8 ms·

This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". Many years

by oblib 4y ago

This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". Many years ago the 3M company created a magnetic tape for the lane lines on roads and a device to detect those for automobiles, along with a gizmo that would vibrate the driver's seat on the side the vehicle was getting too close to crossing the lane lines. That could help prevent these kinds of incidents, but cameras trying to detect painted lane lines have many obvious fail points and one of them is keeping the car in it's lane. This incident proves that once again. You cannot tell a human "this car can drive itself but you need to be ready to take control at all times" because that's a clear oxymoron. It either works, or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it's potentially deadly, and it only takes a second to become deadly, and humans cannot react to that failure 100% of the time. That's been proven too many times already.

cmsj 4y ago
> Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety, where even minor incidents are thoroughly investigated and often lead to industry-improving changes. Their approach clearly works because despite the fact that we hurl hundreds of thousands of people through the air every day in millimetre thick metal tubes, it's the safest way to travel. Leaving autonomous driving to the whims of the empathy-deficient utilitarianist VCs of the world, and barely regulating their work at all, is really not ok.
- shultays 4y ago
  I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety To do that you need to increase your standards for being a car driver up to being a pilot. Since most accidents would involve human error.
  - salex89 4y ago
    Yeah, but training will cost a multiple thousand dollars and the car would go for a checkup every week.
    - shultays 4y ago
      That is what I am trying to say. It is not feasible. There are less airplanes or pilots compared to all cars and drivers out there. You can't have the same standard
  - cmsj 4y ago
    If our goal is truly to work towards Level 5 autonomy, then by definition most accidents couldn't involve human error other than a person hurling themselves in front of such a vehicle.
joshstrange 4y ago
Did you read the article? > “The vehicle has a level 2 driving assistance system that is already incorporated in production vehicles today and which can support the driver on demand,” the company said. “With level 2 vehicles the driver always retains responsibility.” > BMW added that the vehicle was required to be marked as a test car for data protection purposes, because it was recording footage. This was not self-driving to start with and could end up being 100% operator error. Though even if it was self-driving (again, it wasn't) I'm nowhere near ready to call it "negligent murder via technology". It's terrible when self-driving tech causes accidents like this but opponents of self-driving seems all too comfortable ignoring the other crashes that happen daily and on top of that there is no way to know how many accidents have been prevented by self-driving/driver assist systems. At the end of the day I care a lot more about the net-difference in car deaths, not the causes of only ones that involved "technology" (obviously accidents per-capita, by car automation type, should be taken into account here). Should we also get rid of drive-by-wire? Since that's tech that can fail? Where does this end?
- cmsj 4y ago
  > seems all too comfortable ignoring the other crashes that happen daily In your view, what is the MVP for self-driving car safety, in terms of the number of crashes/deaths per day?
  - shultays 4y ago
    Lower than human driven cars? I think it is just basic math at that point when you try to generalize things.
    - cmsj 4y ago
      The question was not really a quantitative one. The purpose of asking that question is to determine the mindset of the person answering. Safety systems don't generally get built with an MVP mindset, but that seems to be what is happening with autonomous cars and it's concerning to me on multiple fronts.
  - 4y ago
cedws 4y ago
It's basically a space race between companies to build a self driving car, except nobody knows what they're doing and they're willing to put as many lives on the line as necessary. We have Elon Musk and his bullshit to thank for this.
- njarboe 4y ago
  Billions of people travel in cars. Those lives are on the line every day. One million people die in car crashes each year. The amount of injuries to people and property is huge. Preventing most of this carnage is a major goal of these self driving car initiatives. How many deaths from someone not following explicit instructions of always being ready to take over from the beta version of some self driving car system would you accept to save 1/2 a million lives per year? One, ten, one hundred, one thousand, more?
macspoofing 4y ago
>That could help prevent these kinds of incidents, but cameras trying to detect painted lane lines have many obvious fail points and one of them is keeping the car in it's lane. This incident proves that once again. Hold on a second. Lane-assist is a perfectly fine feature that is obviously meant to be used in conjunction with an alert driver with their hands on the wheel. That is typically dubbed 'Level 1' of autonomous driving, similar to adaptive cruise control. This accident wasn't related to that, but instead to a 'Level 2' autonomous driving where there is some level of driving automation.
- fredgrott 4y ago
  Hmm, where have we heard this argument before and even the facts that prove it wrong? Ahem, the Airline industry already found out why this not true. Automation always requires more training not less.
gdy 4y ago
"This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder" Meatbags do it all the time. Two people die in a car accident every minute [0] and nobody cares. (Actually, two and a half, but that's just too gory.) [0] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffi...

