3 ms·

> In the end it's a regulation problem, not a Tesla problem Are you joking? If you’re the one causing the problem, you’re the problem. No regulation can preve

> In the end it's a regulation problem, not a Tesla problem Are you joking? If you’re the one causing the problem, you’re the problem. No regulation can prevent me from kicking someone in the shins. This isn’t a regulation problem, it’s a me problem.

nrb 5y ago
The <Insert State Here> Code certainly applies penalties for assault and battery, and you can rest assured knowing shin-kicking would happen regularly without it. The car problem presented here is quite a bit more shades of gray and we absolutely need to set acceptable parameters for the technology.
- paulcole 5y ago
  Yes, but my point is that if you’re being a jerk, then you’re the problem, not the person who is not saying, “please don’t be a jerk.” You don’t need a regulation telling you not to be a jerk — unless of course you are a jerk. And even then, you’d probably still be a jerk, regulation or not.
XorNot 5y ago
Except it is: literally none of this is illegal. And it's not clear how it could be illegal: what's the distinction between cruise control and lane keeping and these systems? Very little - nothing you can codify. It's also very likely that this system can pass a standard driving test: AIs are really good at handling fixed test cases. So any regulation you do pass has a complicated assurance problem: how does it prove the system is safe? Pretend Tesla just knocked "beta" off the name and said "this is a limited self driving system, Tesla exclusive" - then you wind up in the same bucket with the same "it's the drivers responsibility problem". People see this footage and assume Tesla self drive does this all the time - but it wouldn't. It probably passes this scenario in testing 100% of the time: but the issue of course is the test is not quite whatever this circumstance is, and the system has a dramatic failure. There is absolutely a regulation problem.
- joeblubaugh 5y ago
  There is an extremely bright line. Can the software automatically make lane changes? Can it initiate turns? Can it decide to make non-emergency stops at lights and signs? Can it accelerate from a stop? What is the expected level of human intervention?
  - XorNot 5y ago
    That determines what the system is. The question I'm posing is, how do you prove it works to an independent authority? It would be extremely reasonable for us to regulate along these lines, but I'm also absolutely willing to bet that Tesla and every other system would get through an approval process just fine. Which sort of loops around too a wider issue: if self driving is a priority, then it needs to be a government, collective priority for public safety and development. I.e. independent reading institutes, a suite of diverse randomised tests and yes: because this is no longer "on the driver" for accidents then both the government and company will be taking responsibility for failures. The issue is that the law of the land is: these systems aren't illegal, and the driver is responsible for how the car handles including any automation they engage. To make any progress you have to break driver responsibility - or use that bright line and just outlaw the whole lot.
    - jowsie 5y ago
      >but I'm also absolutely willing to bet that Tesla and every other system would get through an approval process just fine. It would be Diesel Gate all over again. The testing would have to be documented somewhere and the car could just be trained for the test scenarios. Considering how often Tesla like to massage their numbers (nurburgring data, sales figures in basically every country, most recently Australia, the big asterisk next to their 1.9s 0-60 run, etc etc) I can't trust they wouldn't train directly for the test and neglect everything else just so they can have the best headlines once again.

nrb 5y ago

The <Insert State Here> Code certainly applies penalties for assault and battery, and you can rest assured knowing shin-kicking would happen regularly without it. The car problem presented here is quite a bit more shades of gray and we absolutely need to set acceptable parameters for the technology.

paulcole 5y ago
Yes, but my point is that if you’re being a jerk, then you’re the problem, not the person who is not saying, “please don’t be a jerk.” You don’t need a regulation telling you not to be a jerk — unless of course you are a jerk. And even then, you’d probably still be a jerk, regulation or not.

XorNot 5y ago

Except it is: literally none of this is illegal. And it's not clear how it could be illegal: what's the distinction between cruise control and lane keeping and these systems? Very little - nothing you can codify. It's also very likely that this system can pass a standard driving test: AIs are really good at handling fixed test cases. So any regulation you do pass has a complicated assurance problem: how does it prove the system is safe? Pretend Tesla just knocked "beta" off the name and said "this is a limited self driving system, Tesla exclusive" - then you wind up in the same bucket with the same "it's the drivers responsibility problem". People see this footage and assume Tesla self drive does this all the time - but it wouldn't. It probably passes this scenario in testing 100% of the time: but the issue of course is the test is not quite whatever this circumstance is, and the system has a dramatic failure. There is absolutely a regulation problem.

joeblubaugh 5y ago
There is an extremely bright line. Can the software automatically make lane changes? Can it initiate turns? Can it decide to make non-emergency stops at lights and signs? Can it accelerate from a stop? What is the expected level of human intervention?
- XorNot 5y ago
  That determines what the system is. The question I'm posing is, how do you prove it works to an independent authority? It would be extremely reasonable for us to regulate along these lines, but I'm also absolutely willing to bet that Tesla and every other system would get through an approval process just fine. Which sort of loops around too a wider issue: if self driving is a priority, then it needs to be a government, collective priority for public safety and development. I.e. independent reading institutes, a suite of diverse randomised tests and yes: because this is no longer "on the driver" for accidents then both the government and company will be taking responsibility for failures. The issue is that the law of the land is: these systems aren't illegal, and the driver is responsible for how the car handles including any automation they engage. To make any progress you have to break driver responsibility - or use that bright line and just outlaw the whole lot.
  - jowsie 5y ago
    >but I'm also absolutely willing to bet that Tesla and every other system would get through an approval process just fine. It would be Diesel Gate all over again. The testing would have to be documented somewhere and the car could just be trained for the test scenarios. Considering how often Tesla like to massage their numbers (nurburgring data, sales figures in basically every country, most recently Australia, the big asterisk next to their 1.9s 0-60 run, etc etc) I can't trust they wouldn't train directly for the test and neglect everything else just so they can have the best headlines once again.