3 ms·

Oh Fuck No. The "safest decision of all" is most definitely not to stop "in its lane of travel". That's insanely dangerous in any real-world scenario. At leas

Oh Fuck No. The "safest decision of all" is most definitely not to stop "in its lane of travel". That's insanely dangerous in any real-world scenario. At least have the vehicle pull over onto the shoulder. What makes them so "special" that they think they should just stop in the middle of a highway? If that's the state-of-the-art of self-driving, then those vehicles simply aren't yet ready to be on the road.

dvh 9y ago
Some time ago there asked people how should self driving car react in various situations if collision is unavoidable (e.g. should they run over old man or young girl) but the actual algorithms are much much simpler: stay in your lane, if you see obstacle break.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  In the context of this story, “break” is an amusing homonym for the word you probably meant (brake).
sandos 9y ago
It should actually not be "insanely" dangerous to stop at any point, if you have sane drivers and laws. You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? But yeah stopping on the shoulder of course is a no-brainer. How to do that, though, is maybe not so simple. In winter judging where the road ends and a ditch begins can be very hard if there is no rail.
- dozzie 9y ago
  > You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? ...unless you consider that "how about winter" part you used to explain that pulling to the road's side is not that simple.
- mantas 9y ago
  > You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? You're following another vehicle at safe following distance. Which is much shorter than distance you can stop at if that car stopped in 0s. Car suddenly changes lanes, revealing obstacle in your line. If you can't change lanes as quickly for some reason, you've a massive problem...
  - kd5bjo 9y ago
    For exactly the reason you list, what you describe is not a "safe following distance."
    - PuffinBlue 9y ago
      You can argue the point until blue in the face but you're not going to improve anyones safety by chasing this argument. Humans are terrible at managing risk. Humans will always make mistakes. Telling them to 'not follow closely' is futile. If you don't design systems to take account of this then your safety practices will be ineffective. If autonomous systems are to be on the road with human users then those autonomous should be designed in a way to minimise the mistakes humans make. They should be designed that way because they can be designed that way.
      - kd5bjo 9y ago
        I agree completely, and I never advocated for any change. I do, however, like to point out cognitive dissonance when I notice it on HN.
        mantas 9y ago
        It's not cognitive dissonance at all. You're talking about safe speed based on line-of-sight. Meanwhile safe following distance is completely different matter. One of the reasons why traffic works is that we trust other drivers and rely on them.
    - perl4ever 9y ago
- TheCoelacanth 9y ago
  > But yeah stopping on the shoulder of course is a no-brainer. How to do that, though, is maybe not so simple. In winter judging where the road ends and a ditch begins can be very hard if there is no rail. If the vehicle can't handle that then it can't handle driving without a human on board. Being able to safely come to a stop somewhere that is not in the middle of a traffic lane is table stakes for any unmanned vehicle.

dvh 9y ago

Some time ago there asked people how should self driving car react in various situations if collision is unavoidable (e.g. should they run over old man or young girl) but the actual algorithms are much much simpler: stay in your lane, if you see obstacle break.

sokoloff 9y ago
In the context of this story, “break” is an amusing homonym for the word you probably meant (brake).

sandos 9y ago

It should actually not be "insanely" dangerous to stop at any point, if you have sane drivers and laws. You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? But yeah stopping on the shoulder of course is a no-brainer. How to do that, though, is maybe not so simple. In winter judging where the road ends and a ditch begins can be very hard if there is no rail.

dozzie 9y ago
> You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? ...unless you consider that "how about winter" part you used to explain that pulling to the road's side is not that simple.
mantas 9y ago
> You should always be able to stop before the visible part of the road ahead of you, or before the vehicle in front of you, right? You're following another vehicle at safe following distance. Which is much shorter than distance you can stop at if that car stopped in 0s. Car suddenly changes lanes, revealing obstacle in your line. If you can't change lanes as quickly for some reason, you've a massive problem...
- kd5bjo 9y ago
  For exactly the reason you list, what you describe is not a "safe following distance."
  - PuffinBlue 9y ago
    You can argue the point until blue in the face but you're not going to improve anyones safety by chasing this argument. Humans are terrible at managing risk. Humans will always make mistakes. Telling them to 'not follow closely' is futile. If you don't design systems to take account of this then your safety practices will be ineffective. If autonomous systems are to be on the road with human users then those autonomous should be designed in a way to minimise the mistakes humans make. They should be designed that way because they can be designed that way.
    - kd5bjo 9y ago
      I agree completely, and I never advocated for any change. I do, however, like to point out cognitive dissonance when I notice it on HN.
      - mantas 9y ago
        It's not cognitive dissonance at all. You're talking about safe speed based on line-of-sight. Meanwhile safe following distance is completely different matter. One of the reasons why traffic works is that we trust other drivers and rely on them.
  - perl4ever 9y ago
TheCoelacanth 9y ago
> But yeah stopping on the shoulder of course is a no-brainer. How to do that, though, is maybe not so simple. In winter judging where the road ends and a ditch begins can be very hard if there is no rail. If the vehicle can't handle that then it can't handle driving without a human on board. Being able to safely come to a stop somewhere that is not in the middle of a traffic lane is table stakes for any unmanned vehicle.