by oblib 4y ago

cmsj 4y ago

> Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder via technology than an "accident". I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety, where even minor incidents are thoroughly investigated and often lead to industry-improving changes. Their approach clearly works because despite the fact that we hurl hundreds of thousands of people through the air every day in millimetre thick metal tubes, it's the safest way to travel. Leaving autonomous driving to the whims of the empathy-deficient utilitarianist VCs of the world, and barely regulating their work at all, is really not ok.

shultays 4y ago
I'd like to see us treat autonomous road safety the way we treat aircraft safety To do that you need to increase your standards for being a car driver up to being a pilot. Since most accidents would involve human error.
- salex89 4y ago
  Yeah, but training will cost a multiple thousand dollars and the car would go for a checkup every week.
  - shultays 4y ago
    That is what I am trying to say. It is not feasible. There are less airplanes or pilots compared to all cars and drivers out there. You can't have the same standard
- cmsj 4y ago
  If our goal is truly to work towards Level 5 autonomy, then by definition most accidents couldn't involve human error other than a person hurling themselves in front of such a vehicle.

joshstrange 4y ago

Did you read the article? > “The vehicle has a level 2 driving assistance system that is already incorporated in production vehicles today and which can support the driver on demand,” the company said. “With level 2 vehicles the driver always retains responsibility.” > BMW added that the vehicle was required to be marked as a test car for data protection purposes, because it was recording footage. This was not self-driving to start with and could end up being 100% operator error. Though even if it was self-driving (again, it wasn't) I'm nowhere near ready to call it "negligent murder via technology". It's terrible when self-driving tech causes accidents like this but opponents of self-driving seems all too comfortable ignoring the other crashes that happen daily and on top of that there is no way to know how many accidents have been prevented by self-driving/driver assist systems. At the end of the day I care a lot more about the net-difference in car deaths, not the causes of only ones that involved "technology" (obviously accidents per-capita, by car automation type, should be taken into account here). Should we also get rid of drive-by-wire? Since that's tech that can fail? Where does this end?

cmsj 4y ago
> seems all too comfortable ignoring the other crashes that happen daily In your view, what is the MVP for self-driving car safety, in terms of the number of crashes/deaths per day?
- shultays 4y ago
  Lower than human driven cars? I think it is just basic math at that point when you try to generalize things.
  - cmsj 4y ago
    The question was not really a quantitative one. The purpose of asking that question is to determine the mindset of the person answering. Safety systems don't generally get built with an MVP mindset, but that seems to be what is happening with autonomous cars and it's concerning to me on multiple fronts.
- 4y ago

cedws 4y ago

It's basically a space race between companies to build a self driving car, except nobody knows what they're doing and they're willing to put as many lives on the line as necessary. We have Elon Musk and his bullshit to thank for this.

njarboe 4y ago
Billions of people travel in cars. Those lives are on the line every day. One million people die in car crashes each year. The amount of injuries to people and property is huge. Preventing most of this carnage is a major goal of these self driving car initiatives. How many deaths from someone not following explicit instructions of always being ready to take over from the beta version of some self driving car system would you accept to save 1/2 a million lives per year? One, ten, one hundred, one thousand, more?

macspoofing 4y ago

>That could help prevent these kinds of incidents, but cameras trying to detect painted lane lines have many obvious fail points and one of them is keeping the car in it's lane. This incident proves that once again. Hold on a second. Lane-assist is a perfectly fine feature that is obviously meant to be used in conjunction with an alert driver with their hands on the wheel. That is typically dubbed 'Level 1' of autonomous driving, similar to adaptive cruise control. This accident wasn't related to that, but instead to a 'Level 2' autonomous driving where there is some level of driving automation.

fredgrott 4y ago
Hmm, where have we heard this argument before and even the facts that prove it wrong? Ahem, the Airline industry already found out why this not true. Automation always requires more training not less.

gdy 4y ago

"This is just wrong. Innocents being injured or killed while testing this tech is more akin to a negligent murder" Meatbags do it all the time. Two people die in a car accident every minute [0] and nobody cares. (Actually, two and a half, but that's just too gory.) [0] https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffi...