4 ms·

> Human drivers sometimes fail-to-notice sirens or other high-priority demands on road capacity. In the lane directly in front of them, facing them, and honkin

> Human drivers sometimes fail-to-notice sirens or other high-priority demands on road capacity. In the lane directly in front of them, facing them, and honking?

mirntyfirty 4y ago
Proof by strawman imaginary counter-example
- InitialLastName 4y ago
  The first 2 sentences of the article we're discussing: > On an early April morning, around 4 am, a San Francisco Fire Department truck responding to a fire tried to pass a doubled-parked garbage truck by using the opposing lane. But a traveling autonomous vehicle, operated by the General Motors subsidiary Cruise without anyone inside, was blocking its path. I don't think it's intolerable to use a straw-man argument when discussing scarecrows.
  - treesprite82 4y ago
    Autonomous car didn't seem to fail to notice the fire truck, just that it arguably took the wrong course of action by yielding to the right instead of reversing into the intersection.
- tadfisher 4y ago
  This example is what we're discussing, e.g. the article.
gojomo 4y ago
> In the lane directly in front of them, facing them, and honking? Yes! In SF and other big free-country cities at 4am, some human drivers are high! Sometimes human drivers are passed-out or suffering a health crisis. Sometimes they've left their vehicles blocking key rights-of-way as they go somewher else for many minutes. In San Francisco, I've seen human-driver-unattended cars block light-rail trains many times. (I live not far from the N-Judah line, which also has a history of pedestrian bystanders physically moving cars to clear the road: https://www.munidiaries.com/2014/02/10/muni-riders-lift-car-off-of-n-judah-tracks-again/ https://www.munidiaries.com/2014/02/10/muni-riders-lift-car-...) We need to judge autonomous car suboptimalities against real human drivers, with all their failures - not against idealized, unerring humans-at-their-best.

> Human drivers sometimes fail-to-notice sirens or other high-priority demands on road capacity. In the lane directly in front of them, facing them, and honking?

mirntyfirty 4y ago

Proof by strawman imaginary counter-example

InitialLastName 4y ago
The first 2 sentences of the article we're discussing: > On an early April morning, around 4 am, a San Francisco Fire Department truck responding to a fire tried to pass a doubled-parked garbage truck by using the opposing lane. But a traveling autonomous vehicle, operated by the General Motors subsidiary Cruise without anyone inside, was blocking its path. I don't think it's intolerable to use a straw-man argument when discussing scarecrows.
- treesprite82 4y ago
  Autonomous car didn't seem to fail to notice the fire truck, just that it arguably took the wrong course of action by yielding to the right instead of reversing into the intersection.
tadfisher 4y ago
This example is what we're discussing, e.g. the article.

gojomo 4y ago

> In the lane directly in front of them, facing them, and honking? Yes! In SF and other big free-country cities at 4am, some human drivers are high! Sometimes human drivers are passed-out or suffering a health crisis. Sometimes they've left their vehicles blocking key rights-of-way as they go somewher else for many minutes. In San Francisco, I've seen human-driver-unattended cars block light-rail trains many times. (I live not far from the N-Judah line, which also has a history of pedestrian bystanders physically moving cars to clear the road: https://www.munidiaries.com/2014/02/10/muni-riders-lift-car-off-of-n-judah-tracks-again/ https://www.munidiaries.com/2014/02/10/muni-riders-lift-car-...) We need to judge autonomous car suboptimalities against real human drivers, with all their failures - not against idealized, unerring humans-at-their-best.