5 ms·

> it would seem Waymo programmed its autonomous vehicles to treat turn signals as an indicator that the car is about to execute a turn or merge, not an indicato

by kalenx 8y ago

> it would seem Waymo programmed its autonomous vehicles to treat turn signals as an indicator that the car is about to execute a turn or merge, not an indicator that it is looking for the opportunity to do so. Well, here's one, if not the issue... I do not know the precise wording of trafic Laws in each state, but in many if not all, turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity". Now, it is already difficult to build a law abiding autonomous car; expecting the car to also break the law in day-to-day cases (not just an emergency) will be downright impossible -- and I'm not even considering the media storm that would be created by a company saying "we program our cars to break the law all the time"...

vageli 8y ago
> > it would seem Waymo programmed its autonomous vehicles to treat turn signals as an indicator that the car is about to execute a turn or merge, not an indicator that it is looking for the opportunity to do so. > Well, here's one, if not the issue... I do not know the precise wording of trafic Laws in each state, but in many if not all, turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity". Certainly not true in NJ. > A signal of intention to turn right or left when required shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-39/section-39-4-126/ https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-39/sectio...
- kalenx 8y ago
  My wording was bad, I admit it. My point was that signals should be given only when you have the _opportunity_ to do such maneuver. If the lane to your right is crowded, putting your right signal on achieves nothing. In other words, your signals do not give you the right of way. I do not think Waymo cars are unable to use their signals, but they are probably programmed not to put them on when the turn/lane change cannot be achieved anyway.
  - TomVDB 8y ago
    When someone indicates his intention to change lanes when there is no room, I slow down. I expect the same of others. And when that doesn’t happen, you just continue on because chances are high that the next one will. In many cases of heavy traffic, this is the only way to change lanes.
- jahewson 8y ago
  But that perfectly describes “about to execute a turn”. Not what the article is describing, which is to request that other cars open up a new (previously non-existent) space to allow for a lane change. Human drivers will sometimes do this, but in my experience they’re just as likely to cut you off once they see you want to change lanes in front of them.
  - TomVDB 8y ago
    Isn’t it perfectly possible to signal intent even when there is no ability to do so?
wlll 8y ago
In the uk I was taught that indicators were to signal intent, not action. Signaling that you intend to merge, even if you can’t merge currently, would be the thing to do. I guess the rationale being something to do with giving other road users an idea that you car might do something so they can be prepared if you do.
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  "In the uk I was taught that indicators were to signal intent, not action." In LA they are used to signal that you just finished crossing 5 lanes on the freeway all at once to get to the exit you almost missed :-)
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    Every time I go to L.A., I say to my wife, "Yay! I don't have to use my turn signals for a whole week!"
  - kurthr 8y ago
    Yes, those are called victory blinks!
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- thedrbrian 8y ago
  It's supposed to be: MIRROR SIGNAL MANEUVER. By the time you've hit that indicator you've worked out what you want to do and had a bloody good look round to make sure there's no one in the way and now you're going. Technically you shouldn't need the indicator because you're driving into the available space for the maneuver.
  - wlll 8y ago
    Just to be clear I wasn't saying "don't use your mirrors". I missed out all the stuff that was irellevant to the discussion like using your mirrors or starting the engine. Also, it's a cute mnemonic device to help people remember to drive better, but as my driving instructor said, you might need to use "mirror, signal, mirror manouvre" because the mirror is to check what's going on, the indicator is to indicate intent, but you might not be able to manouvre immediately so you might need to check what's going on around you again before you actually make your move. People who indiate as they are making their manouvre are a PITA and almost universally despised. Almost as much as people who don't use their indicators at all. There's a few issues with the "Technically you shouldn't need the indicator" world you describe. First, you assume that there's flawless information available to you. You know where everyone and everything is and you've not missed anything. Indicators give people around you a chance to see what you're up to even if you don't know they are there, or don't think they are relevant to you. Second, you're describing a world in which you always have space and time to make a manoeuvre without impacting others around you. My reality of driving round the North West of England is lots of cars in a small space. People who don't use their indicators are a PITA. It's just selfish. That sudden deceleration for a left turn or sitting in the middle of the road, are you turning right, or have you broken down? Using an inicator is just polite and helps other people drive more comfortably. Third, it helps people plan. This is linked to the other two things, but I think it's important enough to have as a separate point. Have you ever seen pedestrians look at you/your indicators to work out wether they should cross a road? It happens when driving around town. One particular case I remember, I wanted to turn left, I was driving along and turned my indicator on. Guy about to cross the road, looks over his shoulder, sees my indicator and stops. I make my turn, he crosses the road. Smooth, organised, orderly. Sure, if he had just walked out I would have stopped in plenty of time, but on the main road, with people behind me wondering what I was doing.
mattkrause 8y ago
> turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity Are you certain about that? When I learned to drive, we were told to indicate a few seconds before turning, changing lanes, etc. This communicates your intentions to other drivers. In other words, the blinker says, “I’d like to get in the left lane” or “I’m getting off the highway”, not “This car is currently moving leftward.” Otherwise, why not just connect the turn signals directly to the steering wheel?
- javagram 8y ago
  Before turning is the law. e.g. Maryland Code "(d) Where signals to be given.- When required, a signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during at least the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning; except that a bicyclist may interrupt the turning signal to maintain control of the bicycle." There are actually many states where using the turn signals to change lanes isn't even legally required though, so things are more mixed when it comes to changing lanes vs. making turns.
  - UncleEntity 8y ago
    > There are actually many states where using the turn signals to change lanes isn't even legally required though, so things are more mixed when it comes to changing lanes vs. making turns. Arizona is one state where it is required judging by a warning I got from a friendly highway patrol officer who chased me ~5 miles while I was having fun on the old ninja during morning rush hour.
- kalenx 8y ago
  Yes of course, but it is a _signal_, not a request. You should _not_ put your signals if there is no room, just to "ask" other drivers to clear the other lane.
  - mattkrause 8y ago
    Suppose you're in the center lane during some stop-and-go traffic. You want to take the next exit. Do you really just drive along in quiet desperation, hoping for a gap? I—and everyone I know—would leave their blinker as they creep forward, "requesting" that someone leave a gap big enough to take the exit.
pofilat 8y ago
In the case you hypothesize, signaling early may be illegal (and so a Waymo care wouldn't do it), but backing off ato yield space to a signaling car is still not illegal, so a Waymo car could do it.
empath75 8y ago
> turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity" This is just flat wrong and makes no sense. If you want to merge, you’re required to use your turn signal ahead of time. If you don’t know when you’ll have an opening to merge, you may have it on for a long time.
- kalenx 8y ago
  Merging is different than changing lane or turning. In some states, you may have to give the right of way even if you do not change lane yourself. But I agree it was bad wording on my part. My point was about those drivers who just leave their signal on for 2000 ft and expect that it gives them the right of way over the other vehicles in the lane they want to move -- and usually get angry when they do not.
mc32 8y ago
States typically follow MUTCD[1] traffic rules, but they can diverge on interpretation. One source of different interpretation is what to do on a solid red arrow. (in some states that means stop and proceed as a normal solid red light, in others it means absolutely no turn on read). I imagine there are other areas where rules are interpreted differently. [1]https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/
wool_gather 8y ago
There's not much point to the signal if you don't provide it before you take the action.
blahedo 8y ago
>...turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity". VA Code §46.2-848: Every driver who intends to back, stop, turn, or partly turn from a direct line ... shall give the signals required in this article, plainly visible to the driver of such other vehicle, of his intention to make such movement. Emphasis mine.

