3 ms·

> the new accelerated evaluation process breaks down difficult real-world driving situations into components that can be tested or simulated repeatedly, exposin

> the new accelerated evaluation process breaks down difficult real-world driving situations into components that can be tested or simulated repeatedly, exposing automated vehicles to a condensed set of the most challenging driving situations Chess engine programmers do something like this. Rather than playing thousands of full games to determine your engines strength, you can get a pretty good snapshot by running custom test-suites that contain a curated selection of known challenging positions [1]. One well known downside to this is that if you optimize your engine for test-suites, it invariably performs worse in overall general gameplay. Maybe we'll end up in a situation where cars learn to drive in an extremely over-cautious and risk-averse manner in order to pass all of the dangerous test scenarios. [1] https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Test-Positions#Test https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Test-Positions#Test Suites

zeta0134 9y ago
Perhaps I'm pulling teeth here, but at 70+ MPH, I don't think there's any such thing as overly-cautious until it backfires and becomes less safe in the process.
- derefr 9y ago
  I think the "overly cautious" bit would be never thinking it's safe to come up to 70MPH in the first place.
  - gumby 9y ago
    Indeed, one thing I look forward to is SDCs returning residential streets to their original primary users: humans.
    - closeparen 9y ago
      Self driving cars will actually take us away from a world where all car trips are humans accomplishing their goals, to a world where a decent proportion of car trips are machines serving their own purposes. As an aside: please do lean further into this "people whose transportation needs are best served by cars aren't humans" rhetoric. It's going to be a lot easier to destroy at the polls. I say this having just sold my car to move to a tiny studio in an urban high rise near work, because I recognize that my top-10% salary and lack of children are the only reason I can do that. I'm excited by the possibility of self-driving cars to bring the benefits of the automobile to more people, and most excited about those it can liberate from slow, crowded buses.
      - derefr 9y ago
        I think the parent was talking more about "robotic" traffic-law obesiance meaning that you'll stop hearing people roaring down your laneway at 3AM at 60MPH, just because there's no cars on the road and no possibility of getting caught.
      - gumby 9y ago
        As derefr said I meant use of the roads for walking, playing, sitting, etc like they were before the "motor car" became common. The SDCs will have to be more careful. Roads are now intended for cars, and new infractions (like jaywalking) were invented to give automotive use primacy over others. Cars should merely be one use of the roadways. Not sure what you mean by "It's going to be a lot easier to destroy at the polls."
        closeparen 9y ago
        "Cars should merely be one use of the roadways" is equivalent to "people who can't afford decent urban homes should live in shitty urban homes." The primacy of the car is what lets us currently live in decent suburban homes. Urban and suburban residents have competing interests here: urban residents (for whom cars are a nuisance) would like to safely frolic in the streets. Suburban residents (whose lives depend on fast travel by car) would like to continue affording decent homes. This competition will appear in city-level politics in various ways. The anti-car side is handing the pro-car side some ammunition when talking about them as subhuman (i.e. framing drivers and people and mutually exclusive categories).

zeta0134 9y ago

Perhaps I'm pulling teeth here, but at 70+ MPH, I don't think there's any such thing as overly-cautious until it backfires and becomes less safe in the process.

derefr 9y ago
I think the "overly cautious" bit would be never thinking it's safe to come up to 70MPH in the first place.
- gumby 9y ago
  Indeed, one thing I look forward to is SDCs returning residential streets to their original primary users: humans.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    Self driving cars will actually take us away from a world where all car trips are humans accomplishing their goals, to a world where a decent proportion of car trips are machines serving their own purposes. As an aside: please do lean further into this "people whose transportation needs are best served by cars aren't humans" rhetoric. It's going to be a lot easier to destroy at the polls. I say this having just sold my car to move to a tiny studio in an urban high rise near work, because I recognize that my top-10% salary and lack of children are the only reason I can do that. I'm excited by the possibility of self-driving cars to bring the benefits of the automobile to more people, and most excited about those it can liberate from slow, crowded buses.
    - derefr 9y ago
      I think the parent was talking more about "robotic" traffic-law obesiance meaning that you'll stop hearing people roaring down your laneway at 3AM at 60MPH, just because there's no cars on the road and no possibility of getting caught.
    - gumby 9y ago
      As derefr said I meant use of the roads for walking, playing, sitting, etc like they were before the "motor car" became common. The SDCs will have to be more careful. Roads are now intended for cars, and new infractions (like jaywalking) were invented to give automotive use primacy over others. Cars should merely be one use of the roadways. Not sure what you mean by "It's going to be a lot easier to destroy at the polls."
      - closeparen 9y ago
        "Cars should merely be one use of the roadways" is equivalent to "people who can't afford decent urban homes should live in shitty urban homes." The primacy of the car is what lets us currently live in decent suburban homes. Urban and suburban residents have competing interests here: urban residents (for whom cars are a nuisance) would like to safely frolic in the streets. Suburban residents (whose lives depend on fast travel by car) would like to continue affording decent homes. This competition will appear in city-level politics in various ways. The anti-car side is handing the pro-car side some ammunition when talking about them as subhuman (i.e. framing drivers and people and mutually exclusive categories).