10 ms·

I agree that it's safe to assume folks at these companies are aware of these issues. But if I'm going to risk my life by using one of these systems, I'd want to

I agree that it's safe to assume folks at these companies are aware of these issues. But if I'm going to risk my life by using one of these systems, I'd want to have good answers to how they have solved them. Until then, I think it's fair to keep asking to avoid unrealistic hype.

amelius 10y ago
Well, one way to solve the problem is to simply bring the car to a halt, then wait until the problem is solved by itself (or by the user).
- saryant 10y ago
  And if you're going 70 down a busy interstate?
  - taneq 10y ago
    The number of times that "you can't stop / brake / slow because someone behind you will run into you" comes up in these threads is always alarmingly high.
    - thaw13579 10y ago
      Indeed, it reminds of this article, which thankfully didn't end up killing anyone: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/ https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig...
      - taneq 10y ago
        > Miller and Valasek’s full arsenal includes functions that at lower speeds fully kill the engine, abruptly engage the brakes, or disable them altogether. Are there seriously cars on the road with complete fly-by-wire brakes which have no pure mechanical backup? That's horrifying. How did we go from dual redundant hydraulic systems that work (if in a reduced capacity) even when the ignition is off, to something at the mercy of some code that can be bamboozled over 3G?
walrus1066 10y ago
I think safety is fine, especially in cities with not too crazy weather. It's more that if an autonomous car with no human stalls, due to a traffic light that's stopped working, or an oddly shaped plastic bag in the road, it's stuck, and would cause a traffic jam. Not sure how to resolve such a scenario, can't rely on someone remotely taking control, as mobile data doesn't have 100% coverage, so a human who is allowed access to the car would somehow need to get thorough the traffic jam to move the vehicle on. Can't think of an efficient way to resolve this situation.
- jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
  First, some baselines: humans suck at driving too. Next, coverage isn't an all or nothing thing, it'd be quite easy for an autonomous uber like service to restrict itself to areas that permit remote control when cars need assistance. Last I'd encourage reading some of the literature behind what folks are doing: it's a very different sort of system, one that blends a lot of complex probability estimates. It's not like everyday coding where a human developer needs to anticipate every combination of corner cases.
  - walrus1066 10y ago
    Machine learning tools also cannot cover corner cases, if they're not present in it's training data. Communication with human agents (other cars, police officers) is also extremely tough.
- stormbrew 10y ago
  It's not as if human driven cars never get stuck in an intersection. I imagine the solution will be much the same: it will be moved manually if possible or towed if not. If a person is deliberately fucking with traffic by deliberately messing with an autonomous car, they'll also probably be fined. I mean the other day on my daily commute there were two cars right in the middle of a freeway, one attempting to jump start the other and they were at it for a while. This is not shockingly new ground.
ageofwant 10y ago
It only needs to be a better driver than you for you to be safer, and its that already. I can guarantee you that on a one to one driving skills shootout between you and the software you will loose 98% of the time.
- walrus1066 10y ago
  Sure, but put a tumbleweed in front of the driverless car and it's stuck. Or wood with a nail sticking out/generic movable obstacle, a human can remove it, the auto-car cannot.
  - ageofwant 10y ago
    Yea so ? Harping on the 2% issues does not negate the benefit you have the rest of the time: It can swerve in microseconds, you cannot. How many times will your nail removal skills save you or your kids live compared to software that knows that rolling the car to the left have a 87.34 better chance of occupants survival that the head-on collision with the truck that just swerved in 0.4 seconds ago ? Forget it, driver-less s cars will be the norm in the future. You won't be able to afford the insurance associated with a meat-driven car.
    - walrus1066 10y ago
      My nail removal skill will prevent gridlock on the road. If an auto-car gets confused due to a 2% issue, it becomes a brick, clogging the road. If multiple auto-cars do this in a city, the result is standstill.
      - jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
        You make it sound like people are gonna be strapped into their autonomous vehicle like Hannibal Lector. Seriously, a couple pieces of debris are not some thing where we go "oh crap, we're done, guess the whole city will just sit here all day."
  - taneq 10y ago
notatoad 10y ago
But nobody's asking you to use any of these systems yet. they're in development, not products for sale. There's no benefit to anybody in questioning whether google knows that snow exists, or if uber understands that traffic stops unexpectedly sometimes. Obviously everybody involved in developing self-driving cars understands the most basic definition of the problem. If google actually starts selling a self-driving car and doesn't give any information about whether it can deal with a policeman-controlled intersection, then you can be concerned. Until then, implying their self-driving car programs haven't considered the basic problems that any uninformed commenter on the internet can think up is not incredibly helpful.

