3 ms·

>If you ask me, only a single car misbehaving is actually much more alarming than if the bug manifests in all cars of that type. It's not if it's hardware fail

>If you ask me, only a single car misbehaving is actually much more alarming than if the bug manifests in all cars of that type. It's not if it's hardware failure.

bee_rider 5y ago
A hardware failure that puts the vehicle in a semi-functioning, but non-safe condition needs to be investigated, it could be silently lurking in any number of cars.
- eru 5y ago
  Investigated, yes. Grounding the whole fleet? Not necessarily. It's a cost-benefit trade-off. We don't ground the whole fleet of human drivers, when one of them crashes their car, because the benefit doesn't outweigh the costs. It's not a given that the answer will change that much for self-driving cars. Especially for extremely rare failure modes.
  - bee_rider 5y ago
    Humans all have different versions of the 'driving' software installed, there's no way of identifying which ones will misbehave. If Teslas are malfunctioning, we shouldn't ground Chevy Cruise. We exist on a spectrum of competence. If a type of car has a widespread issue that unexpectedly gets it into a state where a minimally competent non-impaired person can't operate it safely, that type of car should be pulled from the road. However, because humans are so sloppy (0 human drivers should be the ultimate goal), it is generally assumed that most accidents are caused by us, and so we require a significant accumulation of evidence to take a type of car off the road. Without a human in the loop, what's the unreliable part to point the finger at?
    - eru 5y ago
      Well, the obvious incentive with such a rule would then be to install slightly different versions of the software in every vehicle. (Or perhaps to have separate versions on file, and just load that different version when the first version is grounded.) > Without a human in the loop, what's the unreliable part to point the finger at? It's a cost benefit analysis. If the problem is sufficiently rare, it might make more sense to leave the cars running while you investigate. Even human lives aren't infinitely valuable. Typical traffic engineering in the US assumes a cost of human life of about 6 million USD or so.
eru 5y ago
Or a cosmic ray..

>If you ask me, only a single car misbehaving is actually much more alarming than if the bug manifests in all cars of that type. It's not if it's hardware failure.

bee_rider 5y ago

A hardware failure that puts the vehicle in a semi-functioning, but non-safe condition needs to be investigated, it could be silently lurking in any number of cars.

eru 5y ago
Investigated, yes. Grounding the whole fleet? Not necessarily. It's a cost-benefit trade-off. We don't ground the whole fleet of human drivers, when one of them crashes their car, because the benefit doesn't outweigh the costs. It's not a given that the answer will change that much for self-driving cars. Especially for extremely rare failure modes.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  Humans all have different versions of the 'driving' software installed, there's no way of identifying which ones will misbehave. If Teslas are malfunctioning, we shouldn't ground Chevy Cruise. We exist on a spectrum of competence. If a type of car has a widespread issue that unexpectedly gets it into a state where a minimally competent non-impaired person can't operate it safely, that type of car should be pulled from the road. However, because humans are so sloppy (0 human drivers should be the ultimate goal), it is generally assumed that most accidents are caused by us, and so we require a significant accumulation of evidence to take a type of car off the road. Without a human in the loop, what's the unreliable part to point the finger at?
  - eru 5y ago
    Well, the obvious incentive with such a rule would then be to install slightly different versions of the software in every vehicle. (Or perhaps to have separate versions on file, and just load that different version when the first version is grounded.) > Without a human in the loop, what's the unreliable part to point the finger at? It's a cost benefit analysis. If the problem is sufficiently rare, it might make more sense to leave the cars running while you investigate. Even human lives aren't infinitely valuable. Typical traffic engineering in the US assumes a cost of human life of about 6 million USD or so.

eru 5y ago

Or a cosmic ray..