11 ms·
Ugh. This really worries me - not because I’m afraid of driverless cars but because this is the kind of “news” headline that will get anti-driverless car jerks
by odammit 9y ago
Ugh. This really worries me - not because I’m afraid of driverless cars but because this is the kind of “news” headline that will get anti-driverless car jerks all up in a righteous tizzy.
Title should be NO_TITLE because “doofus driving truck backs into something” isn’t news.
- ben_jones 9y agoAt the same time there are issues that need to be addressed / forced. I'm still waiting for mean spirited drivers to start bullying self-driving cars. For instance commuters cutting them off knowing they will stop to avoid an accident. Which leads to another question. Will driverless cars report bad drivers to police? Making tech companies police informants... will laws be pass forcing this behavior?
- odammit 9y agoOh. I would love it if they did.
- crankylinuxuser 9y agoI can only imagine... Here's the logs of the aggressive driving, during the last 50 seconds. These logs entail a full 3d pointcloud showing that they were not responding to other drivers' potentially erratic patterns. Other driver came within 1 foot of car on multiple occasions. License plate is ABC123 and facial scan of user is $face . User appears to have wronged our passengers with the following laws: $list We're talking an open and shut case here. And every car with enough of these sensors could provide "dumps".
- AlexandrB 9y agoAre you sure? Sounds like a crowdsourced surveillance dystopia to me. What if driverless cars reported every jaywalker too?
- odammit 9y agoGreat. Ambiguity creates accidents. "Are you walking? Should I stop!? Oh no you aren't walking I can go, oh wait you are I should stop." How many times have you had that happen when you're driving and you see someone hesitantly about to jaywalk? Also, as a cyclist, when a cyclist doesn't ride on the road and follow the laws it drives me nuts. Are you a vehicle or a pedestrian? Please don't be both.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> What if driverless cars reported every jaywalker too? We'd have a high-quality signal as to where existing marked crossings were inadequate?
- walshemj 9y agoAnd if a plied to trucks there will be more cases of hijacking or for cross boarder runs illegal immigrants.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Will driverless cars report bad drivers to police? Human driven cars can, and their are public ad campaigns encouraging them to, and its easier for a driverless cars to do something detailed data without interfering with driving, so I'd be surprised if they didn't.
- crankylinuxuser 9y agoNooooo.... The title needs to be changed to, "Human in truck, backs up and hits vehicle (self-driving)" ? Because that's what happened. A human caused a wreck. Doesn't seem as scare-mongery now, eh? A persistent vision system, like 360 radar would have been fully aware of a vehicle at any direction, and would have not hit them. A human on the other hand.....
- megy 9y agoExcept they didn't back up, the bus hit the truck on its side. So the truck may have pulled out too quickly without care, but the bus should have picked it up. https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/8/16626224/las-vegas-self-driving-shuttle-crash-accident-first-day https://www.theverge.com/2017/11/8/16626224/las-vegas-self-d...
- phyzome 9y agoIt looks like the truck was backing up while turning, so the side of the truck hit the front of the bus. The truck driver is primarily at fault in that scenario, but I would put the autonomous bus maybe 15% at fault for not backing up or honking.
- lsaferite 9y agoThe bus is 0% at fault. That's fully on the human driver. The bus have certainly done something in an attempt to prevent being hit by the human driver. That doesn't place any fault on the bus though.
- wil421 9y agoThere is no percentage for at fault it’s black or white, it should never be grey. If someone is going to back into you there is no law to honk or back up.
- slededit 9y agoMost states require you to take reasonable steps to avoid an accident.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- random023987 9y agoCounterpoint, as technical people, we can agree that there is probably a better solution to an impending accident rather than sit still like a deer in the headlights. In fact, this article could start a discussion on if the risks of active accident avoidance measures (e.g. running a stop light at a clear intersection if you're about to be rear-ended) might cause more problems than they solve.
- saas_co_de 9y agoObviously there are better solutions but the technology is immature at this point and is being hyped way beyond its capabilities. The "autonomous" cars that work are basically little trains running on digital tracks with collision avoidance systems. They are no where close to being "intelligent."
- SeanDav 9y agoIf the technology is immature - it should have a backup driver to take over in an instant. Immature technology has no business running solo.
- roenxi 9y agoBut in practical terms, aren't human drivers basically simulating little trains running on analog tracks with collision avoidance systems? The obvious solution in this case is to get rid of the human driver of the truck that collided with the autonomous vehicle, because he was demonstrating behavior that wasn't intelligent.
- lsaferite 9y agoHave you seen Logan? I'd say that long and short haul trucking is a career on a fast-track to be replaced at this point.
- cordite 9y agoA human paying attention would honk before trying to move, most of the time, right? But a driverless vehicle may be able to do both at the same time to avoid an accident.
- eloff 9y agoExcept the driver-less shuttle didn't take any evasive action, the way a human would have. Did it even honk the horn? Clearly this company's tech isn't up to par.
- mikeash 9y agoPlenty of humans freeze up or react slowly when confronted with something like this.
- sundaeofshock 9y agoThat’s true, but theoit h for autonomous cars is that don’t freeze and they don’t react slowly. They are better drivers then humans.
- tdfx 9y agoYeah I watch people freeze and let people back into them all the time in parking lots while they furiously honk. I think you may be overestimating the abilities of the average human driver.
- adriand 9y agoI did this. My neighbour backed into me. And I honked before he hit me but otherwise did nothing. To an observer it may have seemed ridiculous but the reason is simple: I assumed he could see me and it wasn’t until it was too late that I realized he wasn’t paying attention and was going to hit me. By then I had no time to put the car in reverse and move, only to honk.
- bdamm 9y agoYep; I'm guilty. When I was a teenager, the first time someone backed into me, I was so surprised I got confused about what to do and consequently did nothing. And by the time I found the horn button it was too late. I was so surprised that I just sat on the horn for about 5 seconds even though it was all over at that point. So, now the makers of this vehicle can code some better evasion technique and consequently all future versions will benefit, very much unlike my children, who have a high probability of reacting just like me the first time it happens to them. (Sure, maybe I will teach them, but then again maybe not.)
- ksk 9y agoWell, If the thing you're proposing isn't better than the thing you're replacing, then such products should not succeed. A driverless car should be on par with the _BEST_ human driver, not the average driver, who as we know, gets into 6 million auto accidents per year.
- baddox 9y agoHow’s that? Driverless cars just need to be better than the average human driver. I’d welcome reducing auto accidents by, say, 25%.
- isostatic 9y agoThe UK has 50% fewer deaths per mile than the US, so automated cars at 25% fewer in the US would be a bad thing in the UK
- baddox 9y agoI don’t understand your argument. Presumably the driverless cars would also reduce the UK’s deaths by a similar percentage.
- isostatic 9y agoYou suggested they could reduce the death rate from 7/bkm to 5/bkm. The uk is already at 3.5, if auto cars also changed that to 5/bkm that would be bad.
- CodeWriter23 9y agoThe anti-driverless car “jerks” (as you have labeled them) will get into a righteous tizzy no matter if events like this happen or not. However, I characterize your response as emotional, and I feel a data-driven response is what is appropriate. So far, autonomous vehicles have a better safety record than human-driven vehicles. That’s the message here. Clouding that with emotional responses and demonizing opponents only serves to distract from that fact.
- draw_down 9y agoThese things will need to cope with the presence of real humans, or else it's never gonna work. See how far this attitude of "the computers would be fine if it weren't for the stupid pesky humans" takes you.
- carapace 9y agoCalling people "anti-driverless car jerks" is also not helpful.
- odammit 9y agoIt’s more accurate than the title!