As I mentioned before, I am a civil engineer. I often get...frustrated...at work, because everybody dives in and tackles the easiest part of a problem first. And honestly, 90% of the time, money, and effort on a project is spent on the last really hard 5% of the project.
That is where driverless car research is right now - the easy stuff. The really easy stuff - highway driving, just like GM did in 1960. I guarantee you - the last 5% of this problem will prove quite difficult.
So this is where we get to my not being ‘bothered to understand the exchange’. The OP, the premise of this ENTIRE thread is an absolute piece of NONSENSE article that states kids born today will NEVER DRIVE. I understand that very well - now do you?
Now, in light of what I’ve just explained about the hardest part of the design still ahead of the companies pursuing this - does any sane person seriously believe the article in the OP is true? In my state, kids as young as 14 can have a restricted license, but I’ll be conservative and use 16 as a benchmark. Do you REALLY think that 16 years from now, there will only be self driving cars? That is the ‘exchange’ being discussed here - and I understand it quite well.
And please explain how I moved my goalpost, without ever changing my original question? All I have ever asked is for one example of a car that can traverse city streets, driverless. I have never changed that request - and you have never been able to produce even one example (for the obvious reason there is no example).
Now sometimes I can’t help myself, but I’m just not a fan of unsubstantiated claims on the interwebs:
“LIDAR isn’t the answer most of the companies are working on.”
Do you have a source for that statement?
And who are these ‘companies’?
Uber: Giant rotating LIDAR head on roof, plus 4 supplemental units at corners of vehicle
Google: Giant rotating LIDAR head on roof
Otto: LIDAR
So I have to ask exactly who are these companies who are building autonomous vehicles without LIDAR?
Recap:
Static Goalpost question #1: Give an example of a driverless car in use today, to back up your unsubstantiated assertion.
Static Goalpost Question #2: Back up the assertion that ‘companies’ aren’t using LIDAR (even though all the big players are using LIDAR)
Actually there are kids today that are never going to drive and it’s got nothing to do with self driving cars. Not everybody drives, some folks live in cities where you just never need to. And we’re seeing a trend of that group increasing in recent generations, a growing number just aren’t interested in it. With public transit and ubers it’s simply becoming an optional skill for good chunks of the world.
The article doesn’t say that within 16 years nobody will be driving as all the cars will be self driving, that’s you moving the goal posts again.
You just did. The article says that SOMEDAY in the FORESEEABLE FUTURE and you turned that into current kids, 16 years. Then of course there’s you demanding the cars be autonomous, since the cars will be taking orders from owners (not really a market for cars that just do what they want) they’ll never technically be autonomous. That’s moved goal posts.
Plenty are using cameras, because they know LIDAR has great limitations.
I already gave you info on cars driving themselves today. Your demand for parking space to parking space is a moved goal post that is outside of what I said.
Tesla and Oryx are going no LIDAR, and most of the others are using cameras and probably will be phasing away from LIDAR because, as you yourself point out, it just isn’t the right solution.