by kalenx 8y ago

vageli 8y ago

> > it would seem Waymo programmed its autonomous vehicles to treat turn signals as an indicator that the car is about to execute a turn or merge, not an indicator that it is looking for the opportunity to do so. > Well, here's one, if not the issue... I do not know the precise wording of trafic Laws in each state, but in many if not all, turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity". Certainly not true in NJ. > A signal of intention to turn right or left when required shall be given continuously during not less than the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning. https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-39/section-39-4-126/ https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2013/title-39/sectio...

kalenx 8y ago
My wording was bad, I admit it. My point was that signals should be given only when you have the _opportunity_ to do such maneuver. If the lane to your right is crowded, putting your right signal on achieves nothing. In other words, your signals do not give you the right of way. I do not think Waymo cars are unable to use their signals, but they are probably programmed not to put them on when the turn/lane change cannot be achieved anyway.
- TomVDB 8y ago
  When someone indicates his intention to change lanes when there is no room, I slow down. I expect the same of others. And when that doesn’t happen, you just continue on because chances are high that the next one will. In many cases of heavy traffic, this is the only way to change lanes.
jahewson 8y ago
But that perfectly describes “about to execute a turn”. Not what the article is describing, which is to request that other cars open up a new (previously non-existent) space to allow for a lane change. Human drivers will sometimes do this, but in my experience they’re just as likely to cut you off once they see you want to change lanes in front of them.
- TomVDB 8y ago
  Isn’t it perfectly possible to signal intent even when there is no ability to do so?

wlll 8y ago

In the uk I was taught that indicators were to signal intent, not action. Signaling that you intend to merge, even if you can’t merge currently, would be the thing to do. I guess the rationale being something to do with giving other road users an idea that you car might do something so they can be prepared if you do.

