What's all this gonna cost? It sounds very expensive -- like having to take a cab or uber everywhere. Instead of fixed monthly costs for a car payment, gas and insurance....you will pay by the trip and the mile. Likely, there will be charges for more desirable automated cars -- or larger ones -- or fancy limo-like amenities. What will happen to the poor who cannot afford these luxe trips in automated cars? Will buses even exist in this scenario? Also: the last few years have amply proven we cannot maintain security on the internet -- in banking data -- credit cards -- not even our voting systems. What happens when we are all 100% dependent on automated cars, and then the system goes down? or gets hacked by foreign powers? and we are all helplessly dependent on it, and can't remember how to drive ourselves or even how to figure out where we are?

And how do we get from all human drivers to all robots without a transition period with both on the roads? Does the government buy up all the conventional cars at once? That would perhaps be even more fiscally challenging than the Republican tax plan. A changeover period, of course, raises a whole set of different problems which are not dealt with in either the starting state or the end point. This is all reminiscent of an old story. A British Commonwealth country decides to join the US and continental Europe by switching from the left side of the road to the right. But not wishing to take the plunge all at once, it proposes first to move the buses over and then later the cars.

Autonomous does not mean shared. For the same reason many of us own our own automobiles now we will continue to own them even when they no longer require us to pilot them. I don't want to have to worry about packing an umbrella, extra jacket for myself and/or the kids, snacks, water, etc. The personal car is more than a means to get from point A to point B it is a personal capsule that transports you and yours in the exact manner you wish. Autonomous or not that desire for personal space will not change.

Windshield? I wonder why human-driven cars even have them now. HD cameras and VR headsets should replace windshields. Put the driver in the middle of the compartment where it is safer. No need to face forward. No need for airbags. Nothing blocking the driver's digital vision. The roof and supports are invisible. Night vision. Head-up display. Why wait for autonomous vehicles? Oh, ya. Every idea is already patented and locked down.

Keep dreaming and please stop drinking the Silicon Valley Kool- Aid as there will never be 100% ANV'S on the road. Californians love to drive. Google's ANV platform is a monumental bust. Watch Tesla in the space.

Eighty-two pages of commentary, speculation, predictions, and warnings, and not one comment about disability and the impact on millions and millions of people throughout the world? Even within the schematic of the self-driving city that includes gender, race, and class, no mention of disability. How is this possible but that those envisioning the future, designing the technology and environments, and those writing about it do not consider people with disabilities, whether blind, deaf, autistic, physically disabled, with chronic mental health needs, and with intellectual disabilities, as worthy of this near future? Fifty-six million people in America and not one thought about them. Shame.

Very little mention of the certainty that when there is a mix of user operated and autonomous cars, the users, some of them anyway, will game the system, and make things less safe. For example, if I am waiting at a red light, behind an autonomous car, I might consider that it is going to delay 2 seconds after the light turns green before proceeding. If I am in a hurry, I might just decide to pass this car as soon as the light changes. On the freeway, people tailgate enough as it is- what's going to stop someone from coming way too close, or committing some other aggression, just for the "fun" of it? How will the autonomous car react to such provocation? And what about motorcycles? Will they be the last free agents on the road? What kinds of fun could thay have, scaring the bejesus out of us hapless victims, in our pods?

There will never be 100% self driving cars. Driving is one of the great joys in life. All this so that you can spend more time on your phone? Anyone with money will drive themselves.

Autonomous cars are an invention that nobody wants. I enjoy driving, and have no interest in a self-driving vehicle. I canvassed several friends, and they all, without exception, agree. This is another case of developing a technology for which there is no need, and attempting to convince the public that it is a "must have." I would like to see the NYT do an article on the public's overwhelming ambivalence to autonomous vehicles, rather than promoting the false assumption that they are a welcome innovation.

I already ride in vehicles which allow me unlimited freedom to do whatever I choose with my attention and my hands. They are called airplanes and buses. I don't enjoy my time there, so the thought of spending a similar amount of time in a self-driving car doesn't feel so much like liberation.

