7 ms·

Poor UX, poor safety controls. At this stage in the game, these prototype vehicles should absolutely detect whether or not their operators are paying attention

Poor UX, poor safety controls. At this stage in the game, these prototype vehicles should absolutely detect whether or not their operators are paying attention, since they’re part of the safety system of the vehicle. Also, did they not learn from Uber’s fatal crash? A sole operator in these vehicles is a terrible idea. One person to monitor road conditions and one person to operate any computer equipment should be the standard until we hit level IV or V autonomy.

kalleboo 8y ago
Especially when drowsiness detection has been an option in various production cars for a decade now
duxup 8y ago
What's the point if you have to pay attention? I'm being serious when I ask. I question weather people can safely use these vehicles in these modes where they're supposed to not interact ... but pay close attention at the same time. I think it is going to have to be full autonomy, or not at all.
- phailhaus 8y ago
  There's a difference between usage while testing and usage in the final product. While they're testing the system, they should probably have two operators paying attention.
- mikestew 8y ago
  I question weather people can safely use these vehicles in these modes Of course they can't. Watch people who've been looking at their phone while the light's red. Watch how they drive after it turns green. Some of them drive away like they're drunk, lurching and weaving, like they're reorienting themselves to the driving task. On the rare occasions I get even slightly engaged with the phone at a light, it's almost like I have to "reboot" back to driving mode when the light goes green. The part of the "throwing it in the human's lap at the last second" that bothers me is that a lot of context gets missed when it's time to grab the wheel. At least for me, I get context a little bit at a time. That guy in the left lane is looking at his phone more than the road...<a few seconds later>...big truck's going to want in this lane when his ends, leave room...<more seconds>...I see taillights 12 cars ahead, what's going? And Level 3 is going to just hand me the wheel without me knowing any of that? Yeah, I see why Waymo is shooting for Level 4.
  - duxup 8y ago
    Indeed. You also miss the interaction between humans. If another driver and I look at each other, we're at least aware of our existence together and I know what is up. If a driver doesn't look at me ... does he know? does his car know? If he is suddenly given the wheel ... I don't think humans can handle that.
  - mnw21cam 8y ago
    And that's why it's illegal (at least here) to do stuff like that with your phone, even when stopped at a red light.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  This is a prototype vehicle. Safety controls must be implemented differently than a production vehicle that has passed some yet unspecified certification process. Complaining about a prototype having different UX than a production vehicle is like complaining about a racing car having different seatbelts than a road car. Different design requirements for different usages.
  - duxup 8y ago
    I'm thinking about actual usage, not the UX.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      I'm not sure what distinction you're drawing here. It's a prototype vehicle, where the self driving features are experimental and not certified by a third party. Extra safety systems are necessary that might not be reasonable once the tech is polished and regulated.
      - duxup 8y ago
        I'm saying any self driving where the human has to monitor how the computer is doing and be ready to take over is probabbly a non starter as human nature likely dictates that they will probabbly not do a worse job at that than just driving.
icebraining 8y ago
these prototype vehicles should absolutely detect whether or not their operators are paying attention The car did warn the driver with two audio signals, what more should it do?
- ThinkSomething 8y ago
  Not crash?
  - icebraining 8y ago
    It was in manual mode. Should it forcibly take away control from the user that gave it a direct command, because it "thinks" they're not paying attention?
    - MBCook 8y ago
      The whole POINT of manual mode is (quite possibly) the car’s interpretation of the situation is wrong and CAN’T be safely followed. If you add safety measures to manual (possible outcome of GP’s comment) then you’re back at not having a manual safety override.
      - icebraining 8y ago
        That's my point :)
      - ThinkSomething 8y ago
        Self driving cars are supposedly utilizing AI. If the AI is this fragile, then it is no where near being ready for public consumption.
        MBCook 8y ago
        Which is why they’re not selling it to the public yet. They’re testing. And they NEED a working manual mode for that.
jillesvangurp 8y ago
Agreed. Long term this should work similar to autopilots in planes. They make a loud noise when disengaged so it is very clear when it stops working for whatever reason. Some modern planes actually take control and engage the autopilot when things get out of hand to recover from dangerous situations. It seems to me that a self driving car is preferable to having a driver that is asleep, zoned out or dangerously distracted by whatever is happening on their phone or in the care. Many accidents have that as the root cause.
briandear 8y ago
Uber’s fatal crash was caused by a crazy, suicidal person who literally stepped in front of the car. A human driver couldn’t have avoided her.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- icebraining 8y ago
  If you can't avoid an obstacle that is slowly entering the road, you're driving too fast for the conditions.
- mnw21cam 8y ago
  That is completely false. Any decent camera or eyesight from the car's point of view would have seen the pedestrian well in advance enough to avoid that crash. Uber's fatal crash was caused by the car being programmed to ignore stationary/slow moving objects in the way.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Not quite. The camera only systems were confused, but the lidar systems were completely certain that a collision was iminent with enough time to prevent the collision or at least reduce injuries. Unfortunately the lidar did not have control of the system, did not have override capability, and could not notify the driver in an emergency in any way. It was effectively disabled from the perspective of vehicle control and safety.

