Robots have been on my mind a lot lately because I’ve come across all kinds of fascinating stories about the new jobs they’re performing, jobs you might think require a human, but in reality, require no such thing, they just need someone or something to follow a simple set of rules. If this, then that, no higher level skills involved. It’s amazing how many seemingly complex tasks can be simplified into a series of logical and very simple decisions, if you’re a programmer you already know this, but for a lot of folks, it can come as a shock.
Most of you know about Google’s autonomous cars, they can do far more complex tasks than those dump trucks, the cars drive through city traffic from any point to anywhere else. Accident free except for when a human took control, think about that.
Photo: Northrop Grumman
Robots can drive anything … and probably will
Round out the transportation field and how many vehicle operators can be replaced by robots? Over the road truck drivers? Just think, no limit to the hours driven on any single day and no need to sleep. Engineers on trains? Airports already have those robot shuttle trains carrying passengers to remote terminals, why do they still have engineers on the big freight trains? Trains run on rails, you don’t even need to steer. The caboose disappeared years ago. What does an engineer do these days? Cargo ship captains and crews? Crews are already dramatically shrinking. Airline pilots? If passengers knew how much of their flight is already controlled by software, they would be shocked. Once in the air, planes fly themselves, a 747 can land itself. The pilot and copilot today may make the passengers feel better, but once passengers get over the creepy feeling of knowing their pilot is really a computer and not some square jawed fellow with thousands of hours in the air, flying may become even safer than it already is. Add to that list, bus drivers, taxi drivers, delivery truck drivers; if all the driver, engineer, captain or pilot does is move a big cargo carrying vehicle from one place to another, robots are pretty much a certainty. Never tired, always vigilant, never gets lost, an all knowing expert under every circumstance, how can a human compete?
When the truck, train, plane or cargo ship arrives at its destination, the unloading and reloading can be highly automated. All of those standardized cargo containers are perfect for robots to pick, stack and transfer, continuing the delivery until it gets to the end of the trip, wherever that may be. Some international ports are already well along in this process. Even commercial airliners could land, pull up to the terminal and discharge passengers without human intervention. Remote control from a central location could start any of these processes until it could be fully automated.
The machine is the robot
Another point to keep in mind is that this idea of a separate robot doing the driving is wrong, the only reason we think of that function as separate is because it always has been, there was a vehicle and a driver, we had the brain, the vehicle was the muscle. The interface was the seat and steering wheel. With a robot, the control system is integral to the vehicle itself, it’s not a truck with a robot driver, it’s a robot truck. The whole vehicle is the robot. You don’t have a robot train engineer, you have a very long, segmented, articulated, robot train. Humans aren’t a body and a brain, our brains are integral to the system, we’re human beings. Same idea. Forget the humanoid form, a robot is any self controlled machine, no matter the shape or function, no matter how big or small.
Motorcycles are different
Interestingly enough, there seems to be one curiosity among motor vehicles far less likely to be roboticized, and that’s the motorcycle. The main reason for a motorcycle in most countries of the world isn’t some utilitarian function, it’s for the sheer pleasure of riding, the excitement, the development of skills; what do you gain if you turn it into a robot? Nothing. There’s no economic incentive to remove the rider from the motorcycle so it can do its job more efficiently. If you remove the rider, what’s left?
Of course, Lit Motors is building a gyro stabilized, fully enclosed two seater and once the balance factor is handled, everything you can do with a car can be applied to the bike, too. As an engineering exercise you can have that robot motorcycle after all, you could even teach it to robotically split lanes between the robot cars and trucks. Maybe robot motorcycle races would gain a following, hmm, …
In a way, it may provide some comfort to the riders here, knowing you’re not on the way out immediately, soon to be replaced by sensors and servo motors, but it also provides perspective, emphasizing the non utilitarian, purely human appeal that motorcycles provide. Other vehicles have that appeal, too, but motorcycles have little else. In a world where everything is reduced to utilitarian function, it’s nice to know something exists for its own sake, to provide a pleasurable experience.
Now, think about what you do every day. How many “If/Then/Else†decision trees would it take to remove a lot of those tasks from your hands and allow a machine with the proper algorithm to do what you do, … only better? Something to think about and a strong incentive to learn a lot of new skills, wouldn’t you say?
Renegade_Azzy says
Ray Kurzweil said that the time is coming when your computer no longer answers your questions, it already has predicted what you want and does it.
When all these computers and robots are doing these things, what will we do?
GenWaylaid says
I think most of the latest OS already try to do that, and in my experience fail miserably. Just try this experiment: click on one graphic anywhere on your computer or phone screen and drag it onto another graphic. Chances are you’ll discover some bizarre new hidden behavior as your computer tries to interpret “thing onto other thing.”
