Drones are making deliveries.

[Dr. Javelin]

hmm

so apparently google says its cars are safe, but i don't see an unbiased outside source confirming their reliability in a real-life scenario

so i'm still dubious. just because one economics professor says that they are safe doesn't mean they are

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Well, nobody really gives automated cars a chance to show its results, so at this rate, we'll never know.

Wikipedia has a page on it. Not a source, but a good page for the basic information.

HowStuffWorks has an article about it.

And here's an article about more stuff that should be considered from driverless cars.
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/09/we-need-to-think-about-the-infrastructure-for-autonomous-cars-too/

I want to see how driverless cars work in person, but I'm still excited that they might be an everyday reality in my lifetime.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

it's not that i'm not willing to give them a chance, but i'm definitely going to need to see examples of where the computer was able to overcome difficulties unforeseeable by the development team

and there's no way i'm ever going to buy a car that doesn't have a manual control as backup in case the computer fails for whatever reason

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

it's not that i'm not willing to give them a chance, but i'm definitely going to need to see examples of where the computer was able to overcome difficulties unforeseeable by the development team

and there's no way i'm ever going to buy a car that doesn't have a manual control as backup in case the computer fails for whatever reason

As for that last sentence, automated cars are likely to have that system as a failsafe measure. Besides, one disadvantage of these cars is that people have less skill and experience to drive a car since the car may be doing most of the driving if all is well.

 

[Chuck Ballymoo]

it's not that i'm not willing to give them a chance, but i'm definitely going to need to see examples of where the computer was able to overcome difficulties unforeseeable by the development team

and there's no way i'm ever going to buy a car that doesn't have a manual control as backup in case the computer fails for whatever reason

As for that last sentence, automated cars are likely to have that system as a failsafe measure. Besides, one disadvantage of these cars is that people have less skill and experience to drive a car since the car may be doing most of the driving if all is well.

There are good things about it, like it would eliminate DWIs. But they had better be 100% reliable, because the FIRST TIME there is a malfunction and someone dies, all hell will break loose. Computers do malfunction, all mechanical devices are subject to failure. The same can be said for a car as is, but at least then people can feel liketthey had control.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

yeah, exactly

i'd rather be able to sue a person than a company with their expensive lawyers

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

The first time they malfunction, the media can and WILL overreact to it, despite statistics showing that human errors are the biggest cause of car crashes. That's the downside. When it comes to safety, think airplane crashes.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

The first time they malfunction, the media can and WILL overreact to it, despite statistics

wait

you actually believe every statistic you hear?

everyone knows that it's incredibly easy to skew statistics to prove your point

 

[Toad Eightyfive]

couldn't they just steal the drone then?

and how would they open it?

having a stolen drone with stolen loot inside is somewhat useless if you don't know what the loot is, let alone able to access it.

 

[Crypt Raider]

The first time they malfunction, the media can and WILL overreact to it, despite statistics

wait

you actually believe every statistic you hear?

everyone knows that it's incredibly easy to skew statistics to prove your point

stop with the red herring

 

[Dr. Javelin]

couldn't they just steal the drone then?

and how would they open it?

having a stolen drone with stolen loot inside is somewhat useless if you don't know what the loot is, let alone able to access it.

by whacking it with a sledgehammer

if it's light enough to fly, you can probably get inside it pretty easily

and if a sledgehammer won't do it, it's still relatively easy to take a welding torch and cut through it

 

[Brock]

I'll keep my driving license, thank you, its one of my few enjoyments. You can keep your computer.

Anyways, it would actually make sense for pizzas, because pizza delivery is considered a hazardous job, and is the 5th most dangerous job in the united states by fatalities. I assume that includes all food deliverers not just pizzas, but you get my point.

Still, thats a lot of delivery jobs taken by drones, but they're low paying. You gotta wonder what the cost of losing a drone to theft is compared to the cost of paying a delivery driver. Delivery drivers dont get hazardous pay, afaik.

Then again, losing a drone is probably better than losing a driver. But most food services probably dont deliver to known bad neighborhoods anyways, I doubt that would change with a drone. You wouldnt send a drone to a neighborhood where you knew it was probably going to get stolen.

Interesting points to consider.

Its worth noting that drones are outlawed in big cities like New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, etc, where there are a large number of skyscrapers, due to the danger of crashing into crowded sidewalks and the obstacles to air travel.

 

[Toad Eightyfive]

couldn't they just steal the drone then?

and how would they open it?

having a stolen drone with stolen loot inside is somewhat useless if you don't know what the loot is, let alone able to access it.

by whacking it with a sledgehammer

if it's light enough to fly, you can probably get inside it pretty easily

and if a sledgehammer won't do it, it's still relatively easy to take a welding torch and cut through it

...good point.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

The first time they malfunction, the media can and WILL overreact to it, despite statistics

wait

you actually believe every statistic you hear?

everyone knows that it's incredibly easy to skew statistics to prove your point

stop with the red herring

Airplane crashes make people think that driving across the U.S. is safer than flying across it.