amelius 10y ago

Well, one way to solve the problem is to simply bring the car to a halt, then wait until the problem is solved by itself (or by the user).

saryant 10y ago
And if you're going 70 down a busy interstate?
- taneq 10y ago
  The number of times that "you can't stop / brake / slow because someone behind you will run into you" comes up in these threads is always alarmingly high.
  - thaw13579 10y ago
    Indeed, it reminds of this article, which thankfully didn't end up killing anyone: https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/ https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig...
    - taneq 10y ago
      > Miller and Valasek’s full arsenal includes functions that at lower speeds fully kill the engine, abruptly engage the brakes, or disable them altogether. Are there seriously cars on the road with complete fly-by-wire brakes which have no pure mechanical backup? That's horrifying. How did we go from dual redundant hydraulic systems that work (if in a reduced capacity) even when the ignition is off, to something at the mercy of some code that can be bamboozled over 3G?

walrus1066 10y ago

I think safety is fine, especially in cities with not too crazy weather. It's more that if an autonomous car with no human stalls, due to a traffic light that's stopped working, or an oddly shaped plastic bag in the road, it's stuck, and would cause a traffic jam. Not sure how to resolve such a scenario, can't rely on someone remotely taking control, as mobile data doesn't have 100% coverage, so a human who is allowed access to the car would somehow need to get thorough the traffic jam to move the vehicle on. Can't think of an efficient way to resolve this situation.

jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
First, some baselines: humans suck at driving too. Next, coverage isn't an all or nothing thing, it'd be quite easy for an autonomous uber like service to restrict itself to areas that permit remote control when cars need assistance. Last I'd encourage reading some of the literature behind what folks are doing: it's a very different sort of system, one that blends a lot of complex probability estimates. It's not like everyday coding where a human developer needs to anticipate every combination of corner cases.
- walrus1066 10y ago
  Machine learning tools also cannot cover corner cases, if they're not present in it's training data. Communication with human agents (other cars, police officers) is also extremely tough.
stormbrew 10y ago
It's not as if human driven cars never get stuck in an intersection. I imagine the solution will be much the same: it will be moved manually if possible or towed if not. If a person is deliberately fucking with traffic by deliberately messing with an autonomous car, they'll also probably be fined. I mean the other day on my daily commute there were two cars right in the middle of a freeway, one attempting to jump start the other and they were at it for a while. This is not shockingly new ground.

ageofwant 10y ago

It only needs to be a better driver than you for you to be safer, and its that already. I can guarantee you that on a one to one driving skills shootout between you and the software you will loose 98% of the time.

walrus1066 10y ago
Sure, but put a tumbleweed in front of the driverless car and it's stuck. Or wood with a nail sticking out/generic movable obstacle, a human can remove it, the auto-car cannot.
- ageofwant 10y ago
  Yea so ? Harping on the 2% issues does not negate the benefit you have the rest of the time: It can swerve in microseconds, you cannot. How many times will your nail removal skills save you or your kids live compared to software that knows that rolling the car to the left have a 87.34 better chance of occupants survival that the head-on collision with the truck that just swerved in 0.4 seconds ago ? Forget it, driver-less s cars will be the norm in the future. You won't be able to afford the insurance associated with a meat-driven car.
  - walrus1066 10y ago
    My nail removal skill will prevent gridlock on the road. If an auto-car gets confused due to a 2% issue, it becomes a brick, clogging the road. If multiple auto-cars do this in a city, the result is standstill.
    - jasonwatkinspdx 10y ago
      You make it sound like people are gonna be strapped into their autonomous vehicle like Hannibal Lector. Seriously, a couple pieces of debris are not some thing where we go "oh crap, we're done, guess the whole city will just sit here all day."
- taneq 10y ago

notatoad 10y ago

But nobody's asking you to use any of these systems yet. they're in development, not products for sale. There's no benefit to anybody in questioning whether google knows that snow exists, or if uber understands that traffic stops unexpectedly sometimes. Obviously everybody involved in developing self-driving cars understands the most basic definition of the problem. If google actually starts selling a self-driving car and doesn't give any information about whether it can deal with a policeman-controlled intersection, then you can be concerned. Until then, implying their self-driving car programs haven't considered the basic problems that any uninformed commenter on the internet can think up is not incredibly helpful.