Actually, that points out the heart of the problem right there: computer interfaces have plenty of nouns but a severe shortage of distinct verbs.
Leo Speedwagon says
Everything go well until we have a Fukushima moment….
Kenny says
Every so often I have a brief educational foray around the internet into the subject of robotics, and every time I’m fascinated by the progress that has been made in the field. 20 years ago something like the DARPA robot desert rally, the google cars, UAV’s packing heavy ordinance and any similar project would have been unfeasible, 10 years ago doable but very difficult and most likely horribly compromised. Today they are a reality.
From an engineering standpoint, I agree with your assessment Paul and I wholeheartedly approve of the introduction of these wondrous machines.
But at the same time, I’m filled with a sense of trepidation. It’s not what is probably the most obvious worry, the loss of jobs to these machines. People have been replaced by machines in many other areas and the world has moved on. Technological progress, as far as I’m aware, has only been stopped on one previous occasion, which was the fall of the Roman empire.
What worries me is the impact on legislation, the encroaching “nanny state” so to speak, where legislation from governing bodies determines what exactly your needs are. Your previous article on EU legislation for mandatory ABS on motorcycles is a good example. A technology that was originally developed for cars, has only proved it’s worth on motorcycles in the last few years, yet already there is a motion to force this technology on motorcyclists for safety reasons not to mention the ridiculous proposal that Qwerty1 pointed out, essentially banning people from servicing or upgrading their own motorcycle.
What worries me is when the roads are perfectly safe with perfect robotic cars, and all workplaces hazardous to humans have been fully automated will these health and safety Nazi’s even allow us a hobby like motorcycling.
Paulinator says
I’m working on a robot that secures wheelchairs on buses. It relieves the bus driver of having to do the job…and it relieves the operator of the liability of having the bus driver do the job improperly. Field-testing is currently under way in Victoria, BC and outside of Chicago (PACE). Based on the feedback, it will become a common sight in NA and Europe over the next several years.
Ultimately all these robots should provide us a better quality of life with a reduced work-week and more prosperity to play with. Let’s see if we can realign our herd-mentality with the coming reality.
GenWaylaid says
I often wonder where the extra hours saved by all these productivity gains have gone. Most people are working more hours than twenty years ago, not fewer. Maybe we should all readjust our standard-of-living expectations back to 1992, drop down to 25 hours a week, and just chill.
I suspect that in reality, most people must subconsciously really like to work. As long as they get paid, even salaried workers seem to put in as much time as possible, even if the robots leave us with little worthwhile work left to do.
kim says
There may be places where people work more hours, with less gain than previously, but I’d put that down to how well the individual can negotiate his or her wages’n’benefits with an employer, and – after that – the question of redistribution. The productivity gains are for the most part invested in a higher standard of living.
As a ‘standard of living’ should not be confused with ‘quality of life’, your suggestion of cutting back the working week to 25 hours sounds very attractive. While there are indeed people out there who really enjoy working (I’m not amongst them, even if I have a fine job), most of us do it because we need to pay the rent etc. In some countries the income level and quality of life is more interconnected than in others, with the US near one end of the scale, and Denmark where I live near the other.
As for the automated trucks mentioned in the article, they may put four or five drivers out of work, but think back a hundred years and think of how many people it took to move that truck’s load from point A to point B. Eventually they got employed doing something else; here the challenge is to make the transition smooth and with as little disruption to people’s lives and wellbeing as possible.
Scotduke says
Those big mining trucks are running in remote parts of Australia where daytime temperatures can top 45C and even hit 50C. Because the mines are remote, getting drivers out there is costly as they’re mainly flown out and stay in camps. It’s expensive.
There are mines in the Andes in Chile, Peru and Bolivia at high altitudes, and running robot trucks makes sense there too. Winter temperatures are low and getting drivers there and keeping them warm and fed is expensive.
The robot trucks are expensive so they’re only used in applications where they make sense.
Leo Speedwagon says
The coming reality is no more cheap oil to grease the wheels of commerce and by extension investment in new technology.
Wim C says
I have seen on one of the Ag shows that I watch that a number of tractor manufacturers are working on autonomus tractors that go between the combine and the semi to carry the grain. They read the GPS of the combine, aligns its self up to the combine as it moves, gets the grain, then goes to the location of the semi. Then returns when called. All without someone in it. Considering that a modern tractor can cost $400K new, and already has GPS and remote steering….Not too much to add this feature.
