Self-driving vehicles

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Domestic cats kill more song birds than wind turbines do, and they don't even produce any useful electricity.

This is how great ideas are born. Domestic cats: the latest untapped energy source:

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by jeremy_haak

This is how great ideas are born. Domestic cats: the latest untapped energy source:

Ya... tastes like chicken

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Domestic cats kill more song birds than wind turbines do, and they don't even produce any useful electricity.

But yet they produce greenhouse gasses.

[zzptichka]

Cars and Windows probably kill 1000x more as well.

[roger1818]

The following posts were in the Ottawa Bypass Corridor thread. Replying here as it is a more appropriate thread for this discussion.

Originally Posted by silvergate

I think it's time the city started thinking about self-driving cars in its overall transportation strategy. They have the potential to significantly improve commutes. I think that self-driving cars would be an excellent replacement for local bus routes, and could carry passengers between rapid transit stations and work or home.
Some estimates say they could knock more than 60% of our current road traffic off the roads. Even being conservative, if in 2030 there are suddenly 30% less cars on the road, can we really justify building a major highway in the 2020s?

I don't understand how self driving cars would reduce traffic. Whether someone is driving the car or it is driving itself, it is still on the road. If you are assuming the cars will be shared, it might reduce the number of cars manufactured, and reduce the need for parking but while the car is going from A to B, it is still taking up space on the road. If anything, car sharing would increase the amount of traffic as the car has to travel empty from where it dropped someone off to where it can pick up someone else.

Originally Posted by Buggys

Why would someone opt for a public transportation self-driving car when it's not really faster than their own car (self-driving or not). Plus, with their own car, they have more flexibility in where & when to go somewhere (errands in the city, road trips, etc).

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Cost. If you think about it, most cars spend 95% of their time parked and not in use. If you could make money by letting your car act as a public transit vehicle while you're at work all day, you'll probably choose to do that. In the end it will be far cheaper to just request a self-driving car everytime you want to go out than it will be to own your own car. A fair number of people probably will choose to keep their own cars, but a good number will switch over to just requesting self-driving cars from a car sharing network.

The issue I see with sharing self driving cars is mess. While some people are good at cleaning up after themselves, many people are slobs. When I go to the gym, I am always amazed at how many people will just leave their gym owned towel on the floor in the change room, sometimes 3 feet from a laundry hamper. With buses, taxis and Uber, there is a driver in the vehicle who can control what happens in his/her vehicle and assist with the cleanup. I am curious how car sharing networks (like VRTUCAR) deal with this. My guess is their users are a small niche that are socially aware and are thus more responsible. If this becomes mainstream, not all of the users may be so responsible. This could affect the willingness of people to both use the service and to let their cars be used (who wants to clean up other people's garbage, spills and even body fluids of different types?).

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Because of sheer volumes, a shared network of self-driving cars like this probably can't replace rapid transit, but it could easily replace local buses.

Quite possibly. It comes down to a cost benefit analysis. During peek periods, many local buses are popular enough that it would be expensive and less efficient to replace them with small cars, yet the city owns more buses than they need for off peak demand. Investing in a fleet of industrial grade, self driving cars that are predominantly used during the off peak and then parking even more buses than they currently do, would be very expensive.

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

In any case, self-driving cars are a long way off, IMO. Barring some eureka moment in AI technology, we're talking at least 20 years before this sort of thing will happen.

Originally Posted by silvergate

20 years isn't that long for a planning horizon. Isn't the TMP a 20 year blueprint? If they don't start exploring it now, we are going to be in a big old mess when self-driving cars become a reality.

Most things in the TMP follow the best practices found in other cities. Given that this is a new technology and it is uncertain how it will play out and what the best practices are, it will be difficult to plan for. We will need to trial the different models before committing to one. Just because the technology is there, doesn't mean society will accept and adopt it.

[daud]

I think self-driving cars are going to be here in 20-30 years and whether they are "shared" or owned, they will be in the mix of our transportation infrastructure.

If (and its a big if) they really catch on, cities with good road infrastructure will benefit. And, there is a possibility, maybe remote, but a possibility nonetheless, that our big investment in LRT to the suburbs will be a day late and a dollar short.

My belief as it relates to transportation and development policy in this city is the following:

Inside greenbelt-strong public transport-LRT-multiple lines. Outside greenbelt-single line connecting the interior network with the 3 satellite centres-Kanata, South and Orleans. No trim road extension. In addition, a southern limited access bypass linking 416 with 417 near the leitrim corridor to facilitate a number of traffic patterns and a kettle island bridge routing trucks to this southern corridor (not allowing access to 417W). That's my dream plan. It costs too much, governments are too self serving-the province wants roads in southern ontario and doesn't want links to Quebec, but that, for me, is a well thought out plan.

To complement the above, I would think it wise to significantly increase the development charges outside the greenbelt, encourage development inside the greenbelt and insist on better building materials for suburban homes-higher percentage of brick etc..

And yes, I know, it'll never happen.

