4 ms·

One question I can't seem to find a good answer for is this: Why doesn't the self-driving tech hand off control to a remote driver if the internet connection i

One question I can't seem to find a good answer for is this: Why doesn't the self-driving tech hand off control to a remote driver if the internet connection is good enough and there is enough warning? Even with a couple seconds notice a primed human could take the wheel and do the right thing when the sensors aren't making sense.

Jyaif 9y ago
There's no good reason; it's likely what they'll do.
- kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
  Never will happen. Latency is a law of nature. 60mph === 8.8 ft / 100ms. Near misses and close calls with unexpected objects can't afford the additional delay of a radio round trip that may or may not be working to make safety critical decisions. All situational awareness has to be handled on board for immediate response when needed.
  - Nition 9y ago
    I've worked on a videogame where vehicles are controlled from the client but have their physics done on the server. Server sends car position, and client sends inputs. So I can give some insight into how driveable it might actually be: - <40ms (round trip) is not really noticeable - 40-~80ms is driveable - 80-150ms is getting difficult - 150-250ms you're overcorrecting all the time - 250ms+ is completely undriveable That's not trying to avoid sudden obstacles, that's just making turns etc that you already intended to make. Avoiding anything sudden would be impossible much earlier. I agree remote control over Internet will never happen.
    - falcor84 9y ago
      If you set up a control center in each metro area, you could potentially have a sub 10ms RTT. And I imagine that in a large percentage of cases the car's sensors might indicate potential danger with enough advance warning for the remote driver to take over.
  - Jyaif 9y ago
    Obviously the operators won't control directly the vehicule :-) The operators will have a map on which they click to set the vehicule's destination, and the console will show what will be the exact path of the car, and ask for confirmation.
Game_Ender 9y ago
Thought experiment: If you had such a system and it was good enough that people would not notice it’s use, would you advertise that? I would look carefully at the wording of these companies. Such a system would let you paper over all sorts of issues and claim zero “driver interventions”...
ghaff 9y ago
"Your upcoming crash is very important to us. Please stay on the line and a representative will be with you shortly." There is no "primed" human on the line or you might as well just have a driver. And leaving aside issues of controlling remotely, you're probably talking on the order of minutes for someone to establish situational awareness, figure out what's going on, and take control. Which may be fine for something like Onstar but not for time-critical vehicle control.
protomikron 9y ago
There is obviously an xkcd for that https://xkcd.com/1897/ https://xkcd.com/1897/.
762236 9y ago
This is what they do to circumvent legal reporting requirements. You don't have to report a hand-off to a remote driver, but you have to report a hand-off to the safety driver in the car.
dogruck 9y ago
The latencies are too high. It’s not an aerial drone.

Jyaif 9y ago

There's no good reason; it's likely what they'll do.

kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
Never will happen. Latency is a law of nature. 60mph === 8.8 ft / 100ms. Near misses and close calls with unexpected objects can't afford the additional delay of a radio round trip that may or may not be working to make safety critical decisions. All situational awareness has to be handled on board for immediate response when needed.
- Nition 9y ago
  I've worked on a videogame where vehicles are controlled from the client but have their physics done on the server. Server sends car position, and client sends inputs. So I can give some insight into how driveable it might actually be: - <40ms (round trip) is not really noticeable - 40-~80ms is driveable - 80-150ms is getting difficult - 150-250ms you're overcorrecting all the time - 250ms+ is completely undriveable That's not trying to avoid sudden obstacles, that's just making turns etc that you already intended to make. Avoiding anything sudden would be impossible much earlier. I agree remote control over Internet will never happen.
  - falcor84 9y ago
    If you set up a control center in each metro area, you could potentially have a sub 10ms RTT. And I imagine that in a large percentage of cases the car's sensors might indicate potential danger with enough advance warning for the remote driver to take over.
- Jyaif 9y ago
  Obviously the operators won't control directly the vehicule :-) The operators will have a map on which they click to set the vehicule's destination, and the console will show what will be the exact path of the car, and ask for confirmation.

Game_Ender 9y ago

Thought experiment: If you had such a system and it was good enough that people would not notice it’s use, would you advertise that? I would look carefully at the wording of these companies. Such a system would let you paper over all sorts of issues and claim zero “driver interventions”...

ghaff 9y ago

"Your upcoming crash is very important to us. Please stay on the line and a representative will be with you shortly." There is no "primed" human on the line or you might as well just have a driver. And leaving aside issues of controlling remotely, you're probably talking on the order of minutes for someone to establish situational awareness, figure out what's going on, and take control. Which may be fine for something like Onstar but not for time-critical vehicle control.

protomikron 9y ago

There is obviously an xkcd for that https://xkcd.com/1897/ https://xkcd.com/1897/.

762236 9y ago

This is what they do to circumvent legal reporting requirements. You don't have to report a hand-off to a remote driver, but you have to report a hand-off to the safety driver in the car.

dogruck 9y ago

The latencies are too high. It’s not an aerial drone.