3 ms·

That's a goal which is easy to formulate, but hard to put into code.

• iainmerrick 9y ago
  The code exists! The collision detection and emergency braking feature which many new cars already have, and which (I assume and hope) has been heavily road-tested.
  • Piskvorrr 9y ago
    That's what has been said of Uber's code as well. Hope-based safety doesn't seem to be working.
    • iainmerrick 9y ago
      But my point is, Uber’s self-driving car has lots of goals -- drive safely, drive legally, drive quickly, drive comfortably, go in the right direction. A low-level safety system has a much simpler requirement: if it looks like the car is about to hit something, hit the brakes. And this second category of code is something that already exists, deployed in production today by multiple car manufacturers. That’s the bit Uber turned off. “It’s a hard problem!” doesn’t seem like a good explanation.
• JorgeGT 9y ago
  The human driver can't coordinate with the self-driving system either, he just makes overriding inputs. Treat the built-in safety system as another overriding actor.
• couchand 9y ago
  Clearly, since they failed so miserably here. But -- here's the crux of the thing -- it's not a new goal, it's the same goal they (should) already have.