Terrorist attacks make people think it will occur to them one day even though our own food is killing us more.

Problems with drones may invoke irrational fear for them.

 

[DragonFreak]

All those are very true. Well said.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

Airplane crashes make people think that driving across the U.S. is safer than flying across it.

driving is much less expensive and is a lot safer than you think it is

 

[Zae]

Airplane crashes make people think that driving across the U.S. is safer than flying across it.

driving is much less expensive and is a lot safer than you think it is

but still pretty expensive and it really depends on where you're going.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Uh, no it isn't. Driving across the U.S. is much more expensive and more time consuming than flying across it. You have to factor in gasoline, hotels, food, and the trip back. The cash you fork out accumulates. Plus, it is more dangerous than flying. Links are below.

According to World Health Organization, "worldwide, an estimated 1.2 million people are killed in road crashes each year and as many as 50 million are injured."

http://www.database-statistics.com/driving-or-flying-plane-vs-car-accident-statistics/

http://traveltips.usatoday.com/air-travel-safer-car-travel-1581.html

http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-daum18aug18,0,972110.column#axzz2nnTn59xY

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/2295566/

As the latimes puts it nicely, "We're obssessed with plane crashes and bridge collapses, yet we pay little attention to the stuff that kills the rest of us."

If there is any contradictory data you find, I'll like to see it.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

more people die because of driving BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE DRIVE THAN FLY

that's like saying "more people die because of handguns than assault weapons every year! therefore, handguns are more dangerous than assault weapons!"

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

^And that also contributes to the rate. There are less airplanes in the sky than cars on the road, thus making driving much more dangerous.

 

[Mario4Ever]

It doesn't really have much to do with the number of people engaging in each activity. Sure, reducing the number of drivers decreases the number of driving accidents, but increasing the number of fliers doesn't increase the number of flying accidents.

 

[Dr. Javelin]

^And that also contributes to the rate. There are less airplanes in the sky than cars on the road, thus making driving much more dangerous.

no, you don't understand

i'm disagreeing with you

the statistic needs to factor in the proportion of airplane deaths/airplane travellers as opposed to automobile deaths/automobile travelers

It doesn't really have much to do with the number of people engaging in each activity. Sure, reducing the number of drivers decreases the number of driving accidents, but increasing the number of fliers doesn't increase the number of flying accidents.

Why wouldn't it? More fliers would cause more airplanes to be in the air, which increases the traffic an airport receives, and the likelihood of a traffic accident due to air control error increases.

 

[Mario4Ever]

Because planes aren't always filled as it is, and there's a fuckton of air space compared to road space, so if there was any increase, it'd be negligible unless you had like six planes trying to land at the same airport/maneuver in the same area, which could be anticipated.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

^And that also contributes to the rate. There are less airplanes in the sky than cars on the road, thus making driving much more dangerous.

no, you don't understand

i'm disagreeing with you

the statistic needs to factor in the proportion of airplane deaths/airplane travellers as opposed to automobile deaths/automobile travelers

It doesn't really have much to do with the number of people engaging in each activity. Sure, reducing the number of drivers decreases the number of driving accidents, but increasing the number of fliers doesn't increase the number of flying accidents.

Why wouldn't it? More fliers would cause more airplanes to be in the air, which increases the traffic an airport receives, and the likelihood of a traffic accident due to air control error increases.

I know. I'm taking your disagreement and applying it to strengthen my own argument.

The likelihood of being involved in a car crash is way higher than being involved in an airplane crash. Cars are extremely common, airplane rides are less frequent. Car crashes are usually from drunk driving, speeding, distraction, and other human errors, something that airplanes are less likely to have. Sure, there are pilot errors and mechanical failure, but the pilots are qualified people who wouldn't dare drive an airplane while drunk.

Speaking of drones, the majority of airplane crashes are from pilot error, so drones can eliminate that problem (while introducing some problems of their own, which shouldn't be overlooked).

 

[Dr. Javelin]

Because planes aren't always filled as it is,

um

95% of flights i've been on were filled

and there's a fuckton of air space compared to road space, so if there was any increase, it'd be negligible unless you had like six planes trying to land at the same airport/maneuver in the same area, which could be anticipated.

That's what I was talking about above.

The likelihood of being involved in a car crash is way higher than being involved in an airplane crash. Cars are extremely common, airplane rides are less frequent. Car crashes are usually from drunk driving, speeding, distraction, and other human errors, something that airplanes are less likely to have.

Car crashes =/= car crash deaths

Sure, there are pilot errors and mechanical failure, but the pilots are qualified people who wouldn't dare drive an airplane while drunk.

"Qualified" in no way means they're perfect.

Speaking of drones, the majority of airplane crashes are from pilot error, so drones can eliminate that problem (while introducing some problems of their own, which shouldn't be overlooked).

Okay, as long as you admit that they will probably bring their own problems.