Mark Hughes says
I work as a programmer for a company that makes these GPS farming systems among other things, While i’m not involved in that side of the business it is my understanding that things are becoming quite well developed as far as automation goes, I believe before long construction sites may also be automated in this fashion.
NDAna says
Just an observation- Most everything we are doing research wise is enabling the machines. Skynet IS coming.
fast Eddie says
Enabling machines is way better than enabling people . This admistration may try to do both
grab some freedom while you can FE
Mark Hughes says
Indeed, it is allready here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skynet_(satellite)
Bart says
I used to work on “the bleeding edge of technology” robots/end effectors and Automated guided vehicles. Doing the basic tasks was hard enough most times with the limited sensor and processing capabilities of the mid eighties. The really hard parts were failure issues, like flat tires, oil on tires, drifting sensors, safety stuff to protect the arms/end effectors from destroying themselves, broken wires/loose connectors. One time, a manager got too close to an excersizing arm slinging test weights. He got hit, came back from the hospital with his arm in a sling!
The new stuff is amazing, we could barely dream of such capability 25 years ago, let alone what the Internet has done for this field of endeavor. It has raised the bar on capability and responsibility for what these highly leveraged platforms can do, good and bad. It will displace/replace entire categories of work with machines and a few jobs for skilled technicians, who could be anywhere on the planet for most service work by Internet.
mattg says
The idea of driving being “fun” is mostly a marketing exercise. Other than my bike(s), driving is a crumby time consuming chore, especially in winter.
Driving sucks and most people can’t be bothered doing it anyway! On the highway all those people that bought into the fantasy of their Audi’s and Adventure trucks are on autopilot anyway!
In a few years the marketing will be the style and convenience of a fancy Gucci Electric Transport Pod.
What will you do? Read, talk to friends, do some work, eat a hamburger, have a nap. Be alive in other words instead of a zombie barely avoiding accidents.
GenWaylaid says
Kinda like a road-going version of those hover couches in “Wall-E”?
FREEMAN says
Speak for yourself, mate. I enjoy driving. It’s traffic I do not enjoy.
Tin Man says
The 1st time a sensor fails and one of those 6 million dollar trucks drives off a cliff the mine owners will think again about what a bargain the “Human Operater” really is. All this effort to put more people out of work, whats the point?? More profit for the rulling class??
fast Eddie says
Right on TM .. not to mention good ole , Mr Disgrunteled . I think I’ll twist a few wires together and make a 500 ton bomb . That will show Mr Jetson why we may need some human touches to this project . My buddie took up sport biking at 64 yrs old . aka hex angel
maybe some kind of robot or sensor could have kept him out of the hospital for the last six weeks . All good in that case . Volentary, of course . ride safe FE
Leo Speedwagon says
We forget that not all humans embrace technology like we do (Kneeslider readers) . Iran has captured two US drones (intact) and I’m sure it is a matter of time until someone developes a device that disrupts or jams frequency transmission to these wonderful robots – the end of this misadventure? You wont catch me flying on a plane that may be brought down by some tech savvy rebels. Whenever there is an advance in technology there is a an advance in circumventing it – car immobilisers for example….
David says
I don’t know what this “we” comment is. “We” as kneeslider readers tend to enjoy motorcycles, but that does not mean that “we” all embrace technology so openly.
For instance, those new blindspot indicator lights. While they are really nice functioning devices, it’s also reinforcing a negative habit, as now many drivers have no need to check their blindspot, and are allowed to let the technology do it for them. What happens when the technology fails? Or if they were to be in a vehicle without it? 10 years down the road, that feature could fail for any number of reasons, like the mirror motor got too hot and fried the circuit or whatever the reason.
I’m fearful of technology that enforces unsafe habit forming. I would prefer instead of using technology as a bandaid for problems, it should be used in combination with proper practices. That’s where my hesitancy lies.
Mark Hughes says
The system will no doubt be designed to detect failed data from a sensor, it will then stop the vehicle and alert an engineer to the problem (in other words, it will fail safe and will no doubt have multiple redundancy built in) So you will still need people on the ground, untill repair and diagnostic robots become available of course.
These vehicles represent a shift in labour at all levels, we (US, UK and others) are moving toward a society where work becomes less and less physical, for example I work as a programmer and I work from home, I could in fact not move out of bed and still do my days work (I never do, but I could) I’m not saying this is a good thing, it just seems to be the way it’s going in some countries.
GenWaylaid says
I think there could be an application for a robotic motorcycle, at least on the smaller end of the size range. A fast, agile, lane-splitting courier vehicle that can move small cargo through dense city traffic would certainly have a niche.
Paul Crowe says
If the cargo is small enough for the agile lane splitting robo-motorcycle, it could probably be carried by a courier drone and fly over the traffic. You could have a whole new delivery service with short range drone deliveries. Faster than a bike because they go straight line.
