2 ms·

Running into the back of a police cruiser that's partly in the lane with lights on is something humans generally only do before blowing a .1x on the breathalyze

Running into the back of a police cruiser that's partly in the lane with lights on is something humans generally only do before blowing a .1x on the breathalyzer. The link you posted shows a clear correlation between low light conditions and hitting people on the shoulder. A police cruiser has blue lights and presumable the federally mandated reflective surfaces that all vehicles sold in the US have (usually in the tail lights). This is a typical case of software making stupid mistakes a human would never make.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
It's a fairly common problem even without being under the influence. > Distracted driving is dangerous, claiming 3,142 lives in 2019. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving > The National Safety Council reports that cell phone use while driving leads to 1.6 million crashes each year. Nearly 390,000 injuries occur each year from accidents caused by texting while driving. 1 out of every 4 car accidents in the United States is caused by texting and driving. https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/safety-topics/distracted-driving https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/safety-topics/distracted-dri...
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Your statistics are for human drivers hitting cars and people. Not objects with blue lights (intentionally designed to be highly visible) that can be seen for miles at night being hit by vehicles that are augmented with computers that don't get distracted. Stop being intentionally misleading. An always-on computer hitting a police cruiser (the rear end of which conforms to known standards regarding number, position and size of reflective surfaces) is nowhere near equivalent to someone hitting something because they were looking at their phone. Is it too much to expect technology to at least avoid the kind of accidents only incapacitated humans have?
  - Aeronwen 6y ago
    Those lights are blinding as hell at night. The only reason a person wouldn't have hit the car is because it's the only thing you can see when trying to pass one.
Animats 6y ago
Running into the back of a police cruiser that's partly in the lane with lights on is something humans generally only do before blowing a .1x on the breathalyzer. ... This is a typical case of software making stupid mistakes a human would never make. Humans making this mistake do tend to brake at some point, just too late. There's still an accident, but damage is mitigated and survival odds, with seat belts and airbags, are good. Teslas are notorious for plowing into unrecognized stationary obstacles at full speed. Many drivers don't get that limitation of Tesla's system. Which is why Level 2 systems that get it right most of the time are dangerous. Tesla has a really good lane keeping system, which creates the illusion that it can drive well. Until it can't.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

It's a fairly common problem even without being under the influence. > Distracted driving is dangerous, claiming 3,142 lives in 2019. https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving > The National Safety Council reports that cell phone use while driving leads to 1.6 million crashes each year. Nearly 390,000 injuries occur each year from accidents caused by texting while driving. 1 out of every 4 car accidents in the United States is caused by texting and driving. https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/safety-topics/distracted-driving https://www.nsc.org/road-safety/safety-topics/distracted-dri...

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Your statistics are for human drivers hitting cars and people. Not objects with blue lights (intentionally designed to be highly visible) that can be seen for miles at night being hit by vehicles that are augmented with computers that don't get distracted. Stop being intentionally misleading. An always-on computer hitting a police cruiser (the rear end of which conforms to known standards regarding number, position and size of reflective surfaces) is nowhere near equivalent to someone hitting something because they were looking at their phone. Is it too much to expect technology to at least avoid the kind of accidents only incapacitated humans have?
- Aeronwen 6y ago
  Those lights are blinding as hell at night. The only reason a person wouldn't have hit the car is because it's the only thing you can see when trying to pass one.

Animats 6y ago

Running into the back of a police cruiser that's partly in the lane with lights on is something humans generally only do before blowing a .1x on the breathalyzer. ... This is a typical case of software making stupid mistakes a human would never make. Humans making this mistake do tend to brake at some point, just too late. There's still an accident, but damage is mitigated and survival odds, with seat belts and airbags, are good. Teslas are notorious for plowing into unrecognized stationary obstacles at full speed. Many drivers don't get that limitation of Tesla's system. Which is why Level 2 systems that get it right most of the time are dangerous. Tesla has a really good lane keeping system, which creates the illusion that it can drive well. Until it can't.