[rocketphish]

BlackBerry announces move into self-driving cars, promises $100M investment and 650 new jobs in Ottawa

Vito Pilieci, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: December 19, 2016 | Last Updated: December 19, 2016 3:03 PM EST

BlackBerry QNX announced Monday morning the opening of an autonomous drive research facility in Ottawa, a move that will lead to the company more than doubling its staff in the coming years at QNX’s head offices in Kanata.

QNX, a software maker that is wholly owned by BlackBerry Ltd., is already a driving force in a majority of automobiles produced globally. The Kanata firm’s software runs everything from routine diagnostics and blind-spot detection systems to in-car entertainment networks.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was on hand for the announcement as was BlackBerry chief executive John Chen. Chen said the company will spend as much as $100 million on staff at the Kanata facility, which will see as many as 650 new employees added to QNX’s Ottawa operations. He promised even more spending to support the self-driving car initiative across the company, but wouldn’t specify how much.

The company currently employs around 400 in Ottawa. Across Canada, BlackBerry employs around 5,000.

BlackBerry is due to release its latest financial report Tuesday morning and more financial details about the announcement are expected to be included in that report.

“Our innovation track record in mobile security and our demonstrated leadership in automotive software make us ideally suited to dominate the market for embedded intelligence in the cars of the future,” said Chen.

Chen would not specify the time frame for the new investment, simply saying it would be made over the coming years.

The prime minister applauded the announcement, saying it was positive news for families as it will create more high-paying jobs in the technology industry of the national capital.

“BlackBerry is helping to establish our country as the global leader in software and security for connected car and autonomous vehicle development,” said Trudeau. “This centre will create great middle class jobs for Canadians, new opportunities for recent graduates, and further position Canada as a global hub for innovation.”

Last month BlackBerry signed a new deal with Ford Motor Co. to create software for future vehicles. And on Monday, Chen said that BlackBerry was working with Ford on its autonomous drive vehicles.

QNX has been working with Ford since 2014 after the company decided to part ways with Microsoft Corp. Microsoft had been providing Ford with software for its Sync in-car entertainment system.

QNX software is already installed in more than 60 million vehicles around the world. In a vast majority of those cases, it sells its software to a third-party parts maker, which installs the QNX software onto a part that is then shipped to the manufacturer.

Chen said BlackBerry has no intention of getting into self-driving car manufacturing, but it sees a big market opportunity for QNX in providing software to companies looking to make self-driving automobiles.

QNX has become an increasingly more important piece in BlackBerry’s business since it was first acquired from Harmon International for an undisclosed sum in 2010. The Ottawa-based firm was brought into the BlackBerry fold to help update the company’s flagship BlackBerry devices with a new, and secure, operating system that could provide better touch screen functionality to compete with market leader Apple Inc. and it’s popular iPhone offering.

BlackBerry has now stopped making operating systems for its phones and in September announced it would be outsourcing all hardware manufacturing to other companies, ending decades of manufacturing of BlackBerry phones and technology.

Monday’s announcement suggests that the once mighty cellular phone company is now focusing squarely on the market opportunity that QNX presents. The small Ottawa firm is a world leader in operating systems for automobiles and software for medical devices. Its software is even running in military equipment, including some tanks, as well as on board the International Space Station.

BlackBerry QNX head John Wall said he was excited by the opportunity that has been presented.

“We’re in the right space at the right time,” he said, adding that hiring an additional 650 people is going to be a tough hill for the company to climb given the competitive climate for technology talent in the nation’s capital. “My goal is to hire at the highest velocity I can.”

He said the company’s current offices on Farrar Road won’t be big enough to contain the staff it hopes to add. He said the firm may need to expand to a nearby BlackBerry building on Innovation Drive, which has been slowly emptying out as BlackBerry cut back on staff in recent years.

http://ottawacitizen.com/business/local-...on-investment-and-650-new-jobs-in-ottawa

[Dr.Z]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Given that [self driving cars] is a new technology and it is uncertain how it will play out and what the best practices are, it will be difficult to plan for. We will need to trial the different models before committing to one. Just because the technology is there, doesn't mean society will accept and adopt it.

This.

[Kitchissippi]

I think driverless car development now is where the internet was in the early 1980s. Back then in the age of dial-up modems and text-only pre-WYSIWYG terminals, people couldn't imagine wifi or hi-def media, stuff we take for granted today.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

I think driverless car development now is where the internet was in the early 1980s. Back then in the age of dial-up modems and text-only pre-WYSIWYG terminals, people couldn't imagine wifi or hi-def media, stuff we take for granted today.

The general public knew nothing of the Internet in the early 80s. I can't remember the name, but there was some special video service from that era that never took off that was sort of a precursor. But the Internet didn't start becoming popular until the mid 90s. I got my first e-mail account in 1997.

Things are changing fast regarding driverless cars. It is very hard to imagine the impact they will have, just as we didn't really know the impact of the Internet.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The general public knew nothing of the Internet in the early 80s. I can't remember the name, but there was some special video service from that era that never took off that was sort of a precursor. But the Internet didn't start becoming popular until the mid 90s. I got my first e-mail account in 1997.