Honyock says
Until, of course, we reach critical mass in urban airspace, and a whole new set of regulations from local FAA’s and FCC’s. Followed closely by a limitation of flight priveleges to UPS, FedEx, and the Gubmint
With the current explosive growth in private UAV’s, I confidently predict the first midair collision ( and vastly entertaining rain of flaming debris) in a major urban area within three years.Helmets and Nomex even more highly recommended.
Hooligan says
And there I was thinking the story of a dog learning to drive in New Zealand was important.
Jim Kunselman says
Years ago, a friend of mine used to start his car to warm up while his German Shepard “Heidi” sat in the back seat. One morning Heidi decided to to get in the front seat, she put the car in gear and motored down the driveway, crossed the street and plowed into the neighbors’ garage door.
I suppose I wouldn’t mind robotic help to park or to alert me if I start to doze off, but I’d rather control my vehicle than have a robotic Heidi at the wheel.
Paul Crowe says
That is a cool story and the dog appears to be more alert and aware than a lot of drivers I’ve seen.
rohorn says
Want to know what robots created by fresh, young, and enthusiastic (3 strikes for too many readers, sorry) minds can do? Get involved with a FIRST Lego League team. Or any other Mindstorms NXT activity. And that’s at the toy level – what hobbyists can do with Arduinos and more advanced microcontrollers is pretty much limited by the imagination.
It is only a matter of time before steering a bike with your limited muscles, reaction time, and knowledge – with stability controlled by a flawed coupling of inertia and friction – will be seen as only the first crude step in vehicular evolution since horseback riding.
Nicolas says
+1 for Rohorn.
I remember reading very old chronicles from when the first cars were created, about the perils and dangers that would inccur, such as hitting bugs at speed that would create major injuries. We’ll adjust, and even if future vehicles are automated, there will always be room for fun and tweaking and ride pimping …
Greg says
As Renegade_Azzy asked, “when robots are doing these things, what will we do?” You will still need humans to build, program, and repair these robots. The problem is that not everybody will have such a skill set, or will have a skill that cannot be performed by a robot. What will those people do?
Using robots for menial, repetitive tasks is fine, but what about activities that could have unpredictable variables? Let’s say a commercial airliner has just taken off. It runs into a flock of birds that damages the engines and the plane loses all propulsion. I’ll take my chances with a cool-headed, square-jawed fellow with thousands of hours in the air, and a strong affinity for self-preservation over a reliance that a robot was programmed for every possible scenario.
Paul Crowe says
This problem is faced by people again and again over the years as technology advances. The benefits that many get from the new technology is costly to those displaced. The only answer I know of is a constant determination to learn whatever is necessary to keep yourself up to date, re-skill and up-skill. It isn’t easy, it takes a lot of effort and determination, but the only other alternative is to say stop advancing because some can’t keep up. I don’t think we want to do that, but it is a tough problem, no doubt about it..
As to your second point, there is a very interesting article that covers the many factors involved. Worth a read.
Greg says
Very interesting indeed. Thanx for the link.
Nicolas says
In the case of the above mentioned plane hitting a flock of bird and landing safely on the Hudson river, it probably helped that the plane was fitted with a computerized (half-robot ?) flight control system that keeps the plane from stalling, no matter what the pilot input on the command is, avoiding any sort of human mistake that could accelerate the plane demise, and giving more chances and time for the squared jaw crew to focus on finding a place to land/crash-land.
todd says
just think of all the new (more interesting) jobs being created because of these robots. What would you rather do; snap together parts on an assembly line or design/build the robot that does that job? Robots are made up of hundred or thousands of parts and millions of lines of code. someone needs to do all that work. There’s still plenty of jobs, they’re all just different than they were 50 years ago.
-todd
J.Smith says
The problem with that is that the jobs created are highly skilled jobs. Jobs that will require you to spend 5 or more years in university. The problem is, although the (most) part of the population probably would theoretically have the capabilities to do so, way too many start wasting time/potential in primary school. How many people do you know are content working their 9 to 5 on an assembly line? one they are sitting in since they are 20? I know plenty! I sure wouldnt, heck that why I am in Uni, but this does not apply to everybody.
todd says
I don’t know anyone working on an assembly line.
Paulinator says
I just heard that Apple is bringing a line back to NA.
Cameron says
Worried about losing your job to a machine? Find a career that has too many if’s. Custom bike building for example. Custom anything for that matter. As Paul has pointed out time and again, learn how to make, build, design something and you will never be bored… or hungry. Robots are not good at one offs. Well trained mand educated humans are.
