6 ms·

FYI if you didn't catch it, the car was from 2002. This isn't about the same AI driving we usually see here.

moccachino 7y ago
Thanks, that turns this from a very serious concern to a much smaller one. I thought it was a Tesla that somehow completely failed to see a pedestrian and then to stop when it made contact, which would have terrible implications for the rest of the fleet.
- mapcars 7y ago
  >that turns this from a very serious concern to a much smaller one. Not really, this means there is a whole bunch of cars like this already in the wild and people being unaware of this.
  - londons_explore 7y ago
    I don't really see any way the remote start could have triggered the car moving... Unless perhaps the car was in gear? I would guess this car has had some kind of aftermarket fiddling...
    - celticmusic 7y ago
      It has to be more than that unless you're willing to hold the bystanders who tried to help criminally responsible. They pushed the car away from the kid, did they just let it roll back up on him? I doubt it, it's more likely the vehicle was in gear.
  - on_and_off 7y ago
    I think that gp is being ironic since the event they described actually happened.
  - moccachino 7y ago
    That is true, but if it's a 2002 model and this first happened now, I perceived it to be a low-probability event. I don't mean to downplay the seriousness of this bug, I'm just saying it doesn't have as catastrophic implications as it would if this happened in a state-of-the-art Tesla.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  No, but understandable since we masquerade 3 Tesla fails per year as international news while ignoring the 101 gruesome highway deaths daily
  - bdcravens 7y ago
    as a ratio, the number of non-Tesla’s on the road is far greater than 34:1, so Tesla’s are responsible for a disproportionate share
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      just let them roll them out and if there is a real problem do a recall, just like every other car manufacturer
      - bdcravens 7y ago
        I'm unaware that anything to the contrary is happening. There's just the added public opinion and media backlash, which is always fair. Tesla doesn't get a free pass.
    - bzbarsky 7y ago
      Just to be clear, the numbers in the parent comments were "3 per year" and "101 per day", so the ratio there is 12288:1. There are approximately 250e6 registered vehicles in the US, so if all the Tesla-related fatalities are those "3 per year" (which seems unlikely to me; it assumes that there are no Teslas involved in fatal accidents when the automatic driving stuff is not engaged) to be disproportionate there would have to be only ~21000 Teslas on the roads. There are close to an order of magnitude more than that at this point.
      - bdcravens 7y ago
        Good catch. This site seems to be an interesting aggregation of Tesla deaths: https://www.tesladeaths.com/ https://www.tesladeaths.com/ It claims 29 deaths in the US from Teslas in 2019; 3 are from accidents where auto pilot use was claimed.
fergie 7y ago
Right, but the moral question is the same: Who's responsibility is it when an automated vehicle kills somebody- the operator or the manufacturer?
- swiley 7y ago
  Part of me is tempted to say the operator because people should demand documentation for how their cars work and shouldn’t just accept abstractions and hand wavy explanations. No one would do that if they could though. No manufacturer would share it if they were asked either since it could “leak IP” and so the reality is that won’t happen and the manufacturer should probably be responsible.
- nkrisc 7y ago
  The operator. People seem to have forgotten that when they get in their car they are driving heavy machinery and have a great deal of power and responsibility. They take it for granted. After all, the operator deployed the autonomous vehicle and should be responsible for what it does. If they aren't familiar with its capabilities and risks, they should not deploy such a vehicle unless they are willing to bear the responsibility for whatever it might do. Until such a time autonomous vehicles have free will and can be held accountable for their actions, the operator who deployed it assumes that accountability. This isn't even a new concept. If I let my dog loose in the park and it bites someone, I'm responsible for it. We don't hold dogs responsible for their actions, we hold the owner who "deployed" it responsible. I'll cede that things are a little murkier when manufacturers are pushing OTA updates to vehicles that change their behavior. But there's no reason the operator and the manufacturer can't share responsibility at a split decided in court.
  - dwild 7y ago
    One day we won't be able to drive at all, it will be all self driving, and at that point, you'll no longer be able to do anything to avoid an accident. That would shift the default responsibility to the manufacturer and then split it with the owner if he bear a bit of responsibility too (like missing maintenance). You forget that we live in a society where we need people to use cars. Nothing force you to have a dog, nothing force you to let him loose either in a park. I hope one day it will no longer be a necessity and public transit will replace that need, but sadly, in most cities, it's pretty far from being able to.
basseq 7y ago
It might be total coincidence, but both cars were 2002 Lexus IS300s. Additionally, I was unable to find any evidence that the 2002 IS300 had remote start as an available option. So I'm wondering if this was an enthusiast and an aftermarket part.

