5 ms·

From the initial reporting it sounded like there was some kind of "just go" button that overrode the safeties, in which case I would have attributed it to poor

From the initial reporting it sounded like there was some kind of "just go" button that overrode the safeties, in which case I would have attributed it to poor self-driving design anyway. But "joystick control" sounds like the driver was much more actively engaged, which is the right thing to require in disengagement situation in my view.

dmix 5y ago
All of the recent self driving cars have an override method so the driver can take over. There’s no getting around that. The only thing you can blame here is the human driver not trusting the system which did make the right choice. You could blame training but again it’s not the software to blame. This is the second article that obscured that fact.
- jimmaswell 5y ago
  This has been a sadly common clickbait/FUD tactic since self driving launched. Another example: https://www.reddit.com/r/savedyouaclick/comments/d35vp9/self_driving_shuttle_crashes_in_las_vegas_hours/ https://www.reddit.com/r/savedyouaclick/comments/d35vp9/self...
- trhway 5y ago
  >self driving cars have an override method so the driver can take over. There’s no getting around that. you'd expect that self-driving car would have a driver assist like on a regular car which prevents or warns about hitting objects/people. In general, seeing Toyota's self-driving cars around MV, they have too few sensors for my taste (compare to Google, Apple, and a bunch of other SD cars driving around). It seems to me that the hardware companies don't get it, and thus only buying the tech like GM Cruise is the possible way for them to move forward.
- phreeza 5y ago
  I agree that some kind of fallback is unavoidable at the current level of technology, but the design is critical. Having a "just go" button that disables the safeties and let's the self-driving continue against its own better judgement is very convenient when it works, but terrible design because it trains the safety driver to just always hit it. Having some more active engagement like a joystick, that forces the safety driver to engage with the situation, seems much more reasonable.

dmix 5y ago

All of the recent self driving cars have an override method so the driver can take over. There’s no getting around that. The only thing you can blame here is the human driver not trusting the system which did make the right choice. You could blame training but again it’s not the software to blame. This is the second article that obscured that fact.

jimmaswell 5y ago
This has been a sadly common clickbait/FUD tactic since self driving launched. Another example: https://www.reddit.com/r/savedyouaclick/comments/d35vp9/self_driving_shuttle_crashes_in_las_vegas_hours/ https://www.reddit.com/r/savedyouaclick/comments/d35vp9/self...
trhway 5y ago
>self driving cars have an override method so the driver can take over. There’s no getting around that. you'd expect that self-driving car would have a driver assist like on a regular car which prevents or warns about hitting objects/people. In general, seeing Toyota's self-driving cars around MV, they have too few sensors for my taste (compare to Google, Apple, and a bunch of other SD cars driving around). It seems to me that the hardware companies don't get it, and thus only buying the tech like GM Cruise is the possible way for them to move forward.
phreeza 5y ago
I agree that some kind of fallback is unavoidable at the current level of technology, but the design is critical. Having a "just go" button that disables the safeties and let's the self-driving continue against its own better judgement is very convenient when it works, but terrible design because it trains the safety driver to just always hit it. Having some more active engagement like a joystick, that forces the safety driver to engage with the situation, seems much more reasonable.