Another field that robots really suck at, IMHO, is induvidualized service. Real service is a dying skill that will be valued more and more. Go to any good four star hotel and you will know that a robot just can’t compete with a concierge. A bank machine is great but a good educated teller can help you. A vending machine is great but a good educated clerk can offer information. Sometimes people just need to see a smiling face.
FREEMAN says
Interesting article. I have no fear of losing our means of transportation as we know it in our life time. Kind of reminds me of the movie “I, Robot”. And then again, would a robot car even sell? Is the demand there and the technology cheap enough to support everyone trading in their mode of transportation for a robot vehicle they more than likely can’t maintain or repair just because they’d like to vegetate during their commute? It is ignorant of me to say, but I can’t see it happening. Even which new eletric and hybrid cars the price (and let’s forget about the inconveniences of charging for the moment) is, to be quite frank, ridiculous for unanimous and global adoption especially in countries were a 50cc moped is a family sedan. Imagine now if they were autonomous.
K-P says
The marines have been operating an unmanned K-Max helicopter in Afghanistan for resupply missions over hazardous terrain a while now. Here a propaganda video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nve2ZEXl-Oo with some information in the description.
I’m at the moment studying to become a helicopter mechanic. In the video it says “2.5 maintenance man hours per flight hour” and that’s something robots won’t be able to do in a long time. So better to be a mechanic than a pilot these days…
Paul Crowe says
Sounds like an old E type Jaguar I used to have 😉
I agree, the support and maintenance of robots will be a big opportunity, as well as the design, engineering and programming, plus manufacturing and all of the surrounding industries that will provide parts and services. As the capabilities of robots continue to advance rapidly, we’ll have an explosion of applications. The potential for growth is impressive and the folks concerned about what everyone will do may want to look in this direction.
Chris Walker says
Well once upon a time a compuyer leader said we’d only need 6 in the world (boss of IBM), years later another said “anyone can access the internet, all you need is a phone a modem & a computer” Well that ruled out over 75% of the human populace.
Whilst people think the robots of today are technical marvels, they are actually hugely expensive pieces of junk. They work great for VERY simple repetative tasks, like car production, but they never managed to make one that can fit a dash or seats in a car with over 50 years of trying. The robot delivery van seems great, but the cost of that vehicle would be enormous to make one that could sense & deal with all the real world variables. Just look at the MARS rovers they have built, these are state of the art sensor laden vehicles & are practically useless.
The greatest supercomputer made has far less capability in processing terms than your average Joe & all of the computers in the world have less ability that a high IQ human.
Planes taking off & flying through empty space & landing a fixed locations automatically, already exists. But throw in an engine failure or bird strike & watch that automated piece of sh!t fall like a leaf to destruction. Robots don’t have feel, they have sensors, they don’t have self preservation, great fro a Predator drone, not for an airliner with 300 souls aboard !
No robot machine has been built that can match the versatality of a human at the controls, they may be able to out perform them in fighters, but that is one of the few areas where a human body is the limiting factor.
“It’s amazing how many seemingly complex tasks can be simplified into a series of logical and very simple decisions” True when there are NO variables, harder when there are & impossible when there are random & as yet unknown variables.
Robots &automated systems have been great at making up for the areas where humans have failings, like repeatability. They are NO where near smart enough to be a patch on the humans ability to react to any unknown variable.
Chris E. says
Great post. I’m a flight instructor and I’ve been hesitating going to the airlines because I see the writing on the wall. It may be 20 or 30 years before we’re fully automated, but I do think the generation now getting hired at the airlines will be the last generation of pilots. Sure, you’ll still have those flying for fun, but the days of a captain making $200k + are limited.
bicho says
Being a “Boss”is a very expensive and repetitive job!Will Bosses,CEOs,Chiefs,polititians in a near future have the vision to replace them selfs with a (Tie)robot,as they do with there workers???(yea right) We will always be workers no matter how many robots,becose we are the only “animal” with infinite tools incorporated in the greatest “machine” ever built,we just dont get it!I can like a robot,but the worker rules!!Sory my view.Great article non the less
Decline says
I’m sure that 2005ish DARPA challenge has already been mentioned, where the guy built a robotic autonomous motorcycle called Ghostrider. It was very cool to watch, even when it would fall over and pick itself back up.
The problem with a robotic two wheeler though is at one point you are just wasting energy keeping it upright when another wheel or two could fix that. Even if the goal is to Hawaii narrow lane splitting robot deliver vehicle, there is still room to just add a wheel to stabilize it.