kalleboo 8y ago

Especially when drowsiness detection has been an option in various production cars for a decade now

duxup 8y ago

What's the point if you have to pay attention? I'm being serious when I ask. I question weather people can safely use these vehicles in these modes where they're supposed to not interact ... but pay close attention at the same time. I think it is going to have to be full autonomy, or not at all.

phailhaus 8y ago
There's a difference between usage while testing and usage in the final product. While they're testing the system, they should probably have two operators paying attention.
mikestew 8y ago
I question weather people can safely use these vehicles in these modes Of course they can't. Watch people who've been looking at their phone while the light's red. Watch how they drive after it turns green. Some of them drive away like they're drunk, lurching and weaving, like they're reorienting themselves to the driving task. On the rare occasions I get even slightly engaged with the phone at a light, it's almost like I have to "reboot" back to driving mode when the light goes green. The part of the "throwing it in the human's lap at the last second" that bothers me is that a lot of context gets missed when it's time to grab the wheel. At least for me, I get context a little bit at a time. That guy in the left lane is looking at his phone more than the road...<a few seconds later>...big truck's going to want in this lane when his ends, leave room...<more seconds>...I see taillights 12 cars ahead, what's going? And Level 3 is going to just hand me the wheel without me knowing any of that? Yeah, I see why Waymo is shooting for Level 4.
- duxup 8y ago
  Indeed. You also miss the interaction between humans. If another driver and I look at each other, we're at least aware of our existence together and I know what is up. If a driver doesn't look at me ... does he know? does his car know? If he is suddenly given the wheel ... I don't think humans can handle that.
- mnw21cam 8y ago
  And that's why it's illegal (at least here) to do stuff like that with your phone, even when stopped at a red light.
village-idiot 8y ago
This is a prototype vehicle. Safety controls must be implemented differently than a production vehicle that has passed some yet unspecified certification process. Complaining about a prototype having different UX than a production vehicle is like complaining about a racing car having different seatbelts than a road car. Different design requirements for different usages.
- duxup 8y ago
  I'm thinking about actual usage, not the UX.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    I'm not sure what distinction you're drawing here. It's a prototype vehicle, where the self driving features are experimental and not certified by a third party. Extra safety systems are necessary that might not be reasonable once the tech is polished and regulated.
    - duxup 8y ago
      I'm saying any self driving where the human has to monitor how the computer is doing and be ready to take over is probabbly a non starter as human nature likely dictates that they will probabbly not do a worse job at that than just driving.

icebraining 8y ago

these prototype vehicles should absolutely detect whether or not their operators are paying attention The car did warn the driver with two audio signals, what more should it do?

ThinkSomething 8y ago
Not crash?
- icebraining 8y ago
  It was in manual mode. Should it forcibly take away control from the user that gave it a direct command, because it "thinks" they're not paying attention?
  - MBCook 8y ago
    The whole POINT of manual mode is (quite possibly) the car’s interpretation of the situation is wrong and CAN’T be safely followed. If you add safety measures to manual (possible outcome of GP’s comment) then you’re back at not having a manual safety override.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      That's my point :)
    - ThinkSomething 8y ago
      Self driving cars are supposedly utilizing AI. If the AI is this fragile, then it is no where near being ready for public consumption.
      - MBCook 8y ago
        Which is why they’re not selling it to the public yet. They’re testing. And they NEED a working manual mode for that.

jillesvangurp 8y ago

Agreed. Long term this should work similar to autopilots in planes. They make a loud noise when disengaged so it is very clear when it stops working for whatever reason. Some modern planes actually take control and engage the autopilot when things get out of hand to recover from dangerous situations. It seems to me that a self driving car is preferable to having a driver that is asleep, zoned out or dangerously distracted by whatever is happening on their phone or in the care. Many accidents have that as the root cause.

briandear 8y ago

Uber’s fatal crash was caused by a crazy, suicidal person who literally stepped in front of the car. A human driver couldn’t have avoided her.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
icebraining 8y ago
If you can't avoid an obstacle that is slowly entering the road, you're driving too fast for the conditions.
mnw21cam 8y ago
That is completely false. Any decent camera or eyesight from the car's point of view would have seen the pedestrian well in advance enough to avoid that crash. Uber's fatal crash was caused by the car being programmed to ignore stationary/slow moving objects in the way.
- village-idiot 8y ago
  Not quite. The camera only systems were confused, but the lidar systems were completely certain that a collision was iminent with enough time to prevent the collision or at least reduce injuries. Unfortunately the lidar did not have control of the system, did not have override capability, and could not notify the driver in an emergency in any way. It was effectively disabled from the perspective of vehicle control and safety.