"Exactly why human drivers are more prone to crash into self-driving cars is something of a mystery, Schoettle said. Taking a guess, he said perhaps human drivers weren't used to the driving patterns of self-driving algorithms, which can sometimes result in the cars braking more frequently, and longer, than a human might consider reasonable."

Yes, from a close call I had with one of these cars, I can say this is likely the reason. These cars drive differently than human drivers. The human drivers on the road are used to predicting the movements of other human drivers. We need to now get used to the movements of machine drivers. In some cases the machine drivers interpret danger where a human driver can tell there is no cause for concern. I have seen this with these cars several times and now I'm getting accustomed to driving around them. I think it just takes practice for people. It's not necessarily about good or bad driving, it's just different and it takes some time for people to adjust to the different movements.

I have noticed myself that when I am driving near one of the Google cars I am very aware of it and I get the feeling that other cars are a little more wary too.

That being said, I was riding as a passenger with a local and we stopped behind a Google car. I made some comment and the driver was not aware that it was driving itself which was quite interesting since she drives the area a lot. If other drivers are not aware for some reason that this is a self driving car do they behave differently than if they are aware? I had not noticed this myself.

On another occasion I was stopped at traffic lights in front of a Google car and the car beside me contained several people with arms out of windows taking pictures and videos of said Google car. I wonder if some drivers are looking on the Google cars as some type of tourist attraction that needs to be observed rather than paying attention to driving themselves.

Yes, they have different driving habits...they follow the laws. Those not following the laws crash into them. Sure is a mystery. I hope they solve it.

They take a long time to get going at a four-way stop. I can see someone rear-ending them if they were expecting the car in front to move more quickly.

Yes, if a driver is not paying attention to the car in front of them, ans assumes they will move forward, and then act on that assumption with acceleration while not giving a safe enough distance, they are bound to run into other cars.

Maybe Google can start working on self driving bicycles.

People generally aren't very cautious drivers. You might be able to get by with below-recommended following distance in normal situations, but any kind of hard stop or longer-than-expected braking and you might be rolling the dice.

I'm hoping that automatic braking (when your car detects there's a high probability of hitting the car ahead of you) will be a standard feature on all new vehicles -- especially for human drivers -- over the next 5 years. Because if you don't have it, your insurance company will be unhappy writing a check if you rear-end the fancy bumper filled with sensors on the self-driving car in front of you.

What I have noticed. Does driving 5 to 10 MPH slower make you a better driver? The other drivers are always passing the Google car because they are the slower vehicle often driving under the speed limit. They also brake too often under some fear someone will turn or a person will walk out in front of them.

Aaah, hahaha. Having to deal with cars programmed to drive within the laws seems to be something difficult for some to adjust to. Proof of just how law-less people act in their cars on a regular basis.
"Quick,someone complain about bikes...we've been exposed!!"

Self-driving cars are still highly experimental, so it's impossible to draw any conclusions about how they will perform 10 years from now when (if) they turn into real products.

This article is the automotive equivalent of: "Cold fusion reactors: cheap fuel but not stable enough."

The study uses the national rate for accidents, but this is Mountain View, a three by three mile stretch of land with city streets. How can this analysis possibly work out?
Also, where is the link to the original study, Mr. journalist? I know I can just Google for it, but it's tedious, with the name of the author down in the middle of the article and neither a specific title or where it was published. Please fix, thank you.

[Post removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]

SLOW .. 25mph is about the speed of a moped

The prototypes' speed is capped at a neighborhood-friendly 25mph, and they'll drive using the same software that our existing Lexus vehicles use—the same fleet that has self-driven over 1 million miles since we started the project.


Web Link

The sooner we can get the average inattentive MV driver into an autonomous car the better. Then those dullards will quit running into them, pedestrians, cyclists and train crossing barriers thus leaving the roads safer for those of us who know what we're doing.

Old News - was reported months ago that Google car crash rate was much higher than average.

And while adjusting for reporting bias, it does not sound like the report adjusted for traffic/speed bias. That is, Google cars mostly operate on very slow and safe suburban streets, which means you really should adjust the Google rate upward.

It also fails to factor in the impact Google cars have on other drivers - the Google cars are so slow and tentative that they cause other people to have accidents - not necessarily into Google cars.

Google has made huge tech strides in self driving, but it is still like handwriting recognition in the 1990s - more of a problem than a solution so far.