Decline says
Ok just in case it hasn’t been mentioned
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CYGT97i8qU
Drive The Wheels Off says
Look how much the teams improved in just one year from 2004 to 2005:
They went from completing 7 miles in 2004 to many teams completing the entire 132 mile course in 2005….
“Sandstorm was the most successful robot during the first Grand Challenge last year, when it traversed less than 8 miles of a 170-mile course.”
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2005/october12/stanleyfinish-100905.html
B50 Jim says
If my daily commute allowed it I would ride a train rather than drive. If my vehicle could drive itself to and from my job I would let it, so I could sit back, enjoy a cup of tea and read one of the many magazines I never seem to have time for. Most traffic tie-ups result from human error, usually ending in crashes. Most weekday urban driving is commuting. Robotic vehicles would eliminate most of the hassles of commuting and get us to our destinations far easier and quicker while using less fuel. We still would have control of our vehicles for recreational driving, vacations or trips to Grandma’s house. We would be no less human.
Are we any less human because of mechanized automation? It’s been going on since the Industrial Revolution. Weaving mills put cottage-industry weavers out of work but made fabrics inexpensive so more consumers could afford it, thus increasing the economy. Those weavers got jobs in the mills, often setting up the machines. Life was far from perfect; conditions in the mills and cities were deplorable, but as economies improved as a result of high production, a middle class emerged and helped feed an even larger economy that in turn offered a better standard of living for everyone.
Farming saw the same effects in the early 20th century. One farmer with a tractor could do the work of 5 horses and 10 field hands. Horses disappeared from farming and farm hands found work in cites, sometimes building tractors and automobiles. Decades later, robots took over their jobs and they went on to other jobs, often at a higher skill level.
Mechanization doesn’t kill jobs, it moves them around. It does have the effect of requiring employees to develop higher skills, but that is a good thing. A technician working on an automated vehicle can command a higher salary than someone doing oil changes.
I can’t imagine where it all will lead; today’s world was science fiction just 30 years ago, and technology is snowballing. The world in the next 30 years will be unbelievable to us as today’s world would have been to those cottage weavers.
FREEMAN says
“Most weekday urban driving is commuting. Robotic vehicles would eliminate most of the hassles of commuting and get us to our destinations far easier and quicker while using less fuel. We still would have control of our vehicles for recreational driving, vacations or trips to Grandma’s house. We would be no less human.”
I agree that just about all driving is commuting. But think of it this way. After autonomous cars are on the road for a while, there will be a “study” that finds they are safer since the human element is removed. For example, just like the Google car safety record sited in the main article: “Accident free except for when a human took control, think about that.” At the same time, your insurance company will be monitoring your use of manual versus autonomous driving habits and will spike your premium since you’re driving in an unsafe manner. Even worse, some insurance companies may refuse to insure you unless you use autopilot at all times. Insurance companies may refuse to honor your insurance because you were not on autopilot, too. The possibilities for loopholes is pretty high. Drivers will practically be “forced” to use autonomous driving at all times to avoid being charged up the wazoo or face losing their (in some states and counties) government mandated vehicular insurance. It will happen if we have autonomous cars.
kim says
Robotic, gyro stabilized motorcycles sounds like a good idea, at least as transportation alternatives to cars. A mass-produced ‘Peraves’-like enclosed two-wheeler would cost less to build and run than a four-wheeler, and if automated driving would make it safer, so much the better. For the sheer pleasure of riding, having the wind in my face, hearing the sounds and smelling the landscape, I’ll still want to be controlling the bike myself. But then one way of motorcycling doesn’t rule out the other.
Carolynne says
I worked on an assembly line at one point, when I first graduated from university making staplers that were used to sew you back up in the OR after surgery, I hated it it was mind numbing.
B50 Jim says
I worked in a factory that made electrical thermostats when I was first out of high school, feed small parts to milling machines. It was hot, oily, noisy, monotonous work that never ended. There was a job ripe or mechanization. “Generally, if a job is repetitive, monotonous, hot and dangerous, that’s a pretty good indicator you can get a machine to do it”— Frederick Lewis Allen, observer and historian of the 20th century. But when I was doing it, the machine was me. That was a crummy summer.
Ax1464 says
I have to disagree with the notion that in “most countries” motorcycles are ridden for fun. Here in the West, sure, but in Asia and other densely populated areas they’re ridden because they’re a practical, efficient and affordable way to get around congested urban areas. I don’t think the farmers I used to see in southern Spain riding their mopeds fully-laden with goods were doing it to have fun.
Tin Man says
If you don’t enjoy driving a car, It may be time to get a better car. Humans are not built to live in an Ant hill, Get out of the big city and learn to live.
