Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

for thinking that giving blind people more independence by letting them have driverless cars is a bad thing?

49 replies

wannaBe · 03/04/2012 09:01

Yes. Provocative thread title for a reason because I want people to agree with me...

last week a blind man testdrove a

\link{\driverless car}

Lots of people are saying this is a wonderful thing. The man in question said that this would give him a far greater level of independence and would change his life. Even I have jokingly said that I want one.

But actually, the idea of blind people in driverless cars out there, on the roads, makes me very uncomfortable.

If you go out there in a car there is always a risk. From your driving, other peoples' driving, other factors on the roads. But to an extent you can control what happens to your car. You may not always be in control, but you can at least see to assess the risks, and still people have accidents.

So what happens if a driverless car, carrying a blind person only, goes out there, and has an accident. What happens if it hits another car; mounts the pavement; kills a child? Who is then liable?

There are lots of people in my circle who think this is a perfectly valid thing, and who think that I'm just not open to change. I am possibly one of the most independent-thinking people I know, but I think there comes a point where someone's desire for independence should not come at the price of other peoples' safety.

I won't lie - I would love to try one out. But I certainly don't think that they should be routinely allowed on the roads. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be.

OP posts:

RhinosDontEatPancakes · 03/04/2012 14:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

abbierhodes · 03/04/2012 14:37

I don't know much about driverless cars, but I agree that they are unlikely to be able to 'see' subtle dangers the way humans can. Do they become more alert and ready to brake if they see teenagers kicking a ball near the road? Or if they notice a toddler isn't holding an adult's hand on a quiet road? Or, as someone else says, will they pick up signs of a possible drunk driver and avoid them/pass them carefully?

The idea that everyone on the road should be put in danger so that people without sight can have 'equal rights' is nonsense. Should a wheelchair user be playing for Manchester United?

I am not in the least bit 'disablist' and I think that everyone has the right to the life they choose, but if you cannot see then there are certain things that you cannot do safely. This is just common sense, surely?

AThingInYourLife · 03/04/2012 15:16

"I don't believe technology should be withheld from someone whose life could be transformed by it because of something that is out of their control."

My life would be transformed by access to a machine gun.

But I can't have one because of the actions of other people in the past.

How aggrieved should I be?

Original poster

wannaBe · 03/04/2012 15:44

"I am not in the least bit 'disablist' and I think that everyone has the right to the life they choose, but if you cannot see then there are certain things
that you cannot do safely. This is just common sense, surely?" yes quite. And there is a distinction between putting your own safety at risk and that of others. For instance, if I go out and buy myself an electric carving knife in order to carve the Sunday roast, the only person I am putting at risk by using it is me. I have a brulee torch for creme brulee, if I use it, the only person likely to get hurt is me (and perhaps my kitchen worktops, ) but I'm not putting others at risk, so those are risks that I can choose to take for myself. (dh won't let me buy an electric carving knife )

But then there are things that put other people at risk too, and often that is where the law needs to be defined.

It is, for instance, entirely possible for a blind person to obtain a pilot's licence, indeed I believe it has been done. But would you be happy getting on a plane with a blind pilot? somehow I don't think so.

I think it is entirely possible to think that it is not safe/appropriate for someone with a certain disability to be allowed to do certain things which put people at risk without that being construed as prejudiced or disablist.

But ok let's look at it another way...

Would you get in a car, blindfold, with me?

In fact, I believe Oxford University are as we speak, trying to gain permission to put one of these cars on the road in the UK, if I could convince them to let me take it out, who would be up for getting in it with me?

I think there are a lot of people who say "oh yes, blind drivers on the road? not a problem," because they fear saying so somehow makes them disablist. I think that were that to ever actually become part of legislation there would be a lot less people keen on the idea when they're up against these driverless cars with no-one able to take control of them.

OP posts:

JustForMe · 03/04/2012 15:59

The thing is no amount of technology can replace human intuition.

People can see situations that a computer cannot.

Its not fair but its life...blind people shouldnt be able to drive...its not safe

poppy283 · 03/04/2012 16:36

I thought driverless cars was an April Fool!

Sunscorch · 03/04/2012 17:54

People can see situations that a computer cannot.

But a computer can react far faster to the situation that it hasn't forseen.
Not to mention the fact that the kind of AI these vehicles would have before being allowed on the road would be a darn sight more perceptive than most drivers.

sashh · 04/04/2012 03:34

But how would a blind person get a licence? Surely the "please read the numberplate on the blue car" would be a problem.

Sunscorch · 04/04/2012 08:05

But how would a blind person get a licence? Surely the "please read the numberplate on the blue car" would be a problem.

