to having an autonomous car. Maybe people that live in traffic hell areas like LA or San Diego will need them so they can drive in the special 'autonomous car' lanes. But here in Phoenix, traffic just isn't bad enough.

And self driving motorcycles will never find a market.....

Flying cars (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612401)

I'm sure they'll all be flying cars too.

You shouldn't be able to start with "Report:" (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612453)

When it's somebody saying "This will happen in 22 years..." you shouldn't call it a report. Reporting is for describing things that happened in the past.

The headline should read:

"Wild ass guess by some random dude on the internet: By 2035, Nearly 100 Million Self-Driving Cars Will Be Sold Per Year"

But... whatever.

Liability issues? (1)

XMark3 (2979399) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612473)

It's interesting how well self-driving cars are working early, and it's certainly promising. But I'm wondering if liability issues will put the whole thing on hold for decades? Right now, if you crash, the blame can be assigned to an individual most of the time (aside from rare crashes caused by brake failures or other technical problems). If a self-driving car crashes, the liability would then be with the car company or the company which programmed the self-driving code. There may be a lower risk of crashing in a well-made self-driving car, and the total number of crashes may be reduced greatly, but it could only take a handful of crash incidents to bring down a company.

same automation kills markets (1)

mspring (126862) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612555)

The same automation technology will have placed so many people out of work who then no longer can afford these cars.

The number is high because... (1)

stoicfaux (466273) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612575)

if you can build autonomous cars, you can build cars autonomously. Meaning, cheaper cars, one that "everyone" can afford. Plus, the reduced driver skill requirements will also increase the market.

Also, due to the stringent testing requirements, reliability and robustness are almost guaranteed, and the long testing cycle means that there will be few models to choose from, so factories will benefit from focus and specialization.

One more vision of the future . . (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612599)

Nonsense. We'll all be hopping from our homes to the Hyperloop station on our Martin Aerospace personal jetpacks by then. I have SEEN the future, my friends! ;)

These thing will change everything (1)

drolli (522659) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612639)

-Who needs an own car if a car comes to you in 5 minutes when you need it

-Shops will be packing motorized shopping carts which bring you the grocery home

-charging stations will be big and centralizsed with secured parking. after all the car can go a few km

Who's gonna buy 'em? (1)

rsilvergun (571051) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612695)

This is what I don't get. Was it Ford that said he wanted his employees paid enough that they could buy the cars they made? By then everything will be made with robots. Sure, it took a little longer than we expected. Computers had to catch up and there were some material science issues. But it's pretty clear that automation is (finally) coming. Heck, Boeing is on it's way back to the US bringing robots instead of jobs... So who, besides maybe 50,000 people at the top and another 200,000 of their bootlickers is going to be able to afford food, much less a car?

I can maybe see self drive only roads / lanes (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612709)

I can maybe see self drive only roads / lanes that have grade separation. At least at first and even in say a full auto drive system maintenance and utility trucks will need to have some manual control.

Doubt it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,3 days | (#44612741)

People don't want electric cars, let alone a car that can drive itself. We're stuck in monotony.

Will we even need to own personal cars? (1)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612815)

I think if the thing self drives, a community car could deliver itself to your door if you order it with a phone. Sure vandalism is possible, but cameras + the next user reporting the problem can track down criminals.

If you believe it, think again (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | 1 year,3 days | (#44612819)

A self driving car will quickly find another and lock in or hook up to it.
Before you know it you have .... a train!
And car drivers that aspire to be on a train are few and far between.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>