StephanP says
You are correct about passenger aircraft, they run on autopilot most of the time and this does not need to be controlled from the cockpit. It’s when things go wrong that the pilot (square jawed or not) is needed onboard. The industry would love to get rid of some more six figure guys and because of the common misconception that computers can do it safer than pilots the industry is taking the pilots away from the controls as much as possible. They want the aircraft to be flown on autopilot and the pilot to simply manage the system. The training has be vastly reduced in the past 20 years. Instead of evaluating flying skills they are more interested in your ability to manage the computers. Evidence of this flawed thinking can be found in the tragedy of AirFrance 447 (the accident report can be found online). In simple terms what started the chain of events that led to this accident is that the computers simply gave up. The pilots should have been a barrier to prevent the accident but lack of training and proficiency in basic airmanship (flying) led to the pilots being unable to control a flyable aircraft. In many other case though the pilots were able take over and land safely.
While robots can and do operate safely in a two demential world we have to remember that the consequences of an accident are not as great as they are for passenger aircraft.
That being said I believe with advances in technology and perception of risk changing we will see pilotless cargo aircraft operating mostly over oceans, pilotless passenger aircraft are at least 50 years away.
Kenny says
Another way of looking at that tragedy is, if the flight computers hadn’t been programmed to partially disengage in the event of inconsistent airspeed readings and hand over control to the pilots, there might be 200~ fewer grieving families.
Volker says
I think Paul misunderstands motorcycling in “most countries of the world”, when he writes: The main reason for a motorcycle in most countries of the world isn’t some utilitarian function, it’s for the sheer pleasure of riding, the excitement, the development of skills. In fact, in most of the world (just consider Europe and Asia, for example), motorcycles are ridden for purely utilitarian reasons. This is why all the manufactures sell a hundred times more bikes in those markets than they do in N.A. Not to say that those riders don’t also maybe enjoy the riding from time to time.
Paul Crowe says
I said most countries, I didn’t say most riders. I am well aware of and have discussed on The Kneeslider countless times, the millions of small displacement motorcycles in Asian countries and some other countries as well, but they have nothing to do with the idea of robotic control of motorcycles, those small bikes are purchased by riders unable to afford a bigger vehicle, which would serve their utilitarian needs even better. As soon as their incomes can support it, they abandon the bike and get a car or truck. This underscores the complete lack of an economic incentive to add robotic control to a motorcycle. Any additional money spent is far better directed at a bigger and more capable vehicle.
Selling a hundred times more bikes collectively means little to the idea of a high technology bike if the riders buying those millions of bikes are simply buying cheap transportation. Those same countries also have many millions of bicycles, the motorcycle is a step up, on the way to a car, not on the way to a bigger motorcycle. Here’s an article on The Kneeslider six years ago addressing this exact issue.
Wave says
Driverless cars are definitely coming eventually, and I agree that driverless motorcycles will come afterwards, if at all. I’m not sure that makes them a ‘last refuge’ though. I hope to keep on driving classic cars and enjoying them, without restrictive driver aids and safety devices.
Frost says
This piece really ties in nicely with society as a whole. I notice among the comments there are lots of “Then what will we do?” said with a forlorn air. That’s the wrong approach to this – the question should be asked joyously, because then we will truly all have a real choice. Do what you want. Because with robots doing all the work, all the manufacturing and all the agriculture work, why should humans be forced to do anything just to get food and shelter?
I foresee a less rosy view for motorcycles too. They’re neither safe or very efficient, and since the robotic transport doesn’t really require a road at all, they will eventually have nothing to ride on. If you’re making robotic transportation systems, it makes much more sense to build rail of some kind, even if it’s something like a suspended overhead monorail. It’s cheaper as well as safer. So cars will be a thing of the past… but so will motorcycles, except perhaps as entertainment on tracks, not as utilitarian vehicles.
v4racer says
“Do what you want. Because with robots doing all the work, all the manufacturing and all the agriculture work, why should humans be forced to do anything just to get food and shelter?”
You’re assuming that an income will no longer be required. I love the sound of that, but it’s not part of the capitalist system so it can never happen.
Also, I don’t think I’d enjoy living in a society of idle humans… as the old saying goes, “Idle hands are the Devi’s tools”… be careful what you wish for!
todd says
It’s all done in baby steps. Electronic “aids” have steadily been added to motorcycles over the years. Who’s to say the current state is where it all stops?
