4 ms·

Humans do have a problem with this. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+car+hit+on+traffic+stop https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pol

Humans do have a problem with this. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+car+hit+on+traffic+stop https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+car+hit+...

JohnWhigham 5y ago
That's besides the point though. There's still a human that's able to react to new situations (albeit very slowly) on the road. Teslas apparently can't do that very well. The question is: how do we fix this? And is this potential for regulation? For me personally, this is one of my biggest hangups with these new technologies: they're black boxes. We don't know how they work, and they change all the time. Companies can get most of the general cases correct, but as for the panoply of edge cases, how do we approach them? How should insurance companies approach them? Whose at fault here, who pays who? There's just so many unanswered questions with automated driving that a lot of people don't really want to solve, they just want the technology out there and we'll worry about the edge cases later...as in, we'll worry about it when people start dying. "Move fast and break things", that retarded shit. I hate it. This SV frat programmer mentality is now bleeding over into automobiles, an industry that does indeed need to be shaken up, but not when it's at the expense of lives. Treating driving software like it's a fucking web application that can be fixed later is malicious negligence.
- bob33212 5y ago
  Much like elevators, computers are fundamentally better at controlling the system than humans. I assume you ride in computer controlled elevators? Do you understand that they were at one point controlled by humans manually? Did you know that there was a transition period where the computer control elevator was not as safe as it is now? In 50 years the idea of letting a 85 year old or a person walking directly out of a bar control a four thousand pound machine moving at 60 miles an hour will seem insane.
  - PinguTS 5y ago
    Funfact: all elevators have a safety system invented by Mr. Otis, which haven't changed much since. So your comparison doesn't make sense.
    - bob33212 5y ago
      You are talking about the brake for if the cable breaks. I'm talking about the control system that prevents the doors opening while it is moving, opening in between floors, shutting down if there is a problem, etc.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Manual_controls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Manual_controls
      - PinguTS 5y ago
        Those doors have also safety systems. Formerly, the circuitry to open the door was closed only, when the cabin was in floor level. Opening and closing required constant push of the push button. (Have some history in elevation control, because we made some standards in the industry.)
Maxburn 5y ago
Yes. Talk to any police or first responder, they have training to cover this. For this and some other reasons is why police often approach stopped vehicles from the passenger side, further off the road and shielded from oncoming traffic by the vehicles.
- smt88 5y ago
  > Talk to any police or first responder, they have training to cover this. That has no bearing on how common these types of collisions are. The original issue is whether Teslas are more likely to crash into a parked emergency vehicle than a human. The training has a better explanation: while "number of collisions per mile driven" is vanishingly small, "percentage of law-enforcement deaths as a result of collisions" is very high. Out of the ~1,200 LEOs killed between 2000 and 2008, about half were due to collisions[1]. That alone tells you how such collisions can be rare, but still a top-of-mind issue for law enforcement. 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0018720818786132 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00187208187861...
smt88 5y ago
I guess that means sharks frequently bite humans[1], dogs regularly befriend cheetahs[2], and people often hit the jackpot when they play slot machines[3]. (YouTube search results are not useful data about national trends, and YouTube would be intensely boring if they were.) 1. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=shark+bite https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=shark+bite 2. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dog+cheetah+friend https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dog+cheetah+fri... 3. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slot+machine+jackpot https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slot+machine+ja...
- bob33212 5y ago
  Slot machine Jackpots are much more common than Teslas hitting parked cars. If that is what you mean by frequent, then yes.

Humans do have a problem with this. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+car+hit+on+traffic+stop https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=police+car+hit+...

JohnWhigham 5y ago

That's besides the point though. There's still a human that's able to react to new situations (albeit very slowly) on the road. Teslas apparently can't do that very well. The question is: how do we fix this? And is this potential for regulation? For me personally, this is one of my biggest hangups with these new technologies: they're black boxes. We don't know how they work, and they change all the time. Companies can get most of the general cases correct, but as for the panoply of edge cases, how do we approach them? How should insurance companies approach them? Whose at fault here, who pays who? There's just so many unanswered questions with automated driving that a lot of people don't really want to solve, they just want the technology out there and we'll worry about the edge cases later...as in, we'll worry about it when people start dying. "Move fast and break things", that retarded shit. I hate it. This SV frat programmer mentality is now bleeding over into automobiles, an industry that does indeed need to be shaken up, but not when it's at the expense of lives. Treating driving software like it's a fucking web application that can be fixed later is malicious negligence.

bob33212 5y ago
Much like elevators, computers are fundamentally better at controlling the system than humans. I assume you ride in computer controlled elevators? Do you understand that they were at one point controlled by humans manually? Did you know that there was a transition period where the computer control elevator was not as safe as it is now? In 50 years the idea of letting a 85 year old or a person walking directly out of a bar control a four thousand pound machine moving at 60 miles an hour will seem insane.
- PinguTS 5y ago
  Funfact: all elevators have a safety system invented by Mr. Otis, which haven't changed much since. So your comparison doesn't make sense.
  - bob33212 5y ago
    You are talking about the brake for if the cable breaks. I'm talking about the control system that prevents the doors opening while it is moving, opening in between floors, shutting down if there is a problem, etc.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Manual_controls https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator#Manual_controls
    - PinguTS 5y ago
      Those doors have also safety systems. Formerly, the circuitry to open the door was closed only, when the cabin was in floor level. Opening and closing required constant push of the push button. (Have some history in elevation control, because we made some standards in the industry.)

Maxburn 5y ago

Yes. Talk to any police or first responder, they have training to cover this. For this and some other reasons is why police often approach stopped vehicles from the passenger side, further off the road and shielded from oncoming traffic by the vehicles.

smt88 5y ago
> Talk to any police or first responder, they have training to cover this. That has no bearing on how common these types of collisions are. The original issue is whether Teslas are more likely to crash into a parked emergency vehicle than a human. The training has a better explanation: while "number of collisions per mile driven" is vanishingly small, "percentage of law-enforcement deaths as a result of collisions" is very high. Out of the ~1,200 LEOs killed between 2000 and 2008, about half were due to collisions[1]. That alone tells you how such collisions can be rare, but still a top-of-mind issue for law enforcement. 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0018720818786132 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00187208187861...

smt88 5y ago

I guess that means sharks frequently bite humans[1], dogs regularly befriend cheetahs[2], and people often hit the jackpot when they play slot machines[3]. (YouTube search results are not useful data about national trends, and YouTube would be intensely boring if they were.) 1. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=shark+bite https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=shark+bite 2. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dog+cheetah+friend https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=dog+cheetah+fri... 3. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slot+machine+jackpot https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=slot+machine+ja...

bob33212 5y ago
Slot machine Jackpots are much more common than Teslas hitting parked cars. If that is what you mean by frequent, then yes.