maxxxxx 8y ago
"In the uk I was taught that indicators were to signal intent, not action." In LA they are used to signal that you just finished crossing 5 lanes on the freeway all at once to get to the exit you almost missed :-)
- reaperducer 8y ago
  Every time I go to L.A., I say to my wife, "Yay! I don't have to use my turn signals for a whole week!"
- kurthr 8y ago
  Yes, those are called victory blinks!
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
thedrbrian 8y ago
It's supposed to be: MIRROR SIGNAL MANEUVER. By the time you've hit that indicator you've worked out what you want to do and had a bloody good look round to make sure there's no one in the way and now you're going. Technically you shouldn't need the indicator because you're driving into the available space for the maneuver.
- wlll 8y ago
  Just to be clear I wasn't saying "don't use your mirrors". I missed out all the stuff that was irellevant to the discussion like using your mirrors or starting the engine. Also, it's a cute mnemonic device to help people remember to drive better, but as my driving instructor said, you might need to use "mirror, signal, mirror manouvre" because the mirror is to check what's going on, the indicator is to indicate intent, but you might not be able to manouvre immediately so you might need to check what's going on around you again before you actually make your move. People who indiate as they are making their manouvre are a PITA and almost universally despised. Almost as much as people who don't use their indicators at all. There's a few issues with the "Technically you shouldn't need the indicator" world you describe. First, you assume that there's flawless information available to you. You know where everyone and everything is and you've not missed anything. Indicators give people around you a chance to see what you're up to even if you don't know they are there, or don't think they are relevant to you. Second, you're describing a world in which you always have space and time to make a manoeuvre without impacting others around you. My reality of driving round the North West of England is lots of cars in a small space. People who don't use their indicators are a PITA. It's just selfish. That sudden deceleration for a left turn or sitting in the middle of the road, are you turning right, or have you broken down? Using an inicator is just polite and helps other people drive more comfortably. Third, it helps people plan. This is linked to the other two things, but I think it's important enough to have as a separate point. Have you ever seen pedestrians look at you/your indicators to work out wether they should cross a road? It happens when driving around town. One particular case I remember, I wanted to turn left, I was driving along and turned my indicator on. Guy about to cross the road, looks over his shoulder, sees my indicator and stops. I make my turn, he crosses the road. Smooth, organised, orderly. Sure, if he had just walked out I would have stopped in plenty of time, but on the main road, with people behind me wondering what I was doing.

mattkrause 8y ago

> turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity Are you certain about that? When I learned to drive, we were told to indicate a few seconds before turning, changing lanes, etc. This communicates your intentions to other drivers. In other words, the blinker says, “I’d like to get in the left lane” or “I’m getting off the highway”, not “This car is currently moving leftward.” Otherwise, why not just connect the turn signals directly to the steering wheel?

javagram 8y ago
Before turning is the law. e.g. Maryland Code "(d) Where signals to be given.- When required, a signal of intention to turn right or left shall be given continuously during at least the last 100 feet traveled by the vehicle before turning; except that a bicyclist may interrupt the turning signal to maintain control of the bicycle." There are actually many states where using the turn signals to change lanes isn't even legally required though, so things are more mixed when it comes to changing lanes vs. making turns.
- UncleEntity 8y ago
  > There are actually many states where using the turn signals to change lanes isn't even legally required though, so things are more mixed when it comes to changing lanes vs. making turns. Arizona is one state where it is required judging by a warning I got from a friendly highway patrol officer who chased me ~5 miles while I was having fun on the old ninja during morning rush hour.
kalenx 8y ago
Yes of course, but it is a _signal_, not a request. You should _not_ put your signals if there is no room, just to "ask" other drivers to clear the other lane.
- mattkrause 8y ago
  Suppose you're in the center lane during some stop-and-go traffic. You want to take the next exit. Do you really just drive along in quiet desperation, hoping for a gap? I—and everyone I know—would leave their blinker as they creep forward, "requesting" that someone leave a gap big enough to take the exit.

pofilat 8y ago

In the case you hypothesize, signaling early may be illegal (and so a Waymo care wouldn't do it), but backing off ato yield space to a signaling car is still not illegal, so a Waymo car could do it.

empath75 8y ago

> turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity" This is just flat wrong and makes no sense. If you want to merge, you’re required to use your turn signal ahead of time. If you don’t know when you’ll have an opening to merge, you may have it on for a long time.

kalenx 8y ago
Merging is different than changing lane or turning. In some states, you may have to give the right of way even if you do not change lane yourself. But I agree it was bad wording on my part. My point was about those drivers who just leave their signal on for 2000 ft and expect that it gives them the right of way over the other vehicles in the lane they want to move -- and usually get angry when they do not.

mc32 8y ago

States typically follow MUTCD[1] traffic rules, but they can diverge on interpretation. One source of different interpretation is what to do on a solid red arrow. (in some states that means stop and proceed as a normal solid red light, in others it means absolutely no turn on read). I imagine there are other areas where rules are interpreted differently. [1]https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/

wool_gather 8y ago

There's not much point to the signal if you don't provide it before you take the action.

blahedo 8y ago

>...turn signals should _not_ be used as "an indicator of opportunity". VA Code §46.2-848: Every driver who intends to back, stop, turn, or partly turn from a direct line ... shall give the signals required in this article, plainly visible to the driver of such other vehicle, of his intention to make such movement. Emphasis mine.