-todd
matt says
I’ll think you’ll find those dump trucks mentioned are already being used and/or transferred to autonomous. I was in WA in Australia with a mate in the industry a while back and when discussing the personal needed to run them he stated it actually takes more people rather than less. I issue has come around as not many people can do the job, (High heat, boredom, fly in fly out work schedules etc) without encountering problems with e.g., drugs alcohol etc and in then end some of these factors have led to some of the change overs. Some of the incidents have been created by human factors. Entire mines are being built with these trucks in mind and foreseen problems are being addressed as a 240 million dollar truck driving over a cliff is bad for business. Most of the trains that shift the minerals in WA are already driven from a building next to the Perth (WA capital) airport which is thousands of miles away. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not for deleting human involvement just for the sake of the bottom line, it was just an interesting side that I hadn’t seen that I thought to share.
Heres a link to an announcement in 2008; http://www.fastcompany.com/1093679/caterpillar-self-driving-dump-truck/
Joe says
Electronic devices already control humans.Every day I see hundreds of people walking around gawking at thier smart phones,gps,s and seem unable to operate without them.Who is controling who. I supose in the ideal world of some people, the robots will control and do everything, while we humans roll around with bodies like Jabber the Hut from Star Wars, bored to tears with nothing to do and out of touch with the natural world.Until we deal with elephant in the room, out of control population growth in the devloping world,robots will mean skwat when the planet’s destroyed.
Hooligan says
Only another 11 days before the world ends according to the Mayan calender. Well except for a village in France which will be spared.
I agree about people not paying attention because they are looking at phones. A local council here in London proposed wrapping the street lamps in padding because people kept walking into them while texting.
And the Austalians have just warned people not to take any notice of the Apple mapping on phones because they were being directed into the middle of a desert instead of the beach.
We had some bad floods recently and deaths because GPS directed cars through flooded river fords.
It seems common sense has left the building.
Decline says
I’m sorry, it’s a pet peeve of mine…the world is not going to end even according to the Mayan calendar.
WRXr says
Some thoughts:
1. As long as driving/riding/piloting and sailing are fun….there will be humans who want to do it.
2. For run of the mill, getting from hear to there, a robot pilot might be better…and safer. Kinda like my grandfather said. “When I drank too much, I could get on the horse, and it would just walk back to the barn.”
So what is old is new again.
2. Robotic trains, trucks busses, cars etc, may actaully make roads SAFER for motorcyclists. No texting, drunk driving, cell phones, blinds spots or other distractions. I say bring it on.
jimmy says
safer for motorcycles, maybe, until a sensor fails or the robot doesn’t recognise your small signature and runs you over. I don’t think the liability lawyers will let robots free on public roads all to soon.
Paul Crowe says
Legal in Nevada and California
Paul Crowe says
The comments above are a pretty good cross section of pro and con and I’m on the pro side of the debate. Robots are coming and coming fast and while some see jobs lost, which certainly will happen, the possible new jobs and opportunities are huge. If you like working on vehicles, here’s a growth area, you’ll just have to re-skill and up-skill as I said in an earlier comment. Like to tinker? Lots of fertile ground in this field and the knowledge and skills you learn will be very transferable.
Bluegrass says
I’d still be skeptical about claims of robots completely replacing drivers, especially in privately owned vehicles. The examples of automation listed so far are commercial applications. Commercial Airliners and Mining trucks would be subject to strict maintenance schedules, and are operated in environments that are well monitored . The public roads across America aren’t so well monitored, with maybe the exception of urban environments.
While the google car tests showed that a vehicle could be modified to self-drive even in traffic, the tests were too limited in what a vehicle would really experience in real world operating conditions. It only dealt with traffic in an urban environment on the west coast. There are many questions involving how such an automated consumer grade vehicle would perform in inclement weather, on various non-paved surfaces, wildlife or debris in the road, even large potholes in poorly maintained roads.
While I’m sure there are engineering solutions to many of those problems, you now have a vehicle much more sophisticated than what we have now. That more sophisticated vehicle will require a more sophisticated technician to maintain it, and possibly a more sophisticated manufacturing process to build it. If robot drivers become the standard for all consumer vehicles, the cost of private transportation increases overall.
The biggest grievance against robotic technology now is that I see the more complicated robotic vehicles costing more than what the the less wealthy of the general public can afford. With that segment of the population priced out of the market, that brings up a lot of possible social changes.
Bart says
Are motorcycles the last refuge from robot transporters? Not sure anymore after watching this!. http://www.youtube.com/embed/iKqpvriKZuA
Earl says
By sheer coincidence I was reading this http://listverse.com/2012/12/13/10-reasons-to-be-terrified-of-robots/ in another window just as I opened this page.
Robots are here, there will undoubtedly be more of them in the future.
Tom Lyons says
I’m all in favor of technology, but if they ever create robot transportation that requires it to be used for all vehicles, I’m moving to another country that doesn’t have it.