9 ms·

I think the public will probably feel the same way, but if this happens again with another company, I think there will be sustained backlash. Hopefully Waymo is

I think the public will probably feel the same way, but if this happens again with another company, I think there will be sustained backlash. Hopefully Waymo is as advanced as they’re advertising, and given what a terrible company Uber is by comparison, that doesn’t seem to be an unreasonable assumption. You know what they say though, once is a mistake, twice is a habit.

foobarian 9y ago
Hopefully Waymo has test drivers that actually pay attention.
- galdosdi 9y ago
  Unlike Uber, Waymo has always said they do not believe (based on data and experience) "safety drivers" are a realistic safety measure, because normal human beings do not have the ability to concentrate hard on a task for 8 hours a day that they have absolutely no control/feedback upon. If this is not obvious to you, you have never tried doing such a task. Try it and you will change your mind immediately.
  - joejerryronnie 9y ago
    I believe the safety drivers are primarily responsible for getting the autonomous cars to resume driving again after they've stopped for some unknown reason, not to react in a fraction of a second to divert a disaster.
    - galdosdi 9y ago
      In practice, yes. In theory, as is obvious from all these comment threads, people seem to think the "safety drivers" (think about that name...) are there to actually, like, you know, improve safety.
    - Piskvorrr 9y ago
      That's the stated goal, I believe. I also believe that the actual task is "scapegoat." I sure hope the people taking this job offer are at least aware of this.
  - sandos 9y ago
    Yep, we are lousy at monitoring automation: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90644/20151003/study-asking-humans-to-monitor-computers-in-airline-cockpits-a-recipe-for-disaster.htm http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90644/20151003/study-askin...
  - foobarian 9y ago
    It could be done; they could drive in shorter shifts, and they could have automation like some high end cars that detect eyes off the road or off the wheel. I guess the main issue is that it would be expensive.
    - galdosdi 9y ago
      I agree with that actually. The task /as defined now/ is impossible for a human, but yes, actually designing it for human psychology would make it better. A great idea I saw on another comment thread was to keep safety drivers busy by giving them a task like labelling objects on the road as pedestrians, cars etc. Even if it is not that useful, it means their eyes will be on the road when it counts. I mean, we all do that when we do normal driving on boring roads, don't we, try to become more observant, count silly things, to fight boredom? Pretty sure Uber doesn't give a damn and they see the safey drivers as window dressing. My bayesian gut tells me it's more likely the safety driver program is systemically weak, not that this guy was a huge outlier.
visarga 9y ago
> You know what they say though, once is a mistake, twice is a habit. This line of thinking might end up with more people dead by delaying the advancement of SDC's.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  All the more reason to get rid of companies like Uber, who endanger the entire self-driving endeavour with their habitual reckless behaviour.

foobarian 9y ago

Hopefully Waymo has test drivers that actually pay attention.

galdosdi 9y ago
Unlike Uber, Waymo has always said they do not believe (based on data and experience) "safety drivers" are a realistic safety measure, because normal human beings do not have the ability to concentrate hard on a task for 8 hours a day that they have absolutely no control/feedback upon. If this is not obvious to you, you have never tried doing such a task. Try it and you will change your mind immediately.
- joejerryronnie 9y ago
  I believe the safety drivers are primarily responsible for getting the autonomous cars to resume driving again after they've stopped for some unknown reason, not to react in a fraction of a second to divert a disaster.
  - galdosdi 9y ago
    In practice, yes. In theory, as is obvious from all these comment threads, people seem to think the "safety drivers" (think about that name...) are there to actually, like, you know, improve safety.
  - Piskvorrr 9y ago
    That's the stated goal, I believe. I also believe that the actual task is "scapegoat." I sure hope the people taking this job offer are at least aware of this.
- sandos 9y ago
  Yep, we are lousy at monitoring automation: http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90644/20151003/study-asking-humans-to-monitor-computers-in-airline-cockpits-a-recipe-for-disaster.htm http://www.techtimes.com/articles/90644/20151003/study-askin...
- foobarian 9y ago
  It could be done; they could drive in shorter shifts, and they could have automation like some high end cars that detect eyes off the road or off the wheel. I guess the main issue is that it would be expensive.
  - galdosdi 9y ago
    I agree with that actually. The task /as defined now/ is impossible for a human, but yes, actually designing it for human psychology would make it better. A great idea I saw on another comment thread was to keep safety drivers busy by giving them a task like labelling objects on the road as pedestrians, cars etc. Even if it is not that useful, it means their eyes will be on the road when it counts. I mean, we all do that when we do normal driving on boring roads, don't we, try to become more observant, count silly things, to fight boredom? Pretty sure Uber doesn't give a damn and they see the safey drivers as window dressing. My bayesian gut tells me it's more likely the safety driver program is systemically weak, not that this guy was a huge outlier.

visarga 9y ago

> You know what they say though, once is a mistake, twice is a habit. This line of thinking might end up with more people dead by delaying the advancement of SDC's.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
All the more reason to get rid of companies like Uber, who endanger the entire self-driving endeavour with their habitual reckless behaviour.