Thanks, that turns this from a very serious concern to a much smaller one. I thought it was a Tesla that somehow completely failed to see a pedestrian and then to stop when it made contact, which would have terrible implications for the rest of the fleet.

mapcars 7y ago
>that turns this from a very serious concern to a much smaller one. Not really, this means there is a whole bunch of cars like this already in the wild and people being unaware of this.
- londons_explore 7y ago
  I don't really see any way the remote start could have triggered the car moving... Unless perhaps the car was in gear? I would guess this car has had some kind of aftermarket fiddling...
  - celticmusic 7y ago
    It has to be more than that unless you're willing to hold the bystanders who tried to help criminally responsible. They pushed the car away from the kid, did they just let it roll back up on him? I doubt it, it's more likely the vehicle was in gear.
- on_and_off 7y ago
  I think that gp is being ironic since the event they described actually happened.
- moccachino 7y ago
  That is true, but if it's a 2002 model and this first happened now, I perceived it to be a low-probability event. I don't mean to downplay the seriousness of this bug, I'm just saying it doesn't have as catastrophic implications as it would if this happened in a state-of-the-art Tesla.
rolltiide 7y ago
No, but understandable since we masquerade 3 Tesla fails per year as international news while ignoring the 101 gruesome highway deaths daily
- bdcravens 7y ago
  as a ratio, the number of non-Tesla’s on the road is far greater than 34:1, so Tesla’s are responsible for a disproportionate share
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    just let them roll them out and if there is a real problem do a recall, just like every other car manufacturer
    - bdcravens 7y ago
      I'm unaware that anything to the contrary is happening. There's just the added public opinion and media backlash, which is always fair. Tesla doesn't get a free pass.
  - bzbarsky 7y ago
    Just to be clear, the numbers in the parent comments were "3 per year" and "101 per day", so the ratio there is 12288:1. There are approximately 250e6 registered vehicles in the US, so if all the Tesla-related fatalities are those "3 per year" (which seems unlikely to me; it assumes that there are no Teslas involved in fatal accidents when the automatic driving stuff is not engaged) to be disproportionate there would have to be only ~21000 Teslas on the roads. There are close to an order of magnitude more than that at this point.
    - bdcravens 7y ago
      Good catch. This site seems to be an interesting aggregation of Tesla deaths: https://www.tesladeaths.com/ https://www.tesladeaths.com/ It claims 29 deaths in the US from Teslas in 2019; 3 are from accidents where auto pilot use was claimed.

fergie 7y ago

Right, but the moral question is the same: Who's responsibility is it when an automated vehicle kills somebody- the operator or the manufacturer?

swiley 7y ago
Part of me is tempted to say the operator because people should demand documentation for how their cars work and shouldn’t just accept abstractions and hand wavy explanations. No one would do that if they could though. No manufacturer would share it if they were asked either since it could “leak IP” and so the reality is that won’t happen and the manufacturer should probably be responsible.
nkrisc 7y ago
The operator. People seem to have forgotten that when they get in their car they are driving heavy machinery and have a great deal of power and responsibility. They take it for granted. After all, the operator deployed the autonomous vehicle and should be responsible for what it does. If they aren't familiar with its capabilities and risks, they should not deploy such a vehicle unless they are willing to bear the responsibility for whatever it might do. Until such a time autonomous vehicles have free will and can be held accountable for their actions, the operator who deployed it assumes that accountability. This isn't even a new concept. If I let my dog loose in the park and it bites someone, I'm responsible for it. We don't hold dogs responsible for their actions, we hold the owner who "deployed" it responsible. I'll cede that things are a little murkier when manufacturers are pushing OTA updates to vehicles that change their behavior. But there's no reason the operator and the manufacturer can't share responsibility at a split decided in court.
- dwild 7y ago
  One day we won't be able to drive at all, it will be all self driving, and at that point, you'll no longer be able to do anything to avoid an accident. That would shift the default responsibility to the manufacturer and then split it with the owner if he bear a bit of responsibility too (like missing maintenance). You forget that we live in a society where we need people to use cars. Nothing force you to have a dog, nothing force you to let him loose either in a park. I hope one day it will no longer be a necessity and public transit will replace that need, but sadly, in most cities, it's pretty far from being able to.

basseq 7y ago

It might be total coincidence, but both cars were 2002 Lexus IS300s. Additionally, I was unable to find any evidence that the 2002 IS300 had remote start as an available option. So I'm wondering if this was an enthusiast and an aftermarket part.