4 ms·

> Two, the cushion already was severely damaged. After a Toyota Prius crashed into it two months earlier, the length of the attenuator was shortened, offering l

> Two, the cushion already was severely damaged. After a Toyota Prius crashed into it two months earlier, the length of the attenuator was shortened, offering less protection against the 3-foot-tall concrete median wall behind it. Maybe the repairing crash mitigation devices of frequent & deadly hazards should be a higher priority. Or maybe better marking the 'gore' lane as in its current state it's simply an empty lane that would look identical to a real lane (i.e if you can't see the divider then it looks like a normal lane). I don't get why we aren't looking into slightly changing our roads to better work with self driving cars when all it takes is a little more paint.

dmitrygr 7y ago
> I don't get why we aren't looking into slightly changing our roads to better work with self driving cars when all it takes is a little more paint. Because 99.9999% of drivers are human and have no issues seeing the concrete barriers and not hitting them head on at full speed. Until self driving is better than humans in all cases it will not be acceptable. Nobody will spend money to adapt roads to self driving cars until they comprise a significant percent of cars (read: decades from now, if ever)
- drewrv 7y ago
  > Because 99.9999% of drivers are human and have no issues seeing the concrete barriers and not hitting them head on at full speed. In this particular case, a human driver did crash head-on into the barrier somewhat recently.
  - cjhopman 7y ago
    According to https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-101 https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffi..., ~125,000 cars drive through that area per day (scroll to "JCT. RTE. 85", divide by 2). According to the report, the previous collision was 2 months earlier, so ~7.5Million cars passed through there. 99.9999% doesn't seem that far off.
GaryNumanVevo 7y ago
The person who died in the Mountain View crash was on his phone playing a game, not paying attention. The autopilot made no indication of an issue and ran into the crash attenuator at 78 MPH

dmitrygr 7y ago

> I don't get why we aren't looking into slightly changing our roads to better work with self driving cars when all it takes is a little more paint. Because 99.9999% of drivers are human and have no issues seeing the concrete barriers and not hitting them head on at full speed. Until self driving is better than humans in all cases it will not be acceptable. Nobody will spend money to adapt roads to self driving cars until they comprise a significant percent of cars (read: decades from now, if ever)

drewrv 7y ago
> Because 99.9999% of drivers are human and have no issues seeing the concrete barriers and not hitting them head on at full speed. In this particular case, a human driver did crash head-on into the barrier somewhat recently.
- cjhopman 7y ago
  According to https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffic-volumes/2017/route-101 https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census/traffi..., ~125,000 cars drive through that area per day (scroll to "JCT. RTE. 85", divide by 2). According to the report, the previous collision was 2 months earlier, so ~7.5Million cars passed through there. 99.9999% doesn't seem that far off.

GaryNumanVevo 7y ago

The person who died in the Mountain View crash was on his phone playing a game, not paying attention. The autopilot made no indication of an issue and ran into the crash attenuator at 78 MPH