7 ms·
"One day in 2011, a Google executive named Isaac Taylor learned that, while he was on paternity leave, Levandowski had modified the cars’ software so that he co
by uptown 8y ago
"One day in 2011, a Google executive named Isaac Taylor learned that, while he was on paternity leave, Levandowski had modified the cars’ software so that he could take them on otherwise forbidden routes. A Google executive recalls witnessing Taylor and Levandowski shouting at each other. Levandowski told Taylor that the only way to show him why his approach was necessary was to take a ride together. The men, both still furious, jumped into a self-driving Prius and headed off.
The car went onto a freeway, where it travelled past an on-ramp. According to people with knowledge of events that day, the Prius accidentally boxed in another vehicle, a Camry. A human driver could easily have handled the situation by slowing down and letting the Camry merge into traffic, but Google’s software wasn’t prepared for this scenario. The cars continued speeding down the freeway side by side. The Camry’s driver jerked his car onto the right shoulder. Then, apparently trying to avoid a guardrail, he veered to the left; the Camry pinwheeled across the freeway and into the median. Levandowski, who was acting as the safety driver, swerved hard to avoid colliding with the Camry, causing Taylor to injure his spine so severely that he eventually required multiple surgeries."
These things sound like they require way more oversight before they should be allowed on the road if a single engineer can override protections like these.
- oldgradstudent 8y agoThe problem isn't a single engineer overriding protections. According to the article they all knew about it, including other executives, and failed to report or discipline Levandowski. They only fired him after he tried to recruit other employees, which demonstrates how exactly they prioritize safety versus profits. They should not be allowed on the road, but not because of a single engineer, but because of their corporate culture. edit: he wasn't fired, he quit.
- dilyevsky 8y agoAfaik they never fired him - he quit
- Natsu 8y agoThe part that bothers me most is that they never seemed to care about this while he worked there, why are we hearing about it so long after the fact? Given the unnamed Google sources being quoted, they would appear to be the source for much of this story. This quote seems to sum it up for me: “He was that kind of guy,” the co-worker said. “You know, an asshole. But a really gifted one. Our asshole, I guess.”
- dilyevsky 8y agoMy take is they tried to drag him through the dirt in the press to increase the lawsuit chances of success but now it’s coming back to bite them since it was basically Larry and other execs who were enabling him. Maybe it’s just some random news cycle thing or maybe someone’s bidding (know any companies going for ipo that would benefit?) - hard to tell
- manfredo 8y agoIf someone has access to the source code, there isn't much that can be done for prevention. I suppose reactive measures, such as attaching a hidden GPS tracker like the ones in expensive rental cars, could detect violations.
- weeks 8y agoCode review, trusted build environments and code signing could entirely prevent a single engineer from modifying the code running on the car.
- DeonPenny 8y agoNone of those would stop a tech lead or engineering manager
- DSingularity 8y agoStructure as appropriate for the potential for public harm. If necessary, make it required that an executive sign. If you can’t trust your executives then you shouldn’t have projects that can harm the public. They could have killed the Camry driver.
- AstralStorm 8y agoIt is more appropriate to say that the Camry driver who was at fault would have caused a fatal accident.
- oldgradstudent 8y agoNo, but making an example of him would have reduced the incentive to do it again. Also, removing him from the the tech lead position would have helped prevent further incidents.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago>>None of those would stop a tech lead or engineering manager Then something else should. Imagine one guy, gone nuts, changing the code on millions of vehicles in one shot.
- mrits 8y agoA few years ago I would have agreed with you. Now I want robot drivers here ASAP. We need to get these human texters off the road.
- joering2 8y agoThis is like saying we want drunk drivers off the street. Call your congressman/woman have them work and pass a bill to hand harsh fines for texting while driving. This is not even technologically complicated, as your cellphone knows when you drive and unless emergency should not let you text. Pushing an unproven and insecure technology that doesn't differentiate a plastic bag swirling on the wind from baby that happen to feel out on to the street, is like trying to fix tooth cavity with a blow torch.
- elteto 8y agoThis is not even remotely like drunk driving, at all. Do you see pretty every adult in the US walking around with a bottle of whiskey in their pocket? Didn’t think so. You could also argue that we could fix drunk driving by installing breathalyzers in every steering wheel and requiring a passing test before being able to drive. Good luck with that.
- davidgould 8y agoThere have been several proposals to install breathalyzers in cars. Had the public education and law enforcement campaign (MADD etc) failed to improve the situation these might well have been the next step.
- joering2 8y agoIt is not illegal to walk or even drive with a bottle of whiskey in your pocket, so long as its a closed container.
- visarga 8y ago> This is not even technologically complicated, as your cellphone knows when you drive How would the phone know if you sit in the left, right or the backseat? Would you propose preventing phone use for every car passenger as well?