If we're going to go through all this effort to replace 300 million cars with robots, why not show a little imagination and figure out a way to get rid of cars altogether? Does anyone really want: - No more public transit (why would anyone bother?) - Twice as many roads - Four times as many highways (hello, suburban sprawl!) - ?? times as many 4,000-lb machines carrying 150 lbs of cargo?

This article seems to be another attempt by technological optimists to paint a story that might justify the large sums of money being spent on autonomous vehicle technology and the related overblown valuations for start up companies in this area. I don't doubt that some day some part of this research will find it way into automobiles, truck and vehicles of various sorts. But the future of transportation should not be focused on single cars with individuals riding is some form of bliss. Transportation issue of concern are: congestion, emissions, wise land use in congested areas, and safety for passengers and pedestrians. Self-driving is a edge issue at best for the luxury crowd. In addition the real scientist working on this stuff will tell you (check Berkeley) this stuff is decades away. This is a poor attempt to generate demand for something that is basically not needed, but a technology dream for people trying to extend computer and information systems into all aspects of our lives (whether we need it or not).

Can you say the Jetsons.

Yeah, a new culture will arise. A culture where legions of unemployed, angry men turn to crime because their lines of work have been totally eliminated. I am not a luddite, I welcome technological progress. But the future we're looking at is not a rosy one.

To focused on technology not enough on finance. With Amazon + A-EV's you will not own a car. That free's up huge amount of money & that money has to go somewhere. Answer: Hype connected + Local World. Walk-able all encompassing micro communities that are highly connect to the broader world. Think a State University.

I always wonder, will drivers be able to program autonomous cars to match their personalities, mood, or prior driving habits. For example, will we be able to program the car to tailgate? To take our half of the road out of the middle? To drive 5 miles under the speed limit in the passing lane?

How about we imagine something much better: a world with very few cars, of any kind.

I was discussing self-driving cars with a younger colleague who lives in San Francisco. I told him I could not imagine owning a self-driving car. Driving is in my DNA. I hate being a passenger. He replied that he spends 90 minutes each way to and from work in horrible traffic, and would much rather sit in the back and get work done. Good point. But if you live where the roads are open, self-driving cars are not going to catch on, in my opinion.

Now imagine a world where all the people whose job involves driving, flying or sailing something around are out of work. They will have plenty of time to hang out in those former parking lots, now green, and maybe get acquainted with local wildlife, if road kill is minimized. Stores will be able to dial up supplies, which will be loaded by robots and delivered by driverless vans. What exactly all those former working people are going to do for a living is unclear at the moment. Maybe go to Harvard online?

As a child who attended the 1939-40 New York World's Fair I recall one exhibition with miniature cars that were driverless - I believe that the notion was that we would all move about on conveyor belts in The World of Tomorrow. That did not happen - but now we have the driverless car - something I have serious doubts about. Not the technology, but the human factor. Most humans like to be in control of their vehicle be it a Mercedes or a skateboard. It will take a great effort to change human nature - the need for control has always been with us and I dare say always will be.

All of these possibilities are nightmarish and horrifying. Sure, lets block our view of the real world and have a bunch of Yelp reviews superimposed over everything we see. Have we learned nothing from the disastrous social experiments of the 1970s when gargantuan inhuman architecture was foisted on our cities by well-meaning urban renewal proponents? When it was assumed that since everybody would go everywhere in cars, there was no need for sidewalks or street life of any kind? The result was unlivable neighborhoods, crime and endless bleak spaces, and the charlatans like Robert Moses who forced their visions on us never had to pay the price for their incompetence. And now we fall into the same trap by thinking some new automated technology will improve our lives by obliterating everything we consider normal and human. The concern over "urban spaces that fail to take into account delight, pleasure or human connection" is very prescient. Of course the people who lose out will be the poor, pedestrians, children and the elderly, like every time, both from the destruction of traditional neighborhoods, even down to removing signs, and from the massive siphoning of resources into autonomous car research that could be invested in actual communities. Its time for everyone to stand up now and say No to this garbage. We have autonomous vehicles where you can relax and talk to your neighbor - its called public transit, and its been shamefully starved of resources for too long!