Things are changing fast regarding driverless cars. It is very hard to imagine the impact they will have, just as we didn't really know the impact of the Internet.

The internet began in 1969 as a US military system. The internet was definitely around in the early 1980s, with email and Usenet both being a thing by then, but it didn't have much of a presence outside of academia, military, and hobbyists.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The general public knew nothing of the Internet in the early 80s. I can't remember the name, but there was some special video service from that era that never took off that was sort of a precursor. But the Internet didn't start becoming popular until the mid 90s. I got my first e-mail account in 1997.

Things are changing fast regarding driverless cars. It is very hard to imagine the impact they will have, just as we didn't really know the impact of the Internet.

Are you referring to the NABU Network? If you're from Ottawa, you may be.

By comparison, here's the history of the Internet.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Are you referring to the NABU Network?

Or Telidon (which I guess is the general name for the same technology from the CRTC)?

[acottawa]

Perhaps a better analogy would be colour film, which was invented int the 1860s, was not obviously better than B&W for many many decades, was popularized in the 1930s when companies started marketing it (probably the era we are in now for ECs) but did not get widespread adoption until the 1960s, and didn't last long until it was replaced with a different technology.

[bless-u]

Will autonomous cars spell the end of car ownership as we know it today? Will it make mass public transportation as the sole means of commuting in the future? What's the point of owning a "Cool Car" if one wouldn't be seen driving it and controlling it? It'd just like sitting in a very cool looking taxi. I reckon electric autonomous cars will cause some serious disruptions to both the automotive and oil industries in the future to come.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bless-u

Will autonomous cars spell the end of car ownership as we know it today? Will it make mass public transportation as the sole means of commuting in the future? What's the point of owning a "Cool Car" if one wouldn't be seen driving it and controlling it? It'd just like sitting in a very cool looking taxi. I reckon electric autonomous cars will cause some serious disruptions to both the automotive and oil industries in the future to come.

I'm not convinced by your argument. Most people buy cars not because they are cool, but because they are convenient. It is convent to hop in the car and drive away when you want to, and not have to wait for one to come to you. Also if you have to do 5 errands, it is convenient to be able to leave your first four purchases in the car securely while you shop for the 5th item.

It may reduce the sale of luxury cars, but most people buy them not to look cool but for the comfort they provide. Even for those who want to look cool, they will still feel cool in a nice car rather than the old jalopy that shows up to drive them. The car will still be parked in their driveway (or garage) to show off to all of their friends.

The question is how many people can truly afford that convenience and how many are living from paycheck to paycheck just to pay off their car loan? Private car ownership may be reduced, but I don't think it will be eliminated. Only time will tell though.

[kevinbottawa]

Originally Posted by bless-u

Will autonomous cars spell the end of car ownership as we know it today? Will it make mass public transportation as the sole means of commuting in the future? What's the point of owning a "Cool Car" if one wouldn't be seen driving it and controlling it? It'd just like sitting in a very cool looking taxi. I reckon electric autonomous cars will cause some serious disruptions to both the automotive and oil industries in the future to come.

As roger1818 said, car ownership is about convenience, especially if you have a family or you live in a sprawling region. In a region like the GTA that's so spread out, the appeal of convenience would be even more attractive.

[bless-u]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I'm not convinced by your argument. Most people buy cars not because they are cool, but because they are convenient. It is convent to hop in the car and drive away when you want to, and not have to wait for one to come to you. Also if you have to do 5 errands, it is convenient to be able to leave your first four purchases in the car securely while you shop for the 5th item.

It may reduce the sale of luxury cars, but most people buy them not to look cool but for the comfort they provide. Even for those who want to look cool, they will still feel cool in a nice car rather than the old jalopy that shows up to drive them. The car will still be parked in their driveway (or garage) to show off to all of their friends.

The question is how many people can truly afford that convenience and how many are living from paycheck to paycheck just to pay off their car loan? Private car ownership may be reduced, but I don't think it will be eliminated. Only time will tell though.

Originally Posted by kevinbottawa

As roger1818 said, car ownership is about convenience, especially if you have a family or you live in a sprawling region. In a region like the GTA that's so spread out, the appeal of convenience would be even more attractive.

According to some recent report, car sales among millennials is actually dropping. This particular group has very different idea about car ownership compared to the older generations. Uber comes along and further strengthens that mindset. If this trend continues to develop, as it is, combining with the new technology of electric autonomous vehicles, the idea of mass public transportation as the central means of commute wouldn't be that far fetch, IMO. Having said that, I understand you view point as I am a car enthusiast myself, but I do see major disruption ahead.

[lrt's friend]

While Uber can maintain standards by rating drivers, how can we maintain adequate levels of cleanliness with shared autonomous vehicles? So the last user threw up in the vehicle or was an absolute pig in it dumping food and drink everywhere, what happens to the next unfortunate user?

[1overcosc]

Automated cleaning cycles. They've already thought about it.

Some estimates are that rideshare fares will drop by 70%-80% once automated. At that point pretty much all trips within the urban area would be $10 or less, many short distance ones under $5. One can easily imagine that a lot of people would give up private car ownership with those rates.