3 ms·

> Just because they aren't perfect doesn't mean they don't make your car safer. There is no evidence that they make your car safer, but there is evidence that

> Just because they aren't perfect doesn't mean they don't make your car safer. There is no evidence that they make your car safer, but there is evidence that AEB fails in common situations or in ways a human driver wouldn't.

parsimo2010 7y ago
It is irreleveant if AEB fails when a human doesn't- the human and AEB systems are complimentary. When the human driver doesn't fail, then it's okay for AEB to fail. AEB only needs to pick up the slack when a human isn't fast enough to get on the brakes. Even if it only works in 10% of those situations, it's still preventing collisions.
- unityByFreedom 7y ago
  > It is irreleveant if AEB fails when a human doesn't Maybe in the eyes of the law. If pedestrian-detection-equipped vehicles cause more deaths, however, it is quite relevant.
- fucking_tragedy 7y ago
  It matters to me as a pedestrian because drivers will become reliant on their AEB, and when it fails, they might run me over.
  - natch 7y ago
    We better design these systems not to fail then. Seems obvious but I think that’s the solution to what you’re describing. Having an unreliable human as a backup is not going to do it because as you say, and I agree, humans will become reliant on it. The systems are not reliable yet. Fortunately humans are not totally reliant on them yet either so humans are still effective as a safety backup. The trick is to make sure the crossover point (when humans become so reliant that they are ineffective safety backups) comes after the system becomes highly reliable. Unfortunately humans are already unreliable to begin with even without AEB, so we are just going to deal with a few incidents from autos, both those without AEB, and, until it becomes perfect, those with AEB.
    - fucking_tragedy 7y ago
      > We better design these systems not to fail then Too late, we're commenting on an article about them failing in common scenarios.
      - natch 7y ago
        But we're not done designing them. This is an ongoing project.
- ShroudedNight 7y ago
  > It is irrelevant if AEB fails when a human doesn't This is only true with false-negatives. A false-positive (say, on a pedestrian-free, controlled access highway) could easily be actively harmful if it causes abrupt changes in vehicle behaviour that would not occur if a human were in full control.

parsimo2010 7y ago

It is irreleveant if AEB fails when a human doesn't- the human and AEB systems are complimentary. When the human driver doesn't fail, then it's okay for AEB to fail. AEB only needs to pick up the slack when a human isn't fast enough to get on the brakes. Even if it only works in 10% of those situations, it's still preventing collisions.

unityByFreedom 7y ago
> It is irreleveant if AEB fails when a human doesn't Maybe in the eyes of the law. If pedestrian-detection-equipped vehicles cause more deaths, however, it is quite relevant.
fucking_tragedy 7y ago
It matters to me as a pedestrian because drivers will become reliant on their AEB, and when it fails, they might run me over.
- natch 7y ago
  We better design these systems not to fail then. Seems obvious but I think that’s the solution to what you’re describing. Having an unreliable human as a backup is not going to do it because as you say, and I agree, humans will become reliant on it. The systems are not reliable yet. Fortunately humans are not totally reliant on them yet either so humans are still effective as a safety backup. The trick is to make sure the crossover point (when humans become so reliant that they are ineffective safety backups) comes after the system becomes highly reliable. Unfortunately humans are already unreliable to begin with even without AEB, so we are just going to deal with a few incidents from autos, both those without AEB, and, until it becomes perfect, those with AEB.
  - fucking_tragedy 7y ago
    > We better design these systems not to fail then Too late, we're commenting on an article about them failing in common scenarios.
    - natch 7y ago
      But we're not done designing them. This is an ongoing project.
ShroudedNight 7y ago
> It is irrelevant if AEB fails when a human doesn't This is only true with false-negatives. A false-positive (say, on a pedestrian-free, controlled access highway) could easily be actively harmful if it causes abrupt changes in vehicle behaviour that would not occur if a human were in full control.