Autonomous vehicles are the brainchild of a corporate malignancy that seeks to "maximize efficiency" to humanity in the image of a spreadsheet, or other inanimate object...........to reduce and dilute culture, identity, individuality, creativity, spontaneity....in a word "humanity".................Independence of Movement is the fundamental origin of a being, a "human"..............I say....do not take this first, fatally prophetic step towards losing control of our human mobility.

Just try to remember the thousand page-thick Yellow Pages and Phone Books of two decades ago. And today, in the age of Googling anything and everything, we laugh just thinking about the current utility of those ungainly, out-of-date-right-on-the-day-of-printing tomes. Similarly, in a few years, we will chuckle just recalling how we all had to compete for space and discern each other’s unpredictable intentions, moods and urgencies while hurtling ourselves in one-ton missiles, unbeknownst to each other, like we mostly do on the roads today! Perhaps car driving as we know of it today will turn into something like horse jumping to showcase a unneeded skill that some us will have the luxury to work on in our spare time about a decade from now. Can’t wait!

The autonomous car theorists are still experiencing a failure of imagination. Adding architects to the technology mix won't make much difference. You should probably hire anthropologists instead. You're ignoring human preference. What if I want to bike to work or walk to the grocery store? An interlaced cacophony of high speed automated automobile networks isn't welcome or pleasant in my experience. Think about having high speed highways everywhere in your community. Sometimes a slower pace is helpful to the human mind. For an oversimplified example, think about the age of letter writing versus the age of twitter. John Adams versus Donald Trump. Fast doesn't always mean better. You'd probably only succeed in decentralizing urban centers across broader areas. There's also the question of liberty. Even if completely automated transit is possible, what if I enjoy driving? Do I not have the right to operate a vehicle myself? The 2nd Amendment protects gun hobbyists despite logic to the contrary. Are automotive hobbyists not granted the same privilege? Realistically, you would need to crate parallel infrastructure for the indefinite future. In which case, automation is either a compliment or a substitute for existing methods of mass transit. The solution is really not a solution in itself. Theorizing is fun but planners need to come down from cloud nine. Humans are still humans no matter what the technology is capable of accomplishing.

As someone with steadily declining vision, the autonomous car development gives me hope.

I can't wait for human drivers to be off the road. Human driver errors, not to mention drunk/distracted human drivers, kill so many of us, we have set the safety bar for driverless cars extremely low.

For me, what is most interesting about autonomous cars is that the companies investing in them, and the consumers eagerly anticipating them, don't seem to realize the potential for manual driving to become part of political identity in the United States. There are millions of people in this country who enjoy driving and take pride in being behind the wheel. Look around you. Do you really think, in the era of Trumpian rage, that bans will fly? I suppose there are progressives out there who imagine that, sure, we're unable to adopt the metric system, but banning manual driving? That'll be a slam dunk.

Autonomous Cars = Horizontal Elevators. - And those cars are just as exciting, sexy and futuristic as elevators.

When all cars are autonomous how will burglars escape from the scene of a crime?

No. You just do not get it. The cars are poisoning us. And everything else. We need electric cars. You need to reset your sense of priorities from childish wonder at meaningless things to respect for a real world that exacts a punishment for thoughtless behavior.

The tech industry is apparently not content with their currently ability to track you everywhere you go on the internet. They want to be able to track you in the real world as well as the virtual world. Self-driving cars will end privacy, completely and permanently. They will keep a digital record of every trip taken by every human being. Big Brother is licking his chops.

Interesting, but how will those of us who like to WALK get through those intersections. Computer chips imbedded in our shoes?

Ok, sure, fine. But this is not going to work on the roads we have. Do we rip up every street in America to install techno-streets? Any technology dependent on reading the white stripe on the road has many, many inherent flaws.