Not if you're "driving" a car that has an electronic record of every numberplate it has ever seen...

wolvesarejustoldendaydogs · 04/04/2012 08:27

As an almost blind person who has never driven a car and would really really really like to, I love the idea. It certainly would improve my life enormously.

Obviously I wouldn't do it unless it was shown to be safe. I doubt that it will be made legal unless it has been shown to be safe. I suspect it was probably an April Fool as someone else has said.

When motor cars were first introduced, people were very worried about their safety. A man had to walk in front of the car with a red flag. Anything new is worrying. I imagine there may well be a day when we are all (sighted and non-sighted) driving 'driverless' cars with no manual override. DH (sighted but doesn't like driving) can't wait.

wolvesarejustoldendaydogs · 04/04/2012 08:29

And don't worry OP. I can tell you from experience, no-one is offering blind people these fabulous opportunities of driving cars or working as a pilot! You are quite safe :o

AfricanExport · 04/04/2012 08:37

The only way driverless cars can really work, and they can, is if every car on the road has a satellite monitoring box and the 'system' knows where every car is at any given time. At the moment this is all completely plausible and a fantastic idea. However for the most part there will be a kick-back because a lot of people do not want their every movement monitored.

A car, can well have sensors attached that would pick up movement in front which would cause it to stop should an unidentified object appears in front of it. It would also be more reliable that a human being and the technological reactions would be far faster than human.

Of course there could be accidents anyway but far less and far less deaths on the road.

DowagersHump · 04/04/2012 08:47

Would a blind person be able to drive a driverless car if they were over the limit?

If we all had them, would we all be able to treat our cars like we were sitting in the back and watch a DVD while drinking a gin and tonic if we fancied it?

wolvesarejustoldendaydogs · 04/04/2012 09:33

Hope so Dowager :)

Whatmeworry · 04/04/2012 09:42

I think driverless cars would be better than 50% of the drivers on the road.

If only we could have cycle-less cyclists :o

wolvesarejustoldendaydogs · 04/04/2012 09:47

perhaps people could mount a cycle machine in the back of their driverless car and pedal along safely looking at the view :O

ReallyTired · 04/04/2012 10:40

AfricanExport, I suppsoe we could attach a satellite monitoring box to all our kids so that cars can avoid them.

Actually we could go a step further and track all our citizens. It would stop crime/ school truancy etc.

It would be a bit big brotherish though.

dontaskme · 04/04/2012 13:21

I saw this story in The Times on April 1.

abbierhodes · 04/04/2012 21:22

LOL! Very relieved this was an April fool! (Assuming it was!) Makes much more sense!!!

noegg · 04/04/2012 21:53

Driverless cars are no April fool. The technology is well advanced and is already finding its way into mainstream cars. Anyone got a VW with park assist? Several manufacturers build cars that will brake if you get too close to the car in front or will automatically maintain a set distance from the car in front.

Of course the issue of liability in accidents would have to be resolved before completely autonomous cars are allowed on the road.

F3rgie · 05/04/2012 09:41

I've got to ask, who do you expect to pay for this technology?

ReallyTired · 05/04/2012 09:55

I imagine that park assist or parking sensors pay for themselves in lower insurance premiums. As the technology becomes more wide spread the cost will reduce.

BusinessTrills · 05/04/2012 09:58

If the only occupant of a driverless car is blind then it is actually driverless.

What you are saying is that you don't trust driverless cars unless they have a driver in them who can take over - is that right?

YANBU to think that driverless cars are not yet ready to be truly driverless.

An extended form of cruise control, sure. Managed edging-forwards-in-a-queue, why not? Better precision-parking, definitely! Actual no-qualified-driver-in-the-car? Not yet.

AfricanExport · 05/04/2012 10:00

ReallyTired : Absolutely I know of parents who are willing to chip their kids so they don't get abducted so it's not that far fetched. and No.. I would not be chipping my kids.. lol

And really, a car with sensors on it would probably respond better to someone walking in front of it than 50% of drivers would. It would 'know' the correct procedure to stop the car as quickly and safely as possible without skidding, swerving etc etc. Imagine having an advanced driver in every car in the country, no drunks, no druggies, no mobiles, no distractions...

The point is that the technology already exists to do this. It is not an unrealistic April Fools thing. It is here already - we just cannot use it because of the Big Brother thing. However i think it's unfounded as number plate recognition means that they already know where we are all the time. There are camera's everywhere. How many people have GPS in their cars? Half the population? The only issue is that we would be a slow process and you could not 'turn it on' unless everyone on the road had the correct equipment in their cars.

Of course you could also do away with private cars completely and have Cars like the bicycles in London. Call a car, it picks you up and drops you off.

Flip

1 2