4 ms·

From the report that the fortune.com article links to: > In 10 of the 13 simulated contact events, the SDC’s predicted behavior would have, in simulation, caus

From the report that the fortune.com article links to: > In 10 of the 13 simulated contact events, the SDC’s predicted behavior would have, in simulation, caused contact (though 2 of these involved simulated contact with traffic cones). The 13 events happened in the 15 months from September 2014 to November 2015 (both incl). 424,331 miles driven. Can the average driver drive 30,000 miles without making contact with a traffic cone or another car?

smileysteve 11y ago
> Can the average driver drive 30,000 miles without making contact with a traffic cone or another car? The broken pylons at my closest bike lane and highway exit indicate that very few drivers can achieve this.
- cfcef 11y ago
  That's averaged over weeks or months or however long it takes for repairs, and over however many thousands of cars pass by (the US drives trillions of miles each year).
  - smileysteve 11y ago
    Yes, and so is the 30,000 mile figure. Detail: I'm speaking in generalizations here, but it seems that small and even less traveled roads that have pylons often have these damages. Scarily, on a run today, a "lightly" traveled road in a residential area had multiple "stop for pedestrian" signs that had been knocked down. I find this particularly scary on the (non major side street) that I live - where other than residents (300ppl) and 1 business (< 300 ppl) few people should choose to drive - loses these road pylons in a matter of days.
ocdtrekkie 11y ago
Yes. According to this pro-Google car post (which is false, when you consider human interventions to prevent accidents), the average mileage between accidents for humans is about 165,000. I've seen claims that humans average closer to 250,000 miles driven between accidents as well. http://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer-than-you/#reCu16x9Mgqj http://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer-...
- jpatokal 11y ago
  You're comparing apples and oranges: reported accident != knocking over a traffic cone.
  - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
    Obviously the scope of the data for Google's cars are still relatively small. But there's little difference between hitting a traffic cone and hitting a small child. And even if you dismiss the two traffic cones, it's not a rosy record. Certainly nowhere near as rosy as Google paints it each time they say "1.x million miles without an accident!" I am asking, if anything, that we take a more critical look at the statement being made every time Chris Urmson opens his mouth. Because when he brags about the safety of his cars, he's ignoring or failing to mention these incidents where humans saved him from having a very, very bad day.
    - aidenn0 11y ago
      > But there's little difference between hitting a traffic cone and hitting a small child. I agree with some of what you have said, but this is the most bizarre statement I have read today. There are probably hundreds (or more) traffic cones hit for every small child hit by a car, just because there are way more cars per day passing close to traffic cones than to children. I personally have had my car hit by others 5 times without reporting it to my insurance company (car was parked, hit and run), as the damage was less than my deductible, and I opted to just live with a few dents. Estimating the number of times a car collides with anything per mile driven is very hard.
      - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
        Yes, that's true, from a reporting/statistical standpoint. I am okay with dismissing those two incidents when evaluating this record. There's a lot of leeway on human driver statistics. As I said above, I've seen 165,000 miles per accident and 250,000 per accident reported/estimated. I've also seen the claim that human drivers go 300,000 to 500,000 miles between accidents on average, but I heavily assume those are based on underreported figures. My intention in comparing a traffic cone to a small child is the actual safety issue. If a SDC could hit a cone, it could also hit a small child. They're small road hazards which are not generally going to be mapped by the car in advance. I don't want to dismiss the fact that the SDC would've hit a road obstacle, just because in that case the obstacle was a cheap plastic object.
lucaspiller 11y ago
At least here in Italy no :-)

smileysteve 11y ago

> Can the average driver drive 30,000 miles without making contact with a traffic cone or another car? The broken pylons at my closest bike lane and highway exit indicate that very few drivers can achieve this.

cfcef 11y ago
That's averaged over weeks or months or however long it takes for repairs, and over however many thousands of cars pass by (the US drives trillions of miles each year).
- smileysteve 11y ago
  Yes, and so is the 30,000 mile figure. Detail: I'm speaking in generalizations here, but it seems that small and even less traveled roads that have pylons often have these damages. Scarily, on a run today, a "lightly" traveled road in a residential area had multiple "stop for pedestrian" signs that had been knocked down. I find this particularly scary on the (non major side street) that I live - where other than residents (300ppl) and 1 business (< 300 ppl) few people should choose to drive - loses these road pylons in a matter of days.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago

Yes. According to this pro-Google car post (which is false, when you consider human interventions to prevent accidents), the average mileage between accidents for humans is about 165,000. I've seen claims that humans average closer to 250,000 miles driven between accidents as well. http://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer-than-you/#reCu16x9Mgqj http://mashable.com/2012/08/07/google-driverless-cars-safer-...

jpatokal 11y ago
You're comparing apples and oranges: reported accident != knocking over a traffic cone.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  Obviously the scope of the data for Google's cars are still relatively small. But there's little difference between hitting a traffic cone and hitting a small child. And even if you dismiss the two traffic cones, it's not a rosy record. Certainly nowhere near as rosy as Google paints it each time they say "1.x million miles without an accident!" I am asking, if anything, that we take a more critical look at the statement being made every time Chris Urmson opens his mouth. Because when he brags about the safety of his cars, he's ignoring or failing to mention these incidents where humans saved him from having a very, very bad day.
  - aidenn0 11y ago
    > But there's little difference between hitting a traffic cone and hitting a small child. I agree with some of what you have said, but this is the most bizarre statement I have read today. There are probably hundreds (or more) traffic cones hit for every small child hit by a car, just because there are way more cars per day passing close to traffic cones than to children. I personally have had my car hit by others 5 times without reporting it to my insurance company (car was parked, hit and run), as the damage was less than my deductible, and I opted to just live with a few dents. Estimating the number of times a car collides with anything per mile driven is very hard.
    - ocdtrekkie 11y ago
      Yes, that's true, from a reporting/statistical standpoint. I am okay with dismissing those two incidents when evaluating this record. There's a lot of leeway on human driver statistics. As I said above, I've seen 165,000 miles per accident and 250,000 per accident reported/estimated. I've also seen the claim that human drivers go 300,000 to 500,000 miles between accidents on average, but I heavily assume those are based on underreported figures. My intention in comparing a traffic cone to a small child is the actual safety issue. If a SDC could hit a cone, it could also hit a small child. They're small road hazards which are not generally going to be mapped by the car in advance. I don't want to dismiss the fact that the SDC would've hit a road obstacle, just because in that case the obstacle was a cheap plastic object.

lucaspiller 11y ago

At least here in Italy no :-)