7 ms·

Food delivery robot casually drives under police tape through active crime scene

65 points by elsewhen 4y ago

lm28469 4y ago
Add it to the infinitely long list of edge cases that autonomous vehicles will never ever be able to handle properly
maerF0x0 4y ago
> "The shooting was later determined to be a hoax." Perhaps ML can read these scenarios better than humans. EDIT: to keep the HN value high here's a link to a case where ML does better than humans in reading the scenario - lung cancer detection in xrays. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325223 https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325223
sokoloff 4y ago
Same underlying story was discussed here (60 comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32861788 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32861788
ltbarcly3 4y ago
Seems like it was waiting and was invited in by the camera guy.
notatoad 4y ago
>in this instance the robot supervisor believed they were being waved through. >In the video, someone standing near the tape raises it for the robot to go under. so the robot was being operated by a human, and the human operator was following the instructions of the authorities on scene. it's a fun headline, but a pretty boring story
- smoe 4y ago
  In the video it looks like the person raising the tape is from a tv camera crew. None of the authorities seem to even notice the robot until it is directly at their feet.
- ouid 4y ago
  Vice really doubled down on dogshit journalism.
  - mitchdoogle 4y ago
    It's a puff piece, indicated by the flippant language employed in the article. It's hardly the kind of piece to judge their journalism standards
    - dkarl 4y ago
      Is there some kind of badge or special section in the site that tells me which pieces are misleading wastes of my time for their profit and which aren't? If not, why wouldn't I use this piece to predict what I can expect from them in the future?
    - ars 4y ago
      No, it's a pretty good example of their journalism.
- everyone 4y ago
  How could it be economical to be employing someone to remote control the robot? Surely it would be much cheaper to just have a regular guy on a moped in that case? Unless the human operator is monitoring multiple robots which are semi-autonomous, with the human operator only taking direct control if a robot gets stuck.
  - Rebelgecko 4y ago
    The humans also don't have to be local. Seems like a clever way to avoid paying HCOL minimum wage and benefits. Instead of paying someone in LA $15/hr, have some kid in Venezuela do it for $50/month. Latency shouldn't be unmanageable.
  - everyone 4y ago
    This actually gives me an idea for a computer game...
  - tyingq 4y ago
    Their website boasts a lot about L4 autonomy, so maybe just what happens when it sees barrier tape?
  - joshribakoff 4y ago
    Yes the part at the end is the case. Furthermore, the human operators are a “crutch” necessary to develop full autonomy. The alternative is to send someone out to retrieve the robot if it gets stuck (which will continue to for years as the technology is refined)
  - krisoft 4y ago
    > Surely it would be much cheaper to just have a regular guy on a moped in that case? There are two reasons why it makes sense economically: - to deliver by moped you need to live in a reasonable commuting distance to the place where you are delivering. The robot driver can operate from a much lower cost of living area, or even a different lower cost country. - even if you don’t do that and your drivers all operate from a high cost of living area the idea is that your software engineers will keep updating the software and you need less and less human supervision. The first day maybe all your robots are remotely operated 100%. A month later you have a model to drive the robots automatically on the simple straight bits. What you can do then is to have a driver operate maybe two robots. When one finishes with the simple task it can do on its own it waits for the operator. The more fully autonomous you can make the software the more robots a single operator can operate at a time, and the beter your margins will ve. This way your level of autonomy is not a binary perfect or nothing proposition but a sliding scale where as you get better you earn more money.
jjk166 4y ago
"Technical support employee misreads situation, makes mildly embarrassing blunder" just doesn't seem as newsworthy a title.
latchkey 4y ago
previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32828898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32828898
mensetmanusman 4y ago
Did it steal the dead guy‘s wallet to pay for the pizza?

65 points by elsewhen 4y ago

Add it to the infinitely long list of edge cases that autonomous vehicles will never ever be able to handle properly

> "The shooting was later determined to be a hoax." Perhaps ML can read these scenarios better than humans. EDIT: to keep the HN value high here's a link to a case where ML does better than humans in reading the scenario - lung cancer detection in xrays. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325223 https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325223

sokoloff 4y ago

Same underlying story was discussed here (60 comments): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32861788 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32861788

ltbarcly3 4y ago

Seems like it was waiting and was invited in by the camera guy.

notatoad 4y ago

>in this instance the robot supervisor believed they were being waved through. >In the video, someone standing near the tape raises it for the robot to go under. so the robot was being operated by a human, and the human operator was following the instructions of the authorities on scene. it's a fun headline, but a pretty boring story

smoe 4y ago
In the video it looks like the person raising the tape is from a tv camera crew. None of the authorities seem to even notice the robot until it is directly at their feet.
ouid 4y ago
Vice really doubled down on dogshit journalism.
- mitchdoogle 4y ago
  It's a puff piece, indicated by the flippant language employed in the article. It's hardly the kind of piece to judge their journalism standards
  - dkarl 4y ago
    Is there some kind of badge or special section in the site that tells me which pieces are misleading wastes of my time for their profit and which aren't? If not, why wouldn't I use this piece to predict what I can expect from them in the future?
  - ars 4y ago
    No, it's a pretty good example of their journalism.
everyone 4y ago
How could it be economical to be employing someone to remote control the robot? Surely it would be much cheaper to just have a regular guy on a moped in that case? Unless the human operator is monitoring multiple robots which are semi-autonomous, with the human operator only taking direct control if a robot gets stuck.
- Rebelgecko 4y ago
  The humans also don't have to be local. Seems like a clever way to avoid paying HCOL minimum wage and benefits. Instead of paying someone in LA $15/hr, have some kid in Venezuela do it for $50/month. Latency shouldn't be unmanageable.
- everyone 4y ago
  This actually gives me an idea for a computer game...
- tyingq 4y ago
  Their website boasts a lot about L4 autonomy, so maybe just what happens when it sees barrier tape?
- joshribakoff 4y ago
  Yes the part at the end is the case. Furthermore, the human operators are a “crutch” necessary to develop full autonomy. The alternative is to send someone out to retrieve the robot if it gets stuck (which will continue to for years as the technology is refined)
- krisoft 4y ago
  > Surely it would be much cheaper to just have a regular guy on a moped in that case? There are two reasons why it makes sense economically: - to deliver by moped you need to live in a reasonable commuting distance to the place where you are delivering. The robot driver can operate from a much lower cost of living area, or even a different lower cost country. - even if you don’t do that and your drivers all operate from a high cost of living area the idea is that your software engineers will keep updating the software and you need less and less human supervision. The first day maybe all your robots are remotely operated 100%. A month later you have a model to drive the robots automatically on the simple straight bits. What you can do then is to have a driver operate maybe two robots. When one finishes with the simple task it can do on its own it waits for the operator. The more fully autonomous you can make the software the more robots a single operator can operate at a time, and the beter your margins will ve. This way your level of autonomy is not a binary perfect or nothing proposition but a sliding scale where as you get better you earn more money.

jjk166 4y ago

"Technical support employee misreads situation, makes mildly embarrassing blunder" just doesn't seem as newsworthy a title.

latchkey 4y ago

previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32828898 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32828898

mensetmanusman 4y ago

Did it steal the dead guy‘s wallet to pay for the pizza?