Yes, there are many benefits of autonomous cars - yes they will be safer, yes, there will be fewer traffic collisions. It could eliminate drunk driving too! The author is overly simplistic though. Consider other consequences - it could make traffic worse. Instead of carefully grouping all my errands to be at the same time for efficiency of my time - I can send my car out on its own at anytime with no impact on my time. In addition, instead of paying for a parking garage near work I could just send my unmanned car back to my home and save the parking fee. Great I avoid parking fees - but now my car is on the road twice as long! The car could ferry children around more than when I had to drive. No the speculation that commute time will be cut in half is delusional dreaming. The traffic situation could be even worse with more gridlock. Environmental impact could be worse too.If I don't have to be "in" the car while it is operating it may get used more and create even more pollution through either an internal combustion engine or through increased electricity demand (remember electricity is not environmentally neutral - it doesn't just magically come from an outlet in the wall). One more point - How old does a person need to be in order to ride in a car unattended? What if car arrives at destination and the expected adult is not there to greet child. Let’s get real and have a real conversation – not just day dreaming.

While there are plenty of potential negatives with autonomous cars, the potential positives also are enormous. Imagine being a grandparent who wants to travel cross country or attend a concert at night downtown -- it's suddenly safer and easier. Imagine being a parent with a crying baby -- you can comfort the child instead of navigating traffic. Imagine visiting a historic town and downloading the driving tour. Or working a little late and sending the car to pick up your (responsible, age-appropriate) kid at home so you can meet at the sports practice or church function. Or arranging for your car to drop you off at a trailhead and then meet you at the other end of a long autumn hike. Or even sending your car to the shop for routine maintenance while you work. The future will be what we make it. That's what we must drive well.

Why is everyone in such a hurry to live in a world that not merely could but will be hacked so easily? To imagine that hackers won't go after cars is outrageous wishful thinking. And so far there is no evidence that any of the companies or governments involved is taking this inevitability seriously. It seems as though the prospect of what could/will happen, and the cost of minimizing the danger, is so awful that no one in a decision-making position wants to think about it, and everyone's mind shies away from the thought.

Perhaps they first need to figure out how to get pedestrians to where they want to go quickly and cheaply. The mass transit system in the NYC/Metropolitan area is abysmal. So we should encourage non-drivers to purchase a vehicle instead of encouraging mass transit? The driverless car is the beginning of the end of civilization as we know it. Prepare to be replaced where you work as well by A.I.

What about Le Mans?

Love the design on this entry page to the column!

Why should cars be driverless? More cancerous technology to go with our outrageous growth rate. More run-away Capitalist trash.

Very interesting read. Quite futuristic. Look, I would be happy if the car just got me to the grocery store in one piece. You have to crawl before you can walk. Some of these features may show up in the next couple of decades. Some will never happen. That's OK. Nothing wrong with pushing the imagination. That's how we move forward and those that dare to dream are the prime movers. But before we automate the process of transportation, it would be great to be able to get a bag of groceries and an occasional trip downtown to the theater. I would settle for that.

Yet who are these people clamoring for driverless cars? I don't know anyone who actually thinks it's good or doable idea. I, like many others I know, actually enjoy the act of driving and find it a pleasure, not a chore. This utopian ideal seems to be driven by tech companies not by public demand.

I'm still waiting for the electricity-generating fusion reactors promised to us "by the end of the century" when I was 12 years old - 60 years ago! Considering the problems they were supposed to solve (high energy prices, scarce energy resources, life-threatening pollution) there was surely enough motivation to solve the inevitable problems of that "new technology". Pie in the sky, like all those wonderful medical advances still touted on TV - for only $1,700 a pill! And the wisest among us avoid doctors and hospitals like the plague. Be skeptical of predictions.

So self-driving cars will make us dumber, as skills related to navigation and operating a mechanical device decline further. And although a comprehensive system entices us with superficial "freedoms" (play with your phone instead of driving, and shorter commuting times), more substantial impacts on personal liberty come with the deal (what begins with tracking your movements can easily progress to controling them, e.g. shutting down routes to the latest protest site). And it further requires people to adapt the way they live to how technology prefers to function, perhaps cool for techno-fans and vendors, but maybe not so appealing to the rest of us who do not want to live "in" Facebook and Twitter. What's not to like?