- 0x00000000 8y agoEvery day I am more convinced we are 20+ years from viable self driving cars.
- jbigelow76 8y agoThe unintentional (I think) phrasing of your statement reminds me of those bars that put signs on the sidewalk reading "Free Beer Tomorrow!" :)
- DeonPenny 8y agoThat was 7 years ago. 7 years before that video ipods just came out, blogging became a thing, and the best phone out was a razor. That was a whole technological epoc ago.
- gsich 8y agoAnd yet, 7 years after there are still similar problems with self-driving cars. Don't get too hang up on dates.
- gwern 8y agoThere are, for the self-driving car program in question which developed over that 7 years of progres? Can you name a similar incident in the past year of a Waymo car boxing in another car on a highway and sending people to the hospital?
- gsich 8y agoUber sent a woman to the grave. Don't know if that counts for you.
- gwern 8y agoNo, it doesn't, because their program sucked from the start, worse than most, and even if they were the best self-driving car program, Uber's has only been around for a few years and so is not a valid counterexample to the claim '7 years won't make a difference'. It sure does seem to've for Waymo.
- gsich 8y agoThe same person (Levandowski) worked at Uber. So all his knowledge went to Uber too, obviously. They didn't start at point zero.
- eiieirurjdndjd 8y ago
- Gustomaximus 8y ago> According to people with knowledge of events that day, the Prius accidentally boxed in another vehicle, a Camry. A human driver could easily have handled the situation by slowing down and letting the Camry merge into traffic Shouldn't the Prius continue at a constant speed? And its the merging cars job to adjust speed the get in? I personally find a frustration when merging onto a freeway is where a driver in the main lane slows down for you but 'just enough' so your not sure if they are slowing down or not so you slow down to get behind them so they slow down more.... just keep your speed constant and the merging car will adjust things.
- AstralStorm 8y agoUntil they don't and you plow into them. Never trust another driver. Ever. It is better to cause a slight confusion but be prepared. This is why people are slowing down when they see a car merging. To brake and to maneuver.
- PhasmaFelis 8y agoContinuing: > The Prius regained control and turned a corner on the freeway, leaving the Camry behind. Levandowski and Taylor didn’t know how badly damaged the Camry was. They didn’t go back to check on the other driver or to see if anyone else had been hurt. Neither they nor other Google executives made inquiries with the authorities. The police were not informed that a self-driving algorithm had contributed to the accident. > Levandowski, rather than being cowed by the incident, later defended it as an invaluable source of data, an opportunity to learn how to avoid similar mistakes. He sent colleagues an e-mail with video of the near-collision. Its subject line was “Prius vs. Camry.” Holy shit. Why aren't there criminal charges here?
- kazinator 8y agoI am unable to find any statement in the available descriptions of this incident to dissuade me from the opinion that the Camry driver behaved in a very negligent way. There is no traffic violation called "boxing in". The vehicle already in the freeway has the right of way; the merging vehicle must accommodate itself to the situation, not the other way around. If necessary, the merging vehicle must stop (way in advance of the merge point) and wait for a suitably long gap which takes into account the acceleration time. It's possible that a vehicle on the freeway can make a hostile move which interferes with the merging driver's judgment, such as unexpectedly changing to the right lane or accelerating. I don't see any claim of this sort about this situation (which doesn't mean that it didn't happen). For a merging vehicle to fail to adjust its speed to the traffic, and to drive side by side with a vehicle which has right-of-way, to the point of then having to swerve to avoid an obstacle, doesn't look good for the driver of the merging vehicle. I get the point that the software should take into account psychotic maniacs of this nature; no disagreement there. It is a fact of driving in North America that people merge on the freeway by seizing the right of way, relying on vehicles passing the on-ramp to hit their brakes, and will pull crazy stunts like driving side by side with a car that doesn't slow down from them, even past the end of the merge lane where they run out of room. Software should defend itself against these maniacs. I say defend; it is a defense against reckless, unlawful motorist behavior.
- CaptainZapp 8y agoThis is completely unrelated to the fact that a single engineer was able to override the software to take the car for what is effectively a joy ride. This should never have been possible to happen. The fact that Waymo hushed this up also doesn't instill trust.
- ehsankia 8y agoFirst off, the "single engineer" was Levandowski, the person who basically started Google's self-driving team and was the lead for the project, not any random person. Second, this was back in 2011, and that was in the early days, "Waymo" wasn't a thing until 2016. This is just a bunch of engineers experimenting, not a real product. Lastly, the person who did this is long gone.
- vadym909 8y agoSo now that Levandowski and Travis are out on their own, can they get back together and do whatever they were planning to- no restrictions from Google or Uber.
- nappy 8y agoNot stopping for the other car betrays their complete lack of ethics.