Yes, we are entering the era of cars smart enough to take over the driving. However, the hurdles faced are enormous. That speaks only to the capability of the machine itself to navigate the automobile landscape we now inhabit. It will take several generations of people to: 1) become accustomed to the concept and 2) to rejigger our streets, roads and highways to work with the new electronics in those cars. In other words, don't hold your breath waiting for this utopia. We are still working on the superhighway system decreed by the Eisenhower administration.

Technology, just like biological species, human societies, and the Earth itself, evolves over time, albeit at a quicker rate. The fact that technological evolution is preceding at an unprecedented speed whereas human evolution, including our ability to learn about and adapt to changing environments, remains firmly rooted in the Pleistocene, is a huge problem that none of the authors addressed directly. Throughout human history, rapid technological change has always been followed by huge [and unpredictable] social changes (consider the invention of agriculture, 14th and 15th century changes in ship construction and navigation, the Industrial Revolution, The Electronics Revolution), not all of them necessarily benign. If, in fact, these authors are even partially correct in terms of what is coming and when it will arrive, someone better start seriously addressing the social consequences because while "techies" are always preaching "Utopia," history suggests that "Dystopia" is just as likely.

Be very careful what you wish for. In recent days, we have seen critical security vulnerabilities in both closed-source and open-source software - most recently in the widely-adopted WPA2 encryption protocol used in almost every home WIFI router which renders the encryption worthless. You may not be paying attention to this, but it is happening all the time. Self-driving cars will almost certainly require some kind of ad-hock mesh network, allowing nearby cars to communicate their positions to one another. A single security issue in that software could allow hackers anywhere in the world that can access that mesh network to control the cars, confuse them about the location of adjacent cars, re-route them from their destinations, etc. The supposed safety of these self-driving vehicles is almost certainly trading one form of risk for a worse one. We have to start asking ourselves as a society whether the convenience of things like self-driving cars is worth that risk. It seems that we are unable to accept that such risks exist, or even understand them. A sizable percentage of the US population doesn't seem to care about network security or privacy, and that is a very scary thing.

In the future, autonomous cars WILL SAVE ON GASOLINE USAGE. Gevalt. So forward thinking! Oh, and no street signs or traffic lights. Imagine that. Sixth Avenue will be so elegant without them. And your car could be parked in New Jersey while you stagger around Washington Square. New Jersey is apparently empty in the future. Plus, rolling parties of drunk teenagers. Count me totally in; sounds like a giant improvement over the cars (and life) we have now. Swipe right.

Autonomous, intelligent, these words are almost at odds with each other, and if they are, who decides.

As someone who got their NJ driver's license in the 1970's, I still carry maps in the car, look up how to get somewhere, and write it down on paper to bring with me for a trip, near or far. Have made it to the midwest, Canada, and NC with all states in between that way. Last week for the first time, at the urging of coworkers and spouse, I tried google maps on a smart phone for a 4 mile trip, heard the voice, followed the turns, and arrived where I needed to go. I felt lost without my hand written instructions and truly prefer to travel my old way than with a smart phone. Can't even imagine an autonomous car...

I absolutely cannot wait for self-driving cars to become a reality. For me, it means complete independence of movement and of places to live. Essentially, everywhere in the United States would be on some kind of magical subway system, except that I'd always get a seat.

All this assumes only passenger cars using urban roadways that follow some kind of logic. NYC is a cacophony of double-parked delivery vehicles, construction sites, bike lanes, pot holes and terrorist prevention obstructions. And when I, as a NYC pedestrian lacking AI, exercise my God-given right to jaywalk, who will I be yelling at as I pound the hood of the self-driving car that has come to a screeching halt (I hope) as I cross the street from between two expertly self-parked cars? "I'M WALKIN HERE!!!"

Are we putting the cart before the horse? Perhaps we need to perfect the A.I. capability of the droid to replace us at work. That way when it takes our autonomous car on the commute to do our job, we won't have to worry.